Some questions about repainting a/c

[awstub]

I have been trying to learn how to do repaints these past few weeks and thanks to the assistance I received from some of the members here, I have finally been able to
produce something that is at least halfway decent and I would now like to make it available for others.

....but first, I have some questions.

1. What is the best/proper/most efficient way to make the paints available to others?

2. What information, at the bare minimum, should be included with the files?

3. Is there any general sort of etiquette in regards to repainting?

 

[Mach3DS]

I have been trying to learn how to do repaints these past few weeks and thanks to the assistance I received from some of the members here, I have finally been able to
produce something that is at least halfway decent and I would now like to make it available for others.

....but first, I have some questions.

1. What is the best/proper/most efficient way to make the paints available to others?

2. What information, at the bare minimum, should be included with the files?

3. Is there any general sort of etiquette in regards to repainting?

1. You can upload it here at SOH.

2. Generally include the [Flight.xx] info needed from the aircraft.cfg.

3. Don't use the work of others without permission (if needed) and include appropriate credit for that which is used. Be careful not to try and sell your repaints if you include copyrighted or Trademarked material (for example, the Apple Logo as a fictional paint scheme which you might try to sell...generally I've never heard of selling repaints anyway...FWIW).

 

[jeansy]

A few things thats often over looked but can get people off side quickly

Do your research before painting most painters wont do another scheme thats already done it can be insult to the original painter
If you do the same paint be humble and dont blow your trumpet

You will find that 99% of experienced painters respect other peoples work and do this out of respect

As rick mention, permissions or credit is a big one
If you cant get hold of the owner for some of your content at least give credit and acknowledgement of thier work

Finally the quickest way to get people off side is charge or demand for donations

 

[Willy]

I've been known to do a few paints that were previously done by someone else, but I've got a few hard and fast rules about that.

1. Use no part of the older version. It should be completely new in all aspects.

2. If I can't do it in a way that doesn't add to it, I won't do it. Usually, this means going into more detail than the previous work did.

3. Do not, ever, ever, refer to the new work as better and it's best to not refer to the older one at all out of respect for the author of the previous work. Your new work should be able to stand on it's own merits without your comparing it to the previous one.

And 4. I rarely release one that has been done before by someone else. I'd prefer that no one else make comparasions either.

 

[Jafo]

I've been known to do a few paints that were previously done by someone else, but I've got a few hard and fast rules about that.

1. Use no part of the older version. It should be completely new in all aspects.

2. If I can't do it in a way that doesn't add to it, I won't do it. Usually, this means going into more detail than the previous work did.

3. Do not, ever, ever, refer to the new work as better and it's best to not refer to the older one at all out of respect for the author of the previous work. Your new work should be able to stand on it's own merits without your comparing it to the previous one.

And 4. I rarely release one that has been done before by someone else. I'd prefer that no one else make comparasions either.

Ditto...
One of the first I did for the C-47 was "Melbourne's Gooney Bird" which previously existed....I think around the time of v2. However it was released about 2 years after the first I had done for the MAAMSim version [which I'd never released but had actually given on DVD to the plane's owners in 2014...on my second trip on it to King Island where I also managed to get clear [unmanned] photos of the cockpit....and yet more detail shots].
With the release of v3 I transposed my old one onto the new plane which enabled a lot more detail/accuracy than the old MAAMSim one - which didn't have specs etc for metal shine...so I'm happy that I never released that. Now, since releasing the ver for v3 I've done one or ten more paints for v3 to the point where I now 'need' to release an updated ver of the Gooney Bird which more closely matches the real animal.
At no time was the other person's release used in the creation. Usually you find variations in 'interpretation' of detail where neither is really more 'right' or 'wrong'...just different.

Now my next plan is to get down to King Island again and give the guys my reworked paint for them to play with on the FSX Demo...

 

[awstub]

Great replies.

It all makes pretty good sense, however I am still a little bit confused by some things I've recently read.

So far, the only serious repaint I have done is VPAF 5121 for the Ivan Jurèaga MiG-21MF.

Now, my confusion....

In the "MiG-21MF Upgrade Phase II ready" thread I'm seeing what appears to be a tiff over using someone's work without permission (not exactly sure if it is the paint kit, or something else).

The paint kit I used came with a paint I downloaded of Czech Air Force Mig-21MF 2410 created by Kendy Schwarz.
It didn't include any documentation (just had the three PSD files) but I'm assuming it was also created by Kendy Schwarz.
The readme included with the Mig-21MF 2410 repaint is written in Czech and the English translation (via Google Translate) is a little confusing.....but I don't see mention of the paint kit in it.

So...

Do I need to find the creator of the paint kit and ask permission to use it? Or.... Do I just explain the circumstances of where I got it from and who I think created it in the readme?

Or, since I don't want my first effort to have any controversy surrounding it, should I just not bother trying to upload what I have done and find something to paint that has a paint kit with a clearer documentation?

 

[huub vink]

The discussion about the textures in the updated Mig thread is a bit confusing. The thread is actually about two different updates by two different developers.

The thread was started to invite people to test a beta the second upgrade, done by Dutch (ceo1944) of Ivan Jurcaga's MiG-21MF. Somewhere in this thread a second update of one of Ivan Jurcaga's MiGS was mentioned. This time the MIG21 MFN and an update by Vipers, also known as VAAFSE or Sim Skunk Works. This is a payware developer and although the updated model will we released as freeware, it will (most likely) be hidden behind a login on their site.

Most repainters do not like it when their textures are used without their permission. Often they also want to stay in control about where their textures are uploaded. For instance I always make my textures available at the SOH first, because this way I hope to make this site more attractive. Obviously SSW didn't ask DAG for permission to use his textures. DAG is the intellectual owner of the textures, so technically and depending in which country you live SSW isn't allowed to use his textures. Although you could debate about this as the model will be released as freeware. SSW gave credits to DAG in the readme file, however they also intend to included textures made by Zsolt Beleznay in the package, for which they didn't give Zsolt credits (so far).

This to explain the issues in the MiG thread.

When somebody includes a paintkit it is safe to assume that this was done to enable others to use it. Therefore no additional permission is required. However most people who make paintkits, appreciate it when credits are given in the readme of the repaint. In some cases it is specifically mentioned in the read me that credits have to be given. Personally I have my doubts whether mentioning this in a readme make it a solid legal requirement. But already out of politeness it should be done.

Cheers,
Huub

 

[SSW1]

I would like to do a bit of clarity on the use of other people's software.
If in the package distributed freely there is no copyright notice the acquired practice is to refer to the world wide used GPL (General Public License see www.fsf.org ).
This license states that the software licensed freely may be freely copied, modified and distributed as long as the derivative work is also distributed as free software.
No original author permission is required since it is implied into the license itself, however is a fair habit to give credits to original author mentioning them as contributors.
So said, SSW does not have distributed nothing yet about his modification on Ivan Jurcaga MIG 21, so we are speaking of nothing, when and if it will be done all credits will be given to original authors and contributors and obviously, following GPL rules, it will be free.
ALL textures will be done using our own resources and using a derivative paintkit for which we already have the permission to use and modify by the original author, Kendy Schwarz.
Since all liveries will be fictional we do not run the risk to be unpolite toward others authors.
So about what we are discussing ?
I guess all is started about an Dag complaint made earlier than things would have happened:
Dag denied a permission before it was asked even if it should not even be asked, we never had an intention to distribute liveries made by him and will continue to do so, we just mentioned him to give credits in sake of politeness, as we did for Zsolt.
SSW wanted do something useful for the community, following both legal and correctness rules, but if this are the results even before to begin, we guess that is far better keep things private and use our work for us.
cheers
/SSW

 

[Jafo]

I would like to do a bit of clarity on the use of other people's software.
If in the package distributed freely there is no copyright notice the acquired practice is to refer to the world wide used GPL (General Public License see www.fsf.org ).
This license states that the software licensed freely may be freely copied, modified and distributed as long as the derivative work is also distributed as free software.
No original author permission is required since it is implied into the license itself, however is a fair habit to give credits to original author mentioning them as contributors.

/SSW

Copyright and its application has been a part of my professional career for over 44 years.
The 'GPL' and/or 'GNU' have no legal relevance unless stated as doing so by the author of the artwork.
ALL art created by an individual is covered by 'inherent copyright' and needs no specific statement/inclusion other than that which may be to REDUCE the owner's inherent copyright.

An artist may revoke his copyright in whole or in part via included statement, such as by specifically stating he releases his work/s under the GPL/GNU license standards [which actually include the requirement that a copy of such license must be included with the release].

Statement of a relinquishment of 'copyright' can include allowing or not allowing derivative works being sold, etc. but that needs to be stated. If NOT stated it can only be 'assumed' OK - until such time as clarification is sought and/or provided....

 

[SSW1]

Copyright and its application has been a part of my professional career for over 44 years.
The 'GPL' and/or 'GNU' have no legal relevance unless stated as doing so by the author of the artwork.
ALL art created by an individual is covered by 'inherent copyright' and needs no specific statement/inclusion other than that which may be to REDUCE the owner's inherent copyright.

An artist may revoke his copyright in whole or in part via included statement, such as by specifically stating he releases his work/s under the GPL/GNU license standards [which actually include the requirement that a copy of such license must be included with the release].

Statement of a relinquishment of 'copyright' can include allowing or not allowing derivative works being sold, etc. but that needs to be stated. If NOT stated it can only be 'assumed' OK - until such time as clarification is sought and/or provided....

Thanks for clarification, yours is a "restricting" interpretation, others use the "wider" interpretation, there is no wide agreement on this.
Software is a "fuzzy" field, something like mathematics,
ie: Pitagora theorema is "inherently copyrighted" ? Following your interpretation yes, permission to use or make derivative work should have been asked.
Richard Stallman would be on the "liberal" side, Bill Gates on the other evidently.
But is not the case of the mentioned discussion, nothing has been done and/or distributed, so we are debating of nothing.
Thanks
/SSW

 

[awstub]

I would like to do a bit of clarity on the use of other people's software.
If in the package distributed freely there is no copyright notice the acquired practice is to refer to the world wide used GPL (General Public License see www.fsf.org ).
This license states that the software licensed freely may be freely copied, modified and distributed as long as the derivative work is also distributed as free software.
No original author permission is required since it is implied into the license itself, however is a fair habit to give credits to original author mentioning them as contributors.
So said, SSW does not have distributed nothing yet about his modification on Ivan Jurcaga MIG 21, so we are speaking of nothing, when and if it will be done all credits will be given to original authors and contributors and obviously, following GPL rules, it will be free.
ALL textures will be done using our own resources and using a derivative paintkit for which we already have the permission to use and modify by the original author, Kendy Schwarz.
Since all liveries will be fictional we do not run the risk to be unpolite toward others authors.
So about what we are discussing ?
I guess all is started about an Dag complaint made earlier than things would have happened:
Dag denied a permission before it was asked even if it should not even be asked, we never had an intention to distribute liveries made by him and will continue to do so, we just mentioned him to give credits in sake of politeness, as we did for Zsolt.
SSW wanted do something useful for the community, following both legal and correctness rules, but if this are the results even before to begin, we guess that is far better keep things private and use our work for us.
cheers
/SSW

Please read this whole thread.

It's not about what you guys have done (or not done), so please don't get all bent out of shape in here.

My initial questions here were based on me not having any clue on how to "properly" present a repaint.

I would really like to upload what I have done, since I don't think anyone else has made one...and I'm kind of proud that I was able to accomplish it (with the gracious help of others here)... but I want to do it in a way that doesn't step on any egos/hurt any feelings if I can help it.

I don't have a lot of patience with people easily offended, since that is not how I roll.
If you don't like something I have done, please tell me. I have a pretty thick skin and I embrace criticism.
That being said, I also try not to be an ignorant a_$ hole.

Anyway......AFTER I posed my questions here in this thread, the issue raised by Dag came up..... which made me ask my follow up question specific regarding Dag's complaint because I used a paint kit that I downloaded along with a repaint done by Kendy Schwarz .... so maybe it's the same paint kit you guys used?

 

[SSW1]

Please read this whole thread.

It's not about what you guys have done (or not done), so please don't get all bent out of shape in here.

My initial questions here were based on me not having any clue on how to "properly" present a repaint.

I would really like to upload what I have done, since I don't think anyone else has made one...and I'm kind of proud that I was able to accomplish it (with the gracious help of others here)... but I want to do it in a way that doesn't step on any egos/hurt any feelings if I can help it.

I don't have a lot of patience with people easily offended, since that is not how I roll.
If you don't like something I have done, please tell me. I have a pretty thick skin and I embrace criticism.
That being said, I also try not to be an ignorant a_$ hole.

Anyway......AFTER I posed my questions here in this thread, the issue raised by Dag came up..... which made me ask my follow up question specific regarding Dag's complaint because I used a paint kit that I downloaded along with a repaint done by Kendy Schwarz .... so maybe it's the same paint kit you guys used?

Hi awstub,
as far i know the Schwarz paintkit is the only one freely available and i guess is the original one from which several painters have derived their works, the original author was asked by us and willingly agreed with derivative works, thanks to him that shows a truly "open source" mind.
it is odd that those who most probably have used his paintkit to make derivative works are those who complain while the original author has no objections.
I do not consider myself a "painter", i'm totally rookie here, neither jealous nor touchy about my work, in fact I consider any contribution added and/or modifying what i have done welcome if it brings a benefit to the community.
So any contribution by you is welcome as far i'm concerned.
My main field of interest are systems and gauges, most of the time fighting with dll's and C/C++ idiosyncrasy, i began to approach to painters field in order to develop a modified version on Ivan's MIG-21 for VAAFSE needs.
But nothing as been completed nor distributed to public and i'm seriously considering to never do it, i see that the painter's touchy world has to be taken with a grain of salt
cheers
/Mario

 

[ce_zeta]

I have been trying to learn how to do repaints these past few weeks and thanks to the assistance I received from some of the members here, I have finally been able to
produce something that is at least halfway decent and I would now like to make it available for others.

....but first, I have some questions.

1. What is the best/proper/most efficient way to make the paints available to others?

2. What information, at the bare minimum, should be included with the files?

3. Is there any general sort of etiquette in regards to repainting?

Also an important thing for me at least, If you post a screenshot of your repaint finished, upload it. It is a childish attitude show modifications (repaints, panels...) in forums and don't distribute it.

 

[gaucho_59]

Very important words!!!! "I think"...

Also an important thing for me at least, If you post a screenshot of your repaint finished, upload it. It is a childish attitude show modifications (repaints, panels...) in forums and don't distribute it.

Very interesting responses... but two words never mentioned... AND I THINK... should preface each one of them... are "I THINK"...
Opinions are like anal orifices... EVERYBODY HAS ONE!!! and it is only just to be able to voice the same...
However... unless a group of hobbyists wish to appear like so many "sh*thouse lawyers" SUCH OPINIONS should be tempered with
"I THINK" because what offends someone does not do the same to others... and vice-versa... Destructive criticisms include"rivet counter"
comments one often sees... even in the name of accuracy or historical relevance...they are never considered offensive and YET are part of the
same thing... it seems to me that comments like "this renditions lacks 2 rivets, one bolt, etc." are no different than saying "I don't like
this guy's work"... only it seems to be taken, I THINK, as constructive just because they are not emotionally charged... etc. etc.
Sanctimonious statements like "NEVER DO THIS OR THAT"... are just as offending to a discerning mind... especially when law professionals
find this issues very tenuously definable in enjoining REAL cases of copyright infringement...
As a practicing anesthetist... I always made it a point to preface all my statements of medical opinion with "I think"... because more often than
not... many opinions come back to "bite you in the ass" when they are in error... just a matter of self preservation...
Political correctness, I THINK, should not enter the world of hobbies... hobbies are meant, I THINK, to entertain NOT become theaters of controversy...
Some of us are more talented than others... yet... I THINK... EVERYONE IS ENTITLED BY HIS CREATOR TO FREE SPEECH AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS... so
have fun with this hobby... and not worry about opinions.. they are just that...
and use "I THINK" sparingly... it keeps that ugly controversy crap away and lets one enjoy life... I THINK.


Cheers,
G.

P.S.: just noticed... ( I am almost 79 myself) THE AVERAGE AGE IN THIS THREAD IS PAST 60!!! Folks.. where the f...k have you been in this life???
Life is too frigging short to be entwined in such byzantine discussions... Pretty soon you are going to meet that CREATOR... LOL...
would it not be a bitch if She starts pointing out you were following the wrong compass headings?... Counting your rivets, I mean... lol
I think SHE is probably not that harsh... and looks at what nice things you did for others.... at least I hope so...

 

[Duckie]

awstub...

Among the weeds of this thread there is some good advice here.

Getting back to your original questions, I'll offer one suggestion. For your own research, if you haven't already done so, download a good sample of repaints from some of the more prolific repainters and see what they include in their documents. I believe, among varying levels of verbiage and detail, you will also find some common threads of what you may call "minimum" information. Examples from these folks have taught me some invaluable lessons.

Just a thought.

 

[huub vink]

As I already said in my previous post and clearly displayed above, there is a lot you can debate about. Personally I have the feeling when you enter a discussion about legal aspects, you already crossed the line of proper behaviour in most cases.

Well as Duckie already said above, back to the original subject:

My readme files always have a few chapters

Introduction: which tells the people for what model the repaint was done and what it depicts.

History: in which the history of the particular plane is explained. (I always hope somebody actually reads it).

Installation instructions: Just a brief instruction and this part also contains the entry for the aircraft configuration file (Will be read when the installation doesn't work). Some people appreciate it when you put your name (as the one who did the repaint) somewhere in the entry for the aircraft.cfg file. This way they can track the one who did the repaint.

Credits: Where I give credits to the developer(s) of the model, when a paintkit from somebody else is used this will be mentioned here as well, and to all who supplied information, support or anything else.

Legal stuff: Where I explain the repaint didn't harm me nor my computer, but use is at people's own risk. And I always tell people they can do what they want with this repaint as long as they don't charge people for it. (I'm not very touchy at this point. Normally I am pleased and feel a bit honoured when people want to use my repaints.)

And I sign with my name and email address, as this is a requirement on sites like Flightsim and Avsim. I also add the date so I can remember when I did what.

Personally I hate to write readme files therefore I always use more or less the same format.

Cheers,
Huub

 

[awstub]

Thank you all

Thank you very much to everyone who posted to this thread. I think I have a pretty good picture on how to go about it.

Time permitting, I will be uploading what I have done within the next couple of days.

My goal is to get proficient enough to do a repaint of a Milviz F-4E in the marking of one my father flew with the 421st TFS and 4th TFS during Operation Linebacker.....but that paint kit is a bit intimidating for me at the moment.

 

[Willy]

but that paint kit is a bit intimidating for me at the moment.

Just get in there and keep plugging away at it. That's what I did until things started clicking and making sense.

 

[BrittMac]

Some great info here, thanks to everyone, and the OP for asking. I may try my hand at this someday when I have time. It's quite limited and I only have an hour or so I can even devote to simming a week if I am lucky.

That being said, does anyone have the ability/time/whatever for a repaint of a Cherokee and Bonanza? My earlier opportunity fell through. Sorry for hijacking, but, this repaint thread seemed coincidental somehow.

Looking up some youtube stuff now, just to learn what I can, when I can.

 

[awstub]

Well, I finally got it figured out enough to able to upload what I have done. ..so it's out there in the FSX Military skins - Vietnam section.

Thank you to everyone who helped me learn about the process and best practices.

If anyone has any ideas on how I can improve on what I have done (or how I did it) PLEASE let me know.

Thanks!