pepakura ethics (or is it ok to make moulds/bucks from pep files?)
- Thread starter Knowone251
- Start date
propologist
Sr Member
my only question is,,,How did the beans get above the frank ?
mccordia
Member
I think the general pint everyone is trying to make varies a bit...
- pep models are a sculpting form
- pep models can be a basis for a suit/model
- a cast of such a model (ethics) should be credited (in part) to the pep creators
And I think some of the 3D monkeys (me as well) tend to be a bit to defensive when somebody takes the hard work, and skill that goes into making 3D models (and unwrapping them in pepakura) and seems to turn it into mere 'tracing' of photos.
Just crediting who should be credited when you build something is the general message by the thread starter. Give credit where credit is due....and if you're buying a new Ferarri from casts made of (pep based) models, maybe buy the pep-file creator a 1:30 scale Ferarri model as well..
- pep models are a sculpting form
- pep models can be a basis for a suit/model
- a cast of such a model (ethics) should be credited (in part) to the pep creators
And I think some of the 3D monkeys (me as well) tend to be a bit to defensive when somebody takes the hard work, and skill that goes into making 3D models (and unwrapping them in pepakura) and seems to turn it into mere 'tracing' of photos.
Just crediting who should be credited when you build something is the general message by the thread starter. Give credit where credit is due....and if you're buying a new Ferarri from casts made of (pep based) models, maybe buy the pep-file creator a 1:30 scale Ferarri model as well..
Trek920
Well-Known Member
why do we care about Pep creations, and someone making masters off the piece made from pep. they spent the time to make it, just like the clay sculptor.
let em. why not? its not stealing anything or anybodies work.
If i wanted to make copies of my halo hand-plates and charge I could, and i have for 5 dollars. ive seen others do the same for 5-10 bucks for the same piece.
let em. why not? its not stealing anything or anybodies work.
If i wanted to make copies of my halo hand-plates and charge I could, and i have for 5 dollars. ive seen others do the same for 5-10 bucks for the same piece.
tk1055
Sr Member
I think the general pint everyone is trying to make varies a bit...
- pep models are a sculpting form
- pep models can be a basis for a suit/model
- a cast of such a model (ethics) should be credited (in part) to the pep creators
And I think some of the 3D monkeys (me as well) tend to be a bit to defensive when somebody takes the hard work, and skill that goes into making 3D models (and unwrapping them in pepakura) and seems to turn it into mere 'tracing' of photos.
Just crediting who should be credited when you build something is the general message by the thread starter. Give credit where credit is due....and if you're buying a new Ferarri from casts made of (pep based) models, maybe buy the pep-file creator a 1:30 scale Ferarri model as well..
You are hitting the nail square on the head.
As for the Ferarri model.... could we pep one instead?
lol:lol
TMP
Sr Member
What i am most sad about is that this situation is that 2 people i highly respected in regards of artist, creativity and behavior have decided to chose to select and to insinuate and totaly ignore my explenation to this beeing a misunderstanding. I tried to reach out to explain that my intrest was in getting a debate about guidelines of how boardmembers (common intrest replica prop baords) can have "rules" code of conduct to be guided after. I know that pepeakura is revolutionary and it has some fantastic advantages as i seen on Finheads and Stealth suits. I never said that they were recasters. It was my lack of written grammer and building up a text that caused that out of context and Finhead chose to make a big issue of it, even ignoring my honest aproach to expalin to him what happend. I even tried 4 times to invite to a phone conversation to resolve but just got a fist back in the face.
If i were against Pepakura why, would i encourage, support, praise, and give advice and spend time if i did not care or disliked it... ? Its no logic.
TO MY ORIGINALY POINT:
As pr today there are many unanswerd, unchalanged questions regarding pepakura. Sculpting art has for a longer period gone trough trail and error and had manny issues with how we look upon sculptors art and how we in comunity by guidelines know how to look at sistuations like recast or modifed parts. These are questions never raised for pepakura since 1. The files are free, 2. The builder makes it from a themeplate. 3. The themplate is modified. Now here is were some of the challanges comes. If a person recast the papakura armor that the builder have made.. Is this ok...? Is it ok for the builder to mass produce the parts and sell them? Is that ok for the file maker? In regards of the 3D modeler how is it looked upon if a 3D modelar takes line trace original art as licenced piece or custom fan made props and make up 3D files for CNC or Pepakura? I am asking these questions because i think they should be evaualted and considerd as there are two different trades of methods in making these props and somewere down the line they can conflict. These conflicts can be avoided if we take a debate, and evaluate the guidelines, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE sides.
Lets put our mids together and figure out this to a accetable "standard among fellow comunity members"
If i were against Pepakura why, would i encourage, support, praise, and give advice and spend time if i did not care or disliked it... ? Its no logic.
TO MY ORIGINALY POINT:
As pr today there are many unanswerd, unchalanged questions regarding pepakura. Sculpting art has for a longer period gone trough trail and error and had manny issues with how we look upon sculptors art and how we in comunity by guidelines know how to look at sistuations like recast or modifed parts. These are questions never raised for pepakura since 1. The files are free, 2. The builder makes it from a themeplate. 3. The themplate is modified. Now here is were some of the challanges comes. If a person recast the papakura armor that the builder have made.. Is this ok...? Is it ok for the builder to mass produce the parts and sell them? Is that ok for the file maker? In regards of the 3D modeler how is it looked upon if a 3D modelar takes line trace original art as licenced piece or custom fan made props and make up 3D files for CNC or Pepakura? I am asking these questions because i think they should be evaualted and considerd as there are two different trades of methods in making these props and somewere down the line they can conflict. These conflicts can be avoided if we take a debate, and evaluate the guidelines, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE sides.
Lets put our mids together and figure out this to a accetable "standard among fellow comunity members"
TMP
Sr Member
CAUSE OF MISUNDERSTANDING:
------------------------------------------------
This is what i wrote:
1.A
If an existing prop, licened or fanmade is altered, modified or resculpted on top of an existing peice and it is not made moulds of to recast it is considerd as a personal project. The moment the armor is moulded to replicate and offerd it is regarded as modified recast peice.
1.B
In regards of Pepakura.. The instant the peices is moulded to make several casts it becomes a "recast" peice in my opinion.
What i meant here was that the istant a pepakura armor is recast by other for the intent of selling then its consider as recast. NOT BY THE MAKER...
---------------------------------------------------------------
The above is what i tried to explain / Quote from SIWDAT as show bellow.. But as you se i made errors in the above grammer and text buildup causing it look to me thinking that pepakura was recast.
Deliberately recasting another member’s creation without consent is not supported by this community. Selling freely distributed paper props is considered a digital form of recasting. This includes Pepakura files.
The term Recast falls into category if the piece has been:
A. Directly recast of original licensed piece or Original fanmade art.
B. Retooled and modified prop over an existing licensed piece or fanmade art.
Recast falls into category when a Pepakura prop that already had been modified, finished, cleaned and detailed has been recast directly of the piece, or modified.
Pepakura files public available for download does not go in under this category IF the maker can show progress photos of the assembly and finish of the Pepakura armor.
Fanmade falls in under the category if the piece has:
A. Been sculpted by hand from scratch.
B. Assembled by hand from scratch.
Category: Private collection, Fanmade VS Recast:
Any alteration, improvement, re-sculpting of existing prop counts as recast if the piece is moulded and replicated. If the alteration, improvement or re-sculpting is for personal improvement of personal collection this does not go in under the category of recast.
------------------------------------------------
This is what i wrote:
1.A
If an existing prop, licened or fanmade is altered, modified or resculpted on top of an existing peice and it is not made moulds of to recast it is considerd as a personal project. The moment the armor is moulded to replicate and offerd it is regarded as modified recast peice.
1.B
In regards of Pepakura.. The instant the peices is moulded to make several casts it becomes a "recast" peice in my opinion.
What i meant here was that the istant a pepakura armor is recast by other for the intent of selling then its consider as recast. NOT BY THE MAKER...
---------------------------------------------------------------
The above is what i tried to explain / Quote from SIWDAT as show bellow.. But as you se i made errors in the above grammer and text buildup causing it look to me thinking that pepakura was recast.
Deliberately recasting another member’s creation without consent is not supported by this community. Selling freely distributed paper props is considered a digital form of recasting. This includes Pepakura files.
The term Recast falls into category if the piece has been:
A. Directly recast of original licensed piece or Original fanmade art.
B. Retooled and modified prop over an existing licensed piece or fanmade art.
Recast falls into category when a Pepakura prop that already had been modified, finished, cleaned and detailed has been recast directly of the piece, or modified.
Pepakura files public available for download does not go in under this category IF the maker can show progress photos of the assembly and finish of the Pepakura armor.
Fanmade falls in under the category if the piece has:
A. Been sculpted by hand from scratch.
B. Assembled by hand from scratch.
Category: Private collection, Fanmade VS Recast:
Any alteration, improvement, re-sculpting of existing prop counts as recast if the piece is moulded and replicated. If the alteration, improvement or re-sculpting is for personal improvement of personal collection this does not go in under the category of recast.
Fetts.Sobriquet
Well-Known Member
TMP, This is not a problem. No one but you cares what anyone does with pep files. No pep maker has said they care, no pep user. Only you care because you don't like seeing people being able to make suits accessible. You don't own Iron Man, you're not the authority on iron man. You not going to be able to demonize pep. You are just rationalizing at this point.
I say this with respect.
I say this with respect.
TMP
Sr Member
You got it all wrong. If you read what i tried to explain was to also provide guidelies for the pepakura makers to have guidelines to protect the hard work, so not they got recasted. Its not been written about pepakura makers intrest so much nor the guidelines they wish to follow them self whatever they are. Even SIWDAT has this is thier guidelines i just quoted / wrote them in a terrible way so it came out completely wrong and your still stuck to it... Still after me countless post trying to explain it was terrible writing error. Talk about demonize?
Darius Alucard
Sr Member
Jeez...
To make things simple...
TMP has valid questions and made some good points, but the language barrier and intent are getting in the way.
The 2 biggest terms to throw this thread for a loop were "recast" and "recaster". They shouldn't have been brought up right away.
Correct me if I'm wrong TMP...
He's talking about art, artists, and how they feel about what is done with their art.
Many artists have rules about what is done with their art (even pep designers) and others don't.
And then there are people that don't care about any rules.
He's just trying to find common ground with all of the differing opinions and get a clearer understanding of what's involved. He's looking for consistant behavior in our community and that's why I think he was encouraging constructive debate on the subject.
Alot of forums and artists do alot to protect their work and the work of other artists, hence all the rules.
PEP is art and he thinks some rules would help to protect those artists too.
To make things simple...
TMP has valid questions and made some good points, but the language barrier and intent are getting in the way.
The 2 biggest terms to throw this thread for a loop were "recast" and "recaster". They shouldn't have been brought up right away.
Correct me if I'm wrong TMP...
He's talking about art, artists, and how they feel about what is done with their art.
Many artists have rules about what is done with their art (even pep designers) and others don't.
And then there are people that don't care about any rules.
He's just trying to find common ground with all of the differing opinions and get a clearer understanding of what's involved. He's looking for consistant behavior in our community and that's why I think he was encouraging constructive debate on the subject.
Alot of forums and artists do alot to protect their work and the work of other artists, hence all the rules.
PEP is art and he thinks some rules would help to protect those artists too.
Neon Sentry
Sr Member
I don't care if people use my Pep files to create items that they end up selling. I would not put them online if I did have a problem with that. I think that if any Pep maker out there does have a problem with that, it would have been brought up by now.
TMP, I understand your intent, but all you're doing at this point is belittling the work that goes into good Pep on both sides of the fence (modeler and builder) without raising points worth debate. Language is an issue, yes, but this all seems to be going in circles.
TMP, I understand your intent, but all you're doing at this point is belittling the work that goes into good Pep on both sides of the fence (modeler and builder) without raising points worth debate. Language is an issue, yes, but this all seems to be going in circles.
TMP
Sr Member
Thank you for desribing this..
...When you feel mistaken it feels so sad:confused CORRECTION... : Not when you feel mistaken, but I feel mistaken
This is your stance, i accept that.
But the instant the builder moderal is recast then what? Can he complain?
Aslo the initial post to this formum was question in regards of Pepakura. Its a reason why people wonder. :confused
Fetts.Sobriquet
Well-Known Member
So, if I buy a Styrofoam mannequin head at the craft store and paint fiberglass resin all over it and make a helmet from it. Does the artist that made the Styrofoam head have any say over if I can reproduce the helmet to sell again and again? I mean thats what pepekura is. Just a base.
Dark asylum
Active Member
Ok you know what, if you use an existing object as a base so be it, I use wood and plaster slushed mask heads to sculpt over saves me the trouble from using extra materials no sculptor builds a sculpture from a huge block of clay unless they are seriously disturbed any one with any sense uses a base and if a resin coated paper form is what the sculptor wants to use let them if you want to use a donn post mask head so be it, needless to say it's not your call to judge who does what, do it your way and they will do it their way no one's wrong no ones right and move on.
TMP
Sr Member
Exuse me but, i guess you must have jumped over 4 pages of what i wrote. I NEVER SAID THAT.
I am saying
IF AN PEPEAKURA BUILDER ARMOR OR EXISITNG ARMOR, OR IS BEEING MODIFIED OR RECAST The instant it is replicated made into moulds then its RECAST.
I wanted clear guidelines to protect the pep builders. If you go back and read, you will se that THIS IS WHAT I TRIED TO EXPLAIN the last day.
BUT sculptor, ordonary sculptors, pep builders and other members.
People read what they want.
Dung0beetle
Well-Known Member
The designer of the original model of the file can sign their work, just like a sculptor, painter, etc. In my pep file, I write: Modeled for Pepakura by Dung0beetle. I can go one step further and sign the .obj file that is imported into Pepakura. It can be viewed by opening the .obj file in a text editor. A signature can be removed from a sculpture, painted over, or a file can be edited. The most we can do is attempt to protect ourselves.
"Recasting" in Pepakura should be defined by how the original file was created. If the 3d content was extracted from a game, that should be frowned upon. If the model was created from an extruded plane, box, sphere, etc. then the credit should go to the original modeler.
All of us here that make replica props are copying the hard work of the original designer. Not to say that what we do is not hard work, but I did not design the props that I am replicating.
"Recasting" in Pepakura should be defined by how the original file was created. If the 3d content was extracted from a game, that should be frowned upon. If the model was created from an extruded plane, box, sphere, etc. then the credit should go to the original modeler.
All of us here that make replica props are copying the hard work of the original designer. Not to say that what we do is not hard work, but I did not design the props that I am replicating.
TMP
Sr Member
I was not talking about the file in the section i was misunderstood. I was talking about if a builder has completed an armor from a file and SOMEONE ELSE comes allong and copy or modify THE ORIGINAL MAKERS PEICE with the intent of copying for sale it is consider as a RECAST. Not the Original maker.
It has nothing to do with recast to the filemaker or orginal builder in that particilur sence.
My other points was that there are still unlcrear areas of pepakure and lack of guidelines to how people can opperate or take freedom / restrictions within the comunity. This is what i wanted to highlight to make it easy for ALL to better have a understanding of this aslo to provide comunity guidelines that will somewhat respect other peoples hard work.
This initial tread started with a question and turned into a hanging mob due to a misunderstanding. There are allot of questions regarding pepakura and there are many opinions ranging from the 3D modeler, to the builder to potentially a conumer and for anyone is trying to modify existing design or alter it... Overall ALLOT of areas that are grey.
Guidelines are not intended to mean harm to anyone, its there to help people understanding and respecting the "rules" and standpoint from the comunity in general. I dont want to se people take other peoples hard work due to lack of guidelines either pepakura or Sculptor. I dont know if "stealing" of 3D models and gaining credits is an issue... But again allot of areas not touch or written down as guidelines to this revolutionary method.
Similar threads
