Rayman himself
Forum rules
Please keep the forum rules and guidelines in mind when creating or replying to a topic.
Please keep the forum rules and guidelines in mind when creating or replying to a topic.
Re: Rayman himself
AniCator, I am as old as you and I own Rayman fanart in my page. 
Re: Rayman himself
I wish to know what lies behind that link but I am too afraid to click it.
Re: Rayman himself
If you're afraid of Rule 34, don't worry.THEdragon wrote:I wish to know what lies behind that link but I am too afraid to click it.
-
Hunchman801

- Posts: 87633
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 6:50 pm
- Location: Paris, France
- Contact:
- Tings: 640277
Re: Rayman himself
That's fan work, not fan art. Calling your own work art is incredibly pretentious.
Re: Rayman himself
Only in the way you're thinking. When I say "Fanart" it isn't with the context of "excessive claims" but with "A piece of work executed by a fan".
Re: Rayman himself
Art - The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination.
Re: Rayman himself
Yeah, not in the context of "My Rayman painting is a ceiling of Sistine Chapel".
-
Hunchman801

- Posts: 87633
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 6:50 pm
- Location: Paris, France
- Contact:
- Tings: 640277
Re: Rayman himself
There is absolutely no consensus over the exact definition of art, so anyone can come up with their own and pollute the debate.
The term is “fan work”. You say the meaning is “a piece of work executed by a fan”, so why call it art?
The term is “fan work”. You say the meaning is “a piece of work executed by a fan”, so why call it art?
Re: Rayman himself
I think you're taking it way too seriously. 
Re: Rayman himself
I'm just curious but why bring this up? The term 'fanart' is used pretty much about anywhere on the internet and hardly anybody argues over it.
Re: Rayman himself
I think Spanex has a point here. The term 'Fanart' is used everywhere on internet.
-
Master

- Posts: 53542
- Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:14 am
- Location: Somewhere specific, I'd assume.
- Tings: 468310
Re: Rayman himself
Is it odd that I knew it was you who made that post when I saw it in my RSS feed?schmooky.luke wrote:I think Spanex has a point here. The term 'Fanart' is used everywhere on internet.
Re: Rayman himself
Spanex is right. So far nobody argued about the definition but "Fanart" it is the word used everywhere on the internet to define a piece of work executed by a fan of a known series. It is not to define "Outstanding art done by a fan". Fanart is named after any art piece, even if values nothing.
-
sergiomonty

- Posts: 3730
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:21 pm
- Tings: 10
Re: Rayman himself
Hunchman801 wrote:There is absolutely no consensus over the exact definition of art, so anyone can come up with their own and pollute the debate.
The term is “fan work”. You say the meaning is “a piece of work executed by a fan”, so why call it art?
No offense but, you are so wrong in so many ways...
-
Hunchman801

- Posts: 87633
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 6:50 pm
- Location: Paris, France
- Contact:
- Tings: 640277
Re: Rayman himself
Why would you think so? Are you so unfamiliar with the concept of a healthy debate?AniCator wrote:I think you're taking it way too seriously.
Spanex wrote:I'm just curious but why bring this up? The term 'fanart' is used pretty much about anywhere on the internet and hardly anybody argues over it.
schmooky.luke wrote:I think Spanex has a point here. The term 'Fanart' is used everywhere on internet.
I cannot believe that the three of you are using the same logical fallacy to justify your opinion: this is nothing but an argumentum ad antiquitatem. I can say a million times that 1 + 1 = 3, however I doubt this will make it more true.Haruka wrote:Spanex is right. So far nobody argued about the definition but "Fanart" it is the word used everywhere on the internet to define a piece of work executed by a fan of a known series. It is not to define "Outstanding art done by a fan". Fanart is named after any art piece, even if values nothing.
No offense taken, however I fail to see the point of such nonconstructive criticism.sergiomonty wrote:No offense but, you are so wrong in so many ways...
Re: Rayman himself
Hunch, it's just a word.
Re: Rayman himself
It's not about the word, it's about sending a message.Spanex wrote:Hunch, it's just a word.
Re: Rayman himself
I guess you're right in that, but I think this debate is pointless.Rulez wrote:It's not about the word, it's about sending a message.Spanex wrote:Hunch, it's just a word.
Re: Rayman himself
I say the same thing. Fanart might not be the best definition for the subject, but that it is used by everybody it is.
-
Adsolution

- Posts: 22233
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:55 pm
- Contact:
- Tings: 110541
Re: Rayman himself
Whoa, hitting a time portal to yesterday suddenly:
Every time I look at that animation it's even more impressive and appreciatable. You'll definitely be someone I'd want to work with even after ROTD. Too good to pass up.Spanex wrote:Whop, that's my work. >_>;
Ahah, I made that years ago for another obsessive Rayman fan. She can actually be found in this topic a while back.schmooky.luke wrote:It says 'By Rayfan9876'...did she really do that?
EDIT: I think you should PM that picture to Rayfan.



