Concept art + frame = pop art?

[Zirngibism]

I was just wondering what it would be considered if one were to put some concept art (to get around copyrights, a personal work done in the "concept art" style), and then framed it in and put it in a gallery.

If it's recognizably for something in a game/movie, would critics (or other "experts") consider it pop art? Or would they perhaps consider it "fan art"? Or are the two categories for the most part interchangeable? Or would neither apply and the work would just be referred to as "Illustration"?

I mean, since games/movies are part of pop culture just like Marilyn Monroe or Campbell's soup, it would seem like pop art might apply, but I've never seen the two connected...

[Seedling]

Are you talking about creating a work in a non-digital medium and then selling it framed in a gallery? Or making a print of your own digital work and selling it in a gallery? Or making a print of work you did but that someone else holds the rights to, and selling it framed in a gallery? Or making a print of someone else’s work and selling it in a gallery?

The first one is kosher. The second is also kosher, but because it is a print you’ll have to sell each one for a lot less. The third and last are only kosher if you have permission from the copyright holder. You can’t use the title “Pop Art” to skirt copyright laws.

[Zirngibism]

Hmmm, I guess I could've been more clear. I was talking about actually creating the work, but the style and subject matter reflecting that of concept art.

And I've never heard the term "Kosher" In this circumstance- does it mean it's allowed, as in you're allowed to call it what you want?

[Elwell]

You can’t use the title “Pop Art” to skirt copyright laws.
No, you have to use the word "appropriation," and back it up with liability insurance.;)

[Seedling]

Yes, that's what "kosher" means in this context. :) As for making "art in the style of concept art" - that's called illustration, and while there aren't loads of galleries that sell illustrative fine-art, there are some about.

[Eurayo]

I recommend this book:

i am 8-bit: Art Inspired by Classic Videogames of the '80s by Jon M. Gibson and Chuck Klosterman

It's got a lot of stuff inspired by games like Pac Man and Mario Bros. I've been wanting to do some Vectrex inspired paintings for a while now. It's a dead system, so copyright may be less of an issue.

[Seedling]

If you want to sell anything through a gallery, I suggest starting with this book:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Survive-Prosper-Artist-5th/dp/0805068007/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199999584&sr=8-2

[DavePalumbo]

I was just wondering what it would be considered if one were to put some concept art (to get around copyrights, a personal work done in the "concept art" style), and then framed it in and put it in a gallery.

Personally I just like to call them drawings or paintings and narrow down from there. Categorizing bothers me at times, and particularly with this sort of thing. People might like a painting but not like the label which you or your gallery has placed on it and then decide that they can't like that painting anymore. It sounds stupid but it is very very true. And I will admit that I'm not above it either. I can tell you that I would favor buying a painting more which was labeled as an illustration than if it were labeled as pop art. The exact same painting. Ain't gonna lie, it's just that "pop art" carries alot of associations and "illustration" carries alot of associations. I prefer those connected with "illustration". If it were just a painting though, it's neutral.

Though I guess I'm maybe too much an idealist at times.