Art Contests: Softwares

[Murlocologist]

I have something on mind I'd like to debate about with those who have the opposite view.

In art contests any software is allowed, the only rule is that the submission must be clean of things like image tracing, stealing and similar.
But there is no word about softwares. And when it comes to digital art software is the key feature. The problem is not all softwares are equally good, some are basic, some are professional, some are free some aren't. To continue the line, you can't compare PC softwares with the drawing tablet. So here comes the question: are different softwares predetermining factor of submissions quality? In my opinion yes, they are. You can hardly say it is equally easy to draw with mouse or pencil on tablet. This is something beyond personal preference. My stance is that rendering cannot be done with same flair on free and non free software when it comes to PC, regardless of artist's knowledge. Rendering on tablet is different story. Furthermore, everyone can use free software on PC and by preference decide which one to go with, but still no free product can be compared with professional tool.
In my opinion, this should be important aspect behind every submission in art contest, whether it is something taken into consideration while judging or as a tool restriction list contesting.

 

[Chaosy]

It would indeed make a difference. Someone working in paint would have a hard time winning against someone who use photoshop.

HOWEVER.

Bring us back to reality, if you're gonna make a game and you're gonna get your 2D artists to create some good looking textures.
Obviously you would not say "Sorry pal, our rival company CheapAf Inc can only afford Paint, so you're not allowed to use Photoshop." to said 2D artists.
In a competitive environment you should not downgrade yourself because someoen else has it worse.

Hell, we should all go and live in wooden huts stone age style because some poor guys in Africa.
Or some homeless beggar in your local town.

 

[Murlocologist]

It would indeed make a difference. Someone working in paint would have a hard time winning against someone who use photoshop.

HOWEVER.

Bring us back to reality, if you're gonna make a game and you're gonna get your 2D artists to create some good looking textures.
Obviously you would not say "Sorry pal, our rival company CheapAf Inc can only afford Paint, so you're not allowed to use Photoshop." to said 2D artists.
In a competitive environment you should not downgrade yourself because someoen else has it worse.

Hell, we should all go and live in wooden huts stone age style because some poor guys in Africa.
Or some homeless beggar in your local town.

I couldn't simply agree with this opinion. With such univeralism stance you deny relevance of economical differences and conclude that generally those who can't afford professional tools should be ignored and given advice they will hardly have a chance in contest on a free membership website. And hive is free website and hive contests are free to part take in. In environment where is everyone considered to have same start position (while they don't) talent of artist is put in the background as he will be disadvantaged in the start.

 

[Ralle]

Use whatever tools you like and have but the work has to come from you. I can imagine some software borderlining on cheating, but Photoshop isn't one of them.

If you suck, Photoshop won't help you be good. In the end, it's the best artist that wins. Sure, tools are important, but they don't make you win without skill.

While many people prefer Photoshop, it isn't required to make high quality stuff. Take a look at this for example. MS Paint.

 

[Chaosy]

With such univeralism stance you deny relevance of economical differences

No.

It would indeed make a difference. Someone working in paint would have a hard time winning against someone who use photoshop.

Overall:
You don't do that in any competitive aspect.

Take a person who plays a sport on a professional level. And then see if they use products found in your local store? no, their stuff cost more than a years salary for us non famous people.
In some sports, the difference isn't huge. But there probably is some differences.

Even on a basic level, a person with football shoes will probably perform better than a person who cannot afford shoes. At least if the grass is wet and slippery.


Espots:
Shitty internet? get out
low fps? get out
(not to mention that the other computer parts aren't free)

 

[Ralle]

Not to mention that it's completely impossible to enforce that people must use tool X or Y unless they must submit a complete screen recording of their entire work most likely amounting to many hours.

 

[GhostWolf]

There is this thing, called Capitalism. Get used to it. It's not necessarily good (and in fact I am usually against it), but we never had anything better.

I also doubt anyone on this site, beside perhaps an exceptional few, actually have legal copies of relatively expensive software such as Photoshop, 3ds Max, etc., and yet lots of people have access to it. You figure out the rest.

On that note, let's all use Pentium 3, because someone probably still has one.

 

[Murlocologist]

Capitalism obviously is present in everyday living and even in life banalities such as digital art contests on a wc3 website. Trivial or not. Despite the belief of many, there indeed do exist people who have both PC and internet connection, but still couldn't possibly afford abundance of digital art buyable addons, paying for non free software or to buy a drawing tablet. You don't have to be especially socially sensitive or have your mind set to Kant's moral philosophy to notice how people often marginalize these other, I suppose less fellow people. Fact is someone does not actually have to be homeless not to be able to afford (I'm not going to suggest the illegal download) professional tools. Yeah professional, unfortunately for digital art, their users' level of art understanding is often the subordinated level of underlined and terribly overused term. On other hand, their results would imply some different story. Shut out to pro addons for that. And yes we could be very free spirited enthusiasts and dedicate a couple of weeks on making outstanding looking Paint MS image, just for the sake of it. And maybe it is just me, however I could still hardly tag these over rendered pieces of strangely-motivated work with art. And yes, Paint MS hyperrealism my favorite anti art eye candy displays unfortunately often devoid of any art talent whatsoever. Not to get into debates about hyper realism and craft, I can just say God bless the canvas. I do hope I wasn't overly not understandable. And not to be misunderstood, I am aware that Hive's stance towards variety of softwares won't be changed.

 

[Kyrbi0]

Interesting discussion.

I think many of you are missing the point & taking something he said out of context to a somewhat ridiculous logical extreme. He's not saying "someone here is on dial-up, making anything faster an unfair advantage thus we should all go back to banging rocks by a phone line". What he's saying (I believe), is something I not only believe but have been working ardently to accomplish with Hive Contests over the last few years. That is the belief that "a Contest should be challenging as few skills/abilities/tools as possible; preferably just one". There are exceptions (i.e. Hero/Techtree Contests, which test a contestant's ability to design and code and and implement (WE) and balance and such), but many of the Contests we run here are appropriately single-skill Contests and the 'testing of other skills' is not only superfluous but dilutive.

As an example, if we were looking for the best all-around athlete, a triathlon would be a great place to look; triathlons test 3 major aerobic skills, involving all sorts of muscle groups & overall endurance due to the 3 separate sustained activities.
However, if we were looking for the best runner, a triathlon would be a terrible place to look; the winner of a triathlon might not be the best runner but instead a great swimmer/cyclist & be making up for his running inadequacies. No, instead one should look towards a race/marathon/dash/etc (depending on whether you needed "the fastest" or "the most enduring" runner) to determine the best runner.

In an example closer to home, one element of Hero/Techtree Contests that I worked hard to get rid of was that of un-standardized base maps. In the past, people would just make whatever test map they wanted. "Cool," you might say, "let each Contestant create a map custom-fitted to their entry, give them more control over the aesthetics... even the details of presentation, testing & playing would be under their control!". Except it diluted from the (supposed) point of the Contest; that of testing hero/techtree design, not map design or terraining or presentation. Some people made big fancy maps with cinematic triggers & special effects swirling all over, and perfectly-crafted testing triggers... And others couldn't afford to dilute their attention from their entry & instead had very simple/lacking test maps. Who's gonna get the better score; the one who made the best Hero/Techtree? Not necessarily.

Standardizing the map-choice (i.e. upload a simple base-map that all Contestants must DL & use), as has been done on other sites & in recent Contests, goes a long way towards helping focus the attention of Contestants upon the proper thing; upon the (again hopefully singular) 'item of contest'. What that is differs from Contest to Contest, as it should. Heck, it might even differ from ___ Contest to ___ Contest (within the same Contest scheme), as people Vote & discuss it. But it should be discussed & pretty explicitly expressed, for the reasons stated above.

(Unfortunately, this all presupposes one thing that itself should be discussed; we need to peel back one last layer and ask "What is the Motivation behind a (given) Contest?". This question & the conversation around it I have been drafting up in my head for a while now, as it's something this site should really take a look into; will get back to ya'll on that.)

In my opinion, this should be important aspect behind every submission in art contest, whether it is something taken into consideration while judging or as a tool restriction list contesting.

This I think is the most salient point. More often than not, Contests on the Hive tend to go with the former (though it's admittedly a bit subjective); we look at all the entries equally but some of them get special consideration/weighting/bonus points for being done well despite the difficult medium (e.g. quality art with Paint, quality geomerges with just Oinkerwinkles, quality animation with just Notepad, etc).