a simple query about tracing. legal or no.

[Quer_Skulll]

well in the near future.. 1 month to 2 months ahead im going to play to trace the heads of people like Jimi Hendrix and Bobmarley.. etcetra to prove that you can do "renders" (i mean the incorrect yet populair term) different and make them yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

now my question is tracing there heads legal or not or will it disprove my point?

 

 

 

would i make a better statement if i did it from scratch? ( i can no problem but will just take me an extra two hours)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

im doing this well because its hard to get the point "renders" (again incorrect yet populair term) at RV, and i want to make a contribution to that point.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

that and if the time comes (if it will) i will need a good abstract artist or something close to it to do the background, i dont have that much skill at abstract grunge backgrounds i mean just check that grunge sig i made few pages back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o well not such simple topic after all..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

edit: i will do this pro-deo tho.

[SubDivi]

It wouldn't really change anything. MANY forums openly accept the "ripping" of commercial art, just as long as you don't claim 'X parts' as your own work. This is ESPECIALLY true when the "art" is as miniscule as signature art. The only exception being the ripping of work from another indyartist. Thats a no-no. Well.. then ofcourse there is the other no-no of selling that type of work for monetary gain.. and no, GP doesn't count.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Though, I do enjoy seeing people have aneurisms over this subject.. so I guess I should probably just watch.

[Nadril]

Yeah, only problem with selling them for GP though sub, is that you can sell it on ebay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yeah, its illegal there too so I see your point, but you still could ultimatly make money off of it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

but eh, I've mostly just given up on this. Even though i'll still ask them to perhaps not use these pictures, if they disagree i'm not going to argue to a brick wall :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skull, if i were you i would just draw them. Mostly so people couldn't get worked up in a fit about tracing lol. All i know, is you should do it, because it'd be funny. (and id gladly put it into an abstract sig :) )

[Godslayer]

Meh, if you don't trace, it will be all the more impressive.

[tttia]

A representation or adaptation of an existing art work is illegal. That is the simple answer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

however, I am sure you can find some type of legal use images of those folks to trace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then again just drawing an image of a copyrighted work is illegal too. It is not the tracing, it is the basis of the original work that is the problem. That is why sites such as cgtalk won't allow images based off of a commercial photo of celebreties etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course, if you do trace, you will have to post it about 10 times to keep people from digging up the original and accusing you of being a low scoundrel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't trace myself, but if folks state ahead of time that it is tracing, I have no problem with the basic practice of it.

[Keiphus]

I think it's just a basic question of respect. Why do we do what we do? Two reason; A) We enjoy art, B) We want people to remember our names. There is nothing really wrong with tracing in my opinion, but you get all the more respect if you draw it yourself. Obviously though, with something so trivial as a signature, it won't matter either way. Tracing shows no creativity, just a technical "skill" that we all learned in 1st grade, follow the line.

[Quer_Skulll]

A representation or adaptation of an existing art work is illegal. That is the simple answer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

however, I am sure you can find some type of legal use images of those folks to trace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then again just drawing an image of a copyrighted work is illegal too. It is not the tracing, it is the basis of the original work that is the problem. That is why sites such as cgtalk won't allow images based off of a commercial photo of celebreties etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course, if you do trace, you will have to post it about 10 times to keep people from digging up the original and accusing you of being a low scoundrel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't trace myself, but if folks state ahead of time that it is tracing, I have no problem with the basic practice of it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wow thanks :D that really helped :D

 

 

 

ill draw it then.

 

 

 

ive downloaded some video's of a few gigs from a few amazing artists (JH woodstock video etc.) and ill get some reference out of those instead combining some facial angles with body poses and angles. not now tho.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thanks, cool nadril.

 

 

 

perhaps ill pm you about it in perhaps a month.

[kingcomet32]

gl wit it, id like to see the finished version once ur dun wit it

[venomai]

Then again just drawing an image of a copyrighted work is illegal too. It is not the tracing, it is the basis of the original work that is the problem. That is why sites such as cgtalk won't allow images based off of a commercial photo of celebreties etc.

 

 

 

Really? So I shouldn't even be using a reference?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I find tracing to be bad and disrespectful thing to do, but if its for practice reasons, and used correctly (never published on the net, of course!) it can be very helpful to you. But only to a certain extent (not a very large extent, either), and then you have to let your own skill take you the rest of the way. :wink:

[tttia]

References should be non commercial images....usually stock images are best.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anything that applies to free use when ripping also applies to reference.

 

 

 

However, if it is just for practice etc. then I suppose use whatever ya like. I used national geographics as references before. Just because they were handy and I wanted practice.