is this what this site is all about?

http://photoshopcontest.com/view-entry/75038/display.html

http://photos3.flickr.com/3132207_6a6cc8d631.jpg



and

http://photoshopcontest.com/view-entry/75054/display.html

http://www.heelsforyou.com/Pleaser/Monroe-26.jpg


because i think there's something seriously wrong with stealing other peoples work-i'm not trying to be mean or single out these authors, but wholly cow, this is disgraceful-how can this kind of behavior be tolerated by the members here? -both these posts continued to get votes even after the links to the original images were posted?wtf is that all about?are we telling people it's not only ok to steal but if you do we'll vote for you?--i'm feeling abit confused on this.maybe an older non-gumbie can explain what the hell's going on here-i'd be happy to get with a program and become a theif if that's what everyone wants-can someone clear this up for me?

I'm not sure which is more offensive... the person who enters such an image or the person who votes for it.

well to be fair i don't think it's the person voting's fault -we all like to assume the best of our fellow "artists"- and rightly so- i truely believe that most people are honorable-and i even voted for one of the examples i used above to show my appreciation for the "author'" sending me a link to his source upon my request-i don't think there's a problem using a stock image if you credit the work properly-i've seen authors like ronni and patre (and many others including myself)do this when they use stock imagery to composite a post..It's another thing though when an author tried to have us believe that they did the work to create a great image when in fact it was someone else-i think i understand your point though nancers-once a link has been posted it then becomes the responsibility of the voter to "do his/her homework" so to speak and take a look at the other image before making a voting decision-if that's what you meant i fully agree-

I think I may be confused myself...are you referring to the amount of work done? Or using the photo itself? Like, if someone wanted to make the staple gun into high-heel shoes, do they paint the shoes themselves? Is it sufficient to chop shoes out of one photo and paste them into another, then change the heel to a staplegun?

I don't mean this facetiously...I really am seeking clarification. I don't think either example is the same as a certain H2H entry, because that was changing one flying saucer-looking thing for another. This was changing a different object into a shoe or sewing machine.

I'm not saying either one is the height of chopping effort or creativity, just that they don't seem egregious enough to have their own thread. Let me know what you think!

*looks up "egregious" in dictionary*

as i said i don't have a problem with artists using stock imagery-just let us know-when you were in school didn't you have to footnote your work?i sure did..man i'll never forget doing that-i'm not telling anyone how to vote or who to vote for-all i'm saying is that if you're gonna use work other than your own (and it makes up a reasonable portion of your image)you should give credit where credit is due-there have been many times when i've used bits and pieces of other images and didn't credit the sources(an example is the finger in my post yesterday)-i'm not talking about that type of use-but we all know when we should give a link- and we've also all seen photo's taken from site's like Getty and presented as original work-to me that's offensive-sure you might be able to fool people but what have you accomplished in the long run?i say a person who engages in this kind of behavior is really only fooling themselves-we have a place here where we can get an honest response to our work-why would someone want anything else?just to get votes?but those votes arn't even really for them..i just don't understand that kind of thinking i guess

I may be going out on a limb here, but I don't see any problem with those two examples at all. It is fairly obvious that those are chops. I found the heel to be a fairly good chop at that. There is reflection work done on the craftsmen section of the heal by the way.

I'm not trying to offend you Nikon but I think you are reading to much into this. If people were to outright post someone elses work, thats a different issue, but otherwise, I say chop away.

Just my thoughts.

fair enough.i know everyone has their own opinion and i honestly wasn't trying to be mean or single anyone out... i agree there was good work done on the craftsman reflection -i didn't mean to be critical of the work that was done - only to point out that other people's work should be-- as a matter of fairness-- credited when it's used to the extent it was used in these two examples(in essence imo to define the entire image)-if you disagree i can respect that-i appreciate the input

Good stock images will always be here, remember it's an image vote for most, if ya like it you vote, if ya see good work in an image ya vote, if ya like naked reinman you need to seek professional help but ya still can vote. Forget the votes and enjoy the art.

i thought i was being clear but i guess i need to make this point one more time-i am NOT saying you shouldn't use stock images-NOR am i saying people should or should not vote for anything in particular-i would not presume to do that-all i'm saying, is that in my opinion, if a member posts an image that is of essence another persons work they should do the right thing and credit that work's author.Many members already do this in the form of a link-i can't imagine why anyone would object to this unless they wanted to intentionally defraud the other members-i know, for me ,when i vote for a post i think is original work only to find out later that it was someone else's stock imagery i voted for -i feel lousy about it-that's all i'm saying-i hope no one takes offence and if you disagree with the examples i chose i will respect your opinion

You're also a little confused about the difference between EJH and Nancers.

Nikon I understand your point, but dude it's a game fun time to be had, enjoy it for what it is. I use stock images all the time and I dont post links, ( because Im a hard drive storage junkie and dont know where half the images I use come from ) some times I get votes some times not, who cares enjoy yourself and dont beat ya self up over a vote, next day new image new idea new winner. Unless you are anfa, "Blessed be his right click", and ya just a PS god.

That's what I meant-- that if a source is cited and it's apparent that a miniscule amount of "work" has been done-- and it still gets a bunch of votes-- sometimes even comments to the effect of "even though it's a stock photo, I like it so here's a vote." I just don't get that.

If I were to take a Van Gogh off the wall and add a few brush strokes of my own, should I be praised for creating a nice piece of art?

No.

This site is about creation, not photo searching. Of course you need sources to work with, but there's a difference between using them as building blocks for your idea and just ripping off a beautiful or conceptual image with a bit of the PSC image pasted in as an afterthought.

lol...Cynn you're so right-- apologies to both EJH and Nancers-i'm easily befuddled in the face of the whole talent/beauty combination you all have going on : )

and Blue lurker i agree 100%-i do this for the fun and to get better-it just gets frustrating sometimes-alot of people that really try to do original chops seem to suffer in the voting as a result of stock images with the featured pic cut and pasted into them in some way-if that's really what members intended to vote for then way cool-i say more power to them-but if in fact they voted for an image they thought was done by another member-or even for features of that image they thought were created by the member but were not-well then that's not really fair-i also use stock imagery in my chops...but we both know the difference between using imagery to compose an image and just ripping one off outright.well,i know i do..and i believe that most of us do as well-i wouldn't assume that you used a stock image as the essential basis for your work unless you told me as much-(or you made it completely obvious)i believe you to be a good enough photoshop artist that you wouldn't feel the need to do that.At the same time in the tournement i voted for a post i also believed to be original work and was sad to find out later that it was ,in fact, essentially a stock image-if i had known before i cast my vote i believe i would have voted differently-the loser of that head to head deserved a fair shot-there's money and prestige involved there-and i really think that a member who tries their best deserves a fair chance

I dont diss-agree EJH, but I cant think of any images that score that well if there is little or no work done with PS. Most get pointed out by some one if they are rip offs, even the h2h had a stock image win, many votes for and against, ( would like to add here that Cynn took this like a true chopper, well done. ) what cane you do. Like most here I have spent hours working an image, no outside source, use every skill I have, and get trumped by a stock image with a cut and paste and blur effect. Thats just part of this site, in regards to the comment

Why not praise is given for all reasons, even big cans of soup get praise, did not Picaso say "that imitation is the greatest compliment that one can receive", if not Im sure he would have.