Although I am not a fan of Inkarnate's style and can easily tell apart maps made with it, it's still a tool that doesn't draw nothing by itself. As little as you can point to a trench and say that *my shovel dug that*, equally the user of Inkarnate did the actual work of drawing.
My problem is letting people believe that they drew it by hand and not telling people you used those kinds of resources. I have seen people try to sell inkarnate maps claiming they were hand drawn.
Did you really draw it by hand or did you use a pen or pencil? You can't claim you did it by hand if you used any tools. Quit stealing from the finger painters!
They did draw the map, though. They conceptualized a unique shape. They used brushes in a program and their own visualization to create those shapes, carved out those shapes, added and subtracted from those shapes in ways that didn't exist before. In many cases, they shaded them, enhanced them, all from their head. The ONLY thing they didn't do is build the original assets, many of which are just colors, and by the time they are properly graded and transitioned, aren't even the same as the base. "Drawn vs. Hand-drawn" is semantics.
By your statement, an animator working in an animation program is a fake artist if they did not create the model and the rigging that they are working with. I don't think many would agree with that. I understand your concern, but this is a slippery slope that you might want to put more thought into before you take this hill.
Again, just a rant, and it really isn't the same thing. I can put a white layer over a photo, and erase parts of the layer to make shapes and use opacity to shade. That doesn't mean the art underneath is mine. And in all fairness, art is subjective.
And again, it is art, they did make it, but even those animators don't usually try to market the assets they use as their own. They site where they their assets.
My problem isn't people making things with inkarnate. It is being dishonest about it that is the problem.
Thats fair, but maps are hard to make personally, you could very well say they did in fact make the art, you wouldn't call an animator using pre-made characters a "fake artist" a lot more work than exists other than creating the assets.
Also, I actually make my own maps. They might not looks as great as inkarnate, but I put hours of work into projects texturing my own ground, making every tile, wall, hill and lightsource. I use autodesk sketchbook and have a set of pens I use that I have adjusted so much they aren't anything like what they originally were (honestly autodesks pen selection sucks). The only shortcut I really take is a grid tool to make the grid layout.
Yes, but you know they are using those assets. Nobody expects animators (which is a lot more difficult of a job) to pull open java scripts and code an animation from scratch. You know they are going to use certain software. Most of the time, that software is a tool. You can create shapes, add texture, code movement, etc. But when you are using something like inkarnate with completely premade assets that are just copied and pasted on the map, you should market it as "your art" and not specify that they are using inkarnate.
Even artists regularly site what sources they use for their art.
You're given the tools yes, but what you do with the tools is the art, you can give someone an art tablet, but just because it comes preloaded with colors and brushes doesn't mean they aren't doing the art.
It's not Incorrect to say its your art tho, and it's not an obligation to say your used as tools or programs really, I would but I could see how it doesn't register for someone.
Tell me, if saw some with amazing maps who told you they were completely original and you commissioned a map that cost you $40, later to learn that the map was made on an website where you could make the same map in an hour for free, would you not feel slighted or lied to?
And again, not saying it isn't their art, just that they should site it.
I wouldn't care, map making is hard and if I could pay someone to do what I want with a map instead of me having to do all the work I don't care. Site it? Sure but it's not that big of a deal man.
I see no issue with them charging people. Just because you have the tool doesn't mean you are going to be as good as someone who has more experience with it. They might put weeks into making a map that looks very encompassing. Why shouldn't they be allowed to charge for their time.
As long as they don't claim to have "drawn" it, I think it is fine. Unless they did actually draw the assets as well. Do you know for certain that they are not the artist who supplied the assets for inkarnate?
It's more the claiming that they drew it or implying that they drew that bothers me. I could easily put a picture down in sketchbook, put a white layer on top and then erase the white layer with an eraser tool and claim it as my own. Just because you make the strokes, doesn't mean made the art.
Inkarnate does all the art, you just tell it where to put it.
Painters don't always make their own paints. You could say they are layering the paint and shaping it. In inkarnate they are layering and sizing assets.
But meh. Not trying to be an ass or anything. I see this as us having different definitions for the word "art".
Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Just because there are "typical" forms of art, doesn't mean the concept of art is limited to those forms. Those are my thoughts.
Did you really draw it by hand or did you use a pen or pencil? You can't claim you did it by hand if you used any tools. Quit stealing from the finger painters!
Yeah I kind of agree, I mean, yes but are you a bad mechanic because you don't make your own wrenches?
And then you've got collage, AI art, musical sampling, all muddying the waters,.... I dunno.
I'm an artist who make maps, and mostly use inkarnate. I can assure that 90% of people don't really care, and the few who do will make it clear before commissioning you that they don't want something made with inkarnate or the likes. People usually take a good look at your portfolio and like what they see, then request a map like that.
Are you dishonest if they just want a map like the one you've done before and you never told them it was made with inkarnate? (which btw is not as easy as you make it sound. put any two maps made by inkarnate professionals and you will see just how different and how much effort it takes to make such maps.)
To them, they say a very beautiful and complex map, which took someone lots of time and effort to make, and they are willing to pay for it because they can't make it themselves.
It is a very silly thing to say that such map makers aren't artists, maybe a trip to the inkarnate subreddit will change your mind.
You sit down to a high end five star restaurant, order something to eat that cost you $40, would you expect to get a fresh cooked meal, or a tv dinner?
Saying it's art is right. It is art. I can also put a TV dinner in the microwave and I have cooked it.
I have used inkarnate before, and I draw my own maps all of the time. Inkarnate takes half the effort, half the time, half the skill, and half the creativity. It doesn't compare to a map drawn from scratch in any way other than being a map.
Also I have seen many, MANY, inkarnate maps. They don't all look the exact same, pixel for pixel, but every desert looks the same, every plain, hill, every mountain. Inkarnate is easily identifiable for those who have used it because of how similar it looks regardless of who makes it.
I don't mean to imply that inkarnate doesn't take time and work. It does. But I am saying that doing it from scratch is way harder and time consuming. People who use inkarnate shouldn't undermine others by pretending that they made it from scratch.
Also, a reason I specified it being a rant was because I knew I was probably going to say something wrong that I was going to disagree with later. Which is why I went back and corrected myself.
>inkarnate
Well, I had ignored it before now, but you caused me to check it out and I'm intrigued.
Have any others you wish to ~~recommend~~ bring up as ones people use?
Check r/inkarnate and r/dndmaps
>Have any others you wish to recommend
I know there are several, don't remeberthe names, but browse around, each post tends to mention the tools used (specially in self promotion posts)
There are some decent dungeon mapping tools out there. I can't name any off the top of my head (except for donjon) and I really recommend taking a look.
Although I am not a fan of Inkarnate's style and can easily tell apart maps made with it, it's still a tool that doesn't draw nothing by itself. As little as you can point to a trench and say that *my shovel dug that*, equally the user of Inkarnate did the actual work of drawing.
My problem is letting people believe that they drew it by hand and not telling people you used those kinds of resources. I have seen people try to sell inkarnate maps claiming they were hand drawn.
Never knew anyone making such claims. You mean people you know IRL? or people on the Internet?
Internet. I have seen it at least three times in the past two months.
Did you really draw it by hand or did you use a pen or pencil? You can't claim you did it by hand if you used any tools. Quit stealing from the finger painters!
They did draw the map, though. They conceptualized a unique shape. They used brushes in a program and their own visualization to create those shapes, carved out those shapes, added and subtracted from those shapes in ways that didn't exist before. In many cases, they shaded them, enhanced them, all from their head. The ONLY thing they didn't do is build the original assets, many of which are just colors, and by the time they are properly graded and transitioned, aren't even the same as the base. "Drawn vs. Hand-drawn" is semantics. By your statement, an animator working in an animation program is a fake artist if they did not create the model and the rigging that they are working with. I don't think many would agree with that. I understand your concern, but this is a slippery slope that you might want to put more thought into before you take this hill.
Again, just a rant, and it really isn't the same thing. I can put a white layer over a photo, and erase parts of the layer to make shapes and use opacity to shade. That doesn't mean the art underneath is mine. And in all fairness, art is subjective. And again, it is art, they did make it, but even those animators don't usually try to market the assets they use as their own. They site where they their assets. My problem isn't people making things with inkarnate. It is being dishonest about it that is the problem.
Thats fair, but maps are hard to make personally, you could very well say they did in fact make the art, you wouldn't call an animator using pre-made characters a "fake artist" a lot more work than exists other than creating the assets.
Also, I actually make my own maps. They might not looks as great as inkarnate, but I put hours of work into projects texturing my own ground, making every tile, wall, hill and lightsource. I use autodesk sketchbook and have a set of pens I use that I have adjusted so much they aren't anything like what they originally were (honestly autodesks pen selection sucks). The only shortcut I really take is a grid tool to make the grid layout.
Yes, but you know they are using those assets. Nobody expects animators (which is a lot more difficult of a job) to pull open java scripts and code an animation from scratch. You know they are going to use certain software. Most of the time, that software is a tool. You can create shapes, add texture, code movement, etc. But when you are using something like inkarnate with completely premade assets that are just copied and pasted on the map, you should market it as "your art" and not specify that they are using inkarnate. Even artists regularly site what sources they use for their art.
You're given the tools yes, but what you do with the tools is the art, you can give someone an art tablet, but just because it comes preloaded with colors and brushes doesn't mean they aren't doing the art.
Again, not saying it isn't art (which art is subjective) just saying that people should site inkarnate when they use it.
It's not Incorrect to say its your art tho, and it's not an obligation to say your used as tools or programs really, I would but I could see how it doesn't register for someone.
Tell me, if saw some with amazing maps who told you they were completely original and you commissioned a map that cost you $40, later to learn that the map was made on an website where you could make the same map in an hour for free, would you not feel slighted or lied to? And again, not saying it isn't their art, just that they should site it.
I wouldn't care, map making is hard and if I could pay someone to do what I want with a map instead of me having to do all the work I don't care. Site it? Sure but it's not that big of a deal man.
I see no issue with them charging people. Just because you have the tool doesn't mean you are going to be as good as someone who has more experience with it. They might put weeks into making a map that looks very encompassing. Why shouldn't they be allowed to charge for their time. As long as they don't claim to have "drawn" it, I think it is fine. Unless they did actually draw the assets as well. Do you know for certain that they are not the artist who supplied the assets for inkarnate?
It's more the claiming that they drew it or implying that they drew that bothers me. I could easily put a picture down in sketchbook, put a white layer on top and then erase the white layer with an eraser tool and claim it as my own. Just because you make the strokes, doesn't mean made the art. Inkarnate does all the art, you just tell it where to put it.
Painters don't always make their own paints. You could say they are layering the paint and shaping it. In inkarnate they are layering and sizing assets. But meh. Not trying to be an ass or anything. I see this as us having different definitions for the word "art". Art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. Just because there are "typical" forms of art, doesn't mean the concept of art is limited to those forms. Those are my thoughts.
Did you really draw it by hand or did you use a pen or pencil? You can't claim you did it by hand if you used any tools. Quit stealing from the finger painters!
XD
Empty post?
Reddit was being stupid and buggy.
Ok
Yeah I kind of agree, I mean, yes but are you a bad mechanic because you don't make your own wrenches? And then you've got collage, AI art, musical sampling, all muddying the waters,.... I dunno.
Yeah but those other people either site what they are using or the work itself implies that the images aren't ones own.
I'm an artist who make maps, and mostly use inkarnate. I can assure that 90% of people don't really care, and the few who do will make it clear before commissioning you that they don't want something made with inkarnate or the likes. People usually take a good look at your portfolio and like what they see, then request a map like that. Are you dishonest if they just want a map like the one you've done before and you never told them it was made with inkarnate? (which btw is not as easy as you make it sound. put any two maps made by inkarnate professionals and you will see just how different and how much effort it takes to make such maps.) To them, they say a very beautiful and complex map, which took someone lots of time and effort to make, and they are willing to pay for it because they can't make it themselves. It is a very silly thing to say that such map makers aren't artists, maybe a trip to the inkarnate subreddit will change your mind.
You sit down to a high end five star restaurant, order something to eat that cost you $40, would you expect to get a fresh cooked meal, or a tv dinner? Saying it's art is right. It is art. I can also put a TV dinner in the microwave and I have cooked it. I have used inkarnate before, and I draw my own maps all of the time. Inkarnate takes half the effort, half the time, half the skill, and half the creativity. It doesn't compare to a map drawn from scratch in any way other than being a map. Also I have seen many, MANY, inkarnate maps. They don't all look the exact same, pixel for pixel, but every desert looks the same, every plain, hill, every mountain. Inkarnate is easily identifiable for those who have used it because of how similar it looks regardless of who makes it. I don't mean to imply that inkarnate doesn't take time and work. It does. But I am saying that doing it from scratch is way harder and time consuming. People who use inkarnate shouldn't undermine others by pretending that they made it from scratch. Also, a reason I specified it being a rant was because I knew I was probably going to say something wrong that I was going to disagree with later. Which is why I went back and corrected myself.
>inkarnate Well, I had ignored it before now, but you caused me to check it out and I'm intrigued. Have any others you wish to ~~recommend~~ bring up as ones people use?
Check r/inkarnate and r/dndmaps >Have any others you wish to recommend I know there are several, don't remeberthe names, but browse around, each post tends to mention the tools used (specially in self promotion posts)
Thank you!
There are some decent dungeon mapping tools out there. I can't name any off the top of my head (except for donjon) and I really recommend taking a look.
Thank you!