No, it isn't. It's a total rip from a commercial for the toy set "Cherry Merry Muffin." I've even located the original picture. =)

Shame on all rippers! ;)

/Samuelf

(Even though I liked the evil touch. ;)

Hehehee, well if thats what you call strawberry shortcake, yes I did take her, not in the unholy way, but I hopefully justified it by all the manips, I even edited her face, hat and arm pixel by pixel just to save the low colour res. You see someone put the strawberry shortcake theme song mp3 on my 'puter. Oh thanks Eddie for the comment.
-Ken

I just clued into the fact that I don't know what you are talking about I decided to look for cherry merry muffin and found a site of it and I see no resemblance to her and strawberry shortcake. So please email me the image you have found so I can see the startling rip off I hadof done. :P
http://members.aol.com/abishort/cherry/cmm.htm this is the page I found.
Now if you wanna talk rip off who came first cherry merry or strawberry shortcake?

If you are going to steal, err... borrow someone else's work, you should at least give them credit. Also, in most cases, if you don't have the artist's permission, it is illegal to use whole or in part any of their material.

Dude. You have to be an artist to understand, I guess... I've seen too many people say, "Oh, it's just another form of art! It's not bad or evil, leave them alone!" Then it happens to you. Someone takes your cool website design or your blood sweat n' tears drawing and sticks it in some crappy-ass Bryce rendering and says, "Isn't this COOOOOLLLL>???~! It took me like an HOUR!~ Man that's a long time!! It's my favorite I think."

And as for this tile, I can't really say I like the manipulation, but it is good in execution, keeping the bad quality of the image's pixelization/noise made it look like it was originally like that. However, it's very easy to pull something like that off... Hm, I remember Strawberry Shortcake when I was just a little kid, too. She was cool. And Rainbow Bright. Yeeah...

And we're not really "freaking out" ... Freaking out would be actually going to the original copyright owner and ratting 'im out. To add onto things, it -could- get iCE into some trouble if someone really decided to do that, or came across a copyrighted image and decided to give them a hard time... Either way, just use your own damn talent. This concludes my essay. :p

OK I guess.
But what if some one paints something red orange and yellow?
Is McDonalds gonna sue them for copying their colours?

If I call you an idiot will you sue me for slander? :P

i think everyone needs to get a life...you cant really say some one bit something off, if you have no proof. hows that go again.."the proof is in the pudding...", well i see no pudding here.
i think its a great tile. he took what he was given, and he used it.
that whole quilt...we are all being photo-manipulated....so, let me get this straight...all you guys used pictures that you yourselves took?...i didnt think so. people in glass houses should not throw stones. *SHRUG*
look at me and the cliches today...

I have never manipulated a picture that I myself did not take and then put it up to display to the public, even on the photomanipulation quilt. As long as the artist decides to show his/her art to the public, criticism has the possibility of coming up in all forms, whether it's negative or positive. Don't think I don't get a lot of criticism myself... but don't accuse me of false deeds, such as not using my own photos in the manipulation quilt. Most of the people DID use their own photos in it, anyway. And if not, they used stock photos, which are easily accessed on the internet, purposely donated for any purpose another person may want to use them for, and you don't need permission or copyright statements to do so. This tile, however, did -not- use a stock photo, it used a well-known copyrighted character from an old cartoon. I'm pretty sure she has several toys and other little things, too. And as for getting a life, I really don't care too much about it. It doesn't strike anger and malice into my heart to see it, but I'll be damned if I look at it and not say what I think about it.


Link

She doesn't exactly have an official website or anything, she's kind of before that, but there are tons and tons of collector's sites about her and her little friends. Hehe. There you go. :)

WHAT???????????!!!!!!!!?????????????
thats one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard..
i thnk he was using his own "damn talent"
i love these quilts and all, but they are are no example of the work that i do. maybe for some , this is their only outlet into the super cool world of being.."an artist", but for others, i believe it to be more of something to do. we all enjoy working on tiles, but when self-rightousness shines through..*shrug*. i think we have all "biten" things off of other peeps before...maybe you should think before saying anything that could possibly hurt someones feelings. i think the tile is great +5.


"this concludes my essay" - "gecko" <---- so as not to rip it off.
~beth

The super cool world of being an artist also involves a lot of fire and smoke... and real life involves feelings getting hurt. Yes, yes, I've seen this defense a million times for the art thievery bit... "It's just a little drawing! I'm just supposed to have fun doing it!" If fun was indeed had while doing it, mission accomplished. But now it's up for the public to see, and there's a cool little comment thingy here, and people are using it. There are probably as many hardcore artists here as there are just normal people surfing around, so there's bound to be some real criticism sometime, not just spiritually uplifting nice little comments meant to give the artist an ego boost. As much as we need that, we also need the opposite to keep us from actually getting into this odd state of thinking we rule and everyone else sucks. But anyway... I think we need to leave the poor tile's message base alone now. If you really want to continue this feel free to do so by emailing me, because you seem to be taking it far more personally than the artist himself is.

Also, I think it has already been said, but the blending on this tile is really good. I like the tile itself, but not the usage of the character. But that's what the newbie quilts are for, keeping you from making any more mistakes. :) I look forward to seeing this artist on Mainquilters at least, and with some very original tiles. :>

Thank you all for you compliments, I will from now on as of sept 23 2001 NEVER use any image that has been copyrighted by another artist. I thought people might like the nostalgia of her. Copyright law right now is all the buzz in the media, soon we will be hearing about the gnutelliums out there sharing pirated movies and how Hollywood is being affected.
Art for me is a record of my minds perserverence in overcoming my body to make itself known to the enviroment outside the body, if even there is such a thing.
As for the mention, I had above, that I preserved the colour resolution in her was not a mention of my talent but a mention of my attention to detail. :P
Again I will not use any other unlicenced photos, although the only other pic I borrowed other than that above, was that of the fish, in the tile "I love you, and fish". But I doubt that anyone could find that same fish picture, think of it as a game, a challenge for all those out there needing to kill time.

And why doesn't anybody give me criticism over on the tile "daycare window", I just wanna know what I could've done better.

As for Gecko, call me an idiot if you wish, it just adds colour to how I see you.

Gigantic hug to all you warm bunnies out there.

Hmm... if you seriously don't know whether or not McDonald's can sue you just for using its color scheme, then I'll just say no, it can't. People used red and yellow long, long before McDonald's came about and people will continue to use it. I thought you were just being sarcastic in response to my copyright speech, so I decided to be sarcastic in return.. ;p

Attention to detail is a talent IMO.

Geck-
Anything can be said to be a talent, and yes I was being sarcastic.
I just thought you were being a dink. Now that is settled *handshake*

Yes, McDonalds couldn't sue anyone for their colours. But there was a debate a way back in the media, of certain colours, sounds, words, and the such could not be used because of copyright and registered trademarks. It is going out of hand.

My greatest protest is the horrible fact that Disney has a copyright on the Mountie, as per the Dudley Do Right movie a few years back.
That is just outragious. (mind my spelling I am tired)

It is like telling someone that they are not allowed to use seven eighths of the dictionary. Within the digital medium things are integral, you couldn't use a certain string of letters, an array of bits (should disney get royalties for all the 101's out there in the binary world?) or a pixel combination without hitting on copyright. I beleive the "in part" should be dropped from copyright.

If it were to say that I should give credit to the person who originally created her then it could be said that I did.
How?
Because she is a pop icon and that her being so recognisable already gives credit, even if I don't know the name.
And to intellectual property, it is my intellectual property because I put it there. I collaborated in its re-newed creation, that I chose it to at those particular x,y coords, that I cropped it off at those points, that I modified its face, that I put a blue person sitting on her hat that I made her hat morph into the tile above, that I, me, myself, Kenneth G. Jinks have rendered an image based on the popular character from an image of the said character. It was not as tho I just saw a picture took it and stuck it there. Not to dig at anyone else in the upper left of me. :)

It's not even really about copyrights with me... it's the fact that a recognizable character is in the image and I just don't like people using them. Coincidences always happen and those are fine, but I just don't like the blatent kind... Plus you made her evil. Bleh. She is just not evil. :p

She is EVIL.
The peculiar purple pieman from porcupine peak is the ultimate in goodness.
She didn't want to go to the party, so she is evil. I just sat and watched fish, cus I didn't want to go the party without her. She is evil.
Besides this conversation is getting old. Hehehehe
Lets tear apart someother tile of mine or maybe yours!

Ta -cha-cha-chicha-cha chi-cha-chicha-cha, chaa!
Whoops was that infringement?

Go ahead... It's not like I haven't already torn up my own tiles. ;>

this is so funny. hey guys lets just drop this. for the sake for all that is sane in this world. so much aingst.*detracting claws*.laf.


to make a long story short, it always feels best, on both sides of the coin.. (ie. "ripper" vs. "rippie")
to use your own original work....i dont think anyone is argueing that fact.
however, finding myself in disagreement, with the way that some peeps go about making their point. i might be wrong, i might be right. it doesnt really matter. i remember when i was a lil kid..i used to take the sunday comics, and practice all the time on drawing all the characters... beetle baily was my favorite, and popeye. laf...i started getting really good, i used to doodle them everywhere. *shrug* i think its one thing to use some kind of art or work done by yes, the blood and sweat and tears of the artisan..but just look at what retarded thing was just fought over..(i use the term fought very loosely)
a character that made lots of money from the idea of another popular character. first a loving, caring Strawberry Shortcake, and all her yummy friends, to a mean spirited, lil punk spin-off, Cherry Merry Muffin.and looking through the pages (of miss cherry merry, i cant even see where there was a ever a mean one..),tis all futile.
can we just agree to disagree, but to keep your work to your own original design. im all done...sorries to all. :)


*waving*
~beth

no

Yessuh, I'm gonna get back to mah dealer...
Profound apologies to jmaguire for the malignment of him, in connection with my intended relinquishing of my present position and also for associating him in any way to this current scandal. I was SIMPLY typing away (between tiles) and also on the cellphone while shaving and partying a bone while I dried my hair at the very same time that I was writing that literary piece above and alas, I blew it! Every now and then, I like to get back in touch with my own human frailties... Hey, tiediedeyes (or whatever it is,) I want YOU to do your best in YOUR recent installation to office and Mr. Maguire sir, that's me you're feeling, and I'm dusting you off...
but still I am, Eddie

and Phooka, I swear, I really don't know where your name came in at all.........
Yessuh, I'm surely gonna' get back to mah dealer...

please oh god please!
Well when my new tiles appear I am sure you will all be proud of me and my original artwork. 100% I even pressed my face into my scanner to build a tile!
Yeppers, just you wait.

This I hope is the last message here.

I apologize for any wrong doing I may have done in the past but I was a newbie, and now I know the rules. I have explored the depths of this site and made some good reading time, as well looked at tiles and their scores. I hope this will prevent me from stepping on anymore toes.

Now on with the show...