Scans of fantasy painters?

[JQP]

Where are all the high resolution scans of fantasy painters? I'm a big fan of guys like Elmore, Caldwell, Parkinson, McBride, etc. I find a few good scans (that let you see the brushstrokes) here and there, but nothing comprehensive, and the quality isn't worth writing home about.

Aren't there places to exchange high quality scans? E.g., I know Elmore at least sells big, high quality prints of his work. But, they're too damned expensive, like 50 bucks a pop. Is there some place where people post and exchange hi res scans of prints like that? Maybe newsgroups or something?

[Dave Kendall]

If you want high quality images I recommend buying some art-books and giving the artists you admire some love and financial reward. The free exchange of images and scans is only going to hit the pockets of hard working illustrators, Not to mention an abuse of their copyright.

The spectrum books are excellent if you want a wide range of styles and subject matter.

[Seedling]

Such high-quality images are not likely to be floating around freely on the internet, because of the possibility of theft.

[JQP]

If you want high quality images I recommend buying some art-books and giving the artists you admire some love and financial reward. The free exchange of images and scans is only going to hit the pockets of hard working illustrators, Not to mention an abuse of their copyright.

The spectrum books are excellent if you want a wide range of styles and subject matter.
The trouble with books is they're printed with the fan, not the student, in mind. So you can only rarely see the brushstrokes, if you get lucky. I assume Elmore's aforementioned prints are a different story, judging by their size.

If he offered reasonably-priced scans for download, I'd put money in his pocket. I'd much rather get what I want from the artist, but buying a decent collection of even Elmore alone would break the bank. Plus it seems he does limited runs for "collectibility" (probably just to keep prices down), so only a small selection of his total body of work is usually available.

I don't think the theft argument is applicable in that context, since buying a print and selling scans is roughly as easy as buying a hi-res scan and selling copies.

[DavePalumbo]

I don't think the theft argument is applicable in that context, since buying a print and selling scans is roughly as easy as buying a hi-res scan and selling copies.

The theft argument is really the only argument, and the threat of it is very real.
Artists generally don't want to post free high res images because anyone can come along and download them and do whatever they please with it. Web res images are fairly safe because you can't do much in terms of printing, but anything print quality is pretty much inviting copyright infringement. It happens enough even with low res images.

[JQP]

My point is it doesn't really matter if they sell hi res digital versions or not, as far as theft goes, if they sell hi res prints of their work; buying, scanning, and putting them on the Web or P2P is trivial.

[DavePalumbo]

sure, theoretically. And yes, occasionally somebody goes to the trouble of scanning a piece from a book to use for their own purposes. The thing is, it makes it terribly terribly easy if you just put a bunch on a web page for all to find and download for somebody to come along and abuse it.

Besides that, selling a print or a book carries a different meaning than selling a high res digital image. A print or book is already a physical object to be looked at as is. A high res scan is intended to be printed, and might give (probably would give) alot of people the idea that once they've bought it, they now have the right to do whatever they want with it, make and sell a whole lot of prints for example. It's asking for trouble.

I understand your frustration, there are a number of artists who's work is already hard enough to track down and undersized images on their websites (if they even have websites) is almost more of a tease than a help, but it's done out of necessity for the most part.

[danielh13]

Yeah but we report the hi res images to Larry and he stops it. Larry has a large fan base myself included who look for this very thing and report it to his team if you would call them that.

[Dave Kendall]

If you want to see brush marks then spend some time trawling around a museum, get the Shawn Barber DVD from this very site or approach an artist to see how they work, then splash some paint around yourself. I guarantee you'll pick up more in five minutes from these activities than staring at a high res print for hours.

[JQP]

sure, theoretically. And yes, occasionally somebody goes to the trouble of scanning a piece from a book to use for their own purposes. The thing is, it makes it terribly terribly easy if you just put a bunch on a web page for all to find and download for somebody to come along and abuse it.

Sure, theoretically. But let's be realistic, if you want to make money by selling someone else's work, you're going to do it by making prints. You can do this just as easily by buying a print from the artist, scanning and printing it.

As for putting them up on a Web page, so what? If the artist doesn't make scans available for download, it's obviously revenue he isn't interested in, so why should he care if people are downloading it? The only loss he's concerned about is print, and if it's cheaper for people to download and print their own, then it's a safe bet he's ripping his customers off.

The train of logic here, isn't very logical.

Besides that, selling a print or a book carries a different meaning than selling a high res digital image. A print or book is already a physical object to be looked at as is. A high res scan is intended to be printed
A hi res scan isn't necessarily intended to be printed. What gives you that idea? I've got tons of hi res scans, and I've never printed even one.
, and might give (probably would give) alot of people the idea that once they've bought it, they now have the right to do whatever they want with it, make and sell a whole lot of prints for example. It's asking for trouble.
That's pretty thin. How about putting up a notice somewhere in the ecommerce process? People are made aware they aren't allowed to print scans for non-personal use. Problem solved.

Why people don't get the same idea with physical prints, according to your logic, is for you to explain, I guess. ;)
I understand your frustration, there are a number of artists who's work is already hard enough to track down and undersized images on their websites (if they even have websites) is almost more of a tease than a help, but it's done out of necessity for the most part.
That may be so, but I've yet to see any real good reason (other than mental ossification) that this necessity is actually a necessity.

Now, I understand if an artist doesn't make any prints of his work available, and only sells for publication at reduced size. Then it makes sense not to release scans. But to sell prints, but not scans of similar resolution, just doesn't make much sense to me (unless the artist overcharging - then it makes sense, in a very economically-illiterate, short-sighted kind of way).

[JQP]

Yeah but we report the hi res images to Larry and he stops it. Larry has a large fan base myself included who look for this very thing and report it to his team if you would call them that.
LOL. Larry should give the boys at the MPAA and RIAA a buzz then. They can use his L33T 5k1lz handling the whole P2P thing.

Back in the real world, if scans of Larry's prints aren't being pirated left and right, it's because of a lack of demand, and nothing else.

[Seedling]

You can do this just as easily by buying a print from the artist, scanning and printing it.

Images degrade when put through such a process.


The train of logic here, isn't very logical.

All right, dude – a professional of high regard has taken the time to answer your questions politely and thoroughly. He knows what he is talking about, because he does it for a living. You have rudely dismissed his answers. Since you haven’t seem fit to post a lick of your own art in the time you have been here, I can only assume you aren’t after images to learn anything. Instead of insulting Dave further (“mental ossification”?), why don’t you bugger off to find your source of free images to steal elsewhere?

[JQP]

Images degrade when put through such a process.
What do you mean?
All right, dude – a professional of high regard has taken the time to answer your questions politely and thoroughly.
What he does for a living, or how highly he's regarded, don't sell his opinions on me.
He knows what he is talking about, because he does it for a living.
If that's the case, then he should be able to explain his positions.

I may seem contentious here, but keep in mind I didn't bring this subject up. It sure as hell wasn't the topic of my thread.
You have rudely dismissed his answers.
Where was I rude? I didn't dismiss his answers, I questioned their logic.
Since you haven’t seem fit to post a lick of your own art in the time you have been here, I can only assume you aren’t after images to learn anything.
Assume whatever you wish, no skin off my nose.
Instead of insulting Dave further (“mental ossification”?), why don’t you bugger off to find your source of free images to steal elsewhere?
I'm inclined to return your rudeness in kind, but since I'm not actually upset, I'll refrain. Why don't you go find another thread to derail/hijack/troll?

Btw, I didn't target anyone in particular with the "mental ossification" phrase, certainly not Mr. Palumbo.

He's probably a big boy, and can take care of himself; no need to be his fanboy and toady up to him.

[Elwell]

I'm inclined to return your rudeness in kind, but since I'm not actually upset, I'll refrain. Why don't you go find another thread to derail/hijack/troll?

***

Dave's probably a big boy, no need to be his fanboy and toady up to him.
And seedling's a big girl, and doesn't need backup from me.
So I'll just say, watch it. This entire thread isn't speaking well for you, in front of an audience of precisely the sort of people you seem to want something from.

[Seedling]

What do you mean?

I would explain, but your lack of humility disinclines me to be helpful. Have a nice day.

[JQP]

And seedling's a big girl, and doesn't need backup from me.
So I'll just say, watch it. This entire thread isn't speaking well for you, in front of an audience of precisely the sort of people you seem to want something from.
Hey, I can take friendly advice. What exactly should I be watching?

The entire thread isn't speaking well for me? That's a bit broad. How about some examples?

[JQP]

I would explain, but your lack of humility disinclines me to be helpful. Have a nice day.
Ah, then I'll speculate. Maybe you meant the degradation is greater relative to the magicful process pros use, where they wave their magic wands and create exact dupes?

Or maybe you just meant the generation loss of making a copy of a copy?

[Seedling]

Hey Elwell, what does it take to get banned around here, exactly?

[Elwell]

We'll see.

[JQP]

Hey Elwell, what does it take to get banned around here, exactly?
Well, telling someone to bugger off (euphemism for sodomy), accusing him of intent to steal without evidence, and otherwise slinging around unfounded accusations evidently doesn't do it. You may have to try harder.

[Seedling]

Shucks, Elwell, should I keep poking him with a stick, or have I exceeded my quota of evil for the week?

[JQP]

So now you've come around to admitting you're deliberately goading me. At least you're honest, and come right out and announce you're a troll.

=)

[Elwell]

JQP, you've already gotten reasonable answers to your question. Nothing else good is going to come from continuing this.