Is this a recolor?
 

Me and a staff member of mine just had a confrontation because I wouldn't use one of the bodies that he made for me, because I thought it was a recolor of a Graal Kingdoms body. He argued against me for some time stating that it is not a recolor, and that 'the pixels are completely different.'

I was under the impression that adding a few lines and changing the shading style of a graphic does not make the graphic 'completely different'

So I just wanted to ask you, the graphics community, what you think of this matter. Is this graphic a recolor? (I have attached both the GK version, and the version that he made.)

100% Recolor. Adding dots does not make it your own.


You are correct, good sir.

I'd call it a recolor, the outline's the same, just a few details changed. Although it's a good recolor. Maybe they should change the outline of the body a bit ;)

I've got a few questions...

What's the dispute over? Where's he using it? Does he want to use it on some server other than GK? (sorry, I don't know what PW your associated with) If he submitted it for GK hoping it would get uploaded, why not allow it? There's nothing wrong with recolors in that case. Somebody might want a light green shirt. Don't need to come up with something completly new just to get that done.

Also... is he trying to take all the credit for it? Or does he just want the credit that he edited it? Either way, if it is for GK, it shouldn't matter much. I'd put it up anyway.

Thats about the definition of recolor.

Recolooooor <3

That's defernately a recolour, besides the few few creases in the body.

Or not.

He cut and pasted and moved a few pixels. That does not make it an original work. It's a recolor.

Yea, totally.

the outline is the same, so it''s technically a recolor. It's nicely done though XD

Yea, someone take the outline of the Mona Lisa and put some airplanes and baseball bats in there.

We'll see if it's a recolor then.

I don't care if the content still directly relates to the original or not, it's changed dramatically (more than a "few pixels"). It's not a recolor.

I think the differences here are dramatically less then the ones you describe in your mona lisa example.
Its really a judgment call I suppose, without zooming in to %500, most cannot tell the difference. Thats a problem if you ask me.

Let's not forget that the images in question are all quite small.

To make any definitions it must be done by magnifying.

Recolor. I'm sticking to it.

Its not a recolor, but a copy, which is just a recolor with more work =D

x-x I explained in the first post that one of my staff members (I do not work on GK) tried to get me to upload it.

Also, Stephen, the only difference I see in that zoomed in version is that the highlights are a bit more vibrant, and the shading doesn't spread out as much.

In which case you failed to noticed that they're in entirely different places, and assume entirely different shapes. :P

It's a recolor that was copied and modified.

No, it isn't. As Zero has pointed out several times now, the patterns and even the lining on the shirts is quite different. The outlining is the only thing that is the same.

But isnt that how recoloring something is defined? You take an outline and then recolor the inside? Don't get me wrong, I'm agreeing that he did more work then if it was a simple recolor, but its also silly to consider it an original work.

More than the color was changed, and therefor... IS NOT A RECOLOR.
Thank you.

These are the parts that are not the same shape in the two bodies...

Im going to go with recolor and adding of a couple pixels.

Very nice job.

It's 200% a recolor. Anyone who says otherwise smokes rocks!

In the examples I've produced #1,# 2, and #3 are all recolors. While #4, regardless of it's different color from the original, has been modified from the original.

It's not a recolor, it's a modification of the original.

I changed the color and added 89 pixels around it as did the person who submitted this body. I still call it a recolor

I don't think it was changed enough to be considered not a recolor. It is a recolor.

However, there are obviously quite a bit of detailed changes. What should we call these? Let's makeup a new word!

Perhaps "modcolors".

Actually now that I look at them, they are drastically changed I wouldn't call it a recolor at all. We used fungsiyan head templates to make heads back in Graal classic. Are all the Graal heads recolors? No

They are modcolors ;-)

Geez, everyone ignored Cid Knight and he had the most well stated comment here...

No, Antago, it's drastically different. You didnt take an airbrush to FungSiYan and make the lighting and shading a little different...then slap it online. You used FungSiYan as a bare bones head shape template and added a new hairstyle.

This is a relatively small piece, considering the size of his changes, and the actual visual difference they make - they're considerably drastic.

Actually it's outline has been modified quite a bit, and if you will see, the fourth row is very altered.

Modcolor, Charlie. :-)

I'm with the psychic on this one. It's the best way to describe it.