Rad Agast said:
Please stop saying "similarities", it's the same picture.
I think that i might have written poorly in my previous posts, i am sorry. I never ment to say that Sucker Punch used a similar skyline picture. The inFamous artwork is based on the skyline picture taken by Paulo Barcellos, i dont mean to say anything against that. If what i said was understood like this, then i am sorry :\ I know for sure that it is the same copyrighted skyline picture that was used to make the inFamous artwork
What i ment with similarities is that the inFamous artwork and the skyline picture arent identical looking at the whole pictures. One of the pictures as added lighting effects, added fire, a bit different color "tint" (or what it is called) etc. That is why i said similarities and not the same pictures.
test_account, you're rapidly leaving the realm of rational, reasonable doubt and moving into... well, I don't know what, but it's not a very good direction to move in.
It's the same picture, retouched and with the Cole character art and lightning effects added on top. That has been pretty much conclusively proven in this thread; there's no point in debating that part of the issue any further. That's why most people have moved on to working out whether there was a fashion in which the piece could have been used legally.
What exactly have i said that is so "crazy"? I have said several of times that i know that the inFamous artwork is based on the skyline picture. When i have refered to "the skyline picture" or to "this skyline picture" i have been refering to the skyline picture taken by by Paulo Barcellos, just so that is said
I never claimed that the inFamous artwork was original and made from scratch, i said that effect were added to the skyline picture, just like you say here. I have asked several of questions around if it was confirmed that the use of this skyline picture was theft. I never claimed that it wasnt theft, or at least i never ment to claim that at least. I also said that i hope that they guy who took the skyline picture will be payed by Sucker Punch and/or Sony and to be credited for his work, if he wants this.
So what have i said that is so "crazy"?
EDIT 2: Or did you think that i ment to say that there are 2 different skyline pictures that looks similar? If so, then i understand that you think that i am "crazy" for writing that, but i never ment to say that there were 2 different skyline pictures that are used here. It is definitly the same skyline picture that Paulo Barcellos took that is used in the inFamous artwork, i dont deny that at all.
Maybe my previous posts looked like i ment that there were 2 different skyline pictures, but if that is the case, then i am sorry for writing my previous posts poorly :\
Thus the reason I said he was daft. People keep saying it's possible to have a similar picture. It's IMPOSSIBLE to have the same cloud formations, light sources, and to have stood in the EXACT spot, down to the INCH, to have two pictures match exactly. It's not similar, it is the same.
Find me the exact same cloud formations, down to the inch, in the same city on two different days. I'm sorry folks, the reason there's "similarities" is because they are the same.
I think that there might have been some missundersanding here and maybe that i have written my prevoius posts poorly, i am sorry about that, so i want to clearify a bit what i said.
When i said the same picture, i ment the inFamous artwork, not the skyline picture. I ment to say that i dont see why you need to take a picture with the exact same clound formations, light sources and be at the exact same spot to make so to say the same inFamous artwork. The most important thing is probably the angle though, but i dont know how hard it is to get the same angle so to say.
As Narag said earlier, it would probably be hard to do this without the use of the skyline picture, but is it impossible? I dont know, since i am no artist myself, but i know that there are many really good artists out there, so i would guess that someone could make so to say the same inFamous artwork without the use of this exact skyline picture.
And just to underline, when i said similar picture, i was refering to and comparing the inFamous artwork picture and the skyline picture. I never ment to say that Sucker Punch used a similar skyline picture. I know for sure that Sucker Punch's inFamous artwork is based on the same skyline picture that Paulo Barcellos took, i dont doubt that for one second.
And to clearify some more, just because i say that it could be possible to take a similar skyline picture and make so to say the same inFamous artwork by using another skyline picture instead, i never ment to say that it was ok to use this particular skyline picture that is copyrighted just because it might be easy to take a similar picture. If a picture is copyrighted, then it is copyrighted, no matter how easy it should be to replicate the same picture.
I am sorry if what i wrote earlier was missunderstood or poorly written by me, but i hope that what i ment is a bit clearer now
EDIT: I added some text. I am sorry for the long posts here as well :\