[Guybrush]

here ya go
http://www.sijun.com/dhabih/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000810.html

always worth a look, he even didnt even change links/deleted the pics..

guybrush

------------------
i'm not like them but i can pretend..

[Frost]

Don't forget to mention to put in a crappy signature on the image to show everyone that it is, in fact, a true, genuine 'threnodized' pic.

Making 1 of these a day also proves how damn good and productive you really are!

[sfr]

"threnody" n. (Song of) lamentation esp. on person's death. [Gk]

Yeah, that guy sure picked an appropriate handle... Loki, great definition of threnodizing, it deserves to be in the next edition of this Oxford Handy Dictionary I've got here

Saffron / Sunflower

[Visigoth]

All I gotta say is...
Heh. =P
When I did nothing but traditional art, I always condemned tracing, viewing it as a form of cheating, instead of doing your pic based on your own eye you would literally copy something to the point of it looking like your own. Oh well. I don't think there's anything wrong with photo-reference; Everyone uses that...The better the artist, the more they'll realize that any sort of reference, whether it be photographical, or physical (live model/still life/etc) drastically increases the quality of your work as well as building a memory of how to draw it for the future...
Just my two cents.

~{V}~

[Pixelator]

I do not see a problem with using photograph (or any other material) as a reference material, but I do have a problem when the �referencer� is signing his/her name on the �referenced� work. I do see a �slight� problem of �copyright infringement� in such actions.


[This message has been edited by Pixelator (edited April 04, 2000).]

[kurisu]

I think Pixelator's comments bring up a very important question:

What is 'copying'?

I'm finding it hard to define it.

1) Extremities - Item 'a' is exactly the same as item 'b' - same image, sound, text, whatever... without any perceptible change.

2) Everything else - Item 'a' contains elements of Items 'b' through 'z' which include imagination, modification, inspiration, mistakes, interpretation...

On the one hand, I agree completely with what Pixelator states. On the other, I see myself copying anything in some form or another - even if it's totally subconscious - and thus find it hard to condemn those who copy (openly or otherwise). I "believe" I resist making anything I create look, sound, read, experience to "be" like something else. It makes me feel better as an artist to "stand alone" and create from ME. But, I think I'm fooling myself. Every experience I've had, emotionally, mentally, physically, etc. affects me and my perception of 'reality.' Any picture, music, poem, animation, or whatever I create - I bet you if I had a super computer analyze it, it would find the elements that I copied from... I just may not realize or remember.

So, the distinction between "conscious" and "unconscious" copying comes up. Which is better or which is wrong? If either! I don't know the answer to that.

I think as long as an artist CLEARLY STATES that he or she has copied something (to the best of their knowledge) and is honest about it, it is fine. Others who experience what they've created can then make an accurate judgement of the artwork (whether its images, animations, music, literature or whatever) and their opinion of the said artist's abilities.

I can say for sure, that I have no respect for hiding or lying.

Without trust, how can people coexist peacefully?

Just my script.

-kurisu

[akh]

ok question:
i dont know if this exactly makes sense, but... In my painting class, we were to choose anything we wanted to paint using acrylics. I saw a beautiful picture of a NY city scene, so I wanted to paint that. Looking at that photo reference, by eye-hand coordination, I sketched the buildings, cars, people, etc. perfectly. (I'm a very tedious and very detailed artist ) I then painted it using the photo as a color reference.
Now, would you consider this wrong, copyright infrigemnet, or an extremety, like kurisu said? I just wanted the picture to look realistic, so i made sure the buildings look right... would you guys consider this wrong? Or how about I took a picture of myself to do a portrait and made the drawing very tight (detailed)?

Maybe it all has to do with each and every situation, whether it be photorealistic or fantasy... what do you guys think?

[Frost]

Making something look Real is a very hard thing, even more so without reference since you have to think it all out (lighting, shadows, colors, refractions, etc). As long as you as an artist LEARNS from doing it, then I would almost encourage it. If you're just doing it and not learning from it, you might as well go by a Xerox machine -- it'll do a much better job and save you the time.

[Togusa]

In my opinion there is no problem in copying anything at all, as long as it is a non-commerical project and you quote the original artist.
Professionals, who are really in the business , have much more to know about their rights and rules.
Enough serious hickhack.

I would like to see Threnodizing as an Olympic discipline.

[Xcal]

Using photographic references vs. outright copying has always been a touchy issue. It involves many things, including profit motives, the techniques used, etc.

A man created a sculpture based on a photograph he saw, and sold the sculpture for a ton of money. The owners of the original Photograph (also in the photo!) sued the sculptor for copyright infringment and won. This is just one of many cases where the owners of the photo successfully litigated people who have worked off of their photos. There are also many artists who do use photos (not their own) for reference on a daily basis, whether for practice, etc.

In general, I would not advise working from any photo which you do not have copyrights to in creating a commercial piece, (you will be making money off of the work) because copyright infringment is based on the "reasonable likeness" of the source material. If the courts think your "painting" looks too close to the real photo, they have a case against you.

However, I do not feel that using photographs for reference (NOT TRACING)to create personal works is wrong. I guarantee you. No one NO ONE can create perfect lifelike artwork of everything by their imagination alone. We all use references, that's how we learn. If I wanted to do a real cool lifelike sketch of some face, I'd need a photo to work off of, whether it be mine or another's. Granted, I don't do a lot of lifelike works, because I'd rather take photos than spend hours painting or sketching one. That's what camera's are for. But again, as in the case of Fallen's piece, there are exceptions. In this case, he did want to create a lifelike painting, but with the addition of his own style into the piece. If you think working off of a photo and ending up with a decent picture is "cheating" or "easy" I'd invite anyone to try it. It does take artistic skill, and a keen eye for detail. Most of the classic masters, including Davinci worked off of live specimens (basically 3d photos), and most commercial portrait artists today work off of photos. Saying that working off of a Photo is crap is basically insulting an entire group of professional artists out there.

The bottom line is, if you're creating a piece to make money, it's expected that you have some rights to the source material, or permission. If you're just doing it for fun, to learn, whatever, art is art, skill is skill.

I apologize for the long post.

-------------
XCAL

[This message has been edited by Xcal (edited April 03, 2000).]

[Loki]

Sorry for posting this again. Was in a thread below - maybe nobody thought it was funny, but I think that should be in the FAQ. Oscar Alexander came up with the excellent term of 'threnodizing', so I made a little definition. Whatcha think?

Threnodizing:
Taking a photograph from a webpage and tediously overworking it so that it looks like a painting.
But there are to requirements that make it a real 'threnody' (btw - that word is related to felony, believe it or not):
1. Make sure you leave some JPEG artifacts in your 'painting'. So when people take a close look, they can see it was originally a scan.

2. Leave the 'painting' the same size than the original you snagged off the net - so paeople don't have to scale it when they compare your 'painting'.

3. Make sure you use an image that easily can be found by others you try to impress with your painting skills.

If you thoroughly follow that description, nothing stands in yout way to become a real 'threnodizer' ...

[Tinusch]

Hahaha, poor Threnody... Bet he regrets his actions now... Heh...

[spooge demon]

I never much understood why someone would want to duplicate a photo. Just look at the photo...

[Joachim]

Hmm, funny subject.

To Threnodize is a really strange hobby

I think it's a lot of different opinions about this, but I don't just think this is a bit stupid, but....
Personally I find it so much easier to use photo reference for let say a portrait, than actually paint out of real life or from imagination. But still it seems like many gets more impressed by this anyway ( just because it looks very realistic)----then I kind of feel that all that hard work and studying of shapes and light etc..is for no use. ..it upsets me a bit.
To be really honest, I'm not too keen on all those girls people like so much to make here these days, since they are obviously a photo original from playboy or whatever. Then it's not more than hard detailing work, since all the proportions and light are right there n front of you, set by the the photograph. So, in fact it's just an almost mindless but hard job.
Soorry !!!!!! I don't mean I don't respect you guys but, I just felt that if I had to mention it some where, this thread is the right place. Anyway, who cares about my opinions, as long as everybody likes it, I'm not the one to satisfy.

sorry again ! Don't want people to think that I'm an idiot.

Joachim

------------------
Joachim
web: http://home.sol.no/~jbarrum/

[Oscar Alexander]

And someday, in the distant future, our grandkids with will think 'threnodizing' is actually a verb

[lungx]

hey i get it now...

lol

[derPunkt]

I wanted to say that some time ago I was terified of even using the photo. Everything I did was from my mind.
But, ppl didn't actually care and respect that, so I stopped. I started using references that I needed to complete my idea, whether it was a face, a body, or even a beer bottle. But, some older artists, would prolly see the differences in lightning, blah,blah, coz if I was mindlessly copying photos the result wouldn't be very good (i.e. the light source would vary). Thats why I use photos as reference for the shape, and the rest is done by me.
How in the world would I know what colours are in sea shells (I dunno how it even looks). So, I go to the library, browse some books, find what I like and draw/photocopy it, or whatever.
I really don't find that lame, I think its a proffesional way.
- Joachim, I know how you feel, I felt that way too, when I was flaming and going nuts bcoz of Made's huge popularity.
(and in no way I find you an idiot =))
more of a friend and a fellow GOOD artist =)
dP

[Spitfire]

A little besides the point, but isnt "Extremities" a medical term for the parts that stick out of/are attached to the (human) body such as arms, legs, etc.

At least that's what it means in Dutch

/Spitfire doesnt know

[sfr]

I don't know about extremities, but I love the word 'excess'. Excess. Excess. You gotta say yes to another excess.

Saffron / Sunflower

[Affected]

Yeah, the way you can pronounce it practically without any wovels at all is great, isn't it?

------------------
Affected

We do not have freedom. We have rules and oppression and where the oppression is less visible we believe to have found freedom.

http://affected.xs.mw

[BooMSticK]

Reference... It's kinda a love/hate relationship isn't it? On one hand you want to do those realistic looking pictures and on the other you don't want to use any kind of guidence because thats 'below' you as an artist.

Well, I have been drawing for years without reference and it shows. I have a pretty hard time doing realistic stuff, which I really really love to do. Having done art without reference has taught me more about composition, drama and action than I would have, if I had relied more on reference I think..

I agree with Joachim - Most pictures here on this board that are drawn from photos, or whatever, are very boring as individual pieces. That even includes my own 'Bodystudy' piccy. I only did that to prove to myself that I could. But the most obivous place to look booooring photo'copying' is (or maybe was?) in the demo scene...

Bottom line: The trick is to USE reference but not to RELY on it. See the difference? I know you do!

Just had to put my words on it...

,B

[micke]

I totally agree with you there, Boom


-Mikael

------------------
-Mikael Noguchi-

http://www.katode.org/noguchi/

[Pigeon]

There's an artist here in Chicago who's all the rage right now (at least he was a couple weeks ago), and he paints reproductions of photocopies of famous paintings like Matisse's Red Room. By painting the reproduction of a painting from life (Matisse's studio), does this artist bring the subject or art object a little closer to reality? There's a lot of fine artists out there who play around with this reproduction idea.

I would recommend to anyone who wants to explore the theoretical side of this to read "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" by Walter Benjamin.
I would recommend finding a realworld copy, but you can find it online at http://pixels.filmtv.ucla.edu/community/julian_scaff/benjamin/benjamin.html

------------------
-Pigeon
http://members.aol.com/dndunakin

[Frost]

Of course, my own personal fantasy is to draw photo-realistic stuff without reference, any time, any place.

I really like Kyri's work for that, although I don't know if he uses reference or not -- his dark contrasted images always fascinate me.

I never use references when drawing/painting, and, it shows (lighting is far from being perfect, colors are often too dull or overdone, I even forget to map shadows at times...). Still, I try to do it on my own, hoping one day I'll be able to achieve my goal.

I should start analysing real-world images more...

my own little 2 cents worth. =]
frost.