@Taiine: I don't see the problem you have with RealCraft. All the person creating the pack is trying to do is to improve their Minecraft experience through using different textures. To obtain these textures, they use a simple Google search and choose a few textures from images. They mean no harm. There is nothing malevolent about this use of textures; no where in the thread of RealCraft do I see:
a) A claim that they created the textures themselves
Monetisation of the textures
Lets put it this way...
Your pack... has this nice little notice:
But according to your views... we can just out right forget that and grab your packs textures, edit them however we wish and post it up. Why? Because we mean no harm and just want to improve our Minecraft experience.
So all the terms of use, all the legal licenses, all the copyright laws, or rules of THIS forum mean jack squat sense in your mind we can take whatever we find floating around the web and use it however we see fit and take credit for making the works.
It is exactly that sort of mindset that we don't need around here. Packs like these are ILLEGAL for a REASON. If they were allowed up and the owner of said works, lets use for example Jason Shutt, a real man, creator and copyright holder of the DIRT texture I posted about, a work off his PORTFOLIO website, found his work used, he could take legal actions not just against the pack's maker, but this forum as well for ALLOWING it to stay up.
It's the same reason movies and some clips get removed off youtube. Because if companies or owners that own the rights to those clips, and youtube allowed them to stay up, then youtube could be in the deep end. It's the same reason why video game companies have files CADO documents against some people posting FAN GAMES. Pokemon for example.
While the work on a portfolio, or many of the works found on google may not be as big, they are still bound by copyright, even YOUR OWN PACK is, and by law ONLY the creator and owner of the work can have any say over how their work is to be used.
Oh hey nice textures I found ON GOOGLE. Mine now! I'll just save that and shove it into a pack and post it up to show off my hard work!
Yeah sorry it don't work that way.
By the way, my rant wasn't about the pack maker stealing textures. It was about the REGULARS here commending and praising the user for his 'work' in the pack. People whom I am very surprised to see making such posts and does make me wonder if I am the only one who bothers to take 10 seconds of their time to do a simple thing like google 'DIRT TEXTURE' and see if there's a match.
I disagree, I think it adds a nice contrast.I do think the dither/shade colour on the cobble is too dark though. It's almost identical to the next darkest shade.
EDIT: Also, for those who have checked out the beta version of the forum changes, do any of you actually like it? I find it much uglier and the layout is pretty bad when on a main forum section, looking for a thread. When you're in a thread it's alright but they made rep for posts much harder to see and profile pictures scale up if they're below a certain size which makes them look blurry and awful. Overall, it completely sucks.
Is it done? I mean, the font and material of it already look nice, but I think the background could use more detail and I don´t get what the pixels on the right are supposed to do.
I tried to add some more detail but it just didn't look right to me, also the black pixels are supposed to be holes.
I'm not going to write a long, individually-targeted post because I don't wish to start an argument, but I will just clear up a few points that I don't think I made very clear.
-snip long post anyho-
I think you miss the point. People will take images from google often with out checking what website they took from. Yes his brick was off a free to use site, for web design mind you. But that is the ONLY texture in his pack that does. This suggestes he did a blind pick, he never went to the pages the textures were from, but rather right clicked right from google, click 'view image' and save. He picked what textures looked good to him rather they were free to use or belonged to another.
I have been doing these pack searches sense 2011, and I see that pattern all the time. Rather they click to view image or save it right off of googles larger preview. They don't really bother to go to the actual page to see if they can use it, nor 'assume' that the 'first one they used is so the rest must be as well'.
I've seen youtube 'how to make a texture pack' showing people how to google image search right click save as and place as textures, I've seen forum tutorials around here that quickly get removed that show the same thing.
Just because the guy got one, ONE texture by a free to use website, does not mean he thought that everything else would be free to use. He would have had to have gone to the actual website the texture was found on, that would mean hed have to do the same to the other textures, and would see they were not free to use. He would have had to KNOW that some stuff would be illegal to use and bother to CHECK them all. But he didn't...
This is just a sign of someone searching for textures clicking to view image right clicking and saving and happened to get one texture, just one, that was off a free to use website, as it was the one he liked the most/the easiet to make tile when croped.
Thats the theme I found with his pack, all the textures were set to already be able to tile, the dirt, he just had to crop one corner of... the bricks were all the same color and tiled easy with cropping, the wood needed little editing to tile while cropped.
Yeah, looks better. Is it supposed to be some kind of leather sheet though? If not (cloth or something else), I would suggest to make the holes a bit larger and leave the inside blank, because now it looks like a rather thick material.
It's supposed to be a banner sort of. I'm afraid it will look odd with larger holes.
What are the most important things to remember when texturing a block, say side grass?
Make sure it tiles
Not flat, unless intended
Not too high or low contrast
Fits theme, if there is one
Somewhat similar to both vanilla texture, and crafting recipe/recognizable
NOT pillow shaded!
idk what else, there probably is more to consider
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quoted from Meringue - Too bad i own and have to use PS (at work) - it's clunky and i hate it..
Make sure it tiles
Not flat, unless intended
Not too high or low contrast
Fits theme, if there is one
Somewhat similar to both vanilla texture, and crafting recipe/recognizable
NOT pillow shaded!
idk what else, there probably is more to consider
-Okay
-Pack is drawn in crayon and scanned, would crayon be considered flat?
-Okay
-Theme is crayon
-I dislike the vanilla colour palette, so I will mix up the colours (but you want have blue grass or anything)
-Pillow shaded? What is that?
-Okay
-Pack is drawn in crayon and scanned, would crayon be considered flat?
-Okay
-Theme is crayon
-I dislike the vanilla colour palette, so I will mix up the colours (but you want have blue grass or anything)
-Pillow shaded? What is that?
Ooh, crayon, i've never seen a crayon pack
As long as it isn't just a single color, it should be fine
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quoted from Meringue - Too bad i own and have to use PS (at work) - it's clunky and i hate it..
original
4x resized
4x tiled
Quoted from Meringue - Too bad i own and have to use PS (at work) - it's clunky and i hate it..
Lets put it this way...
Your pack... has this nice little notice:
But according to your views... we can just out right forget that and grab your packs textures, edit them however we wish and post it up. Why? Because we mean no harm and just want to improve our Minecraft experience.
So all the terms of use, all the legal licenses, all the copyright laws, or rules of THIS forum mean jack squat sense in your mind we can take whatever we find floating around the web and use it however we see fit and take credit for making the works.
It is exactly that sort of mindset that we don't need around here. Packs like these are ILLEGAL for a REASON. If they were allowed up and the owner of said works, lets use for example Jason Shutt, a real man, creator and copyright holder of the DIRT texture I posted about, a work off his PORTFOLIO website, found his work used, he could take legal actions not just against the pack's maker, but this forum as well for ALLOWING it to stay up.
It's the same reason movies and some clips get removed off youtube. Because if companies or owners that own the rights to those clips, and youtube allowed them to stay up, then youtube could be in the deep end. It's the same reason why video game companies have files CADO documents against some people posting FAN GAMES. Pokemon for example.
While the work on a portfolio, or many of the works found on google may not be as big, they are still bound by copyright, even YOUR OWN PACK is, and by law ONLY the creator and owner of the work can have any say over how their work is to be used.
Oh hey nice textures I found ON GOOGLE. Mine now! I'll just save that and shove it into a pack and post it up to show off my hard work!
Yeah sorry it don't work that way.
By the way, my rant wasn't about the pack maker stealing textures. It was about the REGULARS here commending and praising the user for his 'work' in the pack. People whom I am very surprised to see making such posts and does make me wonder if I am the only one who bothers to take 10 seconds of their time to do a simple thing like google 'DIRT TEXTURE' and see if there's a match.
Recoloured some of SB's old and current textures out of boredom, though I'd post the results here
I honestly like this colour palette over my old washed-out one. Thoughts?
I really like the new colors. Also that bookshelf is tasty.
I disagree, I think it adds a nice contrast.I do think the dither/shade colour on the cobble is too dark though. It's almost identical to the next darkest shade.
EDIT: Also, for those who have checked out the beta version of the forum changes, do any of you actually like it? I find it much uglier and the layout is pretty bad when on a main forum section, looking for a thread. When you're in a thread it's alright but they made rep for posts much harder to see and profile pictures scale up if they're below a certain size which makes them look blurry and awful. Overall, it completely sucks.
I took a look at it and felt that it lacked visual consistency and looked rather amateurish.
I tried to add some more detail but it just didn't look right to me, also the black pixels are supposed to be holes.
Tried again:
Is this better?
I think you miss the point. People will take images from google often with out checking what website they took from. Yes his brick was off a free to use site, for web design mind you. But that is the ONLY texture in his pack that does. This suggestes he did a blind pick, he never went to the pages the textures were from, but rather right clicked right from google, click 'view image' and save. He picked what textures looked good to him rather they were free to use or belonged to another.
I have been doing these pack searches sense 2011, and I see that pattern all the time. Rather they click to view image or save it right off of googles larger preview. They don't really bother to go to the actual page to see if they can use it, nor 'assume' that the 'first one they used is so the rest must be as well'.
I've seen youtube 'how to make a texture pack' showing people how to google image search right click save as and place as textures, I've seen forum tutorials around here that quickly get removed that show the same thing.
Just because the guy got one, ONE texture by a free to use website, does not mean he thought that everything else would be free to use. He would have had to have gone to the actual website the texture was found on, that would mean hed have to do the same to the other textures, and would see they were not free to use. He would have had to KNOW that some stuff would be illegal to use and bother to CHECK them all. But he didn't...
This is just a sign of someone searching for textures clicking to view image right clicking and saving and happened to get one texture, just one, that was off a free to use website, as it was the one he liked the most/the easiet to make tile when croped.
Thats the theme I found with his pack, all the textures were set to already be able to tile, the dirt, he just had to crop one corner of... the bricks were all the same color and tiled easy with cropping, the wood needed little editing to tile while cropped.
It's supposed to be a banner sort of. I'm afraid it will look odd with larger holes.
I like the shape of that banner, I'll try to make it look like that!
Finally finished the nether block textures:
*Obsidian is purple, soulsand is black
Servers Rules|Support Forum Rules|Show Your Creation Rules|Off Topic Rules
Make sure it tiles
Not flat, unless intended
Not too high or low contrast
Fits theme, if there is one
Somewhat similar to both vanilla texture, and crafting recipe/recognizable
NOT pillow shaded!
idk what else, there probably is more to consider
Quoted from Meringue - Too bad i own and have to use PS (at work) - it's clunky and i hate it..
(Downscaled because the 4096x2048 original is too much for my pathetically broken internet to upload without failing)
Old:
-Okay
-Pack is drawn in crayon and scanned, would crayon be considered flat?
-Okay
-Theme is crayon
-I dislike the vanilla colour palette, so I will mix up the colours (but you want have blue grass or anything)
-Pillow shaded? What is that?
Ooh, crayon, i've never seen a crayon pack
As long as it isn't just a single color, it should be fine
Quoted from Meringue - Too bad i own and have to use PS (at work) - it's clunky and i hate it..