Hello, this might be a strange topic, but when i saw the splash screen it reminded me of a wallpaper i once saw on www.nexus.com (great place to get texture by the way)
(sorry but there is some bare skin involved 
rolleyes::eyebrowlift2::no::p)
Yeah that seems like a legitimate concern. Well spotted.
Copying someone else’s artwork is perfectly fine if it’s for your own personal learning, but releasing it as your own without referring back to the original is generally called stealing. The fact that this is the official splash screen of blender makes it potentially worse.
But let’s give Alexey the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps there’s another side to it.
A more important question is, was it created with blender?
mmmm may be is better use the girl as splash uahauhaua:D
Still need to reverse the situation of if the the picture of the chick has the splash pic shopped in. It’d seem easier to simply alpha out the flower and insert it in the fire.
Edit: Disregard that. But you’d still need to ask whether or not if the person that made the chick pic is the one that stole the flower.
the funny thing is that when i came accross this wallpaper on the nexus site and saw the fireflower i was actually thinking" wow how awesome would it be to be able to make that in blender" but i gave up on that idea because i was just a beginner.
Ifilgood: yes next time they can model the girl and put her on splash, although we do have to think about the younger blender users. Let us think of the children 
I think they may have seen that flower somewhere and decided to re-create it. I don’t think that’s clear-cut infringement (it might be, I am not a lawyer) and I don’t personally see anything too bad about it, although it’s kind of disappointing to see.
That’s embarrassing, you guys should always check “final render” and "original artwork snapshot’ or even the BLEND file.
Search “Fire Flower” using Google.
Maybe this is the original artist?
http://houroboros.deviantart.com/art/Fireflower-216938150
Or this one?
Interestingly, maybe one can try to re-create this in Blender?
(merged with other post)
hmmm… I think it’s too close from the other one to look just like a coincidence… not a problem to replicate the technique but he should have done a differrent flower shape or some different object. Like this, it’s a bit embarassing. I wonder what the artist has to say…
While it does look strikingly similar there are subtle differences. However, it seems clear this art has been copied from somewhere else as there are so many similar instances on the net. It should be referenced properly and if not, in my opinion it should be removed.
Boobies!
I think it ultimately comes down to the blend file. If there is a blend file that can produce the image on the splash, or produce an image that can be logically manipulated through PS or GIMP to create the image, I think he is fine. The fire flower concept actually goes back to the 80s, with super Mario. I don’t think reference is required anymore than a car model needs to reference a photo.
It looks like it was obviously inspired by the original but it is most definetly a remake, there are pleanty of differences to notice. I actually like the splash pad one more than the others…must be because it was made with Blender:)
That’s a shame, I really like that flower!
Just curious, but why when I try the link, I’m taken to Amphenol Nexus Technologies Incorporated website - apparently a supplier of custom designed & manufactured plugs, jacks & switches and not a texture website?
Randy
Moved from “Artwork > Focused Critique” to “General Forums > Blender and CG Discussions”
Price, you should know better than to even speculate that it may have been anything more than passing inspiration.
for those confused:
This would be news:
This is not news:
Not to mention the people who see women as human beings and not sex objects.
The internet isn’t just a big old boys’ club, and neither is the FOSS community, and neither is BlenderArtists.
