In article <56706c41$1@news.povray.org>, ano### [at] anonymousorg says...
> Because as it has been presented so far, this smells a bit like a 
poorly
> disguised attempt by a certain The Jamaica Focus MediaStream Corporation
> -- which otherwise seems to put great emphasis on the concept of
> intellectual property -- to recruit some freelance artists for zero payment.

I am confused by the web site.  On the one hand, it is soliciting for 
work/web hosting. Ok. On the other hand, click here to donate money to 
the company. Um, what?

I gave up before I ran across any IP references.

dik

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> I do not want to sound cynical but I doubt there are many artists who
> accept to create something only to be simply part of somebody else's
> work. Most will be reluctant to do so if I am not mistaken. A creation
> process is very individualistic with a strong proprietary sense. Maybe
> in advertisements work (for instance) that may not be so, but in that
> case you are paid for your work. Just my two cents of course.
>
>
> --
> Thomas

My thoughts exactly.

Personally, all my time, energy, efforts and interests are already "reserved"
for my own project(s) only. I'm having my very own visions, plans, goals and
ways of doing things and all, thus it'd feel extremely weird and wrong to have
any of that stuff included in someone elses work.

Post a reply to this message

On 25-12-2015 16:08, Pekka Aho wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> I do not want to sound cynical but I doubt there are many artists who
>> accept to create something only to be simply part of somebody else's
>> work. Most will be reluctant to do so if I am not mistaken. A creation
>> process is very individualistic with a strong proprietary sense. Maybe
>> in advertisements work (for instance) that may not be so, but in that
>> case you are paid for your work. Just my two cents of course.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> My thoughts exactly.
>
> Personally, all my time, energy, efforts and interests are already "reserved"
> for my own project(s) only. I'm having my very own visions, plans, goals and
> ways of doing things and all, thus it'd feel extremely weird and wrong to have
> any of that stuff included in someone elses work.
>

Well, that is something very true to consider indeed. I totally agree.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Hmmm.....
The same concepts exists all over the world, and many of us accept free
cooperations actually. Let me give you examples:

OPEN OFFICE
Many software developers are working together to produce Open Office.
Yes, Oracle is the company behind. And still, people work together. For
free (yes, I know, it's a sin in your eyes).

FACEBOOK
Everyone who uses Facebook agrees to give personal data to the marketing
and advertizing companies behind, FB earns a fortune by that. Still,
many persons support that money-earning concept from FB by using it and
submitting therefore their data. For my part, I do not intend to earn
money from my spaceship. In fact, based on an earlier discussion with
one of the active members here, I got the intention to offer my
spaceship, when it is finish, to the POV-Ray team as free include for
all other users. For my own part, I am not someone who's just always
greedy for money. I have some other values I am believing in and this
will show when I offer my ship as includable scene file to the POV-Ray team.

POV-RAY
If I'm not entirely wrong, it might be, that the one or other person who
develops POV-Ray does it also without charging money. Still, POV-Ray is
also a legal body, a type of company (though anachronistically and
anarchical  non-commercial like me).

POV-RAY
There is also the object database, where users upload (without
charging?!?) their creations in order to make them available to all
others. This was the intended destiny for my ship, if the POV-Ray team
would reject my offer to have it included as includable scene file
through the editor menu. Strange, that so many people are sinning by
giving their input for free...

SPORE
You even have to purchase that game, in order to be fully able to create
your own creations and upload them for everyone's availability. It is a
very commercial company behind. Still, millions do this.

WINAMP
This music player, developed by a commercial company, lives from its
amazing visual plugins that display the most amazing visual patterns in
the rhythm of the music it plays. These plugins are developed by private
persons, and help that commercial company to distribute their products
(not only WinAmp as the basic version is free, like POV-Ray).

ME
My initial idea was, to populate a virtual universe with the amazing
creations of others and me (search for my other postings, months and
years ago). But this is not a commercial project, thus it must not be
supported. I understand that, I see the larger pattern.

Many other big and very commercial companies invite regular people to do
things for them, and they do. I don't really like that idea, as this is
in my eyes exploitation. But I am a private person, I am acting as
private person, and what I do with POV-Ray, is my private fun and hobby.
I am waiting for the first person to come forward and trying to tell me,
that I am intending to use my ship in some company-based commercial way.

I understand, that in a world driven by money, gold, glitter and other
false (or destructive) values, it is not easy to find open minds who
would participate in a project just for the sake of fun. Most people, I
agree as this is what I am observing since many years, want money. Maybe
it is my big fault, that I just cannot believe in money alone. But I
respect, of course, the decisions of each of you here. Well, no problem,
I won't ask ever again for interested people to join. I will use just my
own creations for the virtual space world I am creating.

---

I herewith pull down my call for the contest, and consider this thread
as closed. I also promise, that I won't ever again ask for others to
join for a larger, common project. No need to answer this thread again,
as I understood and won't open this thread again for reading. Mankind's
attitude is causing to much frustration and limitations.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/26/2015 11:32 AM, Sven Littkowski wrote:
> Hmmm.....

>

Hmm! indeed.
You might have gotten better support for your ideas if you hadn't asked 
for help in the past. Allowed other users to spend hours of their time 
to donate models only to never to hear from you again except to start 
over with the same thing and on top of that to demand more bespoke 
customiseations your your use.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

I never used the word "money" did I? I was talking about "Art" and 
"creation".

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Am 26.12.2015 um 12:32 schrieb Sven Littkowski:
> Hmmm.....
> The same concepts exists all over the world, and many of us accept free
> cooperations actually. Let me give you examples:
> 
> OPEN OFFICE
> Many software developers are working together to produce Open Office.
> Yes, Oracle is the company behind. And still, people work together. For
> free (yes, I know, it's a sin in your eyes).

Interestingly, the primary developers have by now hollered out loud
"f*ck you, Oracle!" and moved on to Libre Office.

> FACEBOOK
> Everyone who uses Facebook agrees to give personal data to the marketing
> and advertizing companies behind, FB earns a fortune by that.

Most people just don't realize that that's what they're doing.

> POV-RAY
> If I'm not entirely wrong, it might be, that the one or other person who
> develops POV-Ray does it also without charging money. Still, POV-Ray is
> also a legal body, a type of company (though anachronistically and
> anarchical  non-commercial like me).

Actually, the legal body is "Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd." -- and the fact
that it even exists is because other companies tried to rip off the
project by including POV-Ray code in their commercial products without
even so much as giving credit.

That aside, you certainly misunderstood the point Pekka was making, and
to which Thomas agreed: They didn't say "sharing is bad"; what they said
was, "I'm not into doing art as a joint effort."

Both may be fine with sharing some of their /existing/ work in one way
or the other (as a matter, presenting the resulting images here already
constitutes some way of sharing), and they certainly won't condemn
others who love to join forces with others to create art."

Also...

> I herewith pull down my call for the contest, and consider this thread
> as closed. I also promise, that I won't ever again ask for others to
> join for a larger, common project. No need to answer this thread again,
> as I understood and won't open this thread again for reading. Mankind's
> attitude is causing to much frustration and limitations.

... it's an entirely different matter whether you ask others to join
/your/ art project, or whether you ask others to start a /common/
project together with you.


As for me, I'm not doing POV-Ray development for altruistic reasons. I
do it for the very egoistic sake of getting a pat on the shoulder now
and again from the users of my work.

Also, I didn't join the POV-Ray dev team because they asked for coding
monkeys to implement their vision. I did it because I love to do
realistically-looking renders (when I find the time), which in POV-Ray
inevitably means radiosity, but integration of radiosity in POV-Ray 3.7
-- which promised faster render times -- was lagging behind. I was
impatient to see the feature implemented, and if that meant having to
get my hands dirty on the POV-Ray code myself, that's what I'd do.


If you want people to join a project of yours, you either have to pay
them some kind of compensation, or you /really/ need to get across that
it'll also be /their/ project. And at that you're doing a pretty poor
job. Nobody will volunteer for a project if they get the impression
they'll be nothing more than your odd hand.

Post a reply to this message

Am 26.12.2015 um 12:32 schrieb Sven Littkowski:

> ME
> My initial idea was, to populate a virtual universe with the amazing
> creations of others and me (search for my other postings, months and
> years ago).

BTW, you may have mentioned it back then (I won't bother to check), but
you never, ever mentioned it this time.

> But this is not a commercial project, thus it must not be
> supported. I understand that, I see the larger pattern.

No, you apparently do /not/ see the larger pattern, which boils down to
an entirely different matter: You suck at marketing(*) ;)


(*That is, marketing in the broadest sense: There is no such thing in
the entire universe as altruism for the sake of being altruistic, or
collaboration for the sake of collaborating; there is always the
expectation involved to get /something/ in return, whether it is money,
fame, security, fun, or whatever. If you want to coax others into doing
something that would make /you/ happy, you need to convince them that
they'll get something out of it to make /them/ happy as well. That's not
only the essence of capitalistic marketing, but of any cooperation
between humans, or any other form of life for that matter.)

Post a reply to this message

Am 26.12.2015 um 12:49 schrieb Stephen:

> You might have gotten better support for your ideas if you hadn't asked
> for help in the past. Allowed other users to spend hours of their time
> to donate models only to never to hear from you again except to start
> over with the same thing and on top of that to demand more bespoke
> customiseations your your use.

Might that have been related to the hard drive crash that wiped Sven's
collection of POV-Ray files clean off the face of the earth some years ago?
Just wondering.


@Sven:

I think you should be worried about the fact that your way of
approaching people in your recent original(*) postings makes it easy not
only to believe that what Stephen just wrote is true (I have no idea
whether it is, it might have slipped past me, dropped from my memory,
happened before my days, or never at all), but also to believe that it
is unrelated to that unfortunate hard drive crash and rather due to some
personality trait of yours.

That means you probably should do two things:

(1) Examine your own habits in all honesty to yourself, to figure out
whether this is just a matter of miscommunication or indeed a matter of
personality; and

(2) try to change whatever the fundamental problem is.

It will help you better get along with people in the future.

Neither of these things is easy for ordinary people to do (especially
the being-honest-to-yourself part), so if you do have the will to
address it, I would recommend going through these steps with a bit of
help from professionals, namely a psychologist (the shrink type, not the
looney-fixing type, for step 1 and possibly 2), and/or a communication
coach (for step 2, if turns out to be just a matter of miscommunication).


(* Original as in, starting a new thread; I'm specifically excluding
replies here because they don't reflect how you approach people, but how
you interact with them once a communication has already started. I
consider that phase to be of minor to no relevance here, as any issues
there may be just an echo of issues already present in the initial post.)

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 16.12.2015 09:40, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> I do not want to sound cynical but I doubt there are many artists who
> accept to create something only to be simply part of somebody else's
> work. Most will be reluctant to do so if I am not mistaken.

...that would be artisanship rather than artistry!

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Now playing: Tribute to Franz Lambert - Samba Medley (Florian Hutter)

Post a reply to this message