delete this thread

[drsyn71]

delete

 

[Indy Magnoli]

I did Step #1 for you: removed watermark and straightened it up:

 

[drsyn71]

.

 

[drsyn71]

.

 

[ZeroSum]

That's looking quite decent. If you use Inkscape you could use the Trace Bitmap function on it. You'd probably still need to do some cleanup on it, but you'd have a vector image at the end.

 

[drsyn71]

.

 

[RafalFett]

I hope this won't brake some rule on the RPF, if so, mods please delete this post.

I redid the whole plaque with approximated fonts, that in the end were modified to fit the original hand drawn/painted ones. The shadows are not the best, but will do for a replica:


Have fun!

 

[TazMan2000]

The RPF is against recasting, but effectively you guys did the same thing with a licensed image.

Just making a point.

TazMan2000

 

[Lightning]

The RPF is against recasting, but effectively you guys did the same thing with a licensed image.

Just making a point.

TazMan2000

Aren't pretty much all the paper props posted here made in exactly the same way as this, recreated from photos? Also, the licensed image is a person holding the sign, not the sign itself.

 

[drsyn71]

.

 

[TazMan2000]

Aren't pretty much all the paper props posted here made in exactly the same way as this, recreated from photos? Also, the licensed image is a person holding the sign, not the sign itself.

It’s is a grey area when you create a paper prop from a screen capture, but the above photo had a watermark.

If someone was selling decals here, posted a picture of them that was watermarked, would it be ok if someone screen-capped it and photoshopped out the watermark and made their own decals?

Perhaps for personal use it wouldn’t be a big issue, but if they were being sold?

TazMan2000

 

[TazMan2000]

A grey area because the watermarked photo is shared on the internet (marketed) and watermarked. The original file that alamy owns was not modified, just a watermarked copy, right?

I'm wondering what the opinion of people on that.

TazMan2000