When is a rip, a rip?

So I've been checking out some new PS tutorials recently and learning some new tricks and skills along the way, as well as gathering inspirarion for new pieces of artwork to create and it occured to me... where exactly do you draw the line when it comes to ripping? I mean, if I follow one of Pank's tutorials on the Team PS site and use these acquired skills to create something of my own, it's obviously going to have *some level* of influence in the newly created artwork.

So then is this a rip?

I'd like to offer an example of a piece I did that includes something I learned from a tutorial but I altered the settings and steps the author used to accomodate my own preferences, and then I added my own custom modifications to create something new.

http://www.d4design.net/images/carbon_example.jpg

I've included the author's end-result of his tutorial so you can compare.

And then I ask... is this a rip?

No it isn't a rip. Tutorials are written so you can duplicate that exact effect. It's really only ripping when you take someone's artwork. For instance if I took that picture you made, put my name on it and said i made it, then that would be ripping. But you following a simple tutorial is far from ripping.

If someone make a tutorial but would not accept to have anyone use it to make stuuf they will pout on a website or in a magzine... it would be pretty stupid... and pretty pointless

Plus it can see it is not an erxact replica... you came up with your own touch... iwch is the good way to use a tutorial...

If it's a tutorial, then the writer obviously wants to teach others how to achieve an effect. It only makes sense that you should be able to follow the tutorial without accusation.

"My" opinion...
If somebody actually "steals" your graphics it's a rip.
If they make their own graphics (even if they look like yours) I don't consider it a rip. Does it suck and are they wrong. Of course. But only true theifs do I consider rippers. I just consider the other ones uncreative and lazy...

May I just say to D4TVGFX that as a beginning designer, this post really brightens my day.
You are going out of your way to make sure that your work is not copyrighted already and you're making sure that you're not plagiarising. It shows your concern for your work being 100% truly yours.

It's a very healthy attitude. Keep it up. :D

ouch! i think pank just called me uncreative and lazy!

[QUOTE=supahsekzy]May I just say to D4TVGFX that as a beginning designer, this post really brightens my day.
You are going out of your way to make sure that your work is not copyrighted already and you're making sure that you're not plagiarising. It shows your concern for your work being 100% truly yours.

It's a very healthy attitude. Keep it up. :D[/QUOTE]

There is nothing that can be done that hasn't been done once before.

Example. Before the whole "grunge" craze died out and people started making "simplistically" designed sites...that's exactly what I was doing...i didn't start it...but i was there...now everyone does it and a style I once loved has been called trendwhore...

Someone called me a trendwhore the other day when I showed them something I did 4 years ago. Man, that hurt.

There is nothing that can be done that hasn't been done once before.

Okay okay, my bad. You're right, but can't you give the guy a break? I still think it's a healthy attitude for him to be having.

[QUOTE=D4TVGFX]ouch! i think pank just called me uncreative and lazy![/QUOTE]

NO, not at all. You misunderstood me. If somebody copies/duplicates a site I have an issue. Doing bit's and pieces on your own (but inspired) is a different story. Ax hit it on the head.

We ALL copy somewhat. Whether it's from TV, magazines, web sites, etc... We are ALL guilty for the most part. New looks are developed by using bits and pieces of old stuff but throwing in your own mix.

The good ones just get by with it because they don't make it obvious ;)