Thank you so much @Wyldanimal for the explanation. 😊

Merci beaucoup @Wyldanimal pour les explications. 😊

I, in part agree with wildanimal. Once downloaded its yours to do with as you wish (i encourage it with my scenes regardless how long it has taken me to write), a lot of you are using other peoples work in your scenes (shadertoy) without explicit permission, just creative commons. How many of those coders would be unhappy with your use in istripper scenes of their work? Yet, you pulbish works containing their code and i have never heard of any complaints that people on here have used/modified their work.

I dont agree with the making us add the istripper logo in the scene as it's just a waste of time. It can easliy be removed, as for adding it to the scene code so we have no control... well they havent added any new functions that we have requested, didnt the person that wrote it leave years ago? I'm sure we would find a way around it or they will break things like the persistent buffer "undocumented feature".

a lot of you are using other peoples work in your scenes (shadertoy) without explicit permission, just creative commons

The Creative Commons licences give you explicit permission to use the work as long as you include an attribution to the original author and allow others the same rights to re-use the combined work. There is a bit more to it than that but, unlike the American "reasonable use" permission, it's not just a "just" thing.

(When I last checked, about a year ago, the Shadertoy site said that the shaders there were released under a particular Creative Commons license except for those for which there was an explicit statement refering to some other licence.)

@TheEMU, you have missed the point. Part of which is ...

Most of those creators have no idea istripper exists. I guarantee there are some people on there that would not want their work associated with strippers regardless of the licence.

The other part being that Calgon is complaing about someone informing someone else how to alter his scene to remove a logo on their computer at the same time as using other peoples code which he has altered, that seems a bit rich to me. Previously i have told calgon not to remove the original attribution on shaders so he seems to be unaware of the protocol (i have messed up myself in this regard, but im not complaing about other people altering my scene or shaders).

Most of those creators have no idea istripper exists.

Nevertheless, by using the Creative Commons licence those creators have explicitly granted everyone the right to use their work - that being pretty much the point of using such licences. Most of those creators have no idea of the vast majority of cases where others may use their work,

Most of those creators have no idea istripper exists.
Nevertheless, by using the Creative Commons licence those creators have explicitly granted everyone the right to use their work - that being pretty much the point of using such licences. Most of those creators have no idea of the vast majority of cases where others may use their work,

For that matter most don't actually know what the licence actually allows.

To my mind you should at least give the original creator a heads up that you are using their shader in a sexualy explicit program. When i used parts of Bigwings (the art of code on youtube) gyroid code, i linked my youtube video(now deleted) in his youtube comments. He liked it, i don't think he would have any problem with Calgon use of his feathers shader but i cant speak for him nor can any of us speak for the other creators which may not understand that the CC licence allows this kind of useage.

Informing them may get some new customers and scene creators too :)

For that matter most don't actually know what the licence actually allows.

Which is one of the reasons why when you release something under the licence it requires you to either provide the full text of the licence or a link (or similar indicator) to where that text can be found. Something like

// == Creator : TheEmu © TheEmu 2017, Some Rights Reserved ==
// == Licence : Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 ==
// == http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-sa/4.0

If you have not done that then you have not adhered to the licence.

Which is one of the reasons why when you release something under the licence it requires you to either provide the full text of the licence or a link (or similar indicator) to where that text can be found.

Just because the agreement is there and even if they have read and understood it that doesnt mean they know istripper exists and has opengl functionality. This is a niche product after all. Just for the sake of basic courtesy you should inform them that you are using it in istripper. They may not want their name/work associated with porn.

I am willing to bet that the majority of people that use the CC licence have not read it, they have just thought "oh i just need to copy past that bit" and that s all. Yes, technically you can use it for whatever you want, but morally ...?

As an extreme example, someone could use a shadertoy as a background while they do stuff to eg:- 13 year old japanese girl (legal in parts of japan) and have the toy's creators name in the corner. Do you honestly think "but you have the CC licence" would be an excuse they would accept?

It is one thing to use their shader in another toy or in a game and an entirely another in a scene with a eg:- woman stuffing a vibe up herself. I don't understand how you can't see that.

@ZZ2 - I do see it. But it in no way changes anything that I have said in which I have deliberately restricted myself to clarifying technical points regarding the licence.

If someone does not want their work to be used in ways they do not approve of then they should not use an unmodified Creative Commons license.

I have been talking about the morality of using someone elses code in a sexual explicit program they are likly to be
unaware of. Your argument is akin to "well you clicked yes on the EULA". People frequently click on things they didnt read and even add links they didnt read either, just because others have.

As i said, this not about legality, its a moral question.

@Mods, can you please move this discussion to the discussion section, i started it in the wrong section.

As i said, this not about legality, its a moral question.

I fully agree that it is a moral question - but it is one that also has a legal basis.

This sub-thread began because you said

a lot of you are using other peoples work in your scenes (shadertoy) without explicit permission, just creative commons

To which I made a reply pointing out that the explicit permission that you denied existed did in fact exist - that is ALL I was saying.

@Mods, can you please move this discussion to the discussion section, i started it in the wrong section.

We can't move a part of a thread, only the full thread. Sorry.

@TheEMU Yes, but that is an out of context clip.

"Once downloaded its yours to do with as you wish (i encourage it with my scenes regardless how long it has taken me to write), a lot of you are using other peoples work in your scenes (shadertoy) without explicit permission, just creative commons. How many of those coders would be unhappy with your use in istripper scenes of their work?"

rest of thread here...

https://www.istripper.com/forum/thread/27449/143?post=755515

Everything about iStripper / Discussions for Scenes for Version 1.2.X Fullscreen Mode here

Moved thread here... There is an easy solution to this... email the owner of shadertoy and inform them of the use in istripper scenes and ask that they inform their userbase, and ask that the users ad...

@Z22

The context of my comment was restricted to the particular part of your post that I quoted in my original reply. That is why I quoted it - to establish the very specific context of the comment. I was was also commenting on your use of "just" when referring to the Creative Commons license which looked to me as if you considered it as something like the common misconception of the American "fair use" provision (which itself is not as liberal as it is often thought to be). Incidently, the use of such phrases as "just Creative Commons" quite possibly contributes to others not bothering to check what is meant by that license (as does the use of "fair use" and "public domain" both of which are typically misunderstood).

I said nothing about the rest of your post because I agreed with it and had nothing useful to add.

EDIT: Frpm previous posts of yours I am pretty sure that you do understand what is meant by Creative Commons, but someone comming fresh to the post I was commenting on would not, I think, understand that.

some futurist scenes...

https://mega.nz/folder/8doXEBza#Q9mC0oU0r6Net2ZTjIm1Jg

Thanks a lot @titiii

There were already several scenes that I had in your pack, which I don't think there were any updates. If I am wrong please correct me.

However, I didn't have cyberpunk. It's a pity that the cyberpunk scenes don't start with titiii like the others, because it makes it easier to identify the authors and to group the scenes in the same place.

Thanks for your beautiful work. 😊


Merci beaucoup @titiii

Il y avait déjà plusieurs scènes que j'avais dans votre pack, dont je ne crois pas qu'il y avait de mises à jour. Si je me trompe corrigez-moi.

Par contre, je n'avais pas cyberpunk. Dommage que les scène de cyberpunk ne commencent pas par titiii comme les autres, car cela facilte l'identification des auteurs et regroupe les scènes au même endroit.

Merci pour votre beau travail. 😊

Ah oui, c'est pas faux, j'ai updaté le fichier avec les préfixes titiii_, il y a trop longtemps que je n'avais pas partagé de scènes...
Pas de mises à jour depuis 2 ans, mais je n'exclu pas d'ajouter des scènes que je n'avais pas partagé jusqu'alors.
Content que ça vous plaise.

You're right > files updated with the correct prefix, thanks for the feedback.

@titiii
Merci pour la mise à jour 👌 Et oui, 2 ans c'est long! Donc si tu as quelques trucs à ajouter, n'hésites surtout pas 👍😄

@titiii

some futurist scenes...

Thanks for sharing these. Some great work there 👍Love the foreground perspective on cyb77_trash01, the background yacht on beach2020_sand1 .... the reversed swing to solve the problems of where swings end. On beach2020_fruits the edges of the foreground fruit are perfect - is there some technique you used to get the edges so crisp ? All very polished scenes 👍

For the mask edges, when my selection is done, i always apply a Selection/Modify/Smooth Selection before delete unwanted parts (the minimum = 0.5 pixels).
I'm glad you like those scenes 😄

is there some technique you used to get the edges so crisp ?

For the mask edges, when my selection is done, i always apply a Selection/Modify/Smooth Selection before delete unwanted parts

I do the same, except that as I am using Gimp the names are different (the term "feathering" is used). Strictly speaking it actually makes the edges less crisp but at the same time makes them much less jagged. In a few cases I manually apply blurring to a small region at the edges of the mask.

Thanks @titiii and @TheEmu - I'm using paint.net. I'll look for an equivalent.

ALL ET Scenes FG089 - FG829
** Important (.scn files only) Updates FG089-829 **

• requires the original FG zips to have been installed earlier...
• Numerous adjustments made to correct existing .scn file issues
• Revised model position orientations/visability/animations
• Corrected many floating stage left/right orientations
• Updated stages with iStripper Logo as per @WA 's recommendation.

Note: This update only applies to the recent FractalGarden originally named scenes.
and these alterations require the original shaders, graphics or animation frames
to be present already from earlier extracted zips posted on this thread.

https://scenes.virtuastripper.net/ET_FractalGarden830Update089-829.zip

zip size = 463 Kb
Extract the zip straight to ../scenes folder. Allow merged folders
and allow to overwrite any existing same name file.
riemixed to The Beatles - 'Free as a bird'

👍 😎

I remember there were scenes someone made that would split the screen into boxes (4, 6, 8, 10, maybe more) with a model in each box. I can't seem to find these, though. Does anyone else remember these or can point me to them? Thanks!