NIGHTFeaR 4

Source (link to git-repo or to original if based on someone elses unmodified work): Add the source-code for this project on opencode.net

Description:

new version 3.0

44 comments

1
2

Comments/Ratings

Please login or register to add a comment or rating

Dundee88
9 years ago

This has been my default wallpaper for some time now.

Report

queelz
11 years ago

your pictures stormgreen and all versions of nightfear from your nature set are the best in the complete internet. thanks that you sent me the 30 layer original file of nightfear. i made some modifications for my own set. i hope you enjoy it. do you still use kde-look.org or do you use other great sites for publishing your great work?

Report

btuttle
8 years ago

Hi queelz. I'm trying to get in touch with Paninaro but haven't heard back yet so I thought I'd reach out here. I'm interested in using this image for a commercial website. Do you have any idea what type of license he has for it? Did he have any special requirements when he gave you the PSDs?

I looked over the "Artistic 2.0" license next to the thumbnail above, but it only references software, and I'm not sure how it would apply to images.

Our site launches in a week, so any response would be greatly appreciated!

Report

btuttle
8 years ago

Ahh! Sorry for the triple post.

Report

btuttle
8 years ago

Report

btuttle
8 years ago

Report

queelz
11 years ago

i made another modification on stormgreen on layer 5 and 7 and on nightfear version 2 on layer 23, 24, 29, hope you enjoy it.
thanks for your answer, youre the greatest artist.

Report

paninaro
11 years ago

thanks

Report

queelz
11 years ago

thanks for the manuals for making such great pictures like stormgreen, nightfear and stormblue.

Report

danfuhry
11 years ago

I found the original wallpaper: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/Pico+do+Breu+?content=59742

For those who are wondering, this was taken at Pico do Breu, in Brazil.

There's also a bit of a licensing issue here... the original image is GPL, whereas this one is obviously a derivative work but supposedly Artistic license...

Report

paninaro
11 years ago

please delete this copy from your link, my picture was released in 2005, the copy from your link two years later, please respect my work, delete your copy and release your own pictures!

Report

supermadman
11 years ago

I have to agree with the poster above - a quick Google Images search for, "Pico do Breu" reveals that this was not, in fact, created from several layers of 3D-generated material, but is a photograph of a real place.

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=Pico+do+Breu

Report

da9250
11 years ago

I have to disagree- I believe this is paninaro's work. See the following:

http://images.google.com/images?q=NIGHTFeaR

http://dev.gentoo.org/~rane/other/wallpaper/
--> dated 5/2007

Either way, the wallpaper nightfear was first submitted in 2005 under paninaro, as the date above shows. Too bad kde-look doesn't keep old versions...

Report

supermadman
11 years ago

That doesn't explain why he stated, "this landscape doesn't exist in reality" when, in fact, it does.

Report

danfuhry
11 years ago

Dude. It's pretty obvious that you replaced the grass and such in your version. Compare the two images side by side:

Orig: http://www.kde-look.org/CONTENT/content-files/59742-morro.jpg
Yours: http://www.kde-look.org/CONTENT/content-files/25331-night4.jpg

It takes no effort at all to look at the two and tell which one is the original image. How could the other guy have possibly obtained the original image with your horrible patchwork on the grass off to the right? Also look at the clouds. The other version shows lighting and clouds that could not possibly have been derived from this image. You ripped this guy off. Just admit it.

Besides, the original picture is under the GPL. All you have to do is release yours under the GPL and state your name and date of modifications. If you do that, they have no reason to delete this image.

I've reported this to kde-look abuse.

Dan

Report

paninaro
11 years ago

the link that you have is the copy of "nightfear version 1.0",that i had released in 2005 , after that i made some modifications on different layers, grass, heaven, backgrounds etc., this image here ist the actually version 4.0. that means between v1 and v4, i made some modifications. i hope now you understand. in the web i find very much copys of this and others of my works. i have no problem with it. i dont want to watermark my work, but if more of this posts are coming, i must do that.

Report

paninaro
11 years ago

this is my own work, and this landscape doesnt exist in reality. this picture is a work from about 30 different layers,
parts of the layers were made with a 3d program.
please dont spam with such mails and respect the artwork of the author

Report

thesupermadman
11 years ago

I did also notice that the, "original" was indeed released before this one, several days before in fact.

Report

paninaro
11 years ago

please delete this copy, my picture was released in 2005, the copy from your link two years later, please respect my work, delete your copy and release your own pictures!

Report

thesupermadman
11 years ago

Honestly, it does look near-exactly the same as the, "original image": in fact, the only difference I spotted was that the sun was darkened at the left on this version. Otherwise, it looks near-exactly the same.

Report

Mofoto
12 years ago

great artistic job! artificial sure but the colors are well chosen! and mystery... ;-)

Report

Caladan
13 years ago

It's also nice, but it's a bit too artificial for me. I liked Night(fear) 1.0 more, which is my absolute favorite.

Report

darkowl
13 years ago

I really love this image, I made a GDM theme out of it and I would like to submit that theme under the GPL license, so if you have no objections I will do that quite soon. Unless you have objections...

Report

Fri13
12 years ago

"I really love this image, I made a GDM theme out of it and I would like to submit that theme under the GPL license, so if you have no objections I will do that quite soon. Unless you have objections..."

I think that you cant release it under GPL because GPL demands that the source is available and if the original source is not, you are violeting the license. So you should check can you do that with LGPL or Artistic 2.0 too.

GPL does not fit to art so well as on code, so there came those other licenses for reason :-)

Report