Curse

Aba · Nov 03, 2009, 10:33 PM // 22:33

Quote:

A Halloween decoration doesn't necessarily have to be plastered with jackolaterns and colored orange and still be a Halloween decoration. By your logic, the charr Halloween mask that appears in game... isn't a Halloween mask.

Last time a checked Halloween included dressing up.......a mask is part of that...
So ya my logic is so messed up.....
By your logic anything on this planet could be a halloween decoration.
See I can play too.....

lilDeath · Nov 03, 2009, 10:47 PM // 22:47

Is it not strange that a cosplay'er won?
Seems a bit odd to me, granted it was well done... but uhm... "Art Contest"?

JR · Nov 03, 2009, 11:14 PM // 23:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilDeath

Is it not strange that a cosplay'er won?
Seems a bit odd to me, granted it was well done... but uhm... "Art Contest"?

Are you really going to attempt to define art for us?

Tramp · Nov 03, 2009, 11:52 PM // 23:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

As someone who actually understands legalese, there is no violation.

Since you claim to understand legalese, I want someone to explain why:

1) The golem does not violate this rule: "Put your imagination and talent to work by crafting Halloween art with a Guild Wars® theme!....Judging: Entries will be judged equally on the basis of creativity, style, and the melding of Halloween into a Guild Wars theme." Are you going to argue that the golem was so good that it managed to outscore all the other entries on the 1/3 creativity, 1/3 style, and 1/3 points for melding of Halloween, because the "melding" part is clearly a big fat zero? Unless you argue that anything is halloweeny and therefore this really is not a halloween contest at all and just an art contest. I could accept that but then it should have not been stated to be a melding of Halloween and GW. And as someone who understand math, I do not see how you can get, and I can only assume the judges loved it and gave it 10's on all categories it qualified in = (10+10+0)/3=6.66, and still be a winner.

2) Tattoo entry: Explain how paying a third person to do an art project that you sketched, submit as your own the finished product, is not a clear, legalese violation of: "Originality: Entries must be the original creation of the contestant..." If the new legal standard is that you just have to come up with the concept, and a professional artist can actually create it for you, then I am in luck because I am going to buy my entry next contest instead of spending 2 days making my own since my score obviously fell short at somewhere under 6.66 for the golem!

WTB artist for next contest to make my creation since I suk. Can pay real money or in game ectos. Will provide sketch, you do the work. Must have my name signed in the corner. No credit given to the actual artist. Your submission becomes the sole property of me to claim it as my own. Caveat Emptor. E Pluribus Unum. Blah de blah de blah. Consult a tax attorney before accepting assignment. All rights reserved. This ends the legalese.

HawkofStorms · Nov 04, 2009, 12:10 AM // 00:10

Did they say their was a scoring system 1/3, 1/3, 1/3? No. Or are those just guidelines? Sounds like just guidelines. There was no rigid restrictions in those guidelines.

In fact, that isn't at all how the results were done at all. There was no "scoring." Regina posted saying people around the office each rated their favorites, and the winners were selected by compiling those lists.

As for the tattoo. Who owns the tattoo? Can the tattoo artist come up to the guy and rip it off his body? It is the guy's tattoo now, not the artist's. The idea for the tattoo was the guy's. He implemented it. He probably sketched it beforehand. He won for the IDEA of having a tattoo put on his body like that. You don't have to perform every step yourself for it to be your art.

Apparently, the person who won with cosplay shouldn't be allowed to win because they didn't pick the cotton by hand and create the fabric that was used to make the outfit. You don't have to perform EVERY step along the way for it to be your art.

Art is more about the idea, then the actual implementation. That's why a giant blank canvas can be considered art, if the artist intends it to be art. Or an installation piece is still the artist's art, even if a museum worker actually sets up the display upon receiving it.

Edit: Kha, considering one guy posted "well the golem would be Halloween art if they stuck a pumpkin on his horns" pretty much shows that yes, many people here really do think this is just about throwing the color orange on something.

Edit2: Over and over again? I made one post... because I was already sick of your whining. And another to defend my position and answer questions. I will not bother posting on this thread again.

Aba · Nov 04, 2009, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Quote:

As for the tattoo. Who owns the tattoo? Can the tattoo artist come up to the guy and rip it off his body? It is the guy's tattoo now, not the artist's. The idea for the tattoo was the guy's. He implemented it. He probably sketched it beforehand. He won for the IDEA of having a tattoo put on his body like that. You don't have to perform every step yourself for it to be your art.

Use your head man.....
Basically your saying someone who went on a computer, Ctrl Copy'd a picture from the web......then printed it all out on computer paper and went in a got it done on a tattoo...HIS ART? Your kidding me
If he did draw it himself good, congrats, But chances he did are slim to none though.

Quote:

Apparently, the person who won with cosplay shouldn't be allowed to win because they didn't pick the cotton by hand and create the fabric that was used to make the outfit. You don't have to perform EVERY step along the way for it to be your art.

Now your just trying to troll.

The point comes down to this, there are countless entrys that had met the criteria SET OUT BY ANET
But there are some that do not meet the crieteria that still won.....
No matter what anyone says its true, and is a fact.
All we can do is suck it up and say congrats to all winners.

Celestial Gaze · Nov 04, 2009, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

As for the tattoo. Who owns the tattoo? Can the tattoo artist come up to the guy and rip it off his body? It is the guy's tattoo now, not the artist's. The idea for the tattoo was the guy's. He implemented it. He probably sketched it beforehand. He won for the IDEA of having a tattoo put on his body like that. You don't have to perform every step yourself for it to be your art.

First off... i doubt he sketched it beforehand. Most likely he took a printed version, showed the artist, and was like "yeah put this on me" End of story. What it seems to me that you are trying to say, is that anyone can win by simply having an idea? Well heck, for the winter contest i'm going to have an IDEA about making lets say.. a costume.. or some wonderful picture, and tell someone to do it for me. I'll tell them what i want, and when it's due. Maybe give them a few pictures i printed from the web. Then pay him/her the money, and even though they did the work FOR me (cause you know, all i had was the IDEA for the project... ) i shall still put it in the gw contest and win. Right. Buddy you're missing a major point here. Rules say no third party. That was third party. He had someone do his work for him. Usually, that is also said to be cheating. Even if he drew the work himself (again i HIGHLY doubt) he still had the artist do the big part of the work for him. It was the tattoo on the body they were impressed with. If he just drew it and submitted it so, it wouldn't have placed. They like the tattoo. Getting tired of seeing everyone try to say that having someone do your work for you is still in the right, and still able to win you a prize.

It's like saying that the one guy that plagiarized did no wrong. You're saying that he had the IDEA to put a guild wars logo over a picture someone already did. He used someone elses work to win, but then again, he had the IDEA to put gw logo in so i guess it's okay even though he took the guys background. Just like it's okay that the tattoo used the artists skills for tattooing to win the prize. They both had an IDEA, and used other people to win. They both used other people for their art. No matter what way you want to look at it, he still used the artist to do his entry for him. There is no way of getting around that fact. Whether or not it was his IDEA, it was still third party, and still him entering something that is not his own work. Just like Logo guy entered something that was not his own work. Same with that guy that took the one guys template.

Edit: Aw, someone already beat me to the quoting.

Kha · Nov 04, 2009, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

As for the tattoo. Who owns the tattoo? Can the tattoo artist come up to the guy and rip it off his body? It is the guy's tattoo now, not the artist's. The idea for the tattoo was the guy's. He implemented it. He probably sketched it beforehand. He won for the IDEA of having a tattoo put on his body like that. You don't have to perform every step yourself for it to be your art.

Apparently, the person who won with cosplay shouldn't be allowed to win because they didn't pick the cotton by hand and create the fabric that was used to make the outfit. You don't have to perform EVERY step along the way for it to be your art.

Art is more about the idea, then the actual implementation. That's why a giant blank canvas can be considered art, if the artist intends it to be art. Or an installation piece is still the artist's art, even if a museum worker actually sets up the display upon receiving it.

Your logic astounds me. If a costume can't be entered because the person didn't pick the cotton and make the fabric, then NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, can enter because I highly doubt any of the digital artists made the art program they used or the painters made their own paints or the tattoo guy made his own ink, etc. You don't have to perform every step of creating the materials, no duh, but you do have to actually make the art to have it be your art.

Art isn't just about an idea. If so, and as already pointed out, I could just tell someone what to draw/make and it would be my artwork. You're insulting to all the artists that entered this contest by using false logic to "interpret" the rules and by defending people not entering their own work.

dr love · Nov 04, 2009, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Dear tramp:

1. the golem is badass. enough people on the anet team voted for it and it won. i can understand why.

2. i can see why people are infuriated at the tattoo. all i can say is, it deserves a spot on the guildwars website, because everyone is still laughing about it (besides those that submitted entries that they labored over and didn't win). but personally i wouldn't have voted it as a winner for the contest.

3. yes you can pay someone to do your art for you, because you won't get caught. i'm sure the tattoo submission is not the only one. maybe the guy with the fold-able mad king paid the original artist to make him that piece. in terms of chinese gold farming mathematics, you can make a very good return (mini worth shite loads) on your investment (paying the artist). but there is a risk, you cannot guarantee to win (see many of the excellent submissions in this thread that didn't win) unless you can make an amazing costume/display (see jora and the golems + asura scene) which could run you $100's.

and as a side note, i find it interesting that the previous art contests with in game rewards (minis) had far superior submissions than the ones with real rewards (monetary etc.) of course, that is subjective, but most would agree.

Tramp · Nov 04, 2009, 04:03 PM // 16:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

As for the tattoo. Who owns the tattoo? Can the tattoo artist come up to the guy and rip it off his body? It is the guy's tattoo now, not the artist's. The idea for the tattoo was the guy's. He implemented it. He probably sketched it beforehand. He won for the IDEA of having a tattoo put on his body like that. You don't have to perform every step yourself for it to be your art.

Apparently, the person who won with cosplay shouldn't be allowed to win because they didn't pick the cotton by hand and create the fabric that was used to make the outfit. You don't have to perform EVERY step along the way for it to be your art.

Art is more about the idea, then the actual implementation.

Your argument is asinine if you use that logic to disprove my complaint that a third person was paid to create the person's tattoo, because it nullifies your defense of his submission also since he did not make the ink, the needle, etc.

The fact is a third person was paid real money to make someone else's idea into a submission.

I say it again, if that is the new standard for these contests, then it is fair for everyone to pay professional artists to make our projects if we are artistically challenged. If it is just the idea that counts and not the implementation, then we can all just scratch out an idea, send that in, and the judges can use their imagination as to how the idea would have looked if implemented perfectly. If they want more than an idea, then we can now pay 3rd party professionals real money to implement them for us since the tattoo is exactly that: a paid piece done by a third party with the idea submitted by the winner. You can not argue that fact. The judges have made it clear that this is acceptable.

dr love · Nov 04, 2009, 05:00 PM // 17:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tramp

then we can now pay 3rd party professionals real money to implement them for us ... a paid piece done by a third party with the idea submitted by the winner. You can not argue that fact. The judges have made it clear that this is acceptable.

did you ever have doubt that it wasn't an option??? seriously??? anet never asked for "proof in progress", and even then, there are ways around that. who's to say first place jora didn't pay someone to make her costume? there is no way of actually knowing, unless you were there when they created it. The tattoo blatantly is not the submitter's own artwork, because its on the guy's back. but what if the tattoo artist was his brother. is that not fair? What if some of the submissions had help from friends and family? should they be disallowed? the lines are not as clearly defined as you might think. i suppose you could compare it to a high school science experiment competition.

think of it from anets standpoint. their goal is to receive as much community involvement, and sexy submissions as possible to keep the game alive. in that respect, it is a success. it's unfortunate not everyone gets a reward, or even a display of their artwork (which is a reward in itself), but everyone was aware of that when they entered.

Skye Marin · Nov 04, 2009, 05:12 PM // 17:12

I'm kind of wondering why they didn't have more than 10 honorable mentions, considering the minis would still be very rare if more were distributed. Why not 100? Call it a special bonus.

It would make judging easier, and make the ultra-rare mini more available to those who feel they can afford it.

Deviant Angel · Nov 04, 2009, 05:21 PM // 17:21

I'm kinda wondering if anyone would cry about there only being 10 honorable mentions if the prize was a stack of pumpkin cookies instead of a minipet.

Reformed · Nov 04, 2009, 05:36 PM // 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deviant Angel

I'm kinda wondering if anyone would cry about there only being 10 honorable mentions if the prize was a stack of pumpkin cookies instead of a minipet.

I basically brought that up earlier and got a no but I came to your same conclusion. Then of course there are things like this...

"C/O 37,500e (Actual offer is for 5000 REAL Dollars, but I am not interested in cash so I converted the offer into what the person would have to buy from an illegal online site)"

Can't make this stuff up it's just too surreal.

dr love · Nov 04, 2009, 06:16 PM // 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skye Marin

I'm kind of wondering why they didn't have more than 10 honorable mentions, considering the minis would still be very rare if more were distributed. Why not 100? Call it a special bonus.

It would make judging easier, and make the ultra-rare mini more available to those who feel they can afford it.

it all depends on how many submissions they get. with more reward spots, more people would anticipate rewards. if someone didn't win and felt their submission was much better than 10 others, i'm sure they'd be mad.

ShadowsRequiem · Nov 04, 2009, 08:31 PM // 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

Are you really going to attempt to define art for us?

No they won't be able to define it, but it won't stop these ignorant people from posting.

Operative 14 · Nov 04, 2009, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbulger

who's to say first place jora didn't pay someone to make her costume?

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10404881

Jensy · Nov 04, 2009, 09:50 PM // 21:50

37k ectos. For a KSLDKFJSLDKFJS minipet? You've got to be kidding me.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Brb, laughing forever.

Tramp · Nov 05, 2009, 01:53 AM // 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbulger

did you ever have doubt that it wasn't an option??? seriously??? ..... The tattoo blatantly is not the submitter's own artwork, because its on the guy's back.

Yes, i understand it is an option to pay someone to do your work for you. But at least we both agree the tattoo is not the submitters work and this is a clear, unarguable violation of the rules as stated in the competition. If that was not a rule, i would say good job on the win (even though the head looks like ----). However, when the judges ignore their own rules, that really rubs me the wrong way. I might pay someone to tattoo "ANET" on my @$$ and enter that in the winter contest, and everytime I sit down it will be a my own personal payback for years of this stuff ~ contest rules that mean nothing, skill nerfs i hated, lagging out at crucial times, getting banned 3 or 4 times for moving gold to my storage account, etc., etc. That would make me feel better, lol. I would suggest we all get the tattoo and have a massive "sit in" protest like the hippies did back in the '60's. Get it? Sit in? At least i crack myself up. Oh...crack..lol. {sigh} i feel better already just thinking about it. maybe i will use a magic marker instead, probably less painful.

Dzjudz · Nov 05, 2009, 02:18 AM // 02:18

The art of the tattoo winner isn't the tattoo itself, it's the picture. In the same way a building can be art, but a picture of it can also be art

.