What's the difference between "source" and "location"? One field that's missing and that I've used/needed for most of the fanart I've uploaded is "notes". Notes include information like that it's an illustration for story/zine X or was created for challenge Y and sometimes commentary the artist included in their header when they posted the art, etc.
QUESTION: I just saw a disturbing image with no warning! How do I add a warning?
1) The most disturbing image I've seen on fanlore is one that doesn't fit any of the warnings (I don't find sex particulary disturbing). It's on a Sentinel zine page and I feel sorry for the zine when I see it. :( http://fanlore.org/wiki/Image:2.jpg
2) The options on how to deal with content that might need warnings are very limited. All warning templates say "To link to this image on an article, please use a pixel size of 100." This is very small and only makes sense when the image is a close-up of a sexual act. Everything else is already quite small in a normal thumbnail version of the image. Also, if the page is about a kink, trope, pairing, it makes sense to include these images in a reasonable size and someone clicking on BDSM shouldn't expect tiny safe pictures. Also, this directly contradicts this part: "QUESTION: How do I know what resolution is appropriate? This is a very good question, and the answer is: use what resolution you need to make your point." I would wish for more flexibility and a warning text that says something like "Only link to this image in a normal thumbnail version when it's used in articles where this kind of content is appropriate and expected, otherwise please use a pixel size of 100 (or wikilink to it using a text link)." (You can wikilink to images without displaying the image on a page by adding a colon at the beginning, for example [[:Image:imagename.jpg]]) Another way to deal with this would be to create categories for these warnings and add something like [[Category:Explicit Content]] to article pages with explicit content and/or [[Category:No Warnings]] to other pages...
QUESTION: Can I upload copyrighted images on Fanlore without the permission of the creator?
I understand and support some of the reasons behind this policy but IMO this is far too broad to apply it to a fannish context. Of course it's much more convenient to say "it's fair use!" than to have a long list with explanations and exceptions and examples, but sometimes in fandom it's better to be more specific.
For example, there is a difference between copying and reposting online art and taking a picture of a physical object like a zine. I can accept the latter as fair use (there are several good arguments for this), the former, however, is more complicated. Personally I use the "Schöpfungshöhe" (don't know the English expression, something like "individuality"?) of the artwork in question as a criterion.
If it's a screenshot/photo with a caption, I wouldn't ask for permission. If it's a screenshot from a vid (vids often feature manips or other art) I wouldn't ask for permission either.
If it's a complex photo manipulation, I would check the artist's policies (some give blanket permission, etc) and usually ask the artist for permission. There may be exceptions when the art isn't online anymore but the artist and artwork had a certain kind of mainstream exposure (for example The Theban Band).
If the online art is drawn or painted, I almost always ask for permission. There may be exceptions when the art is explicitly created as a cover for a story or a promotional banner because then using the artwork on the wiki would be using it for its intended purpose.
I think situations where only one particular piece of online art can illustrate a point that no other art by an artist who doesn't object to this use can illustrate as well are pretty rare. It probably can be argued that fair use is more important in these rare cases than the artist's wishes (after all, we use screencaps of blog entries when the entries were deleted in the middle of a flamewar or wank, so it's not that fandom doesn't go occasionally against the wishes of the creator), but IMO that doesn't make it alright to extend the fair use argument preemptively to all artwork.
no subject
What's the difference between "source" and "location"? One field that's missing and that I've used/needed for most of the fanart I've uploaded is "notes". Notes include information like that it's an illustration for story/zine X or was created for challenge Y and sometimes commentary the artist included in their header when they posted the art, etc.
QUESTION: I just saw a disturbing image with no warning! How do I add a warning?
1) The most disturbing image I've seen on fanlore is one that doesn't fit any of the warnings (I don't find sex particulary disturbing). It's on a Sentinel zine page and I feel sorry for the zine when I see it. :( http://fanlore.org/wiki/Image:2.jpg
2) The options on how to deal with content that might need warnings are very limited. All warning templates say "To link to this image on an article, please use a pixel size of 100." This is very small and only makes sense when the image is a close-up of a sexual act. Everything else is already quite small in a normal thumbnail version of the image. Also, if the page is about a kink, trope, pairing, it makes sense to include these images in a reasonable size and someone clicking on BDSM shouldn't expect tiny safe pictures. Also, this directly contradicts this part: "QUESTION: How do I know what resolution is appropriate? This is a very good question, and the answer is: use what resolution you need to make your point." I would wish for more flexibility and a warning text that says something like "Only link to this image in a normal thumbnail version when it's used in articles where this kind of content is appropriate and expected, otherwise please use a pixel size of 100 (or wikilink to it using a text link)." (You can wikilink to images without displaying the image on a page by adding a colon at the beginning, for example [[:Image:imagename.jpg]]) Another way to deal with this would be to create categories for these warnings and add something like [[Category:Explicit Content]] to article pages with explicit content and/or [[Category:No Warnings]] to other pages...
QUESTION: Can I upload copyrighted images on Fanlore without the permission of the creator?
I understand and support some of the reasons behind this policy but IMO this is far too broad to apply it to a fannish context. Of course it's much more convenient to say "it's fair use!" than to have a long list with explanations and exceptions and examples, but sometimes in fandom it's better to be more specific.
For example, there is a difference between copying and reposting online art and taking a picture of a physical object like a zine. I can accept the latter as fair use (there are several good arguments for this), the former, however, is more complicated. Personally I use the "Schöpfungshöhe" (don't know the English expression, something like "individuality"?) of the artwork in question as a criterion.
If it's a screenshot/photo with a caption, I wouldn't ask for permission. If it's a screenshot from a vid (vids often feature manips or other art) I wouldn't ask for permission either.
If it's a complex photo manipulation, I would check the artist's policies (some give blanket permission, etc) and usually ask the artist for permission. There may be exceptions when the art isn't online anymore but the artist and artwork had a certain kind of mainstream exposure (for example The Theban Band).
If the online art is drawn or painted, I almost always ask for permission. There may be exceptions when the art is explicitly created as a cover for a story or a promotional banner because then using the artwork on the wiki would be using it for its intended purpose.
I think situations where only one particular piece of online art can illustrate a point that no other art by an artist who doesn't object to this use can illustrate as well are pretty rare. It probably can be argued that fair use is more important in these rare cases than the artist's wishes (after all, we use screencaps of blog entries when the entries were deleted in the middle of a flamewar or wank, so it's not that fandom doesn't go occasionally against the wishes of the creator), but IMO that doesn't make it alright to extend the fair use argument preemptively to all artwork.
~Doro (frogspace)