This comparison was first made by someone on 4chan who put together the image I'm using here:



The first is from Hunter: the Vigil, the second from the popular video game Devil May Cry... released in 2005. It's pretty obviously a rip-off tracing of it with a few details smudged over because the artist had trouble doing them. Little details like the spear in the background, the cut of the hair and the lay of the coat are either identical, or near-enough to identical to show that it's not merely similar, but actually a copy.

I can't find a listing of who the artist was anywhere, but if someone can, it would be the right thing to confront them about their unacknowledged rip-off. White-Wolf is remaining mum while GenCon is going on, but this post on RPG.net by one of the contributors to Hunter:the Vigil mentions that it may not even be the only plagiarised illustration in his section.

In commercial and comic art its often referred to as "swipe" and it is endemic. There used ot be a page somewhere with tons of it. There are whole comics out there that are nothing but one swiped panel after another. Copying (not tracing) is a great way to learn how to draw, but you have to understand right from the start that you can't claim the work as your own- and sooner or later (best it be sooner) you need to go your own way- in fact, if you have ANYTHING going on at all it should take care of itself.

That is just so sad and pathetic, considering that WW once sued Sony over the Underworld movie (yeah, like vampires and werewolves were their creation).

But hey, I guess plagiarism means "mature" these days!

Hell, 1st edition Vampire: the Masquerade had character drawings that were copied from a Victoria's Secret catalogue.  Nothing quite so obvious as this, but there it was.

!i!

Thanks for pointing this out. This kind of thing really pisses me off. As a teenager, I aspired to be an artist. Life got in the way of that. There was a kid at my high school who did shit like this all the time. He'd trace other artist's work with an opaque projector, sometimes with minor changes, sometimes without, then claim it as his own. My teacher, Mr. Pittman, who still teaches there BTW, had absolutely no patience for it. kid's mom couldn't understand why her son got such poor grades in art class. One time, the kid actually bought a painting, defaced the artist's name, and signed it himself. Total bullshit. The only original thing he ever did was a Jackson Pollock style drip painting, which actually wasn't bad, as such things go.

Years later, there was this lady in community theater, who always did a Katherine Hepburn impression. I saw her in two shows, both of which had been done as movies with Hepburn ('The Lion in Winter' and 'Suddenly Last Summer'). She did a full-on Hepburn, accent, palsy, the works. I told her both times it was bullshit. If you can't do your own work, you're not an artist. I'd rather see somene's flawed, not-quite-there original work than look at some half-assed copy, no matter how good the source material. God this pisses me off.

 Do you know the name of the offending "artist"?

Quote from: Leo Knight;235801Years later, there was this lady in community theater, who always did a Katherine Hepburn impression.... look at some half-assed copy, no matter how good the source material. God this pisses me off.

Digitally copying art and then editing details doesn't take much skill, which is why it's considered not quite art.

Learning to imitate someone's voice and mannerisms to the extent that you can do them perfectly, is performance art, and very difficult art. It's simply not in the same class as digital image plagiarism. At worst, your community artist is a one trick pony and stuck on "homage".

Quote from: JongWK;235796That is just so sad and pathetic, considering that WW once sued Sony over the Underworld movie (yeah, like vampires and werewolves were their creation).

But hey, I guess plagiarism means "mature" these days!

I don't think White-Wolf intentionally ripped off Devil May Cry. Chances are the art director simply wasn't familiar with that specific picture and the artist slipped it past them. Personally, I'm curious as to what their response to this will be. Are they going to pulp the books (unlikely); pay Capcom or the original artist royalty fees; fire the plagiarist?

Leo> I don't. I can't find the information on wikipedia.

Quote from: Ikrast;235804Digitally copying art and then editing details doesn't take much skill, which is why it's considered not quite art.

Learning to imitate someone's voice and mannerisms to the extent that you can do them perfectly, is performance art, and very difficult art. It's simply not in the same class as digital image plagiarism. At worst, your community artist is a one trick pony and stuck on "homage".

I did think the image in question looked like a digital copy. Compare the shading on the figures' legs.

I agree somewhat with your other point. One trick pony? Yes. Homage? Maybe. There is some skill in learning the voice, mannerisms, etc. just as learning and absorbing another artist's style takes skill. In the plays above, she did not do so "perfectly". Her main motive was instead a failure of nerve, a feeling that her own work wasn't "good enough", and that people would rather see a one-off. Also, it is easier to steal someone else's mannerisms than to do your own work, research, analysis, etc. to make the role your own. She always sought those types of roles, no others. I suppose it doesn't make that much difference in the grand scheme of things. But I told her, and still believe, that if she had spent half as much time and effort creating something of her own as she had in producing a copy, she would have done something she could really be proud of.

And that's what really pisses me off about plaigirism in the arts. I guess it's really a pet peeve, and I'm projecting my feelings onto this. To me, art, at its best, is about personal truth. Integrity. If you have the urge to create, then have the courage to make it your own.

I just remembered the song lyrics in my signature. Too funny.

As if we need anymore emo guys with trenchcoats in White Wolf products.

Quote from: JongWK;235796That is just so sad and pathetic, considering that WW once sued Sony over the Underworld movie (yeah, like vampires and werewolves were their creation).

Well, what really happened was that the script of Underworld allegedly bore suspicious similarities to the short story "The Love of Monsters" by Nancy Collins, published in the WoD anthology Dark Destiny, about a forbidden romance between a vampire and a werewolf whose clan and tribe are at war. As I recall, the case was later settled out of court.

Great victory in the war on swine... but somehow no one cares and writers of that book probably weren't responzible for this... I just wonder, if centrain people will be so vocal if case WoTC did something similar...

Quote from: GrimGent;235822Well, what really happened was that the script of Underworld allegedly bore suspicious similarities to the short story "The Love of Monsters" by Nancy Collins, published in the WoD anthology Dark Destiny, about a forbidden romance between a vampire and a werewolf whose clan and tribe are at war. As I recall, the case was later settled out of court.

I also heard it was the exact sam script submitted to white-wolf for a Vampire: the Masquerade movie. A script White-Wolf rejected. So they changed around some "proper nouns" and tried to sell it elsewhere. Sony bought it unknowingly.

I'm hoping it's a similar situation here, where White-Wolf just didn't know. I wonder if this is why the book has disappeared from distributors?

It's very likely that WW didn't know about this. Still, it's pretty embarrasing, given their past history.

Quote from: KrakaJak;235833I also heard it was the exact sam script submitted to white-wolf for a Vampire: the Masquerade movie. A script White-Wolf rejected. So they changed around some "proper nouns" and tried to sell it elsewhere.

And just to cloud matters further, I'd heard it was essentially the same pitch that White Wolf had made to a couple of different producers, but had been declined, only to be worked up by different writers using different "proper nouns".

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;235889And just to cloud matters further, I'd heard it was essentially the same pitch that White Wolf had made to a couple of different producers, but had been declined, only to be worked up by different writers using different "proper nouns".

!i!

I've heard that this is rather common in in Hollywood - reject the script of an unknown writer  then rip off the idea.  A few changes and poor writers make for few lawsuits.  A woman sued the Wachowski brothers over the Matrix - I believe she settled out of court but don't remember.