[SXX]

I think main problem isn't really lack of artists around, but lack of management. Many programmers start contribute to open source projects because it's easy to start and it's also relatively easy to accept contributions for project leaders.

Basically if you're programmer you can find some some project on github, check that some feature missing or bug exist and just by reading code implement or fix it. If you just stick to the project coding guidelines most of the time you'll get code review, advices, requests and then contribution going to be accepted. Easy.

In same time when you're UI designer it's not easy. UI designer would have to prove that his version of UI is better and why. As there is no one managing project and take decisions it's can be tough to argue with programmers.

And for artist there is usually no one to talk with at all. What worse due to lack of management most of open source games don't even have some list of assets they need, not even talking about art style guidelines.

So problem isn't the fact that artists don't want to contribute, but that there is no one to accept these contributions. Just as everyone they don't like idea of working for rubbish bin.

PS: Project where art contributions handled properly is 0 A.D. So open source game with quality art and style is doable, but require some management effort.

[lsc]

>Basically if you're programmer you can find some some project on github, check that some feature missing or bug exist and just by reading code implement or fix it. If you just stick to the project coding guidelines most of the time you'll get code review, advices, requests and then contribution going to be accepted. Easy.

Eh, when we're talking about new features or major architectural changes rather than bugfixes, there's often quite a fight to get your code up-streamed when your changes are significant; it goes from "style" arguments all the way up to "your feature is a bad one"

this is probably similar to what would happen with art. If you wanted to draw a slightly better ironclad, it'd probably be pretty easy to get it accepted. If you want to change the look and feel of the whole goddamn thing, good luck with that; release your own tile set.

[SXX]

You don't start participation in project from major architectural changes. It's always take time to learn code base and find out about design advantages/flaws/etc.

Problem with art is that unlike with bugs nobody even know what needed and what isn't. As result there is really low guarantee that art you can make actually going to be used.

[lsc]

my argument is that art isn't fundamentally different from code in this respect.

If you have a very small patch that obviously fixes something broken and doesn't change much else, you are gonna have an easy time, be that change art or code. And as you said, either way, that's how you should probably start. Little things.

Either way, if you want to make major changes, be those changes in art or code, you are going to meet resistance, especially if you don't already have social capital built up in the project by making lots of smaller changes.

Getting your changes upstream in a open-source project is a fundamentally social process. If you show up with a bunch of patches and then leave, well, a lot of your work is probably not going to get used. Hell, even if you do everything right, a lot of your work isn't going to get used. That's just how things work.

[SXX]

I agree with you that art isn't that different than code in community game development. My point is that in case of art most open source project don't even try to actually accept and review contributions at all.

Still I can't agree that upstreaming of code is anything like hard in case of most open source games. There is only few projects that feature complete and have plenty of programmers. Of course such projects usually have higher requirements to contributors, but most of projects are newbie-friendly as they always happy to see more developers.

[exDM69]

I have to agree that management is difficult. It's a challenging task to coordinate the work of individual contributors who aren't paid or committed to schedules, etc.

But all this is saying is that there are very few individuals who are willing to work on managing open source projects. Or at least they don't get in contact with the projects they could help with.

Open source projects need more contributors than just programmers, but how to achieve that is a hard question. Programmers don't make good artists, UI designers or managers, but finding individuals who would like to contribute is an issue.

[SXX]

Finding artists is much easier for open source games that based off known titles because there is people who like original game or already participate modding community. Many open source games even started this way (like The Dark Mod).

Personally I'm participate development of VCMI (FOSS engine for Heroes of Might & Magic 3) and there is plenty of artists that contributed to modding community in past and totally okay with contributing their work under CC licenses. Sure that for more popular titles it's may be even easier.

But I agree it's really tricky to find contributors who going to work on brand new game or professional software like GIMP.

[aselzer]

Maybe everyone would benefit from a centralized solution where open-source projects submit requests for designing something and designers can have a go at it. This way designers will be able to quickly browse and find the projects most appealing to them / suited to their skills, are able to build a portfolio, and will be able to avoid awkward conversations with uninterested developers. I guess having created parts of a real game or program is worth more than the thousandth redesign of a popular web page, and it actually benefits someone.

[plonh]

The Community video game "Hawkthorne" (inpired by a mockup on the TV show) managed dozens of artist contributors very effectively.