I can only say that this rule wasn't there back when the first wave happened in mid November. I don't read the rules every day. That would get boring :p.

I could try, but if you are right that every bit needs to be made by me, then none of my art can be reuploaded as they use either a map or models to create a scene. Only one picture could be uploaded because it just features Felicia with a black background, which would just be poor quality art (IMO).

Rereading the whole topic while, Tom said that SFM Art in general was just banned. So it would just be me wasting the time of a mod for nothing :(.

I hope that Tom can clear up a few things on what's allowed and what isn't. It's probably the New Year after effects that makes me confused and uncertain.

Hopefully this situation matures enough so we'll know what's allowed now. It's been a huge mess for scouts lately in the AP.. (myself included)

agree the Rule didn't exist

and i just have all my work delete

why you newground don't kick us instead of make arbitrary rules

I'll admit it, I haven't touched it. I haven't touched any animation program. But it's not really about effort. At least not in this case, since for most things here we judge based on effort, but also on whether they add to the material they're using. You need to understand that our rules are different. That kind of stuff just isn't allowed, and I understand why. We're not trying to alienate anyone, nor is Tom being unfair to SFM artists. They're welcome to animate things, but we can have the rules we want. They are for the site's safety, and Tom wouldn't alienate an artist base for no reason.

Unfortunately, i did not submit the Source Filmmaker from Newgrounds.

Well. Even though I payed for the majority of the things I use. I guess im not aloud to exist here either. I was hoping for a new home but. I get the feeling this will be just the start of the new years troubles. If this rule is ever lifted or altered I will come back and support the site financially as well (I believe this site needs to exist and continue existing). Just sad cause i was excited to be a part of a community I grew up with before joining outright.

It was fun meeting any of you that followed me on here but I'm not welcome here. :c Suppose I'll just move back to derpi and inkbunny.

If I might ask? If I had a part in the creation of an asset. or the outright payment for an asset (model) and when I say that I mean I'm the only person who has the item other then the model maker. Does that count as something I'm aloud to use in a post here? or is that still against the rules? Cause were I lack model making skills. I like paying my friends to make things for me to use. I have enough models that if that works I could make it by on a few posts and animations.

Please use the Source Filmmaker community forums.

The amount of money you’ve paid to assist with your static picture has no effect on its acceptability here.

What does this mean for artists like me then, that made custom models but use the same style as sfm assets (In my case, remade the pony head with custom body sculpts for anthro work, I render using Iray.), or Hooves-art, who essentially paints over his renders entirely. Are we not allowed here then?

I've mainly been doing animations but thank you for not answering my questions and making assumptions.

If I'm paying for a tool that only I have. whats the difference between that and a tool another person makes for there own use? no one has it or can use it. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just frustrated that another site is taking the hentai foundry route on content creation. I'm being told my work does not matter cause someone else created the materials I work with.

I just got kicked out of my home site of 5 years and the new one I wanna be apart of days later changed the rules and told me to get the fuck out with my content as well. Sorry if I'm being a pain.

Firstly, your questions are the wrong questions. Your work is not being permitted because you’re utilising somebody else’s assets to make a pic. That’s it.

Secondly, if you’re only doing animations with it, it’s not a problem. I don’t know why you’re complaining otherwise.

Thirdly (and this is my biggest problem with what you said) I’m totally not interested in how deep your pockets are in order to make your pics.

Nobody’s changed the rules: pics made with scene creators were never permitted. A lot of you are failing to accept that.

I prefer people who can make arguments without sarcasm.

Honestly, I feel using SFM as an example of a "scene creator" is an erroneous classification at best and a manipulative lie at worst. It's not a scene creator, It's an animation program just like Blender except with one feature (In-Program Modeling) missing.

Also, Yes, The rules were changed. Adding SFM as an example of a "scene creator" is a change. Saying they were not changed is a flat out lie.

And they still bring up a valid point. If they payed for the model, It is their model. This isn't flexing their money, it's about using a product they purchased to create their art. Just like people who purchase tablets to draw their art, or paying for music and sprites to make a game.

Buying a model is not the same as buying a tablet to draw with, the tablet is a tool used to create artwork, it is NOT a part of the art itself, a model is.

As for buying sprites, yes, you certainly can make a game out of them, because what you are making is the game itself, not the artwork, "and even then it's a dick move to not credit the original artist", a static image made with purchased sprites however, will also not fly on the art portal and will be taken down just as fast as an SFM image made with assets from another artist.

In the end, this isn't about Source Film Maker or anything like that, this is about posting someone else's art and calling it your own. If you did not make the models, you did not make the piece, at that point it is a collaboration where one or more of the collaborators doesn't get any credit.

I don’t know why you guys keep bringing up the money element, as it’s irrelevant. It’s the usage of other assets - not from copyright, but looking at screenshots of you reposing somebody else’s model is lame.

If you don’t want to be considered as a scene creator, you shouldn’t take on arguments where you accept that people buy other’s models to make their pictures.

The amount of effort put in and the norms of the 3D communities are not what is in question, what IS in question is the rules of Newgrounds which clearly state

It does not matter that you've edited the models into something other than they were originally intended, the base model was still made by someone else, just like I'm not allowed to draw a dick on a Mario sprite and upload that.

HOWEVER, if I wanted to draw a piece of Mario fan art where he has his dick out, then I am free to do so, because I'm the one who created that particular piece of artwork, despite not creating the character. Just like if you wanted to make a piece of artwork out of 3D models that you made yourself, then you are absolutely allowed to do that as well.

I’m looking at your submissions, and you don’t even acknowledge that you’re using assets from elsewhere, irrespective of whether you use SFM or not.

When you say “larger” 3D art community, you’ve cast the net pretty wide, here. You’re not creating the 3D models, you’re plopping them in a scene and Photoshopping it. It takes you time, but so do other submissions in the art portal.

Had you the ability to make a 3D model, it would be no issue.

Pardon me but this all seems a bit silly; considering this website has no issues catering to contentious content that literally mimics the cartoon styles of some shows from Cartoon Network, just to give on example: (Warning NSFW) https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/551022. This is a very blurry line you're digging in the sand. Underage characters from existing copyrighted IPs getting raped by rock monsters is fine and dandy but a few SFM assets that can't be verified isn't? Very odd indeed, considering this website is primary a host of fan creations of very well-known mascots and recognizable characters of intellectual property that you don't even own. SFM though? Wew. Gotta draw that line I guess.

If you’re going to create an account to join the argument, white knight, please read the thread at least.

The SFM assets are literally made by somebody else. It’s got nothing to do with copyright.

So... even if it is entirely original work: not OK?

I assumed the rules were getting a bit more lenient with the recent influx, in that not only was original art always OK, but also: any art you have a right to use OK, regardless of source. As it seems to tie in to the question regarding commissions, and if users are allowed to post work they've commissioned, which was stated early on as OK. Seems to be some conflicting messages here regarding the level of originality required for something to be accepted.

If it's entirely original works, its OK.

However, more often than not, SFM is taking a pre-existing model(s) as the subject, taking away some clothing and posing them in a scene.

Please quote me the conflicting messages regarding SFM and I'll iron them out. I thought I was being consistent with the message.

EDIT: I would also say that if the model used for the main subject weren't from a game and the creator for the model is acknowledged, it could be considered as collaborative work between the modeller and the creator of the scene. That's purely my opinion, though, and more often than not it is also not the case. It would also alleviate a lot of grief.

That's hand-drawn, unlike SFM posters.

What does that have to do with anything, really? What were you trying to argue?

If the reason people cant post it is because they didn't create the models that's one thing. But saying "Its just posing a 3d model therefore its lazy" comes from a position of someone who clearly has never used a 3d program like sfm to make a poster. There is alot of crappy sfm posters out there for every 1 good one, but to say its lazy in general is ignorant. I dont claim to make good posters either.

Damn right I don’t use SFM.

The pics look fucking shit.

I’ve said multiple times it’s because the assets are from elsewhere. My last reply is me being brutally honest about the majority of SFM pics, which you’ve just picked apart because ... well, see my last sentence.

If people need me to make a picture featuring MLP models fucking the Team Fortress Scout in order to make that argument credible: tough shit.

The cleanest way to clean loop holes is to ban SFM pics completely. Locking the thread also kills off the flames and removes the space for SFM people to vent.

You happy? Course not.

You’re free to be biased.