professional cheaters setting the bar too high

[riceface]

well even tho this is old news, it was new to me.. one of my idols enayla was caught being a cheater.. and paint over photos or whatever she did..

my question is... if someone is that good at what they do.. and the product that comes out is sooooo good.. doesn't it set the bar really high? also comic artist gregland i believe is a tracer... theyre work looks amazing because of their cheating..

but they will get work because the end product is amazing and clients dont care how they did it.. doesn't that make it harder for people who are not cheating and using actual skill from years of practice? and their stuff will still come out 10x better then yours....

with 3d so available now its tempting to just cheat and trace it.. and enayla seems to have the resources to do just about anything.. its tempting if it will land u a great job..

what do you guys think?

[Irishdrunk]

I haven't read the Artist Rulebook in awhile...

But I don't remember any rule against tracing.

[Goog]

It doesn't matter man, the world still goes 'round. If you think it is a problem then that just means that you have to work that much harder to get to where you want to be.

[Noah Bradley]

"There are no rules, only tools."

-Vilppu

(except breaking the law--that's still bad)

[riceface]

why dont i just trace every drawing i do then.. who cares about construction.. people get paid for their tracing and paint overs, i should just do that right? i notice this forum always says there are no rules.. and then tell u ur not suppose to trace, only use reference.

then other people say trace all u want theres no rules.

plus.. there is no working harder.. enayla's painting are at the top of the food chain.. and she cheats.. so what does that tell young eager artist?

[Elwell]

Stop worrying so much about other people.
As I've said many times before, if you can't draw, you can't trace.
Greg Land's work isn't annoying because he lightboxes photos, but because the way he does it often detracts from the storytelling.

[Irishdrunk]

Okay, if you don't want to improve. You can trace.

But these people have improved, and mastered their craft. Is a potter fired because they used a cast?

[Jason Ross]

What those kinds of artists do is beyond tracing. It's photo manipulation disguised as a painting, but sold as a painting. I didn't really care about her until she started posting "wip's" that were photos that she worked backwards from then made look as if they were sketched. Here is a thread I started a while ago about this very thing.

http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=114323

[riceface]

Stop worrying so much about other people.
As I've said many times before, if you can't draw, you can't trace.
Greg Land's work isn't annoying because he lightboxes photos, but because the way he does it often detracts from the storytelling.

i didn't know tracing was such a hard skill to have... much harder then actual drawing.. greg land uses a lightbox? u mean the standard tool for tracing wow i didnt' know that.

thanks ill brush up on my tracing skill cuz its soooooooo hard esp with photoshop.. it makes it 10x harder.. cuz this skill is taught in school... theres a cirriculum just for tracing.

is this forum for art related discussion such as this or is it just for novice artist asking how to draw a head?

[Noah Bradley]

Ask a professional, highly trained artist and a complete novice to trace the same photograph and then compare the results.

You'll probably be surprised. There's more to a good drawing than accuracy.

[riceface]

What those kinds of artists do is beyond tracing. It's photo manipulation disguised as a painting, but sold as a painting. I didn't really care about her until she started posting "wip's" that were photos that she worked backwards from then made look as if they were sketched. Here is a thread I started a while ago about this very thing.

http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=114323

wow thanks, people seem more up to discussing it there, unlike now, yeah shes a fraud who tries come off as a master painter.. yet its alll good with people..

and all u people stop bringing in other types of art like photography, its painting art were talkin about. and actually painting. sheesh is it that hard?

[Puck]

I don't think there is such a thing as cheating; Make the work however you want - it's the end result that matters. Especially considering the purpose of concept art and illustration is primarily commercial - complaining about people using 3d and photos is like being a calligrapher and complaining about computers being able to print perfect text faster than you. If you want to use traditional skills only then you should, and you should be proud of that and enjoy it and compare yourself to others who do the same. The bar can't be set too high - the highest it goes is nature, and that should always be in your sights regardless of how imaginative your work is.
The thing I don't like is if a person lies about their method to make themselves appear more skilful, as the appreciation of manual skill is one of the many things that I enjoy about art.

PS: Linda's work is lovely - she's one of the first artist's that made me interested in digital painting. She uses photos in her work, and maybe has been a bit sneaky about it too, but she also brings a lot of skill to the table, and the end result makes me forgive all sins.

EDIT: Just reread some of that thread that Jason Ross linked to from almost 2 years ago: I argued a lot back then.... all that talk talk talk and not enough art making!

[riceface]

@cole.ossus
yeah that makes alot of sense, i guess its ok as long as u know what your doing, and i agree ur studies should never be cheating

@puck
I guess from whats more impressive standpoint.. a guy who can paint as good as enayla from scratch.. thats more impressive and ur awed by their skill... so giving enayla the same recognition isn't fair to the much more skilled painter who doesn't cheat

[alesoun]

why dont i just trace every drawing i do then.. who cares about construction..

So, why don't you? Seriously, if you think that's all it takes.....

[Flake]

So, why don't you? Seriously, if you think that's all it takes.....

Indeed, go for it.

Here are 300 million reference photos.
http://images.google.co.uk/

Here's a free painting app.
http://www.gimp.org/

Oh look, free 3d software
http://www.blender.org/
http://wings3d.com/
http://sketchup.google.com/

When you've used all these magic cheats to produce work comparable to Bergkvists sketchiest doodles, be sure and share it.

[SMILEFACE]

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR SAY'N BUT I THINK ITS TOTALLY OK I DONT DO IT NOW BECAUSE I WANT TO LEARN RIGHT NOW BUT IN THE PRO WORLD (FROM JUST WHAT I SEE) THE END RESULT IS THE FOCUS . IN MOVIES THEY WANT THINGS TO LOOK REAL . IF YOU DONT HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OF STUDY SUCH AS LIGHTING COMP ANATOMY AN ALL THAT IT WONT MATTER IF YOU TRACED OR PAINTED OVER IT WONT COME OUT RIGHT.BUT USE'N A COMBINATION OF THINGS CAN BRING IDEAS AN IMAGINATION TO LIFE
AN THANKS FER THE LINKS Flake

[Derek the Usurper]

with 3d so available now its tempting to just cheat and trace it..

If you can sculpt or 3D model a believable posed figure yourself, you should damn well be able to trace it or do a paint-over without being called a cheater.

[JJacks]

wow thanks, people seem more up to discussing it there, unlike now, yeah shes a fraud who tries come off as a master painter.. yet its alll good with people..


It's already been talked about to death. So many professionals have been "exposed" to tracing and painting over things and yeah it sucks to know that a person you looked up to is not as "talented," or more importantly, as honest as you thought they were. However, people shouldn't be eager to dwell on something that came to light two years ago.

[Ilaekae]

One big thing you all seem to overlook when this is bought up is that there are times when tracing is almost an absolute necessity in the "professional" world, especially in art meant for tight-time deadlines in advertising.

Yeah, It would be great to do a perfect rendering from scratch of the Great Cathedral at Pooky-Hooky built in the 13th century, including two blocks of historical buildings on either side, but the article appears in five days, and it damn well better be accurate and instantly recognizable by the third-grade dropouts reading the Washington post and Bizarre News from Supermarket.

Another area that requires at least some tracing is the motion picture and television promotional industry, especially in the last 40 years. Modern stars all look superficially identical, both male and female (sort of explains why so many GOOD character actors are over fifty, don't it?). Same nose, same lips, same silicon tits, same hairdresser, same oh-so-cool-bad-boy stubble, that they are literally impossible to draw accurately AND recognizably under deadline without at least some help from tracing or projection of some sort.

If you think I'm exaggerating here, take a quick look through the various threads on this forums that have exhibited portraits/sketches of various people we should be able to recognize, famous and otherwise. Are we all that bad, or is it the fact that it is fucking hard to capture a perfect likeness, period, especially under time constraints?

Historically accurate renderings of city scenes, important buildings, and famous people done for mass consumer publications are almost certainly traced by extremely skilled artists who COULD do it the "politically correct" way if they had another two days/weeks/months. The trick is to make it look good, accurate, and still be an appealing piece of art that gets the point across.

One caveat here--this is not to give the impression that EVERY artist working does this. Some have a wonderful knack for accuracy/likeness-capture that makes portraiture and historical art just come to life in a way that seems effortless, but it IS a truly rare skill in the field.

Use common sense. It helps more than anything in any thing you attempt...and this is coming from somebody fired six times in 18 months and married twice.

[armando]

"enayla's painting are at the top of the food chain.. and she cheats.. so what does that tell young eager artist?"

That a lot of people have bad taste in art. A lot of tracers just want to make stuff look "real". The problem with tracing is that so much of the image is accidental, but that happens when you draw from life too, if you don't have a clear idea in mind you'll go and trace a lot of that irrelevance. Talking about people who trace the majority of the image not just a few props or bits of background, the only decent one I'm aware of is Robert McGinnis. He makes a lot of adjustments, he's a good designer. Tracing is a craft. It's possible to teach someone to be a good tracer faster than to be a good artist: just teach them a few basic ideas on linear and shape design, give them a few generic composition templates( cresent moon and star, balance of the steelyard, etc), give them a few stock poses and they're off. It's like fast food art. That's setting the bar real low. McDonald's food-preperation workers aren't chefs.

[Anton Chigurh]

well even tho this is old news, it was new to me.. one of my idols enayla was caught being a cheater.. and paint over photos or whatever she did..

Uhmmm...Massive Black paints over 3d. You calling them cheaters too?

so what does that tell young eager artist?


Some people like to compete with plastic forks while others compete with machine guns.


kV8AOeME8fo

TlgtLXhwJSM

[Chris Saksida]

I think "tracing" like any other tool will only help you if it helps your work reach a level of perfection you couldn`t physically reach any other way... it`s not a way to "get better easier" and stop studying perspective, foreshortening, anatomy and so on, that would be a bad use of the tool because it will put a limitation to your potential, you`re taking the lazy route.

I personally don`t find the fun in tracing so I just prefer to draw from imagination or reference, but I have great respect on those artists that use that tool to make incredible things with a realism that would be near impossible to make any other way, like Bergkvist, Tim Bradstreet and others.

[riceface]

yeah google sketch is really amaizng.... perfect perspective everytime.. those massive black guys get results anyway they can!

i can't help but wonder what the future of conceptual art will be... with all these moder tools almost every thing is done for u... with illustudio program having manikans of any conceivable body type that u can pose anyway inside the program.. to the new game AION having sliders for face types that can make almost anyone...

its only a matter of time b4 some type of character creator becomes its own full blown program.. probably will have every animal also...

in the future we might all just be placing elements where we want.. with all the perspective and lighting, shadows done for us, and we just paint over it..

[JJacks]

riceface, have you ever noticed how awful things look when elements are just generated, copied, and pasted? Great drawing and "art-making" ability cannot be mimicked by a program or a shortcut. Your idea of the future is highly unlikely.

[Dave_]

We're not forcing you to trace.

[armando]

Those massive black examples are environment and vehicle designs, not photo tracing examples, or tracings of other people's designs. Illustrations that incorporate 3D are more about showing off prop designs than they are about picture making.

That idea of a program with premodeled characters can be likened to a synth-keyboard: still gotta be a composer, still gotta be a musician.

[ijacobs9]

First of all you should not be judging yourself according to what someone else is doing, its not fair to yourself or anyone else. Art is a problem you have to solve in your own way! As the wise Kungu Panda said: "There is no secret ingredient."
Secondly, paintovers might be frowned upon by the general art community, but for good reason. Tracing is alot like using training wheels, you might not fall over but you will never be able to go as fast as you are capable, you are just limiting yourself. In fact sometimes tracing is smarter and more effective, like comic artists (I want to see you freehand hundreds of panels over and over without going insane). Matt painting is literally painting over another picture and was started as a way of saving millions of dollars instead of building sets on a exotic location.
Thirdly, the reason why the community tells you to use reference is because it gives balance between realism and unique art. Reference is smart to use because its a crutch or safety net that you can fall back on if you ever get stuck, that doesnt mean that you have to be permanently crippled or sulking in the net.
Fourthly, tracing or painting over someone elses work and calling it your own is plagiarism and that IS illegal (but an entirely different question).
So if you want to trace...trace! I wouldn't recommend it but there really isn't any law against it, you'll just be putting yourself in a box that you will hit later.
Please someone correct me if I'm wrong in my views.

[Kaycy is tanning]

It think people who only trace can only do limited things, they're not full time concept artists for a company. They make a few artworks here and there and get paid way too much for them.

The point is, you can't trace and produce fast, the two don't go together, I'm sure many people who only trace don't have a clue how to actually draw and wouldn't last as a real concept artist.

Paintovers are so stupid, even though Painter and Photoshop even promotes that their program can do it, it's lame, it usually looks bad and they'll get busted one day.

[Kaycy is tanning]

"There are no rules, only tools."

-Vilppu

(except breaking the law--that's still bad)

Out of contect, he said that about constructing the body, it had NOTHING to do with tracing. When Vilppu says that in his videos, he was doing out-of-mind drawings, he is known for never copying when it's not needed, he is the prime example of concepts and the opposite of anyone who would trace. Don't use his quotes out of contect. In all of his videos, I never once saw him trace and he still manages to outdraw every lame tracer out there.

[Puck]

I don't think Noah was saying that Vilppu encourages tracing - rather that Vilppu's philosophy is that there is not only one way to do something; different approaches all have merit in different ways, and it's self-limiting to impose 'rules' on creating art.

[riceface]

riceface, have you ever noticed how awful things look when elements are just generated, copied, and pasted? Great drawing and "art-making" ability cannot be mimicked by a program or a shortcut. Your idea of the future is highly unlikely.

really?? its "highly unlikely??" its already here! there are games that have character creators so powerful it can reproduce any celebrity.. like wii miis on crack

with google sketch, illustudios, photoshops 3d capabilites.. how is this HIGHLY UNLIKELY? are u kidding me?

if u think logicially in the future its just gonna get even easier... artist back then ddint have google image searches..

[Puck]

...think logically for once

Because somebody doesn't agree with you they're not thinking logically?

People still get paid to paint portraits even though photography exists. People still get paid to animate characters even though motion-capture exists. I understand that you're upset - I've felt the same way when I've tried to animate a biped or get a likeness in a portrait and fallen short... but then I remember that somebody is paying me to do it that way because it has advantages over mocap or photography.

Saying that 3d posed models and face sliders are going to make conceptart redundant is like saying that Auto-Tune is going to make singing redundant. Sometimes the old is destroyed by the new, but often technology just expands the possibilities. Talent is still required.

[algenpfleger]

Putting everything everybody said aside, Linda Bergkvist (Enayla) can hardly be called a cheater. True, there was one of her (very) old pieces that was a paintover. But honestly, instead of believing what these deviantart kids say, just take a close look at her brushwork, her handling of edges, her color choices. That stuff can't be faked. Trust me on this one, I've been intensely studying her stuff for over two years now (since I started painting). She's just that damn good.

[riceface]

Because somebody doesn't agree with you they're not thinking logically?

People still get paid to paint portraits even though photography exists. People still get paid to animate characters even though motion-capture exists. I understand that you're upset - I've felt the same way when I've tried to animate a biped or get a likeness in a portrait and fallen short... but then I remember that somebody is paying me to do it that way because it has advantages over mocap or photography.

Saying that 3d posed models and face sliders are going to make conceptart redundant is like saying that Auto-Tune is going to make singing redundant. Sometimes the old is destroyed by the new, but often technology just expands the possibilities. Talent is still required.

u missing the point to or what? that person said my future prediction was highly unlikely... i said 20 years in the future the tools are just going to get way way better then it is now.. who knows what photoshop year 2030 will bring... all we know is tech advances fast

and that person said its "highly unlikely" what the heck

[velderia]

doesn't that make it harder for people who are not cheating and using actual skill from years of practice? and their stuff will still come out 10x better then yours....


Absolutely not. There are things you simply can't achieve by tracing. Things like impossible perspectives that photographers can't get, mutations, surrealism... The list goes on. Just keep imagining.

[ijacobs9]

u missing the point to or what? that person said my future prediction was highly unlikely... i said 20 years in the future the tools are just going to get way way better then it is now.. who knows what photoshop year 2030 will bring... all we know is tech advances fast
and that person said its "highly unlikely" what the heck

Well then we are all pretty much screwed cus in your future the machines will have become so advanced that they are creative...meaning that artificial intellegence will have been bypassed with such advanced technologie that all other life would just be obsolete, thus the machines will rule, apes will be able to talk and humans will be in a epic battle against orcs trying to invade Kallimdor.

[Baron Impossible]

I think it's possible to discuss the subject without statements such as this

yeah shes a fraud who tries come off as a master painter..

As well as being untrue, and unhelpful, it's pretty low to make such heavy and sweeping accusations against named people in a public forum.

[Sascha Thau]

well even tho this is old news, it was new to me.. one of my idols enayla was caught being a cheater.. and paint over photos or whatever she did..

Is that so? Where is your information from?

[Viridis]

Went and looked at enayla's work because I'd forgotten, and... well, yeah. If she can paint that well I don't particularly care if she's tracing over photos for the figures. True, it seems like a lesser skill to do paint-overs, but she's changing things enough it seems that I don't have an issue with it.

I don't usually like tracing because I tend to think that it doesn't really help-- you can trace the outlines of a pose and that won't teach you much about the structure of the body. Also, of course, traced art is often used by amateurs to justify art theft, especially on theft-happy communities like dA.

But the fact is that plenty of people make lots of money doing crappy or at least kitschy art (Thomas Kinkaide, I'm looking at you). That doesn't mean other artists can't do better.

[jhofferle]

This reminds me of a few years ago when all the stories about cultured diamonds came out. You can grow a real diamond for an engagement ring at a fraction of the cost of a mined diamond. It even looks better because natural diamonds have imperfections that don't exist in lab stones. I mentioned it to a couple women, interested in their reactions, and they said they wouldn't want a "fake" diamond. Despite the synthetic stone being optically superior to natural diamond, they would rather have the more expensive rock.

The point is, some people value something based on the end result. Other people value something based on how much work went into making it.

I think in commercial art, the end product is what matters. As long as the artist isn't doing anything illegal, the client doesn't care how the image was produced.

In fine art, there is more interest and value placed on the crafting and the skill required to produce the image.

[RyerOrdStar]

I just looked at her stuff again, and I remember the first time I saw it. I thought they were photomanips. It's a little smooth for my taste. However I don't see what she does as cheating, since I'm sure it takes her quite as long as other people to make her works.

[Maidith]

If tracing and photomanipulation were the trick to awesome work, we'd all be awesome artists. Seriously, if tracing and photomanipulating had ever helped me to make great work, I'd totally rely on it. But the reality is, that if I want to use photos in my work, I still have to put in a big effort and my own skill in order to make it look good. There are tons of art techniques out there, tracing and collage being two of them, but they don't guarantee a good result. The finished artwork, no matter what techniques used, always betrays the skill of its maker.


And Enayla, seriously? This horse is so dead its mummified remains have gone to dust. No matter whether used a few photo-parts in some of her 8+year old works or not, her gallery clearly shows she has skill, and an amazing dose of that.

[freiheit]

I've seen a lot of very helpful tutorials and workshops from Enayla and even if I'm not such a big fan of to girly/sugary illustrations, it's safe to say her real talent isn't tracing. ;)

that and what Maidith said

[TASmith]

"Is a potter fired because they used a cast?"

This is a tangent to the topic, but working from casts is sooo much harder than building freehand.

The contention we so often see here on the boards is when someone does a paintover of a photo or another artwork, AND THEN DENIES IT. You know, if you do a paintover of one of your own photos, and you then sell it, and it looks nice, more power to you. It's the lying part that gets people in trouble here.

I think there are certain things that tracing alone won't get you. For example, cicinimo. You'll never get his imagery through tracing.

[JJacks]

really?? its "highly unlikely??" its already here! there are games that have character creators so powerful it can reproduce any celebrity.. like wii miis on crack

with google sketch, illustudios, photoshops 3d capabilites.. how is this HIGHLY UNLIKELY? are u kidding me?

if u think logicially in the future its just gonna get even easier... artist back then ddint have google image searches..

You said "i can't help but wonder what the future of conceptual art will be... with all these moder tools almost every thing is done for u... with illustudio program having manikans of any conceivable body type that u can pose anyway inside the program.. to the new game AION having sliders for face types that can make almost anyone..."

So how is a game that can mimic a celebrety's face the future of conceptual art? What does that have anything to do with art making? Who is presenting these things as art? Or did you forget you said that?

[the_jos]

Cheating?

In the old days computer coding or making a website was hard. You had to do all coding manual.
Nowadays people can just click and drag their computer program or their website together.

But that does not mean everyone can make a good functioning program or an accessible and nice website. There are tons and tons of examples floating around on the web how stuff should not be done.
And the tools these people use, well, those were made to make things easier.
Guess what, it's easier now to focus on what's important for experienced developers.
Unexperienced people can hide their lack of experience behind a fancy interface but to knowledgeable people it will be clear that it's just crap in a shiney package.

Why should things be different related to art?
As long as you credit the use of reference (if it's not your own) nothing is wrong with it.
Using tools does not as some kind of miracle make someone experienced or give him/her greater skill. Investing time in proper study and decent work does.

For some reason people seem to forget one thing.
Either you make art for yourself or people close to you for free. That's ok, you can toy around whatever you want and do things the way you think it's best.
But when you depend on selling art to feed yourself and your family it's something else.
You cannot do stuff that's too time consuming. In the end there will be bills for the house, gas, water, electricity, car, food, drinks, whatever. And those bills need to be paid. Meaning you have to produce and sell, you cannot linger around.
And if you have a job at a company your boss will be yelling at you that things are too slow and that deadlines are getting near.

Such is life. Theories about how things should be are nice but in the end reality often is very different.
And don't worry too much about the future. PS2030 will probably have some amazing features but it's a tool. Tools don't make great artists, great artists know how to use tools to their advantage.

[Xeon_OND]

"There are no rules, only tools."
-Vilppu(except breaking the law--that's still bad)
This! Vilppu's infamous badass quote in action again! :D

[Jason Ross]

As usual when talking about Linda, the point has gone astray.

Tracing is ok because there are no rules and plenty of master artists created methods of tracing...lying is not ok. She took photos, made them look painterly, then said (paraphrase) "Oh on this painting I started out by sketching out the form unsure about what I was going to do. Then I started to add in values that I thought would bring the form out. Once I established the form I worked in the details of the outfit and boy was it tough but I was persistent. Lastly I refined the areas of importance. I called this piece "Summer's forest".

I knew all along that it was photomanip but I didn't care. It was when she started making fake tutorials is when I started voicing my opinion. She took photos and worked them backwords to look like there was a process...that was extremly devious. It illustrated (literally) how far she was willing to go to lie to the public.

Watching a guy with the suffix "geo" post about her was painful. I knew he was right all along but man that guy got banned and flamed on any forum he posted. He was correct all along and even matched up the paintings with the photos she used to show proof...the tards did not care and simply changed the debate to " well it's still art and I love linda blah blah blah". People complain on this forum all the time going back and forth, however when people complain about Linda the argument inevitably goes to "stop complaining and go draw". Here is another one that is not Linda but is virtually the same thing.

http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/?p=3253

[Sascha Thau]

...lying is not ok.

Exactly. That's the one and only problem.

Tracing, Overpainting, whatever - I have no problem with that. But don't tell me you did that from scratch.

Concerning Enaylas work - i don't know nothing. What she did or did not. It's hard or me to accuse people of something that I personally don't know.

[Donna]

Putting everything everybody said aside, Linda Bergkvist (Enayla) can hardly be called a cheater. True, there was one of her (very) old pieces that was a paintover. But honestly, instead of believing what these deviantart kids say, just take a close look at her brushwork, her handling of edges, her color choices. That stuff can't be faked. Trust me on this one, I've been intensely studying her stuff for over two years now (since I started painting). She's just that damn good.

Quoted for Truth.

What made her so good was the thought she put into her paintings, that is what she was all about - emotion, wonderful stories to go with pictures, symbolism. Honestly, there are people out there painting pictures similar to hers, with similar technical skills, but their pictures are dead because they are so caught up with the technique that the actual story part is left out. And as far as I am concerned, it is the 'thought' part that makes the artist, not their technical skill.

One more thing about Linda. She said more than once that she used celebrity photos in her early days to learn, and that she made a lot of mistakes along the way. Just read her Meet the Artist thread, it's all there.

I have more problems with people who cheat by using ACTUAL parts of more-or-less famous images of great artists in order to gain popularity, jobs or whatever else they may be after.

[yoitisi]

Riceface: Consider this your final warning before I perma-ban you. You were banned for 2 months for being rude and making tons of threads similar to this one, and I was hoping you'd learned from that experience, but it seems you didn't. Stop whining and complaining so much about what others do and focus on your own education for a bit, and try and listen to people instead of calling them stupid when they try to discuss matters seriously.

[KarylGilbertson]

I might be alone on this, but every time Riceface makes a new thread I get this mental image of a cat, wearing a T-shirt, playing the piano... weird right??? :P

[Elwell]

Riceface, look on the bright side. If the world is unfair and people are cheats and liars, then it's not your fault if you don't succeed. So what if you have the social skills of a rabid mongoose and a remarkable talent for putting your foot in it. That's not the problem! No sense trying to change the things you can control if it won't do any good anyway, right?

[Qitsune]

The only rule in the book is to respect other people's copyrights. When I was young and naive, I copied a lot of references from magazines, and a bit from the internet (copied, more than traced....) and you know what? I LEARNED stuff. Now I try to shoot all the references I need (unfortunately, I don't own a menagerie, planes, ships and everything that exists, so I still rely on some refs from other people) but I'm much more aware of other people's copyright.

I know Linda copied magazine pictures when she started, but as far as I know, she now works with her own pictures and she can damn well do whatever she likes with it. Did you see the small tutorials she makes of eyes and lips and hair? No amount of tracing can replace the understanding she's showing there.

[Vatsel]

I think it's possible to discuss the subject without statements such as this



As well as being untrue, and unhelpful, it's pretty low to make such heavy and sweeping accusations against named people in a public forum.

Couldn't agree more.
We're discussing a phenomena here, let's not resort to name calling.

[Jason Ross]

Putting everything everybody said aside, Linda Bergkvist (Enayla) can hardly be called a cheater. True, there was one of her (very) old pieces that was a paintover. But honestly, instead of believing what these deviantart kids say, just take a close look at her brushwork, her handling of edges, her color choices. That stuff can't be faked. Trust me on this one, I've been intensely studying her stuff for over two years now (since I started painting). She's just that damn good.

I trust you algenpfleger but not Linda. I've seen your traditional work and it matches what you paint. Has Linda ever posted anything non-digital traditional? I've also studied her art for quite some time as well. It was WAY more than one and even as close as 2005 imo she was using photos and being dishonest about it. She was just publicly caught on that one at first...then more started to show up. If it was just one then I wouldn't have even bothered with it. "That stuff can't be faked." Come on...seriously? Fake pastels, fake oils, fake watercolor is what we all love about PS and Painter. Play with a photo long enough with some PS brush knowledge I'm sure that anyone here can psuedo-paint a photo. I ran filters over some of her work and even tutorials and saw remnants of photos still there.

Name calling...Rob Liefield was/is shown no mercy but Linda can't be discussed? please...Check out the dismissive and rude remarks in his thread
http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=112930&highlight=Liefeld
Bashing an artist like Rob or Kincaide is fine until you voice a harsh opinion about an individual that has positional friends. BS and not fair I say.

BTW...does she even paint anymore? It seemed like as soon as these issues came up publicly she stopped painting. I haven't seen any new work since 2005 or so.

Regardless of how I come off, I still understand and acknowledge what skills she is using in her images. Her composition/coloring is fantastic...just be honest and you'll be loved.

Lastly in regards to the whole "her "cheating" doesn't affect you...get over it." What other industry is that philosophy accepted? Photomanip psuedo-paintings are/were the "steriods" of the digital art industry.

[riceface]

Riceface: Consider this your final warning before I perma-ban you. You were banned for 2 months for being rude and making tons of threads similar to this one, and I was hoping you'd learned from that experience, but it seems you didn't. Stop whining and complaining so much about what others do and focus on your own education for a bit, and try and listen to people instead of calling them stupid when they try to discuss matters seriously.

wait a minute, i never called anyone stupid and never made a thread about professionals using photomanips and getting paid for it.. i didn't know there was a thread about this 4 years ago. I dont understand why is it called "art discussion" if we can't discuss art unless its just a question about how to achieve something.. or some books

did u warn the guy who started a thread like this 4 years ago? or am i being singled out.

[yoitisi]

wait a minute, i never called anyone stupid and never made a thread about professionals using photomanips and getting paid for it.. i didn't know there was a thread about this 4 years ago. I dont understand why is it called "art discussion" if we can't discuss art unless its just a question about how to achieve something.. or some books

did u warn the guy who started a thread like this 4 years ago? or am i being singled out.

I'm having a hard time to decide whether you're being clueless on purpose or just don't get it, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for a moment. What I meant with the temporary ban I gave you earlier and the one that is hanging over your head right now is that most of the threads you made in here, your so called 'discussions' are posts whining about how the industry is unfair to everyone and you in particular and how you would just about give up blah blah.

In case you hadn't noticed, this site is here to help you out and offer you advice and critiques to get better and reach that level -something that you and only you can make happen, and not by complaining and trying to lower the bar.

If you'd meant it to be a discussion, you wouldn't have written your first post like that nor would you have ignored almost everything anyone said in here by only answering to a few specific things you manage to get a grip on.

As for the 'stupid' part, it wasn't taken literally from your post but that's basically what you say with the way you reply and the language you use in there. You tend to insult people with your posts and pretend not to notice it or play innocent.

I suggest you change your approach on these forums into a more positive one, stay out of the lounge and the art discussion section for a year or two until you actually have something to add, and stick to your art for a while.

[Donna]

BTW...does she even paint anymore? It seemed like as soon as these issues came up publicly she stopped painting. I haven't seen any new work since 2005 or so.

The last I've seen of her is an ImagineFX issue, summer of 2006 I think, and The Golden Compass concept art. She was active in The Sims 2 skinning/customisation communities for a while, but it seems she retired from that as well.

[Icon]

man. ban threats happen quick round these parts.

:/

[yoitisi]

man. ban threats happen quick round these parts.

:/

Icon: Thing is, this is not his first warning -at all.

[riceface]

Icon: Thing is, this is not his first warning -at all.

im not playing dumb, i geniunely ask because i want to talk about it, i dont think its whining, its more insight into the industry (because i know nothing) and i already got alot of good info and answers from this thread.

I dont know why i got banned last time but i understand if i straight up curse someone out, but i think the last one u guys just didn't like teh topic and the majority was against my views... how does that constitute a banning?

now i have to be fearful just because i bring up a topic.. even if it was complainging or whinning as u call it.. that should not equal a ban.. i read many useless threads on here and complaining ones.. they never seem to get anything.

[FraserMcT]

I think the banning is because you contribute nothing to the forum, and you bring the overall spirit down.

[Elwell]

Riceface, your art is good. You should post more of it. People would be a lot more forgiving of, or at least wiling to ignore, the rest of your posts then.

[SMILEFACE]

riceface why dont you start a sketchbook here an focus on your drawing
i have a hard time with discussions cause i always seem to see both sides but this often hinders me from make'n a choice but at least it offers me the chance to really think about something before i make a decision (haha i did it right there) an i may not think or agree w/ all of your views but we can all learn an grow together i think drawing an going after your goal will be way more helpful in your understanding of where you want to go an how to get there than this thread

[riceface]

riceface why dont you start a sketchbook here an focus on your drawing
i have a hard time with discussions cause i always seem to see both sides but this often hinders me from make'n a choice but at least it offers me the chance to really think about something before i make a decision (haha i did it right there) an i may not think or agree w/ all of your views but we can all learn an grow together i think drawing an going after your goal will be way more helpful in your understanding of where you want to go an how to get there than this thread

i really dont understand the point of the sketchbook.. its hard to follow, and i never really look at anyones sketch books.. i rather just see finished work.. and my own sketch book i do, i dont feel the need to post them.. if i need critique ill post finished or wip work on the critique center...

[Derek the Usurper]

i really dont understand the point of the sketchbook.. its hard to follow, and i never really look at anyones sketch books.. i rather just see finished work.. and my own sketch book i do, i dont feel the need to post them.. if i need critique ill post finished or wip work on the critique center...

A sketchbook thread is for seeing long-term progress. It allows other people to critique your long term progress, and acts as inspiration to others if you improve.

You learn way more from starts and studies than you do from a finished piece anyway.

[Puck]

I think you're right Jason Ross, the double standard does seem unfair. That "geo" guy was really aggro though and it was his attitude that pissed a lot of people off if I remember correctly.

I really don't know, this thread is hurting my brain and I really have to go and do some painting now - Life is too short to bitch and moan about other people, I don't want to look back at all the time I could have been painting and realise that I'd wasted it complaining.

Good luck with your work Riceface - my advice is to let it go and just be the best artist you can, because it's possible to be that good without "cheating" - there's plenty of people here that renew my faith in that every day.

[SMILEFACE]

yeah its alot of fun too you meet really great people who help push you like support an it all ways trips me out when i look back a month year or even a page or two .... the crit sec is great too they are a kinda ''the more you put in the more you get''
i have learned more in two years here in the scketchbook an crit sect than anywhere esle the more you talk to people the more you find you can help each other i really like the work i saw from your dv page it RRRRRRRRROCKSSSSSSSSSSS an it would be cool to see more we have an amazing opportunity to werk w/ all different skill levels an styles it is truly amazing an i am grateful

[Pigeonkill]

well even tho this is old news, it was new to me.. one of my idols enayla was caught being a cheater.. and paint over photos or whatever she did..

my question is... if someone is that good at what they do.. and the product that comes out is sooooo good.. doesn't er... theyre work looks amazing because of their cheating..it set the bar really high? also comic artist gregland i believe is a trac


I think it would be unethical if an artist lies about their process regardless of the "quality produced." If there was a famous artist who was selling techniques in a book and hid the fact they were producing their art completely by other means(Such as painting over photos); It would be a disservice to those who genuinely wanting to learn.

Artist who paint over photos or trace are fine as long as they are professional enough to be honest about it. Then people can fairly critique the work, and clients are given proper estimate/value on the workload involved.

(I'll be hosting these files for a short while...)
http://www.brianluk.com/extra2/Maybe_paintover_caught.zip

Here are some interesting points made by slickgreekgeo, I wouldn't dismiss them too quickly just because they use deviantart. Judge for yourself after seeing some of the painted close ups...

.

[alesoun]

i really dont understand the point of the sketchbook.. its hard to follow, and i never really look at anyones sketch books.. i rather just see finished work.. and my own sketch book i do, i dont feel the need to post them.. if i need critique ill post finished or wip work on the critique center...

Ah! Don't be a party-pooper! Try it. You might like it! :P
Don't you ever want to see other people's work? Never want to see their thought processes?

What's hard to follow about posting your own progress? Unless you're worried about failure; and that's all part of the learning process.

Rice, I'm not trying to pick on you (trust me I'd do a much better job if was), but join in here.

Most of us post a sketchbook to LET people crit and help us. Loosen up. Elwell's already said he likes your work. I'm sure other people do, too, but you're keeping them at a distance.

Let us see your thought processes...

[Ilaekae]

"Let us see your thought processes..."

...well...most of us... I don't know if I really wanna know what's in your noggin... :P

[DSillustration]

Yeah, anyone who paints over photos is a cheater.
Plain and simple.
In fact, if you even look at photo, you're a cheater in my book.
I also feel the same way about Photoshop.
Undo?
What's that crap?!
Cheating!
You need to do it all from your head,
and all with traditional materials or the art is just worthless to even look at.
And when I say traditional, I don't mean walking into some played-out Dick Blick and buying your paint like some stay-at-home Mom.
Screw that.
If you don't grind that shit yourself, you're just as bad as all the other cheaters.

[Jason Ross]

I paint digitally by typing in 0 or 1.

[Muscari]

as said by many others, if "cheating" (i don't think tracing is cheating to be honest) is all it took, i woulnd't even waste my time doing it the "honest" way. though i would be mad at someone who passed photo manipulation as a painting.

the one thing that does upset me is the fact that you place using 3d as a cheat. i design the buildings that i create in SU, i spend a good amount of time in doing them (much more than in any painting i've done), and i do it because that's the more efficient way since i'm always crunched for time. the fact that you think that i'm doing something dishonest when i print my plans and paint over them with watercolor does feel very much like an insult.

[Pigeonkill]

I guess to sum up this thread...

Less finger pointing...
More drawing people?

Something like that...

[Noah Bradley]

"As a CA.org discussion grows longer, the probability of someone suggesting, 'Go draw something' approaches 1."

Who should we name it after?

[TASmith]

Dude, there are so many crazy good sketchbooks... You haven't gone through any of them? You realize for many artists here, those really are for showing off finished works more than anything else? The only difference between the sketchbook and finally finished section is

1. artists have all their work neatly organized in one long thread, so there's less hunting required to find one person's work.
2. There's usually MOAR art image goodness added.
3. Artists get asked questions and give incredible tips you can read, and you also get more insight into their work and lives.
4. Many great artists only post in their sketchbooks. Jana Schirmer has yet to post in finally finished.

My god, you haven't seen Clochette's sketchbook???

[armando]

I believe defending tracing from photos has more to do with defending someone's livelihood than it has to do with defending art. If you speak out against it you threaten both tracers and photographers. "If you trace someone else's art then it's not art."(as is the case when people bash Leifield) "If you trace a photo then it's art." This sounds like "photography is art" propaganda to me. Ignoring copyrights, it seems to me if you trace art you get art, just in a diminished degree. If you trace a photo, you get a traced photo, a jumble of facts, at best really weak art. Tracers waste are time because they don't tell us anything new, they give us the jumble of facts they found in the photo. There's something wrong culturally when a bunch of people believe that photo realism is the ultimate artistic achievement.

[Farvus]

Regarding using 3d in concept art. To me concept art is not some type of illustration but design job that uses illustration techniques to communicate idea. Drawing and painting are the most direct way of communicating so they are the most common option. You're not limited to that though.

Sometimes accuracy can be superior to technique if you're showing design of something that has to be build. You wouldn't do projection of a building with watercolor or oil paint just so that it's not cheating. Engineers don't care about expressive brush strokes and good rendering of form. They need information. :)

[FallenGodX11]

It depends on the situation whether to trace something or not. If it was a figure drawing class and you just trace a bunch of contours and shadows without thinking about gesture, shape and form then you aren't really learning anything about figure drawing, your just learning how to manually transfer an image on to another piece of paper. If you are doing a project and you need the end result to be done then use whatever you want. Tracing and paint overs are perfectly acceptable assuming that it will get the right results. However That doesn't mean you ignore what you learned in figure drawing class. Your reference might not always be perfect so you might have have to improvise a bit. If someone just copied a photo accurately and realistically but it doesn't totally make sense to the picture they made then they screwed up.

[Anid Maro]

What's with the tracing bashing? Why not use the most effective technique possible? I agree there is a certain amount of admiration to be held for those who do everything the hard way like a farmer who tills his family land by hand with the hoe he inherited from his father and his father's father and so on; however that's completely impractical for anyone attempting to make a living as a farmer, and anybody who farms on the side simply would not have the time.

I think the problem a lot of people have with tracing or copying is the degree to which it is a means to an end (http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=130468) versus simply being the end (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Lichtenstein). But really, that has nothing to do with the technique and everything to do with the artist.

[KarylGilbertson]

I will throw my opinion into this fracas... I too believe that tracing isn't necessarily wrong. If you aren't doing anything illegal, and you get the work to the point where you, your art director, or your client are happy with it, then GREAT.

I do agree with those who have said the dishonesty is the sticking point. Anyone who pretends to be, or be doing, something they're not, deserves a certain amount of tongue-lashing.

If Enayla was up-front about her processes, I would have a hard time feeling upset about this situation. As it stands, I still don't see the issue with referencing photographs or doing paintovers, so long as nothing illegal is taking place. I do however feel a little rankled that she is (was) lying about it.

[FightingSeraph]

I'm torn between the two sides in this discussion. On one hand, I appreciate effort that comes from drawing from scratch. However, there are times when tracing/rotoscoping/motion-capturing is neccissary to the final product. This kind of discussion reminds me of the periodic ordeals on Newgrounds. (long, sordid story there)
However, I don't like it how someone takes credit for another's work. Yet, when the exposer(s) are unable to come up with anything good themselves; they deserve to be ignored and mocked like the petty hypocrites that they are. In the end, however, it's the final product that matters.

[Jason Ross]

The thread's "intent" is getting lost again.

Here is my version of paintover "cheating"......WARNING!!!! Some heavy lying coming at you. I did this as satire...No particular artist is singled out.

Artist (me): Hey guys check out my newest armor concept. As usual I started with a blank canvas, sketched the armor design, then started adding in some details. The tutorial will be published in this months Fake Digital Magazine. Buy some prints if can.
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/jasonrossart/Knight.jpg

Fan A: WOW Awesome!

Fan B: Reminds me of Rembrant great job.

Fan C: I was thinking Carivaggio.

Fan D: Very cool! The wings are badass. Just need a scar over the eye and it'll be way badass.

Upset Artist: What the hell you guys talking about? That's a photo that was painted over...look the wings suck.
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/jasonrossart/Knight-1.gif

Fan A: You're just jealous.

Fan B: It's still art.

Fan C: I did some research and concluded that you're a dumbass.

Fan D: Even if you did the same thing, you couldn't do it that good.

Upset Artist has been banned from the forum.

Fan E (out of nowhere): Served him right.

Fan F: Don't be bringing up all that negativity up in here.

[jcpahl]

Fan A: You're just jealous.

Fan B: It's still art.

Fan C: I did some research and concluded that you're a dumbass.

Fan D: Even if you did the same thing, you couldn't do it that good.

Upset Artist has been banned from the forum.

Fan E (out of nowhere): Served him right.

Fan F: Don't be bringing up all that negativity up in here.

10/10 <3

[KarylGilbertson]

@Jason: Ahahahaha!!! That's hilarious. :)

[Arshes Nei]

As I see it and seems to go in circles.

There isn't a problem with tracing photos (provided you're not violating copyright) if it's your works. I think Bruce Dorn would be a good example of "paintovers" This is his own photography and he uses Painter for the result, which I believe is beautiful. Dan Dos Santos also used his own photography to help create beautiful results. Also not a problem.

Someone taking another person's image without permission is a problem since copyright violation is a crime.

The other part of it is, the honesty aspect. I don't think there is shame if you're using your photos or legally using photos to create a piece. You can be honest about it too. Nothing wrong with it. Hiding it seems silly imo. It's also dishonest if you're trying to cover up this fact.

[Derek the Usurper]

I do wonder why you would trace instead of drawing the photo from observation. I have to do ink tracings out of Hale for my anatomy class, and if anything it takes me longer than drawing a photo from observation, so time isn't really the issue here.

Your result is also going to end up more painterly anyway.

[Crass]

As some people have said already it's not about the tools you use but about what you do with them. Tracing isn't more of a cheat compared to oils than oils are compared to pigment on a rock wall, if there was no progression in art media and techniques, Rembrandt would have been a cave painter.

Passing your work off as something it's not is very bad etiquette but as long as you don't trace a photo and say it's a painting you made from scratch I don't see the problem, it's a technique like any other.

People might be unimpressed by a traced image, but art isn't about being impressive. I have no problems mixing elements of 3D or textures from photos in my work if it helps me convey my vision. Straight up tracing of a photograph isn't very fulfilling to me and I wouldn't do it myself, but if someone else likes to work like that I have no problem with it as long as they are up front about it.

[Anid Maro]

Hey Jason, don't mind me but I did a bit of messing around with your post, putting in Vermeer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Vermeer) and Camera Obscura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_obscura) where appropriate. :)

Vermeer: Hey guys check out my newest chick wearing yellow concept. As usual I started with a blank canvas, sketched the character design, then started adding in some details. The tutorial will be published in this months Fake Oils Magazine. Buy some prints if can.

Fan A: WOW Awesome!

Fan B: Reminds me of Rembrant great job.

Fan C: I was thinking Carivaggio.

Fan D: Very cool! That room is badass. Just need a guitar in there and it'll be way badass.

Upset Artist: What the hell you guys talking about? That guy just used camera obscura!

Fan A: You're just jealous.

Fan B: It's still art.

Fan C: I did some research and concluded that you're a dumbass.

Fan D: Even if you did the same thing, you couldn't do it that good.

Upset Artist has been banned from the forum.

Fan E (out of nowhere): Served him right.

Fan F: Don't be bringing up all that negativity up in here.

[armando]

Give me a break. If you can't naturally tell the difference between Vermeer and either Linda Bergkvist or Bruce Dorn, I pity you.

[jcpahl]

I wonder if I could ignite some fan-rage if I entered "Linda Bergkvist" into the Favorite Photographer field on my DeviantArt page. >:|





(probably not; no one visits my page anyway)

[Jason Ross]

Hey Jason, don't mind me but I did a bit of messing around with your post, putting in Vermeer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Vermeer) and Camera Obscura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_obscura) where appropriate. :)
I don't mind at all but your analogy can't be accurately compared.

I have an artograph projector which I admit to using sometimes, but I can't color pick and smudge the results of the projection then say "look what I painted from scratch". Huge difference.

If I used my projector then publicly claimed that I used only my thumb to obtain correct proportions then I would a liar.

[riceface]

I don't mind at all but your analogy can't be accurately compared.

I have an artograph projector which I admit to using sometimes, but I can't color pick and smudge the results of the projection then say "look what I painted from scratch". Huge difference.

If I used my projector then publicly claimed that I used only my thumb to obtain correct proportions then I would a liar.

ahhahaha that was hella accurate mock discussion of this forum... I'm guessing the upset artist being ban can only be me!

that paint over was badass, ive done paint overs b4.. its definately not as hard and drawing from scratch.. its almost easy

edit: one thing u forgot.. someone always says draw more (and they say i dont contribute nothing)

[riceface]

Dude, there are so many crazy good sketchbooks... You haven't gone through any of them? You realize for many artists here, those really are for showing off finished works more than anything else? The only difference between the sketchbook and finally finished section is

1. artists have all their work neatly organized in one long thread, so there's less hunting required to find one person's work.
2. There's usually MOAR art image goodness added.
3. Artists get asked questions and give incredible tips you can read, and you also get more insight into their work and lives.
4. Many great artists only post in their sketchbooks. Jana Schirmer has yet to post in finally finished.

My god, you haven't seen Clochette's sketchbook???

ive seen it b4 and ive seen some awesome work, but the majority is just regular sketches.. and theres to many pages to get through.. it doesn't alert me of an update, and theres no gallery mode like deviantart where i can just see all the art..

[ShroudStar]

ive seen it b4 and ive seen some awesome work, but the majority is just regular sketches.. and theres to many pages to get through.. it doesn't alert me of an update, and theres no gallery mode like deviantart where i can just see all the art..

You have to subscribe to the SB thread if you want to get updates. One of the best aspects of a sketchbook are seeing WIPs being worked on. Besides, it shows you how they start out and what they're studying, which might be of use to you.

[algenpfleger]

This thread makes me laugh in a bitter way. It's incredible how many people believe those "proofs" that George (slickgreekgeo) even openly admitted to mostly being forged by him when he publicly apologized to Linda, instead of using their own damn eyes. Why people would rather believe in what some guy says rather than actually looking at her colors and brushwork and the pure skill that is on display there is beyond me.

This is not about "Oh it's still art" or "You're just jealous". This is about being unqualified to judge, but still joining the angry, stupid mob.

Look at her damn colors. She's the real thing.

But I guess it's a lot easier to say "Oh so she cheated, thank God, now I do not have to practice that much after all."

[KarylGilbertson]

This thread makes me laugh in a bitter way. It's incredible how many people believe those "proofs" that George (slickgreekgeo) even openly admitted to mostly being forged by him when he publicly apologized to Linda, instead of using their own damn eyes. Why people would rather believe in what some guy says rather than actually looking at her colors and brushwork and the pure skill that is on display there is beyond me.

This is not about "Oh it's still art" or "You're just jealous". This is about being unqualified to judge, but still joining the angry, stupid mob.

Look at her damn colors. She's the real thing.

But I guess it's a lot easier to say "Oh so she cheated, thank God, now I do not have to practice that much after all."

Just out of curiosity, do you have any links or more info about George openly admitting to forgery and apologizing to Linda? I'm not saying you're wrong, I would like to get the whole story and that sounds like a very interesting read.

[Anid Maro]

Give me a break. If you can't naturally tell the difference between Vermeer and either Linda Bergkvist or Bruce Dorn, I pity you.

I don't mind at all but your analogy can't be accurately compared.

To say I made that post tongue-in-cheek would be a massive understatement. Always so serious around here. :)

Edit: Just wanted to make sure it's known, I wasn't really coming down on anyone or making a statement about tracing/copying with my Vermeer post. I was just having a lil' fun with Jason Ross' amusing post.

[Aly Fell]

Ookchk - I think it's better to let it lie. Raking up old bones is no good to anyone, and Linda never posted her work here. I'm really surprised this is still being picked over, as she effectively disappeared from public view a couple of years back.

[Baron Impossible]

I'm really surprised this is still being picked over, as she effectively disappeared from public view a couple of years back.

Indeed, and I'm kind of surprised this thread still exists, containing as it does some pretty nasty slurs against her of "cheat" and "fraud". All the other threads were removed, and rightly so. It was stuff like that which caused her to stop posting online in the first place.

[jcpahl]

But I guess it's a lot easier to say "Oh so she cheated, thank God, now I do not have to practice that much after all."

Meh, we still have Nox, and Mullins, and a hundred other unbelievably good painters to feel insignificant beside.

To be clear, I don't care enough to form a belief on the matter; I like Enayla's work regardless. Just love forum drama. :P

[Jason Ross]

This thread makes me laugh in a bitter way. It's incredible how many people believe those "proofs" that George (slickgreekgeo) even openly admitted to mostly being forged by him when he publicly apologized to Linda, instead of using their own damn eyes. Why people would rather believe in what some guy says rather than actually looking at her colors and brushwork and the pure skill that is on display there is beyond me.

This is not about "Oh it's still art" or "You're just jealous". This is about being unqualified to judge, but still joining the angry, stupid mob.

Look at her damn colors. She's the real thing.

But I guess it's a lot easier to say "Oh so she cheated, thank God, now I do not have to practice that much after all."

When I first saw her work in 2005 or so I said to myself...she's painting over photographs...no research, just a hunch on the look of her paintings. Then I researched her art, examined it carefully, and came to a conclusion. I didn't need Slickgreek to for that. I found out about him later and he just added to it. I don't think anyone here is saying that they only believe it because of Slickgreekgeo. I just checked her site again, looked at the tutorials, ran some filters, and came up with the same conclusion...So I am using my own eyes. I will not post the comparison but it's there. I never read that Slickgreekgeo "forged" anything...searched "slickgreekgeo" and "forged"....nothing came up. If you have the link(s) please post it. I'm sure we would all love to read it.

Joining the "mob" is a little backwards...it's been the mob vs. Slickgreekgeo to be fair. He took the blunt of the flaming since 2005. I'm not really sure who's "qualified" to judge since you have artists and non-artists on both sides of the "debate"...But we're all qualified to have an opinion.

"Look at her damn colors. She's the real thing." We agree on this, her coloring is fantastic, but the equalize filter makes it tough for me to agree with you on whether or not she painted over photos. When the "evidence" started to surface in '06 she disappeared, stopped posting, and never responded. That really didn't look good on her part. Agree to disagree I guess.

Has anyone ever watched her work? That would shut everyone up including myself. I'd formally apologize like most civilized people would.

Sorry Algen but people do this. Some get caught and some don't.
http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=140067&highlight=photo-real

[riceface]

When I first saw her work in 2005 or so I said to myself...she's painting over photographs...no research, just a hunch on the look of her paintings. Then I researched her art, examined it carefully, and came to a conclusion. I didn't need Slickgreek to for that. I found out about him later and he just added to it. I don't think anyone here is saying that they only believe it because of Slickgreekgeo. I just checked her site again, looked at the tutorials, ran some filters, and came up with the same conclusion...So I am using my own eyes. I will not post the comparison but it's there. I never read that Slickgreekgeo "forged" anything...searched "slickgreekgeo" and "forged"....nothing came up. If you have the link(s) please post it. I'm sure we would all love to read it.

Joining the "mob" is a little backwards...it's been the mob vs. Slickgreekgeo to be fair. He took the blunt of the flaming since 2005. I'm not really sure who's "qualified" to judge since you have artists and non-artists on both sides of the "debate"...But we're all qualified to have an opinion.

"Look at her damn colors. She's the real thing." We agree on this, her coloring is fantastic, but the equalize filter makes it tough for me to agree with you on whether or not she painted over photos. When the "evidence" started to surface in '06 she disappeared, stopped posting, and never responded. That really didn't look good on her part. Agree to disagree I guess.

Has anyone ever watched her work? That would shut everyone up including myself. I'd formally apologize like most civilized people would.

Sorry Algen but people do this. Some get caught and some don't.
http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=140067&highlight=photo-real

wow that guys a fraud! and people attacked him! and right fully soo.. wheres all the defenders of this on that dude....

it truly doensn't look good at all if u claim to be an artist.. thanks jason ross!

see if he were to do that and actually make some money off his lies.. i'd be mad.. its probably super easy to cheat a client..

[Anid Maro]

wow that guys a fraud! and people attacked him! and right fully soo.. wheres all the defenders of this on that dude....

Defenders for Ryan Metcalf? Pfft, nowhere to be found. That "work" is clearly nothing but a copy.

However were an artist to use a photo (that was either open for their use or owned the copyright to) to trace out a line drawing, there's already at least some artistic input being put in. After all, one has to determine which contours to emphasize and which to ignore, not to mention if shading is to be done then one must determine how and in which direction to crosshatch. An artist who is proficient with drawing "honestly" will produce far superior work to even the most finely tuned tracing machine (e.g. Photoshop filters).

Even better is if the photo in question is either cropped smaller or incorporated into a larger piece, putting the matter of composition in the hands of the artist rather than the photographer. Our photo reference sticky (http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=130468) shows Norman Rockwell using several photos to create what one might consider a "charcoal collage".

But, as has been determined, Ryan Metcalf was doing no such thing with his paintover.

[Flake]

Riceypoos, you have equal access to all the cheat moves that the pro "cheats" have, I'd suggest you go forth and "cheat" some clients, see how far you get.

After all, your overnight success will only prove your point.

Edit: or just post more ill thought out angry rant threads, whatever works for you..

[TASmith]

seeing updates in the sketchbook forum is easy. Just check the first page. Scroll down and see which books you recognize. The titles change with each update. Artists will add in the date of the most recent update, so you know there's something new. Plus, it wouldn't be revived if there weren't something recently added.

[Mock]

When the "evidence" started to surface in '06 she disappeared, stopped posting, and never responded. That really didn't look good on her part. Agree to disagree I guess.

Considering the amount of shit that was flung in her direction during that time, I can't really blame her. I've seen this argument brought up to suggest that she disappeared because she was guilty in several forums. People weren't just accusing her of cheating, they were downright nasty about it. I don't know if you read any of those forums back when it happened, but I wouldn't say that a majority of artists could just shrug off that level of blatant hatred. They hounded her on every forum she visited and every gallery she had. It was a witch hunt.

I'm not saying anything about her innocence or guilt because I haven't dug up the paintovers or really looked into the issue enough to make an educated statement on it. However, so many people bring up her disappearing as though it means she's guilty. If she wasn't the talentless hack some of these people seemed to think she was, then how do you think it felt to have a reputation she worked for, years of study and improvement, and a lot of respect go down the drain because some really bored fucking dude made a witch hunt out of it?

Has anyone ever watched her work? That would shut everyone up including myself. I'd formally apologize like most civilized people would.

Personally, no. However, she has taught classes before and done paintings with an audience at Umea University, so I'm sure there are people out there who can say they've watched her work.

[algenpfleger]

She actually had already disappeared before that happened, because of health troubles. Someone over at cgtalk put it quite nicely I said, something along the lines of "she got sick and was gone for a while, and when she came back, saw all this mess and left again, highly offended."

The main problem was people buying into what slickgreekgeo believed to be and presented as "evidence". Some of it was straightout forged by him, and some of it was bullshit, like the noise, which in fact comes from converting CMYK to RGB, or the "photo parts" that the equalize filter shows, which are just texture overlays that everyone uses.
Of course it is true that she did some paintovers, one obvious, and a few doubtable, but these were all old, and she admitted to having done some shit in the past, and everyone knew what it meant, and everyone knew that she was past it. The real problem was that the people who hadn't realized that were so shocked that they also believed the geo's bullshit above, and took that as a basis to mistrust all of her work. Which is where things get bitter, because all you have to do here is to free your mind for a second, look at her stuff and ask yourself: "Can these colors and brushstrokes and that understanding of form and light and temperature be fake?" Because the answer is, no, it can't, and her quick scribbles for the Daily Sketches are proof, because that's where skill really shows.

And as Mock said, she has taught live, and I think there was also a video tutorial with one of the Exposes.


I think this WIP thread is pretty credible though: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=164&t=222004&pp=30

Especially, and this is where I fear I might just be too naive, but why would people ask "What about this could be fake" instead of "Why would she even need to fake something like that when simply painting it would be so much easier." It's like with the whole camera obscura thing. Who even came up with that shit. Like, even if it WAS possible to mix colors in a dark room, or to apply color to a surface that is lit with colored light which constantly shows you something completely different from what you paint - why would you even need to that? Who the hell would go through the trouble to "backengineer" a tutorial? It's so much easier to simply paint it. Honestly I have no idea where all the distrust comes from.


Anyways, that's my whole opinion on this matter. I'm back to studying, and by the way, I'm determined to reach her skill level, so maybe when I can do the same stuff that will shut people up haha. We will see. See you around guys :]

[Sascha Thau]

Uh, I think there is a misunderstanding. Most of the poeple don't critize her skills - which are obviously there. They critize that they feel lied to, cheated, etc. No need to defend her eye for color and knowledge about form.

I think it somehow got its own dynamic. She probably wasn't to honest about some of her techniques in the beginning and then a cult aroused around her. Later on she maybe felt obligated to do as she did (all these "i scribbled around, the old masters" etc. we've all read those comments) and this stirred the shitstorm later on, because people believed she did everything from scratch or "counseld loosely photos" when she actually used photos directly in her work. I know, I know lots of guessing on my part, but that's my conclusion.

So in my book both sides of the argument get credit.

The other thing is the internet. It's depersonalising everybody, so people get cruel to each other, more so than in reality and things get out of control, which actually happened in this instance in its purest form. A sad story all in all.

[Jason Ross]

Anyways, that's my whole opinion on this matter. I'm back to studying, and by the way, I'm determined to reach her skill level, so maybe when I can do the same stuff that will shut people up haha. We will see. See you around guys :]

We've all watched you progress and see your traditional work. You'll have some plenty of people defending you if someone started to accuse you of being a fraud.

[KarylGilbertson]

I have to say, that WIP thread that Algen posted IS pretty damn convincing...

I mean it's always been clear that if she has been using photos, she's got tons of skill besides that, but I can't see any photos in that piece (I didn't look at the WHOLE thread it's like 50 pgs or something), I have looked closely at the detail shots and WIPs and it looks like she's painted everything...

Like I said before, if she's lied about her technique that is what bothers me; but it's fairly clear that she has loads of skill whether or not photos have been used, and she is a wonderful painter.

[Donna]

Has anyone ever watched her work?

She did a 15 minute video tutorial for Expose 6 on (re)painting an eye. I can tell you she uses a shitload of textures to achieve that realistic look. From photo textures of rocks to small, manual, squiggly, sketchy overlays.

[Qitsune]

Uh, I think there is a misunderstanding. Most of the poeple don't critize her skills - which are obviously there. They critize that they feel lied to, cheated, etc. No need to defend her eye for color and knowledge about form.

Well, if they are so sensitive, they are in for a big shock when they find out that Bruce Willis really didn't blow up an asteroid and that Elijah Wood is not really 4 foot tall. Hmmm, of and Stuart Little, he doesn't exist either. Seriously.

I have seen many artists who work from photograph, many of them very good and respected, and they were very upfront about it. It's not like they lied. Sometimes it's paint overs, or heavy references, or anything in between. If people bother reading on it, they will know about it, but just assuming about what one does or does not and then acting all offended, well, that's ignorant and rude.

I admit, I was a little shocked the first few times I read in magazines some interviews with artists showing how they painted over refs, or traced, but it was not because I was feeling cheated, it was because I hoped that someday I could become good enough to not need ref and that it would be a breeze to draw anything. Nope, it's hard work, even for pros. And they have deadlines. And kids.

[Baron Impossible]

Well, if they are so sensitive, they are in for a big shock when they find out that ... Elijah Wood is not really 4 foot tall.

Actually...

[Mock]

People are just pissed that they're Not Epilogue Quality.

[KarylGilbertson]

I have seen many artists who work from photograph, many of them very good and respected, and they were very upfront about it. It's not like they lied.

But again, when someone DOES lie about it, that is a problem.

[Ashtonw]

I think part of the reason people want to believe Linda "cheats" is because it feels better to believe that than acknowledge the fact that Linda spends many, many hours on her realistic pieces. Who wants to spend that much time on one painting? How does someone achieve that discipline?

Anyway, I was really curious to see the alleged evidence, but I searched around and couldn't find it. It seems it was only uploaded to slickgreekgeo's photobucket account and has since been deleted. While looking around I did find that slickgreekgeo went to various forums, including Enayla's deviantart account, on a smear campaign. Whether his allegations are true or not, dude needed to get over it.

[Arshes Nei]

I know...

It's so shocking to believe that art is created by human beings that are prone to mistakes.

(I'm just not going to repeat anything else...it's already been said enough times).

[Qitsune]

But again, when someone DOES lie about it, that is a problem.

Well, aside from the obvious plagiasm cases were the person steals someone else's art, I have yet to find a single case of that. Do you have any exemples of artists who SAID that they didn't trace and it was afterwards proven that they did? In this particular case, Linda DID admit to tracing photos at one point in her career, do you still call her a liar?

The problem with art and many other things in life is that people make up rules and then they get pissed at others who don't follow these imaginary rules. As I said, the only rule here is other people's copyright.

[Anid Maro]

The problem with art and many other things in life is that people make up rules and then they get pissed at others who don't follow these imaginary rules. As I said, the only rule here is other people's copyright.

Reminds me of David Sirlin's articles about Playing (http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.html) to (http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-2-mailbag.html) Win (http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-3-not-playing-to-win.html). Those articles are just as true for the topic of this thread as they are for video games.

[KarylGilbertson]

Well, aside from the obvious plagiasm cases were the person steals someone else's art, I have yet to find a single case of that. Do you have any exemples of artists who SAID that they didn't trace and it was afterwards proven that they did? In this particular case, Linda DID admit to tracing photos at one point in her career, do you still call her a liar?

The problem with art and many other things in life is that people make up rules and then they get pissed at others who don't follow these imaginary rules. As I said, the only rule here is other people's copyright.

Here's the thing: While I more or less agree with you, there are two things I'd like to express. There are a lot of IFs in this post because the fracas is 3 years old and a lot of the "evidence" has been deleted or whatever.

There were claims that Linda claimed she painted everything by hand, and then LATER admitted that some photo-tracing took place. IF this is the case (like I said I haven't seen proof of this) admitting that one had lied earlier doesn't "undo" the lie and make it okay in the first place (however it is better than not ever admitting it).

Another thing is the bit about copyright. IF some of the images that slickgreekgeo used as proofs ARE legit (again, hard to say, but possible I suppose), then Linda did trace from photos that she did not own copyrights for.

[nauvice]

if someone wants to trace or do paint overs... fine but ADMIT IT. Do not categorize yourself with other people who actually work their ass off and didnt choose the easy route. And that's why I have no respect for them, because they refuse to be honest.

No, it doesnt make it okay just because of a deadline, if a so called "pro" artist has to do that, then he needs to go back to school or training.

It's not setting the Bar High at all, its setting the Bar LOW because a majority would rather cheat the same way just to keep up then stand up against it. Its shameful that classic masters from generations ago are still better than today's artists. The Evolution of technology is interfering with the evolution of humankind, we are lazier and apparently from some comments in this thread, some of us are completely fine about it.

[nauvice]

people who undermine how serious this is must be living under a rock. This is a serious threat to committed Realistic painters. Especially digital ones, because it devalues their hard work. The general consesus will just be "its so good he obviously traced... its not near as impressive as this abstract painting next to it where this artist glued Elephant dong on a lazy sketch of a woman... now that's art!"

[Ivory_Oasis]

Hmm, if schools focused on taking pictures / stock assets and turning them into production art (through tracing, filters, paintovers, and other modern techniques) I think it would go a long way to lifting the quality of work people can do (especially people coming right out of college and trying to get into the industry).

I think that would actually be a good way to spend education (not all of it! learning the basics is still important, but not completely critical to duplicate something that you see in front of you onto paper if you can trace / resize the proportions for work).

It's about work. It's about money. It's about being able to do something that creates value for the people who hired you. At least by focusing on these "easier" ways of producing, you would have more people capable of producing real work out of college instead of the VERY common art school graduate that can't produce anything close enough to get a job with (like my sister).

Knowing how to work in the software and modern technology (which studios will be using) is very very important. Modern techniques of producing art is very very important.

Do you think animators are "cheating" when they attach tracking reflectors on a skin suit and actually act out the animations in front of a camera to be imported into the computer? Nope, because it is faster and produces better work for everyone that isn't "omg the most amazing animator in the world!"....which...is a LARGEEE portion of the employees trying to find jobs.

Basically, you have the rest of your life to try and perfect your art.... to get to a level where you can draw anything from your head perfectly.... but until you get to that level, why not use a crutch or two so you can actually make a living?

[Kaycy is tanning]

The problem with art and many other things in life is that people make up rules and then they get pissed at others who don't follow these imaginary rules. As I said, the only rule here is other people's copyright.

It's one and the same rule, they're not imaginary, if you're tracing a photograph or someone else's work and commercialise the work, you are in danger of copyright violation. There's no rule that gives you the right to just copy trace complete works and sell them, none, there are rules in almost every nation which tells you you can't though. I have very little respect for people who trace and then commercialise.

The only exception would be taking pictures of models and tracing them yourself, which would limit you to realism and which means you're not a concept artist anymore, or an artist, just a tracer.

[entdroid]

http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=115680

[Kaycy is tanning]

people who undermine how serious this is must be living under a rock. This is a serious threat to committed Realistic painters. Especially digital ones, because it devalues their hard work. The general consesus will just be "its so good he obviously traced... its not near as impressive as this abstract painting next to it where this artist glued Elephant dong on a lazy sketch of a woman... now that's art!"

Oh, it will happen, no doubt about it. Someone (think at TED) predicted this is going to happen. The same way people shout "FAKE" at video clips or photographs now because they are just digitised, will be done for digital paintings and even real paintings too. You can't tell the difference between overpaints (photographs + filter) or real digital paintings right now, this will only become worse once digitisation advances.

[nauvice]

Hmm, if schools focused on taking pictures / stock assets and turning them into production art (through tracing, filters, paintovers, and other modern techniques) I think it would go a long way to lifting the quality of work people can do (especially people coming right out of college and trying to get into the industry).

I think that would actually be a good way to spend education (not all of it! learning the basics is still important, but not completely critical to duplicate something that you see in front of you onto paper if you can trace / resize the proportions for work).

It's about work. It's about money. It's about being able to do something that creates value for the people who hired you. At least by focusing on these "easier" ways of producing, you would have more people capable of producing real work out of college instead of the VERY common art school graduate that can't produce anything close enough to get a job with (like my sister).

Knowing how to work in the software and modern technology (which studios will be using) is very very important. Modern techniques of producing art is very very important.

Do you think animators are "cheating" when they attach tracking reflectors on a skin suit and actually act out the animations in front of a camera to be imported into the computer? Nope, because it is faster and produces better work for everyone that isn't "omg the most amazing animator in the world!"....which...is a LARGEEE portion of the employees trying to find jobs.

Basically, you have the rest of your life to try and perfect your art.... to get to a level where you can draw anything from your head perfectly.... but until you get to that level, why not use a crutch or two so you can actually make a living?

Right, lets send "artists" to school not to hone their skills and self expression but to find shortcuts and depend heavily on technology, to be trained to do exactly what everyone else does, for the sole purpose of making money.

Nevermind that you learning something that everyone else can do makes a job you want that much more competitive, and nevermind also this borderline crosses the definition of art and applies more to Manufacturing.

[Sascha Thau]

It's not about tracing or overpainting. It's about being honest about your process.

My imaginary ruleset says: Lies are a bad thing. ;)

[nauvice]

Oh, it will happen, no doubt about it. Someone (think at TED) predicted this is going to happen. The same way people shout "FAKE" at video clips or photographs now because they are just digitised, will be done for digital paintings and even real paintings too. You can't tell the difference between overpaints (photographs + filter) or real digital paintings right now, this will only become worse once digitisation advances.so true, your comment made me realize that today, for me to be more impressed with a stunt done in a film or something exotic captured in a photo, I need the "this is real!" assurance. It saddens me because one of my teachers I had years ago is so hopeful that realism will become big in Fine arts again because people are more interested in abstract...

[Qitsune]

It's one and the same rule, they're not imaginary...

Eh, let me make this clear, NO, they are NOT. On one side, we are talking about breaking the law, on the other we are talking of "OMG, what a lame cheater I'm so upset! Life is unfair!" Two very different things.

The pro I'm talking about shoot their own ref (or, you know, material that was given to them by the client.) Yet, according to this thread, they are cheaters because they have the art on book covers, or ads, or album covers, you know, with the real artists who do it all by hand and walk uphill in the snow both ways. Would the only way to redeem themselves would be to print in bold on the image "I used photorefs on this and I traced the hands because I was in a hurry so you know I'm not the real thing"? The thing is, the clients usually know about how the art was made, and they are willing to pay anyways.

I guess by looking at who's upset about cheating and who's not in this thread that you have the people who know what's going on on one side and the students who still live at mom's place on the other and are full of romantic notions about art. That might be harsh, but it's the impression that I get. And by the way, I'm not endorsing plagiarism in anyway, I'm talking about using public domain images or pics owned by the artists or clients.

... Those articles are just as true for the topic of this thread as they are for video games...
Holy crap! What a great article! I know a whole lot of scrubs (my bro is a scrub master!)

[KarylGilbertson]

The pro I'm talking about shoot their own ref (or, you know, material that was given to them by the client.) Yet, according to this thread, they are cheaters because they have the art on book covers, or ads, or album covers, you know, with the real artists who do it all by hand and walk uphill in the snow both ways. Would the only way to redeem themselves would be to print in bold on the image "I used photorefs on this and I traced the hands because I was in a hurry so you know I'm not the real thing"? The thing is, the clients usually know about how the art was made, and they are willing to pay anyways.

The only exception would be taking pictures of models and tracing them yourself

Qitsune, are you reading the posts? MOST of us are saying that if you own the images (aka shoot your own ref) or have rights to the images (aka getting images from client, etc) then it's not a big deal. Pulling things off of google image search and amazon (as in some of slickgreekgeo's proofs) is a big deal.

And I don't think there's a need to write in bold "OMG I USED TEH PH0T0z" on things. Just as there's no need to write "I painted this all by hand and walk uphill in the snow both ways" on pieces where photo ref IS used. That is what we're not really liking.

next...

which would limit you to realism and which means you're not a concept artist anymore, or an artist, just a tracer.

Wrong. If you shoot your own ref, you're not limited to anything. You can stylize if you wish, of course. Also, there is a thread by either Dan Dos Santos or Elwell I believe somewhere (I don't remember which guy, sorry) that shows how he takes ref that a photographer shoots for him, and uses it in his piece WITHOUT being totally dependent on it, and the end product is definitely NOT "just a trace". I suggest looking it up.

EDIT: Here's that thread, it was Elwell.
http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=125083

[Portus]

Unfortunately there ain't no honor medal at the end of day, but what's next? Pointing fingers at people who cut photos to reference while you draw everything on your own? Just be honest with yourself and go with whatever approach you feel it's right, it's true that digital arts enabled a lot of cheapness but also amazing talent, I wouldn't feel bad about some photo-painters/tracers getting exposure in some magazine, there's loads of amazing talent under the spotlight doing real work.

[Kaycy is tanning]

Eh, let me make this clear, NO, they are NOT.

I guess by looking at who's upset about cheating and who's not in this thread that you have the people who know what's going on on one side and the students who still live at mom's place on the other and are full of romantic notions about art. That might be harsh, but it's the impression that I get. And by the way, I'm not endorsing plagiarism in anyway, I'm talking about using public domain images or pics owned by the artists or clients.



Ok missy. Whatever makes you feel better about yourself or about your tracing, remind me to ignore you from now on.

[PieterV]

meh... most people think using computers for making art is cheating...

[Arshes Nei]

Ok missy. Whatever makes you feel better about yourself or about your tracing, remind me to ignore you from now on.

Consider this a warning. For the most part, this topic was rather civil (with some obvious exceptions). Do not ruin the discussion for others by being insulting to other members on this forum.

[Kaycy is tanning]

Consider this a warning. For the most part, this topic was rather civil (with some obvious exceptions). Do not ruin the discussion for others by being insulting to other members on this forum.

Care to explain your bias? I responded to a post claiming everyone who doesn't agree with her lives in their mom's basement. You can keep your warning, if you want to ban, ban, don't jump on a horse and talk down to me, I could give a ratts ass.

[Arshes Nei]

Care to explain your bias? I responded to a post claiming everyone who doesn't agree with her lives in their mom's basement. You can keep your warning, if you want to ban, ban, don't jump on a horse and talk down to me, I could give a ratts ass.

Excuse me? I don't agree with all her posts either, but I'm sure as hell not going to go out of my way to directly insult her like you have. Consider this strike 2.

[Jason Ross]

Kaycy...Easy there. There isn't much worth posting in this section that's worth getting banned for. Especially on a dead end topic like this.

[jcpahl]

Kaycy...Easy there. There isn't much worth posting in this section that's worth getting banned for. Especially on a dead end topic like this.

Quoted for truth. But I also thought the 'you're all just losers who live in mom's basement' comment was rather uncalled for (as well as demonstrably false).

[KarylGilbertson]

Care to explain your bias? I responded to a post claiming everyone who doesn't agree with her lives in their mom's basement. You can keep your warning, if you want to ban, ban, don't jump on a horse and talk down to me, I could give a ratts ass.

Cool it girl, getting yourself banned isn't going to solve anything. I am with you in that I disagree with Qitsune's post and think that her statement about people living in their mom's basement was tacky, but try to be the bigger person...

And also consider this: When I am on CA, I try to behave myself for the most part. Things can get crazy in threads like this, but how would you feel if you ran into someone you were having a flame war with at a workshop, or when they were interviewing you for an art job? There's lots of pros around here, so watch who's toes you're stepping on. We all slip up from time to time but be careful.

[jcpahl]

but how would you feel if you ran into someone you were having a flame war with at a workshop, or when they were interviewing you for an art job?

No need to worry about that, unless the workshop is in your mom's basment. :P

[KarylGilbertson]

I should pm Jason and see what he thinks about having the next workshop in my mom's basement... would save me some money on airfare and hotel... :P

[Arshes Nei]

I guess by looking at who's upset about cheating and who's not in this thread that you have the people who know what's going on on one side and the students who still live at mom's place on the other and are full of romantic notions about art. That might be harsh, but it's the impression that I get. And by the way, I'm not endorsing plagiarism in anyway, I'm talking about using public domain images or pics owned by the artists or clients.


Quoted for truth. But I also thought the 'you're all just losers who live in mom's basement' comment was rather uncalled for (as well as demonstrably ridiculous).

Cool it girl, getting yourself banned isn't going to solve anything. I am with you in that I disagree with Qitsune's post and think that her statement about people living in their mom's basement was tacky, but try to be the bigger person...


Just quoting her post in question where are you getting "Basement" and "losers" from?

I can understand how you feel if that's exactly what she said, but she didn't. The impression I'm getting from her post is that many artists thought to create art commercially had to be this way and still have "growing up" to do. Living at your Mom's place is hardly the same as being a basement dweller. One sounds more like living under a parental guardian but still has some learning to do. The other are mannerless cave dewellers.

[jcpahl]

Just quoting her post in question where are you getting "Basement" and "losers" from?



Ah, you're right; I misread that as slightly more insulting than it was. I see a reference to living at mom's, my mind sees "basement dweller." Too much time reading 4chan, I suspect.

[KarylGilbertson]

True Arshes, I suppose I didn't paraphrase it correctly. The meaning I got is that those who disagree with tracing are young romantics who don't have to pay rent and haven't seen the "darker side" of commercial art. While this may be, I still think she could've worded it in a more succinct and less insulting manner.

[Maidith]

meh... most people think using computers for making art is cheating...


It's not just computers! Traditional artists even use paintbrushes...! Nah, I'll keep painting with my finger, lest I become a cheater like them. How dare they making the painting process easier using brushes?!?!?! Cheating BASTARDS!





;]

[DefiledVisions]

Reading is better than TV.. atleast here. Many opinions, oh the tension.
Anyway, I have nothing against tracing, though I don't use it myself. I can barely handle custom brushes in PS, why go over the edge.

And to all of you out there really geting fired up over tracing, think about this - There are millions of people out there earning money by doing nothing. In World of Warcraft, people buy bots to play for them and farm gold - which in turned is sold. Amount of time put into earning those monthly bucks? 20 minutes of communication with a gold-dealer.
Why should people work 8 honest hours a day when they can earn the same amount of money with only 20 minutes of effort? Don't ask me.. lack of whits? Some kind of morality?

I don't give a damn about those who earn thousands and do nothing, they outsmarted me in that field. I however can and will earn money by mastering the tools of art - if tracing is included for me to reach my goal and be able to LET OUT MY INNER VISIONS and bring life to my ideas, then damn I WILL TRACE.
I look up to Enayla, her art is Fantastic. Tracing or not, it's still her imagination and creativity that gave birth to what we see.

And for the sake of argument, why not compare to music. No one seems to have a problem with sampling sounds for a song. Wouldn't it be the same thing in context? It's like saying that it makes it harder for classicaly trained musicians to make a living because of all the sampling dj's out there - no it's not. Two entirely different fields, same goes for tracing.

[Anid Maro]

It's not just computers! Traditional artists even use paintbrushes...! Nah, I'll keep painting with my finger, lest I become a cheater like them. How dare they making the painting process easier using brushes?!?!?! Cheating BASTARDS!


Not to mention tube paints. Real artists back in the day used to hand grind pigments and add binder manually. Nowadays everybody clings to tube paints like a crutch.

[Arshes Nei]

True Arshes, I suppose I didn't paraphrase it correctly. The meaning I got is that those who disagree with tracing are young romantics who don't have to pay rent and haven't seen the "darker side" of commercial art. While this may be, I still think she could've worded it in a more succinct and less insulting manner.

Well I think a lot of people are overreacting in the thread.

There are very valid arguments on both sides.

The most sensible arguments is that, there's nothing wrong with using your own work (photos) and "tracing" is not just about slapping down some lines. You still need to use your artist's eye if you're going to do it. "Can't trace if you can't draw".

The other most sensible argument is not the method, but the lying about it. I disagree that just because she came forth later she's "no longer a liar". Once you break some kind of trust it's hard to get back.

That said, I also think there are valid points where people would take things from one side and post it like fact - ie, the user who went on a rampage to defame her. There ARE people who just take his comments as fact and not do what Jason Ross said.

There is also some valid points about algen's post about people being haters. However, not EVERYONE is a hater, so some of the validity is taken away when people are painted with one broad brush. Both parties are actually right to some degree.

Ookchk, I'm most in line with your viewpoints to be honest. I think though Qitsune's harsh viewpoint is a bit valid too. There are many who don't know how things work and assume someone is less of an artist because of how reference is used. It's still hard work for the most part, and everyone has their own way of doing their work. As you said, though be honest about it. There are people who are still gonna bitch and or find a way to devalue an artist due to a method one way or the other, but that's just human nature.

I said before, Art is created by humans, we're full of mistakes and it reflects in our art.

[Zirngibism]

All I can say is that if I was an art director, I'd want my artists/illustrators to do whatever they (legally) could to do the best job they can, as quickly as they can, because it means I get more work/designs/images for my money, (provided that I'd be paying them a salary).

I wouldn't want to pay someone 80k a year to slave over painting in every bit of a background because of personal pride, when another artist sitting next to them is cranking out more designs for me and getting the same pay.

[Sascha Thau]

I think another viewpoint is: Young artists are always on a quest. They strive to find THAT secret hat makes creation powerful. On that journey they discover older artists that mastered the craft and they look up on these creators. And they want to know the 'secret', so they ask questions. And not all are very helpful. What brushes do you use? What software? What [insert useless question here]?

Just like young Norman Rockwell did.

Young Norman Rockwell dreamed of the day he would paint as well as his idol, the great illustrator J.C. Leyendecker. Rockwell spied on Leyendecker, trying to discover the secret of his genius:

I'd followed him around town just to see how he acted....I'd ask the models what Mr. Leyendecker did when he was painting. Did he stand up or sit down? Did he talk to the models? What kind of brushes did he use? Did he use Winsor & Newton paints?
http://illustrationart.blogspot.com/2006/07/anvil-of-art.html

They just want to know. They want to believe there is this one secret. That they only have to work hard enough and than they can create this or that.

I think enayla gave these people something they believed in. The people thought enayla did everything from scratch and that is a very powerful fantasy for young artists. In the end it was too disappointing for them when it came out that she used also photos as a little helper. It's this age old romantic idea that artists can create realistic art without looking at reality while painting. I don't know where that stems from, but it's always the same.

Qitsune is right I've never ever found an artist that can produce 100% realistic art only from his imagination. And if there's one, then he only learned and learned an learned from reality, so he can paint from a clear cut imagination. That's all there is. There are no two ways about it.

And as I said: Enayla has mastered colors and form, no question about that. And sometimes she only did a little photomanipulation. Her mistake was that she wasn't really open about it in the beginning and people critize that. Some people went overboard with their criticism.

The End ;)

[Derek the Usurper]

Not to mention tube paints. Real artists back in the day used to hand grind pigments and add binder manually. Nowadays everybody clings to tube paints like a crutch.

I'll have you know that I and everyone at my atelier hand grind our own paint. We even make our own binder and medium. :muscle:

[OmenSpirits]

I'll have you know that I and everyone at my atelier hand grind our own paint. We even make our own binder and medium. :muscle:
suckers!

:D :)

[riceface]

is the starter of this thread ill conclude it, since i feel its my duty

- in the business, "cheat" do all u can to make the client happy, cuz thats all that matters if u wanna make money, use any tool possible in this modern age, but dont steal photos

- when u practice, practice hard and dont cheat

- never lie about ur process cuz u might get astrosized for life on the internet

- and i got my answer, "THEY DO SET THE BAR PRETTY DAM HIGH"

in conclusion, painters should paint.. its just way more impressive and gives u a sense of awe.. if u see a beautiful over painting then saw the source, you'll always be let down, it looses its magic. as a fan of course not as a client. what if i was 10 years old and traced everything and showed it to my parents? not as impressive as my imagination dinosaur..

painters should paint from scratch! or use some references... as an artfan thats what i want to get inspired by!

[KarylGilbertson]

what's "astrosized"... Does it involve eating a lot?

[Flake]

Yeah, but in space.

[Mock]

is the starter of this thread ill conclude it, since i feel its my duty

- in the business, "cheat" do all u can to make the client happy, cuz thats all that matters if u wanna make money, use any tool possible in this modern age, but dont steal photos

- when u practice, practice hard and dont cheat

- never lie about ur process cuz u might get astrosized for life on the internet

- and i got my answer, "THEY DO SET THE BAR PRETTY DAM HIGH"

in conclusion, painters should paint.. its just way more impressive and gives u a sense of awe.. if u see a beautiful over painting then saw the source, you'll always be let down, it looses its magic. as a fan of course not as a client. what if i was 10 years old and traced everything and showed it to my parents? not as impressive as my imagination dinosaur..

painters should paint from scratch! or use some references... as an artfan thats what i want to get inspired by!

...

What is wrong with you?

[jcpahl]

...

What is wrong with you?

I blame your avatar.

[nauvice]

Some of you are not getting it. Even from a business stand point, tracing does Not reduce time spent on a work.

Comparison time!

A) An artist who trained for years on anatomy, human figure, shadows, perspective, and color theory

B) An artist who depends on not just references, but literally taking parts of an image (whether sampling colors or tracing)

Who do you think will meet a deadline the fastest, the one who can draw from memory or the one who will have to first find a specific stock image that fits the requirements; the more complicated they are, the more the artist will need to find specific images.

I dont know about those who think Im just living some "romantic notions" about art, but I'd rather be the artist who can draw a rabbit right in front of my client in 5 seconds the minute they ask for it, rather than the latter who'd most likely ask "hey can I use google images lolz Im still a "true" artist rite"

I firmly believe that its a fact; the less of a tracer you are, the Better of an artist. Fine if you want to take an easy route and trace, just dont complain because you dont think you're getting respect that you dont even deserve. Its sad that people in this very forum would put Money before Fame, they are perfectly fine if they're remembered as that other generic artist who also traces.

[Bowlin]

Sascha Thau - Norman Rockwell said in his book "How I Make a Picture" When using the blopticon (a projector) in this way, I do not simply copy everything which is projected from the photograph. Instead, I make many, many changes, large and small, in order to make the drawing like the image in my mind of what I want to protray. Even has a photograph of him using the projector on his painting.

[Flake]

I'd rather be the artist who can draw a rabbit right in front of my client in 5 seconds the minute they ask for it, rather than the latter who'd most likely ask "hey can I use google images lolz Im still a "true" artist rite"


OK Z, that's a sweet rabbit but we need it sitting on top of a historically accurate Old London postbox circa 1860, get it to us by 5 yeah?

[nauvice]

OK Z, that's a sweet rabbit but we need it sitting on top of a historically accurate Old London postbox circa 1860, get it to us by 5 yeah? good retort, but that's where reference comes into play. Not tracing. The span of time it would take a tracer to set up his tools, the better trained artist could use symbolic or abstract lines that would depict that postbox at a faster pace. (Like, would you draw every single eye lash for an eye to look realistic...)

[Arshes Nei]

I dont know about those who think Im just living some "romantic notions" about art, but I'd rather be the artist who can draw a rabbit right in front of my client in 5 seconds the minute they ask for it, rather than the latter who'd most likely ask "hey can I use google images lolz Im still a "true" artist rite"


I dunno about that, usually an artist's first idea isn't always their best one, especially in 5 seconds.

[Hexism]

But I guess it's a lot easier to say "Oh so she cheated, thank God, now I do not have to practice that much after all."

thank you soooooo much for this. got me taking up my pencil again after a long time.

[Zirngibism]

Some of you are not getting it. Even from a business stand point, tracing does Not reduce time spent on a work.


Depends-- I wasn't referring to "tracing" in my post above, more about using textures or photos as backgrounds, sort of like rough matte paintings for communicating the mood of a concept.

I guess overlaying textures or background landscapes isn't quite the same as tracing, but it certainly could be categorized as "cheating" all the same.




But you know what? I do kinda sympathize with the OP. I remember when I was brand new to looking at digital painting, and I was awed and floored by all the gorgeous lighting and textures going on-- ("How do they DO it?") It was rather magical.

As I learned about layer effects and texturing and special brushes, it was initially a bit of a letdown. At that point in time, I felt a little unimpressed with ALL of it...

But, looking back at what USED to impress me, some of that stuff seems cheap, poorly composed, and kind of uninformed. I find my tastes going towards the people with amazing sense of light, color, and composition...


I guess my point is that that kind of special stuff matters more to people who view the whole process as mysterious to begin with.

[nauvice]

I dunno about that, usually an artist's first idea isn't always their best one, especially in 5 seconds.

Im confused at how this is relevant. I think you might be overthinking it or being too technical.

Depends-- I wasn't referring to "tracing" in my post above, more about using textures or photos as backgrounds, sort of like rough matte paintings for communicating the mood of a concept.

I guess overlaying textures or background landscapes isn't quite the same as tracing, but it certainly could be categorized as "cheating" all the same.

I dont know, I personally dont see it as cheating. Maybe because Im used to seeing traditional collage paintings and was even taught how to do it. So I think pasting an image to your artwork is no different than using paint, for as long as you make it clear that its mixed media.


But you know what? I do kinda sympathize with the OP. I remember when I was brand new to looking at digital painting, and I was awed and floored by all the gorgeous lighting and textures going on-- ("How do they DO it?") It was rather magical.

As I learned about layer effects and texturing and special brushes, it was initially a bit of a letdown. At that point in time, I felt a little unimpressed with ALL of it...

But, looking back at what USED to impress me, some of that stuff seems cheap, poorly composed, and kind of uninformed. I find my tastes going towards the people with amazing sense of light, color, and composition...


I guess my point is that that kind of special stuff matters more to people who view the whole process as mysterious to begin with.

That's where I have a different mindset. And I asked myself how come I dont mind copy/paste but am against tracing, and my conclusion is copy/pasting (using PS brushes, textures, or images, etc) is more of a style while tracing has been more of the layman's easy way to keep up with the more capable artists.

tracing is smart, and they can get away with it because it doesnt break any rules, so technically yes they arent cheating. Maybe I wouldnt look down at them if they were more open about it, if it isnt cheating then why do they act like it is? Most certainly dont mention it in their description, and others just flat out deny it.

If you're a tracer than you are not as great as someone who can duplicate something by reference or even more impressive, by memory. Maybe tracers should just be accepting of that rather than think they are at the same level of skill.

[Flake]

Photoshop is the cheatiest of all devices ever.

Grids, models, camera obscura, tracing, projectors, whatever. All require more skills than the industry standard software..

If you have ever used Photoshop you may never again bitch about cheating. It's the ultimate cheaty bitch cheap cheat tool.

Shut up and get the job done.

[OmenSpirits]

I blame your avatar.
You too?

I blame his also.

[Arshes Nei]

Im confused at how this is relevant. I think you might be overthinking it or being too technical.


No, I just think your comparison was rather flawed. Whatever looks best to the client is the real answer, is it not?

[nauvice]

No, I just think your comparison was rather flawed. Whatever looks best to the client is the real answer, is it not?
We were discussing speed rather than quality but fine in your case, the artist could just reference it and still be faster than a tracer.

My comparison wasn't flawed, I just didnt feel like being too specific/technical. But if you want me to... let's say the client wanted a rabbit on top of a postbox at a specific angle, specific time (let's say sunset), and a deformed size (where the rabbit is either smaller or bigger than one would normally look next to a postbox.)

artist can just use reference and manage the rest on his own. A tracer, or one who depends on the eye dropper tool would need not just an image of a rabbit, but one with the right angle wanted, with the right colors (both fur color and lighting effect because of sunset). and would need to adjust its size. Repeat same process for the postbox.

Anyway you try to spin it, an artist who depends less on tracing will always be more capable.

[Jason Ross]

Some of you are not getting it. Even from a business stand point, tracing does Not reduce time spent on a work.

Comparison time!

A) An artist who trained for years on anatomy, human figure, shadows, perspective, and color theory

B) An artist who depends on not just references, but literally taking parts of an image (whether sampling colors or tracing)

Who do you think will meet a deadline the fastest, the one who can draw from memory or the one who will have to first find a specific stock image that fits the requirements; the more complicated they are, the more the artist will need to find specific images.

I dont know about those who think Im just living some "romantic notions" about art, but I'd rather be the artist who can draw a rabbit right in front of my client in 5 seconds the minute they ask for it, rather than the latter who'd most likely ask "hey can I use google images lolz Im still a "true" artist rite"

I firmly believe that its a fact; the less of a tracer you are, the Better of an artist. Fine if you want to take an easy route and trace, just dont complain because you dont think you're getting respect that you dont even deserve. Its sad that people in this very forum would put Money before Fame, they are perfectly fine if they're remembered as that other generic artist who also traces.

You forgot...
C.) An artist who trained for years on anatomy, human figure, shadows, perspective, and color theory who uses references by taking parts of an image (whether sampling colors or tracing).

Drew struzan openly uses an artograph projector. He's one of my favorite artists but doesn't depend on a projector, it just saves man hours. Tracing because you don't have the time is much different than tracing because you don't have the skill.

[nauvice]

I disagree... tracing because you don't have time = tracing because you don't have the skill.

You dont have the skill to get your proportions right on the first, second, or third try, so you depend on tracing so not to waste any more time. Instead of dealing with the fact that maybe you should train more, you're completely satisfied with the easy way out.

One of my teachers thinks that art school should be an 8 year program and I can see he's point. He argued in a 4yr span artists are not really learning as much as they should. Once an artist graduates, he needs a job and and all those deadlines and rush ins give little time for self improvement. And I see tracing as just that, a lazy tactic that disables an artist to become better. And if you keep depending on it, your skills will not be on par to how good you might have been before.

[Arshes Nei]

Considering the industry doesn't care about whether or not you have a degree, 8 years for exactly what? While the rest of society moves on and gets jobs and hires those that have good portfolios?

It doesn't matter how many years you think an artist needs of art school for some foundation, because art is a learning experience beyond a degree.

[Ivory_Oasis]

Some of you are not getting it. Even from a business stand point, tracing does Not reduce time spent on a work.

Comparison time!

A) An artist who trained for years on anatomy, human figure, shadows, perspective, and color theory

B) An artist who depends on not just references, but literally taking parts of an image (whether sampling colors or tracing)

Who do you think will meet a deadline the fastest, the one who can draw from memory or the one who will have to first find a specific stock image that fits the requirements; the more complicated they are, the more the artist will need to find specific images.

I dont know about those who think Im just living some "romantic notions" about art, but I'd rather be the artist who can draw a rabbit right in front of my client in 5 seconds the minute they ask for it, rather than the latter who'd most likely ask "hey can I use google images lolz Im still a "true" artist rite"

I firmly believe that its a fact; the less of a tracer you are, the Better of an artist. Fine if you want to take an easy route and trace, just dont complain because you dont think you're getting respect that you dont even deserve. Its sad that people in this very forum would put Money before Fame, they are perfectly fine if they're remembered as that other generic artist who also traces.

And what do you do for work while you spend those "years" becoming a super amazing artist that everyone dreams of becoming?.... work at mc donalds?

[Jason Ross]

I disagree... tracing because you don't have time = tracing because you don't have the skill.

You dont have the skill to get your proportions right on the first, second, or third try, so you depend on tracing so not to waste any more time. Instead of dealing with the fact that maybe you should train more, you're completely satisfied with the easy way out.


HMMM...Maybe you should let this guy know this...
http://drewstruzan.com/illustrated/

Even if you get the proportions right on the first try tracing will be faster. It's considered a "shortcut" for a reason.

One of my teachers thinks that art ...
Ahhh...there we go. You're an art student. Still full pride and ideas. Learn how to do it the right way first then learn shortcuts if you want to. It's the way to master most anything.

[nauvice]

Arshes Nei, by "the industry" 1) your grouping many industries that artists could work in under just one 2) "Industries dont care about a degree"... funny how you're stating it as a matter of factly when its such a painfully ignorant comment. 3) My teacher who said that is Gary Panter, look him up, he actually can back up his words.

Ivory Oasis, you're twisting my words, nowhere am I implying "a super amazing artist that everyone dreams of becoming", as not everyone wishes to be a realistic painter. But Im sure every artist has a desire to be their best though. And how do you become great; by challenging yourself or rushing by tracing and rushing to get out of school?

I realize money has to be taken into account for some people (including me) either you want to go to school and ateliers for as long as you feel like or you dont, and either you want to challenge yourself or you want to trace is up to you, you have choices. But please don't be insulted because I'm suggesting some choices are better than others. If two guys who work out are the same size, but one of them used steroids (outside of any industry where it would be illegal, so its not cheating) does the steroid user have a right to be offended because people think the one who didnt depend on it is better?

[nauvice]

HMMM...Maybe you should let this guy know this...
http://drewstruzan.com/illustrated/

Even if you get the proportions right on the first try tracing will be faster. It's considered a "shortcut" for a reason.


Ahhh...there we go. You're an art student. Still full pride and ideas. Learn how to do it the right way first then learn shortcuts if you want to. It's the way to master most anything.

ahh... being judged and looked down upon for being a student, great feeling

Tracing will be faster really? I don't think this can be proven. I think the time it takes for a tracer to set up his tools, a skilled artist would have gotten the proportions right through mere lines. But like I said, it cant be proven, the subject matter vary, and it would also vary depending on the artists.

I don't get the point of linking Struzan's website. what is it exactly?

[nauvice]

I think I've reached a point where my comments are no longer welcomed here. My goal was to try to explain the downsize of tracing and hope others here wouldn't depend on it so much anymore. Apparently those who trace are very charming in defending their reason for doing it, like "such and such artist traces and they're so great"... have you considered the masters who don't trace?

anyway just my two cents being repeated over and over, I'm just beating a dead horse.

[Arshes Nei]

2) "Industries dont care about a degree"... funny how you're stating it as a matter of factly when its such a painfully ignorant comment.

Jason Manley, I suggest you look him up. ...specifically this post http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=102315

About half in the industry have a degree. Going to art school is not the same as getting a degree.

[nauvice]

uhh I said I would leave this thread but your comment really struck me.

You denounced my teacher when I said he thinks art school should be 8 years without even knowing who he is and his experiences, but you're eating Jason Manley's words like he's some kind of God. Now I'm not going to go out of my way to dissect everything I disagree with in his thread, you should just note that, even though he states them as a matter of facts... those aren't facts. Those are his opinions derived from his personal experience. And with all due respect for him, My experience, and the experience of others that I've learned about contradict many things said in that thread. But neither of us would be more right than the other since it all depends on the individual. Its also worth noting however Jason's situation is one in a million, as in more of the exception than the rule.

Actually what I will make fun of from that thread is this:

"10. Art school recruiters will say anything they think you want to hear in order to get you to go."

oh the hypocrisy.
(http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=169525)

as much as I'm grateful to Massive Black for this forum, I loath all the ass kissing and favoritism going on here. step outside the box...

[Sascha Thau]

ahh... being judged and looked down upon for being a student, great feeling

I don't think he meant that in particular. All these people only want to show you how it is in the field.

You have to pay rent, you have to pay taxes and you most often can't live off from one shitty paid illustration per month. Therefore you use shortcuts. This isn't so much about art, it's mathematics as in: time is money.

It's everyones decision: is it my goal do this for a living or will I hone my craft in my private time. Each decision comes with a flaw.

If you want to do this for a living you have to churn out quailty in a short amount of time or you have nothing to eat (or not enough, hail ramen). That is when a shortcut comes in handy. Sometimes you can't produce your best art due to time constraints, you simply have to live with that, but at least you have something to eat.

If you want to do this without pressure, shortcuts, whathavenot do this in your spare time, it's all the better, but you probably can't live off of it.

Concerning Drew Struznan - sadly his old website is gone. He described there several situations where he had do do alterations on finished artwork. In the old days nobody used photoshop, it was a great undergoing to change something till the next morning, i.e. paint Michael J. Fox several times with perfet likeness.
It's simply not possible to do this without shortcuts. Today every employer knows that you probably know about photoshop and can do this even faster than back then. Thus the pressure is even greater.

I mean.. paint me big ass STAR WARS Poster including: Han Solo, Jabba, Luke, Leia, Obi Wan, a Death Star, several Tie Fighters...and I need it in 2 days.

What do you do? Invite the actors to you at home and draw from life? On a Side note: Struznan did exactly that. Nailed the likeness of every actor involved and he didn't even use a computer BUT he probably traced some photos. Good work or bad work?

It was this one *afair
http://famousmonstersoffilmland.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/star_wars_trilogy_850.jpg

[Baron Impossible]

uhh I said I would leave this thread but your comment really struck me.

You denounced my teacher when I said he thinks art school should be 8 years without even knowing who he is and his experiences, but you're eating Jason Manley's words like he's some kind of God. Now I'm not going to go out of my way to dissect everything I disagree with in his thread, you should just note that, even though he states them as a matter of facts... those aren't facts. Those are his opinions derived from his personal experience. And with all due respect for him, My experience, and the experience of others that I've learned about contradict many things said in that thread. But neither of us would be more right than the other since it all depends on the individual. Its also worth noting however Jason's situation is one in a million, as in more of the exception than the rule.

Actually what I will make fun of from that thread is this:

"10. Art school recruiters will say anything they think you want to hear in order to get you to go."

oh the hypocrisy.
(http://conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=169525)

as much as I'm grateful to Massive Black for this forum, I loath all the ass kissing and favoritism going on here. step outside the box...

I'm the last person to suck up to the "management" or indeed anybody, I say what I think, but I'd trust Jason Manley's words on this matter and any other matter of industry practice over Gary Panter's. And you can be sure Arshes included that link on merit and not because of any ass-kissing.

As for tracing, it's like any other tool. If used well and on top of a good skills foundation it works, if not it doesn't. The problem is that most of the tracing attempts you see on the web are from people who should be concentrating on their basics and not worrying about ways of speeding up their workflow.

[rinjii]

...wait, how does an opinion thread count as an actual recruitment, as you've quoted it? the school program he's pitching isn't even operational yet! am i the only one confused here, or is this just my own ignorance?

sorry zwarrior, but for me, that was a faulty swipe.


..back to the topic at hand!

as a recent AA graduate, we've had the same doctrine drilled into our heads- especially since we were only studying what would be considered 'fine art'. you gotta learn composition, anatomy, color theory, etc. the 'normal' way- with practice. there are no shortcuts in art, yadda yadda yadda. tracing is bad and an abomination.... and in a way, i can respect that mindset. there is a certain value and personal reward in knowing that you worked hard to obtain the skills you've perfected on your own. and it truly is deplorable to see a no-talent hack garner praise for their 'handiwork' when all they've done is trace over the original masterfully [there is something to be said for a very well-done trace-over compared to a craptastic attempt]. there are a LOT of screen-shot 'artists' on deviantART that do that and ONLY that, and they get a lot of ire for tracing over Naruto screenshots [that the original animators in Japan have slaved over] and posing it as their own without ANY form of recognition that the effort is not entirely theirs. no mention of previous ownership is the same as copyright infringement. give credit where credit is due.

but let's be serious. we're in the real world now. not the classroom.

correct me if i'm wrong, but based on the professionals i've been in contact with, and the information i've gathered from others both on this site and off, the 'industries' that most of us here are interested in working in [the commercial, entertainment industry that almost solely relies on what you can do on the computer] don't really care if you graduated at the top of your class. it's nice if you did and more power to you for it- that eliminates the doubt that you aren't a dedicated worker. but we're all aiming for an industry that looks at our results- our portfolio of work [and it's not just jason manley that says this- double-check any major animation studio and the big names that work there and see how much attention they pay to your school and your degree- i'll guarantee you it's minimal at best].

if your entire artistic knowledge is limited to the pen tool, copying/pasting and eye dropper tool in any digital software- and ESPECIALLY if the images you've created can easily be led back to an original work you've barely altered- yea, you're despicable. i think that thought is pretty universal.

but my goodness, i don't see how one can lump in the use of textures, brushes or anything else others may have made SPECIFICALLY for the use of others- with their creator's blessings- can be considered outright cheating. 'oh noes i got stuck on a pose so i used a royalty-free reference and traced that to ensure its accuracy- I'M NO LONGER AN ARTIST!! D:' REALLY?? is THAT the pettiness we've boiled down to?

if you know how to use your resources to their fullest and still create eye-catching pieces of art, you're good. example: somebody can make swatches of skin tones for public use- but only someone skilled in color theory will know how to combine the various shades of pinks and browns to create something believable- they know what to do to avoid fuck-ups. someone who doesn't know squat of what they're doing is either gonna be real lucky in their experimenting, or is going to do a real shitty job.

[Derek the Usurper]

I have to admit I'm pretty disappointed that Drew Struzan traced photos rather than drawing them from observation. While I should have done the research to find this out, I was always really inspired by the likenesses I thought he got from photo observation. I look at his non-commercial personal work, which has the same level of photo realism, and I wonder, did he trace those too?

Is it really any surprise that movie studios generally don't use paintings anymore when the guy at the top of the game produced work that is essentially the same as the photo posters they use now? If time and money are all that matters here, what is stopping people from just running painterly filters over photographs and removing any and all time consuming hand work?

I get that we need to eat, but is there nothing to be said of integrity?

[nauvice]

I don't think he meant that in particular. All these people only want to show you how it is in the field.

Can you only criticize a president if you were one yourself? His statement was clear; I'm a student, not a "pro" therefore my words should be less qualified.

You have to pay rent, you have to pay taxes and you most often can't live off from one shitty paid illustration per month.

I agree. I even acknowledged that before. I compared that situation to body builders, where steroids (tracing) will help you achieve results faster, would you have the right to be offended if people think the ones who don't use steroids are better (e.i. harder working)?

I noticed some tracers seem insulted that their method is looked down upon. As if they believe they deserve to be in the same league as those who don't depend on it.

time constraints has always been an issue in any commercial art industries. Another one of my teachers drilled us with anatomy (and I mean drill... 100 figures a night from imagination... didn't have to be detailed, just the outline and the breakdown of muscles, but not allowed to use references at all. all had to be proportionally correct) He's reasoning is that... trying to find a reference for everything will take more time away from you than if you already knew how to draw it from experience (and that's just reference, it would take even longer to find a more specific image for tracing)


Concerning Drew Struznan -
His work is amazing. But stack him next to a guy like Nelson Shanks, I wonder who will stand the test of time the longest. Yeah you can make a living when you shell out a lot of rushed art, and fans will Adore your work for now. but after your death you might not even be remembered. Some artists rather fame over money

[Jason Ross]

zwarrior "His statement was clear; I'm a student, not a "pro" therefore my words should be less qualified."

You should have stopped at "student" since that was the only part you got right...the rest you "filled in" as you saw fit.
To be "clear", you are a student and are still learning quite a bit. You most likely have "ideas" about art instead of real world experience. So as a student, your remarks are in line with what a "student"might believe in. I wasn't putting you down at all. I've been there. Most of us have been there and believed things that you are saying. But as you get older, things change. You're behaving like a feral cat right now...All these nice people are trying to feed you some good food (fancy feast with the white cat on the can) and you're scratching and biting because you "sense" attacks. No one is trying to call you out. But if you keep it up...someone might.


I have to admit I'm pretty disappointed that Drew Struzan traced photos rather than drawing them from observation. While I should have done the research to find this out, I was always really inspired by the likenesses I thought he got from photo observation. I look at his non-commercial personal work, which has the same level of photo realism, and I wonder, did he trace those too?


Don't be disappointed. If Drew drew from observation, it wouldn't look any different. It would probably just take longer. His personal stuff is from observation. No deadlines to meet and created just because he felt like painting. He's actually a really nice guy. I've emailed him before and he actually wrote back...I was like holy *!$%$*, I'm conversing with Drew on art. You'd be surprised who will write back sometimes. This is one of my favorites.
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/3733/drewstruzan159221242.jpg


zwarrior "His statement was clear; I'm a student, not a "pro" therefore my words should be less qualified."

You should have stopped at "student" since that was the only part you got right...the rest you "filled in" as you saw fit.
To be "clear", you are a student and are still learning quite a bit. You most likely have "ideas" about art instead of real world experience. So as a student, your remarks are in line with what a "student"might believe in. I wasn't putting you down at all. I've been there. Most of us have been there and believed things that you are saying. But as you get older, things change. You're behaving like a feral cat right now...All these nice people are trying to feed you some good food (fancy feast with the white cat on the can) and you're scratching and biting because you "sense" attacks. No one is trying to call you out. But if you keep it up...someone might.

[TASmith]

this thread should've been closed by the second comment.

[nauvice]

I'm the last person to suck up to the "management" or indeed anybody, I say what I think, but I'd trust Jason Manley's words on this matter and any other matter of industry practice over Gary Panter's. And you can be sure Arshes included that link on merit and not because of any ass-kissing.

Good for you? Really like what do you want me to say to that? I'm not going to persuade you to who you should believe. I can only give opposing views, without suggesting that one is better. Stanley Kubrick hated school yet his films are considered something every film student should watch. different people, different experiences.

As for tracing, it's like any other tool. If used well and on top of a good skills foundation it works, if not it doesn't. The problem is that most of the tracing attempts you see on the web are from people who should be concentrating on their basics and not worrying about ways of speeding up their workflow.

No it's not like any other tool. It's not a style, it's not a technique. Noone says you should have a good foundation on finger painting before you can use the brush. It's a shortcut, a cop out, and accept it for what it is.

...wait, how does an opinion thread count as an actual recruitment, as you've quoted it? the school program he's pitching isn't even operational yet! am i the only one confused here, or is this just my own ignorance?

sorry zwarrior, but for me, that was a faulty swipe.

o an opinion thread asking students how they could be recruited ;)

To make the hypocrisy painfully obvious, he says art schools will say anything you want to hear, yet in his own thread, he claims things like "What if you were a top student and made industry famous overnight when you began your career?" hmm love promises. The worst though is the video... with lame quotes like "you just dont get that at an art school" and showing a rave scene... honestly who would want a working environment like that but o well, to each his own.


the 'industries' that most of us here are interested in working in [the commercial, entertainment industry that almost solely relies on what you can do on the computer] don't really care if you graduated at the top of your class.

I'm over this redundant argument. can someone please just put it to rest by pulling out statistics on which artists find jobs faster and/or earn more money, those with a degree or those without. Statistics is the only way this ongoing bickering will cease.

[KarylGilbertson]

At this point, pretty much everything has been said and I don't have much to offer to the original topic... However, I thought I would point something out to our friendly student Mr. Zwarrior...

In the artistic/creative industries, where you went to school and what degree you got there means FUCK ALL. The only thing that really matters at the end of the day is how good your work, and your portfolio, is.

The only consideration is a "good school" and a "good program" might do a better job at arming their students and grads with the skills necessary to compete in the professional market. That said, someone who goes to a less-than-stellar school, who still has the drive to put in work and fill the gaps in the curriculum with their own hard work and practice, will have just as much of a chance of getting a job as anyone else.

There are pros in this industry with degrees in Industrial Design. There are pros in this industry with diplomas in game design. Some went to universities and colleges, some went to technical schools, some when to ateliers. A good number of them are self-taught. What you can do means everything. The little piece of paper you get after school is out means nothing.

I've heard time and again, from professionals (including Manley, Marc Taro Holmes, Android, and other less well-known art directors), when asked "what's the best way to break into the industry" and the answer is always "A KILLER PORTFOLIO".

If you don't have your work to the level it needs to be, you can take your fancy degree from your fancy art school, and look at it every morning as you get ready to go to your job at McDonald's.

Sorry Z I don't have stats, only personal experience. And for the record, my work is not quite to the level it should be, even though I spent four years at a good college and got a Bachelor Degree... I'm picking up the slack on my own time, and working at a sign shop. How's that?

[jcpahl]

this thread should've been closed by the second comment.

Heh, but it has 5,000+ views and is the hottest topic in this section atm. Incendiary threads are fun.

[nauvice]

Jason Ross "You should have stopped at "student" since that was the only part you got right...the rest you "filled in" as you saw fit.
To be "clear", you are a student and are still learning quite a bit. You most likely have "ideas" about art instead of real world experience. So as a student, your remarks are in line with what a "student"might believe in. I wasn't putting you down at all. I've been there. Most of us have been there and believed things that you are saying. But as you get older, things change. You're behaving like a feral cat right now...All these nice people are trying to feed you some good food (fancy feast with the white cat on the can) and you're scratching and biting because you "sense" attacks. No one is trying to call you out. But if you keep it up...someone might."

you're just proving my point. You're using stereotypes of a student to denounce my credibility (< and I use that word without the intent of sounding pretentious). I ask again, can you only critique a president if you were one yourself?

Well I thank you for trying to feed me for I admit I dont have all the answers, but I've met other professionals, also studied under some, who would say the complete opposite of your beliefs, so don't act like your point of view this the universal agreement of professionals versus that of the "romantic student's".

[Virg]

@ riceface :
maybe some people trace to compensate their lack of construction skills or knowledge of the subjects.. but many do it to produce more art faster for work, whats the points redrawing a whole 3d setup that you need to paint over, when you can just paint over a 3d render with solid basics... its not called cheating its called being smart..
Also would you call all those custom brushes Cheating ?? You use a brush to pop a tree there and there , does that mean that you wouldnt be able to paint the same tree in 5 hours ?? At some point you got to stop being a god damn purist and adapt to the production needs, your boss doesnt care how you did something.

[Elwell]

zwarrior, concerning degrees being irrelevant to a career in illustration/comics: many instructors at your school will tell you the same thing. I'm one of them. The value of your education is in the things you learn, the people you are exposed to, and the connections you make. The degree is just a little something extra, a concession to the outside world that values such things.

[rinjii]

question then zwarrior- and i ask this with all due respect. since your main gripe with the aforementioned 'redundant' topic is that we're all going by what we have personally asked professionals both within CA.org's members and industry officials outside of Massive Black alone instead of going for statistics, instead of saying that you're just gonna ignore anyone who brings up that point, why don't you find statistics to back up your own view that what we said was rubbish? it works both ways :)

in the past i've looked up those same statistics to show my parents while i was still trying to convince them to allow me to study in the arts. in the end, either due to my own inexperience or just because that info 'isn't there', i couldn't find it. when i started my schooling 3 years ago, every professional i could find, i picked their brain about how they hire prospective workers. when i found CA.org and connected with other professionals either by emailing art directors in studios like Sucker Punch on Cartoon Network [to name just two]- and ESPECIALLY when i went to Reverie and asked the professionals across the board/companies that attended the job fair how they judged their applicants- they all answered the same way. kick ass with the portfolio! in some instances, the fact that you went to a school and came out with a BA meant nothing to them. it didn't matter to them if you were self-taught, went to a vocational school or if you graduated valedictorian; if you can do the work- and do it WELL- they'll consider you.

i know listening to one person talk about their experiences is never going to be the 'be all end all' to the topic. but if NUMEROUS people doing their own research come up with the same answers... i think you may have the beginnings of your statistics. just saying.

[Anid Maro]

Is it really any surprise that movie studios generally don't use paintings anymore when the guy at the top of the game produced work that is essentially the same as the photo posters they use now? If time and money are all that matters here, what is stopping people from just running painterly filters over photographs and removing any and all time consuming hand work?

I get that we need to eat, but is there nothing to be said of integrity?

I think a distinction needs to be made here (not just with you Derek) between creating Art and doing a job.

When making Art you are creating this work for yourself, based upon your moral and aesthetic principles, upholding what you think to be most beautiful/integral in art or even life itself. Many of these "tracers" who do so to get a job done would be completely uninterested in tracing in order to create a piece of Art. And even if they did they would do it in an artistically transformative way (e.g. using so many photo references to make the inclusion of any particular one artistically irrelevant, cropping one so close as to create an entirely new composition and unique work, making a photo collage and not even painting/drawing/tracing over it).

When doing a job you are creating work for others, based upon your need for a paycheck, doing what you think to be the most expedient way to bring food to you and your family's table. Many of these "tracers" do so because it is an effective technique that does exactly what they are looking to do. They are not too proud to put their Artistic (with a capital A) integrity before their own financial needs, they may not get to make the Art they'd like but they get the job done and make it damned fine looking to boot.

Besides, you know what's amusing at times? Sometimes the "lowly" illustrators that are simply performing a job can manage to produce some better Art than the high and mighty Artists. Even with tracing (re: "making Art" for how).

As a final note, Derek brought up movie posters and how they might as well just run painterly filters over some photographs. You do realize that is what they do, minus the "painterly" part? It's called photo-manipulation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_manipulation) and it's not a recent development.

Because time and money is all that matters in a capitalist system, as soon as photo-manipulation was able to give satisfactory results quicker and cheaper than hand painting (with or without the tracing) painters got the boot and photographers got the welcoming hand (some of which were probably former painters themselves). This is the same thing that happened to the time honored tradition of printmaking, as soon as newspapers got the technology to reproduce artwork via photography rather than hand carved print blocks the carvers got the boot. It's also the same thing that happened to skilled craftsmen when assembly line manufacturing came along, and countless other jobs.

Lets not have anybody kid themselves here, art as a job only lasts so long as it is efficient in both production and cost. The art jobs of today could easily be replaced by the technologies and techniques of tomorrow, either by an old trade that has been revitalized or a new trade altogether. Applying arbitrary and personal rules for creating Art to creating art is completely inappropriate, the goals and circumstances are simply too different.

Where's the integrity in telling your spouse that you can't pay the bills again? Or telling your children that you can't replace their now tattered clothing? Integrity isn't limited to just the Art you produce.

But you better believe that artists (with a lower case "a") do try to create Art (with a capital "A") whenever they can (on or off work).

[Baron Impossible]

Good for you? Really like what do you want me to say to that? I'm not going to persuade you to who you should believe. I can only give opposing views, without suggesting that one is better.

But you did. When Jason Manley was quoted as an opposing view to your teacher you started talking about ass-kissing and favouritism, and suggested that Jason Manley's experience was for some reason so outlandish that it was non-representative and "one in a million". I've never met him but he does know about the industry and has a great deal of experience, which is a good reason not to dismiss his views.

But yes, you're right, I did state my opinion. And there it is.

It's not a style

Correct

it's not a technique

Incorrect

It's a shortcut

Correct

a cop out

Incorrect

You're 50% of the way there. Nobody is defending those who trace in preference to knowing their trade and neither is anyone suggesting that tracing should be done all the time. There are, however, occasions for which tracing is necessary and prudent. If an art director tells you they require exact liknesses of person X, Y and Z by Friday then what are you going to say? No? And if you think a "true" artist could paint from reference as fast as they could trace then you're wrong.

Personally I've never traced anything - yet - but if I'm put in a position where I believe that tracing something is the best way to get the job done then I'll do it, provided there's no copyright issues involved.

And your analogy with bodybuilding is flawed. A bodybuilder is one or the other, natural or juiced. Steroids aren't something that you use for the odd competition, or for a couple of weeks if you've been overindulging. If an artist approached their craft from the same perspective and traced everything they painted then I'd agree with you, it's a cop out. But that's not what we're talking about.

[rinjii]

You're 50% of the way there. Nobody is defending those who trace in preference to knowing their trade and neither is anyone suggesting that tracing should be done all the time. There are, however, occasions for which tracing is necessary and prudent. If an art director tells you they require exact liknesses of person X, Y and Z by Friday then what are you going to say? No? And if you think a "true" artist could paint from reference as fast as they could trace then you're wrong.

Personally I've never traced anything - yet - but if I'm put in a position where I believe that tracing something is the best way to get the job done then I'll do it, provided there's no copyright issues involved.


THANK YOU.


that is all.

[Derek the Usurper]

It seems to me that if tracing is ever a better or quicker option than drawing from observation, your goal should be getting better at observation, not to employ tracing.

[CCThrom]

I had so wanted to stay the heck out of this thread, but...

The problem is that most of the tracing attempts you see on the web are from people who should be concentrating on their basics and not worrying about ways of speeding up their workflow.

Seriously, just gotta say THANK YOU

[rinjii]

It seems to me that if tracing is ever a better or quicker option than drawing from observation, your goal should be getting better at observation, not to employ tracing.

i hesitate to think that if it was obvious you were tracing everything you got your hands on, anyone would hire you. one thing i've noticed about the art community online, they're REALLY quick to viciously call someone out on their lie when it comes to copyright infringement. even more so when they have the legal clout to back it up.

once again, i don't think anyone is disputing that those who trace consistently without a shred of artistic knowledge and have the cajones to pass it as their own are lying scum. the reason why i underlined that is because of professional artists who do trace like mr struzan- but who can also kick ass on his own ability. depending on the job, it may be required- heck, even asked of you- to tace something that's needed for your assignment and if a paycheck is on the line, i don't know how long you'd want to snub your nose at it and claim 'artistic integrity'.
MY artistic integrity would be to honestly state where any help as come from- be it from a custom brush, a pose, a texture or a pattern- especially if the creator of such stock has asked for that credit to be given, and to constantly practice wherever i may falter.

most likely, if someone takes their art seriously, if they realize they have to trace/reference something one too many times, they'll find the time to improve it on their own through their own practice whenever they can.

[Anid Maro]

It seems to me that if tracing is ever a better or quicker option than drawing from observation, your goal should be getting better at observation, not to employ tracing.

There's another distinction to be held here, that between working for self-improvement and working for a paycheck. Some artists are so quick with working from observation that they can afford the extra time to do so or are even faster at it than tracing*.

However an employer doesn't give a shit about your self-improvement goals, he just wants the job done pronto. If you do it within budget and on schedule by painting from observation at your easel with a paid model, great. If you do it by tracing with Photoshop, just as great.



*They might faster with working from observation because they are less practiced at tracing. Yes, there are some skills to be had with effective tracing, mostly a matter of using an artist's eye to pick out what is worthy of tracing as well as good and expedient draftsmanship. Although I believe that there is less to master with tracing than there is with drawing from observation, this does not invalidate it as a practical and valid technique.

P.S. Quick question for you if you will. Feel free to answer or not, I won't be trying to twist your answer against you or anything it is simply a matter of curiosity. But I know it's a loaded question considering the topic at hand, so yeah...

Do you consider inking to be tracing? You know, like in comics where the pencil drawn pages get sent off to a guy to ink who then sends them off to a guy to color.

[Jason Ross]

Jason Ross
you're just proving my point. You're using stereotypes of a student to denounce my credibility (< and I use that word without the intent of sounding pretentious). I ask again, can you only critique a president if you were one yourself?

Well I thank you for trying to feed me for I admit I dont have all the answers, but I've met other professionals, also studied under some, who would say the complete opposite of your beliefs, so don't act like your point of view this the universal agreement of professionals versus that of the "romantic student's".


Denounce is a little harsh...more like "question" your credibility. I remember when I was maybe 16 or so I told my mom that I would NEVER trace ANYTHING! I learned how to properly use a projector in art school and I own an Artoghraph projector.

"so don't act like your point of view this the universal agreement of professionals versus that of the "romantic student's"."

I wouldn't but that's how you're taking it. I've met pros who trace and I've met pros who won't trace...but the pro's I've talked to will agree that tracing is accurately faster to get correct proportions than eyeballing it, using your thumb, using calipers. How about those techniques? cheating? You must only use your eye...no thumbs, no calipers, no rulers! Again, tracing to get a likeness faster is different because you can't get a likeness at all.

"I ask again, can you only critique a president if you were one yourself?" Sure, but expect your knowledge of politics in general to be weighed against your criticism of the president. You being a student does not automatically make you wrong in any way. But as a student you need to accept that you are in the early stages of becoming what kind of artist you will be in 10 years.

[Derek the Usurper]

I see inking as more of a transfer, or application of a new media over an under drawing, rather than anything like tracing. Like the cartoons Michelangelo used to transfer his drawings to the Sistine chapel walls in paint, something had to be drawn first, not traced.

[Anid Maro]

Ah, I see. I view inking (even over lines someone else had drawn) as an artform in and of itself. To me the handling of the line work, the adjustment of weight, the choosing of solid blacks, and various other qualities of inking combine to create an abstract type of art that stands entirely on its own. I think that difference in opinion sheds some light on the nature of our disagreement.

At this point, I think I'll step out of the debate for a while. Not that it's gotten disagreeable or anything, but I know how I can get when I become too wrapped up in a debate. I'd like to keep this one on the lighter side. :)

I think I managed to present both my opinion on the matter as well as the circumstances at hand (at least as I see them) without necessarily telling you that your viewpoint is wrong. I wouldn't want to tell you that you're wrong outright because for one I don't want to get into that serious of a discussion, and for two because there have been successful commercial artists (of a realistic style) who had not employed tracing (as well as other time saving techniques). Though I've stressed the practicality of tracing it is by no means a necessary technique, as the (perhaps revolting) saying goes "there are many ways to skin a cat".

And with that, I bid you a good day. Enjoy the rest of your afternoon Derek and I thank you for the brief conversation. :)

[nauvice]

"what's the best way to break into the industry" and the answer is always "A KILLER PORTFOLIO".

I have no doubt that I could break in with a killer portfolio. But next to me, if someone has a killer portfolio AND a degree... I would be out of luck. Because that piece of paper is that person's warrant that says "I am competitive, I know how to work in teams, I will be on time if there are meetings, I can follow any given instructions, I most likely learned how to do other forms of art than just my main interest, and I will meet any deadline, for I wouldn't have that piece of paper if I was not capable." (from a credible school anyway.)

In this argument, the "degrees are useless" side are discrediting Art students as being people who depend only on that piece of paper but aren't as capable as those who are self-taught or start in the industry earlier. That is such an inaccurate notion; I cant speak for every student but I can assure you, I work my ass off, my peers work their ass off, and by the time we graduate, we will be on par, if not better, than those who already had sunk their feet in the water.

....

Elwell In that one sentence, you referred to a degree as being irrelevant and then as something extra, which one is it? Well some of your fellow teachers at SVA have already expressed that this "little extra" icing on the cake will broaden one's horizon. Someone with a BA can find a job elsewhere in other industries, or could proceed to graduate school and aim for an even more impressive school background (as recommended to me by one of my teachers). In your opinion it may be irrelevant in illustration/comic fields, but I wonder what advertisement, Hollywood, or any other industry who want to hire people who know what their doing (a degree gives you that license) before hopeful dreamers would do?

I understand what you both are saying, and it is true. However, I noticed the same people who said they could break in the industry without a degree are the same ones complaining how underpaid they are for their skills (and its true). Therefore, a degree is safer, and not only that but opens bigger doors... I'm comparison the success of SVA and RISD alumni versus those who don't have a degree... sorry the latter gets the short end of the stick.

[nauvice]

but if NUMEROUS people doing their own research come up with the same answers... i think you may have the beginnings of your statistics. just saying.

Really? If you go to a Republic gathering and ask the general consensus about Obama, what do you think will be your most common answer, and would you use that to validate how "Every American" feel that way? Those "Numerous people" you're referring to are most likely not all coming from different backgrounds. just saying.

Also the burden of proof over statistics is on your side since you're so consistent in affirming how useless a degree is. Me, I never put myself on a higher pedestal by starting that argument first, Im on the defensive end.

But you did. When Jason Manley was quoted as an opposing view to your teacher you started talking about ass-kissing and favouritism, and suggested that Jason Manley's experience was for some reason so outlandish that it was non-representative and "one in a million". I've never met him but he does know about the industry and has a great deal of experience, which is a good reason not to dismiss his views.

He never graduates high school but now owns 2 very successful companies. How is that not a one in a million situation? I think you misunderstood what I meant as insulting, no, its incredible. With that said however, we're not replicas of Jason Manley, so it would be wise to also consider the experiences of other successful people, than to blindly follow Jesus.

technique -Incorrect haha, you may adjust it a little, it still doesnt change the fact that your following one line from point A to point B to match exactly with the original part. It's as technical as walking. Everyone is an artist.


cop out- Incorrect

It is. cop out i.e. an excuse. You cant get proportions accurately on your first/second/third/try so you cop out and trace.

You're 50% of the way there. Nobody is defending those who trace in preference to knowing their trade and neither is anyone suggesting that tracing should be done all the time. There are, however, occasions for which tracing is necessary and prudent. If an art director tells you they require exact liknesses of person X, Y and Z by Friday then what are you going to say? No? And if you think a "true" artist could paint from reference as fast as they could trace then you're wrong.

No there is no right or wrong, that theory cant be proven. An artist who decides not to trace could still be a more skillful painter than the one who cops out, so he'd naturally still finish faster. But like I said, neither side can be proven since the skills of an artist and tracer would vary.


And your analogy with bodybuilding is flawed. A bodybuilder is one or the other, natural or juiced. Steroids aren't something that you use for the odd competition, or for a couple of weeks if you've been overindulging. If an artist approached their craft from the same perspective and traced everything they painted then I'd agree with you, it's a cop out. But that's not what we're talking about.

No it is actually. its not as black/white. Some body builders will use steroids only for an upcoming feat. While others use it more often than that. Similar to artists who will trace because they don't want to work as hard to meet one deadline, and others who trace at leisure constantly.

[alesoun]

Sooo, if I do a drawing and want to change the pose of an arm, I should never use a tracing for speed (bearing in mind I work traditionally)?

If I'm doing a complicated drawing and I want to experiment to see how an element would sit in that composition, I should redraw the whole shebang to meet somebody else's idea of purity instead of using a tracing?

Nice idealism, but it's not going to happen, because I'm not perfect, not a saint and although I can and do rework something because I feel it's not right, it's up to me to decide how I'll do it. The end viewer won't know or care.

As to tracing being a learning tool? Yes, it definitely can be. Nothing should be dismissed out of hand. If it works, it works.

[nauvice]

Denounce is a little harsh...more like "question" your credibility. I remember when I was maybe 16 or so I told my mom that I would NEVER trace ANYTHING! I learned how to properly use a projector in art school and I own an Artoghraph projector.

How did those lessons go? I might as well know more about something before I continue trashing it. Right now it just seems to me like they handicapped you.


I wouldn't but that's how you're taking it. I've met pros who trace and I've met pros who won't trace...but the pro's I've talked to will agree that tracing is accurately faster to get correct proportions than eyeballing it

k, I might as well stop finding loopholes to that argument, and just accept you're right in general talk.

, using your thumb, using calipers. How about those techniques? cheating? You must only use your eye...no thumbs, no calipers, no rulers! Again, tracing to get a likeness faster is different because you can't get a likeness at all. I don';t think those examples are in the same league as tracing. using a ruler or your thumb, that line on the paper is still fresh and original, tracing = replica.

Sure, but expect your knowledge of politics in general to be weighed against your criticism of the president. You being a student does not automatically make you wrong in any way. But as a student you need to accept that you are in the early stages of becoming what kind of artist you will be in 10 years.

Im aware of the fact. But Im also know that at the stage I am right now, I am already better than the worst professional in any given field, the kind that makes me think how the hell did that guy get his stuff published, and the kind that makes me think I could quit school already if he's getting jobs.

[alesoun]

Im aware of the fact. But Im also know that at the stage I am right now, I am already better than the worst professional in any given field, the kind that makes me think how the hell did that guy get his stuff published, and the kind that makes me think I could quit school already if he's getting jobs.


I'm going to pretend I didn't hear that...

[nauvice]

Sooo, if I do a drawing and want to change the pose of an arm, I should never use a tracing for speed (bearing in mind I work traditionally)?

If you're incapable of doing it out of your head because you are not a well trained artist, then by all means just trace. Sorry to sound harsh but its a reality. My teachers recounts how an editor yelled at someone at a convention for not knowing how to draw hands. glad that guy didn't just trace them because he would give a false notion to the editor (or if he admitted it, then the guy would still yell at him). Its pathetic that you depend on tracing to redraw a position of an arm which should take you 5secs max just to sketch it out. Go back to the drawing board.

If I'm doing a complicated drawing and I want to experiment to see how an element would sit in that composition, I should redraw the whole shebang to meet somebody else's idea of purity instead of using a tracing?

Nice idealism, but it's not going to happen, because I'm not perfect, not a saint and although I can and do rework something because I feel it's not right, it's up to me to decide how I'll do it. The end viewer won't know or care.

As to tracing being a learning tool? Yes, it definitely can be. Nothing should be dismissed out of hand. If it works, it works.

The end viewer wont know or care?.... look at the very thread you're posting in. oh people care. You're right you arent perfect, noone is. But... srry for judging, from this post alone... you just come off as Lazy and unwilling to challenge yourself. You want to trace things that would just take you seconds to sketch out... if tracing is a "learning tool" (I chuckled) then its one for the incapable.

[nauvice]

I'm going to pretend I didn't hear that...why is that? ...maybe we're not on the same page. Did you see the Transformers 2 movie the day it opened? (terrible movie), they gave away a comic sample of it like they usually do for some action movies. Im sure it could have been rushed, still didn't negate the many amateur flaws of the artist(s) behind it. Any trained eye could see all the mistakes. And that's who Im referring to when I said that.

I will at least command him for not tracing lol.

[alesoun]

So, maybe you could check out my SB and advise me what else I should try?

[KarylGilbertson]

I have no doubt that I could break in with a killer portfolio. But next to me, if someone has a killer portfolio AND a degree... I would be out of luck. Because that piece of paper is that person's warrant that says "I am competitive, I know how to work in teams, I will be on time if there are meetings, I can follow any given instructions, I most likely learned how to do other forms of art than just my main interest, and I will meet any deadline, for I wouldn't have that piece of paper if I was not capable." (from a credible school anyway.)

I don't think this is true. It MIGHT play a small part in the decision, I'll give you that much.

Getting to the same level of proficiency withOUT outside motivation shows just as much competitiveness and maybe more drive. Not every institution makes students work in groups or teams. Lots of full-time students at a college level have problems with tardiness. Lots of students butt heads with their instructors on following instructions. Lots of students fail projects and/or miss deadlines for sketches, WIPs, and finished work.

LOTS of the students I graduated with were very, very capable by the time they graduated. And a fair number have that piece of paper, and not much else.

In this argument, the "degrees are useless" side are discrediting Art students as being people who depend only on that piece of paper but aren't as capable as those who are self-taught or start in the industry earlier. That is such an inaccurate notion; I cant speak for every student but I can assure you, I work my ass off, my peers work their ass off, and by the time we graduate, we will be on par, if not better, than those who already had sunk their feet in the water.

For one, I think you're being quite defensive about the fact that you're a student, which isn't necessary.

I worked my ass off in school too, drawing and painting mostly from 9AM to 1AM 7 days a week for weeks or months at a time... Others didn't work as hard. And just as you and I worked our asses of in school, there are plenty of folks out there who are working their asses off without a school program.

[alesoun]

If you're incapable of doing it out of your head because you are not a well trained artist, then by all means just trace.


srry for judging, from this post alone... you just come off as Lazy and unwilling to challenge yourself. You want to trace things that would just take you seconds to sketch out... if tracing is a "learning tool" (I chuckled) then its one for the incapable.

I have one, and only one, image in my SB where I employed tracing. Name it, and you get a cookie! ;)

[nauvice]

So, maybe you could check out my SB and advise me what else I should try?By no means did I mean to devalue your work. Im just telling you the same thing my teachers told me: If you want to change a position of an arm, Learn how to draw an arm that will be proportionally correct, don't depend on tracing.


I don't think this is true. It MIGHT play a small part in the decision, I'll give you that much.

Getting to the same level of proficiency withOUT outside motivation shows just as much competitiveness and maybe more drive.

uhh what? How can you tell by looking at two portfolios that show equal amount of skills, who worked at a faster pace and who would wake up at 7am and not sleep until 4am working on it, etc. etc. My theory was very clear; if two people are at the same level of skill, but one has a degree. He's at an advantage. A small part in decision making, fine, but a part nonetheless.


For one, I think you're being quite defensive about the fact that you're a student, which isn't necessary.

I worked my ass off in school too, drawing and painting mostly from 9AM to 1AM 7 days a week for weeks or months at a time... Others didn't work as hard. And just as you and I worked our asses of in school, there are plenty of folks out there who are working their asses off without a school program.

I applaud those people, I dont think I ever gave the impression that Im better than them, in fact in this thread I felt the opposite, where students are the ones being looked down at. Anyway, school isnt for everyone, but school is right for me. And I wouldnt be so defensive if I wasnt being told "that degree your working your ass off to acheive doesnt mean shit zwarrior" well thank you, and I would have probably been persuaded if I was ignorant of other people who do have a degree and how much that helped them.

[KarylGilbertson]

And I wouldnt be so defensive if I wasnt being told "that degree your working your ass off to acheive doesnt mean shit zwarrior" well thank you, and I would believe it if I was ignorant of other people who do have a degree and how much that helped them.

The degree isn't what matters. It's the work you put in to get it. The improvement, the skill you develop. It's not the destination that matters, it's the journey.

[nauvice]

The degree isn't what matters. It's the work you put in to get it. The improvement, the skill you develop. It's not the destination that matters, it's the journey.The degree is a license proving the work you put into it...

[Flake]

The degree will help with teaching positions and overseas work permits.

[alesoun]

The end viewer wont know or care?.... look at the very thread you're posting in. oh people care. You're right you arent perfect, noone is. But... srry for judging, from this post alone... you just come off as Lazy and unwilling to challenge yourself. You want to trace things that would just take you seconds to sketch out... if tracing is a "learning tool" (I chuckled) then its one for the incapable.

"By no means did I mean to devalue your work. Im just telling you the same thing my teachers told me: If you want to change a position of an arm, Learn how to draw an arm that will be proportionally correct, don't depend on tracing."

I'm still going to pretend I didn't hear that...

Have you guessed yet?

[nauvice]

alesoun, if you're going to argue in middle school grade level by "pretending what you didnt hear" and "just look at my sketchbook! wahh" then take your bickering elsewhere.

[Elwell]

Elwell In that one sentence, you referred to a degree as being irrelevant and then as something extra, which one is it? Well some of your fellow teachers at SVA have already expressed that this "little extra" icing on the cake will broaden one's horizon. Someone with a BA can find a job elsewhere in other industries, or could proceed to graduate school and aim for an even more impressive school background (as recommended to me by one of my teachers). In your opinion it may be irrelevant in illustration/comic fields, but I wonder what advertisement, Hollywood, or any other industry who want to hire people who know what their doing (a degree gives you that license) before hopeful dreamers would do?

I think you've done a pretty good job of explaining what I meant, actually. Except for the "in your opinion" part. I'll say it again, in no uncertain terms: a degree is absolutely irrelevant in the illustration/comics field. Is it a bad thing to have? Absolutely not. Could it come in extremely useful in other, related circumstances? Yes, of course. But ask any working illustrators or cartoonists if a degree or lack thereof has ever been a factor in getting a job and I'd be extremely surprised if you got any positive answers. It's just not how those industries work.

[Elwell]

The degree is a license proving the work you put into it...

Q: What do you call someone who graduated last in their class in medical school?

A: Doctor.

The proof of your work is your work.

[alesoun]

*sigh* I'm waaay too old and evil for middle school.

Sorry, zwarrior, you're the one making assumptions here.

You'll live.... :)

[nauvice]

I think you've done a pretty good job of explaining what I meant, actually. Except for the "in your opinion" part. I'll say it again, in no uncertain terms: a degree is absolutely irrelevant in the illustration/comics field. Is it a bad thing to have? Absolutely not. Could it come in extremely useful in other, related circumstances? Yes, of course. But ask any working illustrators or cartoonists if a degree or lack thereof has ever been a factor in getting a job and I'd be extremely surprised if you got any positive answers. It's just not how those industries work.Correct. You're absolutely right and I don't think I ever denied that someone can find work in those fields without a degree. Thanks for at least admitting where one with a degree would have his advantages. Why anyone would be satisfied without one is beyond me, I think every artist should think big rather than "o I just wanna to be a penciller at DC comics and work on supaman".

Seth McFarlane just wanted to be an animator at Disney (not a huge aspiration and far too common of a goal for animation majors) but by the time he graduated, His senior thesis was sent to a company that looks at school graduates' stuff first, especially from accredited schools. That earned him a gig that eventually became Family Guy, now that guy is rich And Famous. I wonder if he would have the same path had he not graduated.

click the "thanks" tab for Jason Manley's posts all you want, while he's trashing schools, those who graduate from it get a similar, if not more, success than him.

Q: What do you call someone who graduated last in their class in medical school?

A: Doctor.

The proof of your work is your work.

Not the best example considering noone can self-train and self-title themselves as doctors unlike artists. Yeah someone who graduates from school would be called a pro artist wether they have the work to back it up or not, But so would someone who didnt go to school and also doesnt even have the skills to back it up.

your jab at degrees is more of a jab against people who cant validate their title in general.

[nauvice]

just to make my argument clear, school or specifically degrees doesn't guarantee success, I agree. Its hard work and Chances that do... having a degree for some people open more doors for those chances to grab them.

[Arshes Nei]

I think every artist should think big rather than "o I just wanna to be a penciller at DC comics and work on supaman".


Damn, so a comic book artist is a small job? Damn Marko, time to pack up, he told you.

[nauvice]

Damn, so a comic book artist is a small job? Damn Marko, time to pack up, he told you.

Did you read what I wrote correctly or are you overthinking it?

[Arshes Nei]

Considering how much you have spammed the thread with your posts after you have said you were leaving a page back or so, try asking that again.

In other words you put out a lot of words as "truth" then say something that gets it half right ...then other times you put your foot in you mouth.

[Mock]

I'm going to make several points here because I think it's important for you to understand this. Take it or leave it, but just understand that my point in posting this isn't to say "NO UR WRONG LOLOLOLZ", but to explain to you why that degree isn't the part of your art education that really matters. You are defensive because you're working your ass off for that degree, and that is the problem.

You should be working your ass off to become a better artist, not a better degree-holder. I get the impression that you're equating having a degree in art with the work it takes to become a better artist, and these are two entirely different things.

The degree is a license proving the work you put into it...

You get a degree for putting in the bare minimum, passing your classes, and handing them a check. You get a job for busting your ass and becoming an artist with industry-level skills.

Why anyone would be satisfied without one is beyond me, I think every artist should think big rather than "o I just wanna to be a penciller at DC comics and work on supaman".

Right. Because one of thousands of people with degree in art is clearly superior to being good enough to get a job at DC or Marvel.

I plan on attending an art atelier where I will work my ass off. I will not come out of it with a degree. Instead, I will come out of it with skills that are good enough to land me a job. Should I not be satisfied because I don't have a piece of paper that says I completed four years at an accredited art school, half of which are general education courses anyways?

Yeah someone who graduates from school would be called a pro artist wether they have the work to back it up or not, But so would someone who didnt go to school and also doesnt even have the skills to back it up.

...No. A pro artist is someone who can make a living with their art, someone who does it as a profession. Hence the term "professional artist". If you don't have the skills to back it up, having that degree doesn't grant you the title of a pro artist. I can call myself a doctor just as easily as someone who graduated art school but can't land a single professional gig can call themselves a professional artist, but that doesn't mean that anybody else is going to recognize it.

And I wouldnt be so defensive if I wasnt being told "that degree your working your ass off to acheive doesnt mean shit zwarrior."

Get over it, because it doesn't. You're working your ass off to become a better artist, and that is what will land you a job. Does having a degree hurt? Hell no. Might it be of some very slight amount of assistance? Maybe. Nevertheless, if you and your degree are applying for a job and so is a better artist with no degree, the better artist is going to get the job.

In this argument, the "degrees are useless" side are discrediting Art students as being people who depend only on that piece of paper but aren't as capable as those who are self-taught or start in the industry earlier.

No, they aren't. The degree is just the end-point. People go to art school to become better artists. Those who slide by and do next to nothing will still get a degree, but they will hardly be better artists. Those who work their asses off will get the same degree, but they'll also have what they actually went there to obtain; skill as an artist.

Because that piece of paper is that person's warrant that says "I am competitive, I know how to work in teams, I will be on time if there are meetings, I can follow any given instructions, I most likely learned how to do other forms of art than just my main interest, and I will meet any deadline, for I wouldn't have that piece of paper if I was not capable"

...Seriously? While YOU may have done those things to get your degree, a lot of people don't. It isn't hard to pass and get a degree. You can miss a lot of deadlines and make excuses. You can do the bare minimum and get a C on your art history exams. That piece of paper says "I got at least a 2.0 GPA."

What says, "I busted my ass and worked hard" is your portfolio. When your understanding of light, color, anatomy, and everything else is clearly visible in your work, they know that you've worked to obtain that knowledge. Your degree will look identical to that of the person who did the bare minimum.

Your portfolio will not.

If you want to waste more time telling us all how wrong we are and how little we know about the meaning of art degrees (despite the fact that Elwell is an instructor at SVA as well as a professional artists), feel free. I have no intention of coming back in here to debate it further.

However, if you're so hell bent on proving everyone wrong, maybe you should be focusing on what you need to be doing to become a better artist instead of repeating yourself like a broken record.

[Derek the Usurper]

Honestly, for a comic book artist, providing you don't want to start up your own series, wouldn't penciling Superman be one of the highest possible accomplishments? Friggin' Jim Lee was doing Superman last I checked. Was he aiming too low for you?

[nauvice]

Arshes Nei you are overthinking it, and no Im not putting my foot in my mouth. I am a cartooning major, I have Marko's DVD and a comic book that he (and Jim Lee) signed himself at comic con when I met him. You don't know how to read, you can't argue your points, and now you're just assuming stuff. I think its best you stay on the bench instead of making quick jabs against me.

I would leave this thread but it seems people have a kick for defending what they believe in; putting them into words really sets a new perspective on some things one may not have realized before. I'm just serving those very people.

Derek the Usurper Honestly, for a comic book artist, providing you don't want to start up your own series, wouldn't penciling Superman be one of the highest possible accomplishments? Friggin' Jim Lee was doing Superman last I checked. Was he aiming too low for you?

No, because though I respect the artists and their skills, they are underpaid and Superman needs to retire. Yes I am aspiring to become a comic book artist, but I am not the hardcore comicbook geek. Pencilling superman may be a high accomplishment in that culture, and those artists are gret draftmans, but it is Not as impressive compared to what other comic artists Like Frank Miller, Moebius, and Robert Crumb have accomplished.

[KarylGilbertson]

Honestly, for a comic book artist, providing you don't want to start up your own series, wouldn't penciling Superman be one of the highest possible accomplishments? Friggin' Jim Lee was doing Superman last I checked. Was he aiming too low for you?

Quoted for friggin' truth, man.

[Elwell]

Honestly, for a comic book artist, providing you don't want to start up your own series, wouldn't penciling Superman be one of the highest possible accomplishments? Friggin' Jim Lee was doing Superman last I checked. Was he aiming too low for you?

That entirely depends on the kind of work you want to do. There's lots of different kinds of comics, and lots of different kinds of comic artists. I can't really imagine Art Spiegelman going "screw the Pulitzer, why didn't they ever ask me to draw Superman?"

[Elwell]

now you're just assuming stuff.

There's been an awfully large amount of assuming going on in this thread from the very beginning. It's the nature of the internet, unfortunately.

You should stop by and say hi sometime.

[Kamber Parrk]

It's really sad when "Family Guy" is held up as an example of the advantages of being "educated!"

Disney's frozen tin-foil coated body must be spinning in its grave about now.

[Arshes Nei]

Arshes Nei you are overthinking it, and no Im not putting my foot in my mouth. I am a cartooning major, I have Marko's DVD and a comic book that he (and Jim Lee) signed himself at comic con when I meant him. You don't know how to read, you can't argue your points,

I'm not the one who needs to post consecutively like a drug addict, many of the points have already been made and it's you who seem hell bent on trying to post them like we can't read.

There is condescending, idiotic or a combo, possibly insanity: Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

As Mock said, stop typing so much to prove us wrong, if you really believe what you're doing, go and do it. Yeesh.

[Ilaekae]

"Im aware of the fact. But Im also know that at the stage I am right now, I am already better than the worst professional in any given field, the kind that makes me think how the hell did that guy get his stuff published, and the kind that makes me think I could quit school already if he's getting jobs."


...


I just stopped reading anything after I read this, and alesoun's reaction to it...

Just how deep a hole are you aiming for, my young friend?

[nauvice]

I'm going to make several points here because I think it's important for you to understand this. Take it or leave it, but just understand that my point in posting this isn't to say "NO UR WRONG LOLOLOLZ", but to explain to you why that degree isn't the part of your art education that really matters. You are defensive because you're working your ass off for that degree, and that is the problem

You should be working your ass off to become a better artist, not a better degree-holder. I get the impression that you're equating having a degree in art with the work it takes to become a better artist, and these are two entirely different things.

Sorry, your impression is right and Im to blame for not being more informative. Yes I am working my ass off to be a better artist, but I would be lying if I said I am putting myself in debt with 100,000 dollars to go to art school while not caring one bit about that degree.


You get a degree for putting in the bare minimum, passing your classes, and handing them a check. You get a job for busting your ass and becoming an artist with industry-level skills.

agreed. My teacher says if he could, he would fail all of his senior class because they dont challenge themselves. they just go by the book. He would fail them because he knows that even though they are not ready, they are still getting that fancy license that says they graduated from a top Art school.


Right. Because one of thousands of people with degree in art is clearly superior to being good enough to get a job at DC or Marvel.

didnt say that. Hell, In my cartooning class that's what the students there aspire to be once they graduate. And why do I get a feeling that I should feel guilty for suggesting someone should aspire for more than that? Is that really shameful (outside of your moral feelings towards greed.)

I plan on attending an art atelier where I will work my ass off. I will not come out of it with a degree. Instead, I will come out of it with skills that are good enough to land me a job. Should I not be satisfied because I don't have a piece of paper that says I completed four years at an accredited art school

I trained for two years at an art atelier, without it I dont think I would ever had a portfolio good enough to be accepted at the school I am in. You should be satisfied, but I wasn't. I want to work hard, and I want to have a degree, why should I feel bad?

, half of which are general education courses anyways?

I learn just as much in Art History, History of Cartooning and selective classes as I did in art workshops.


...No. A pro artist is someone who can make a living with their art, someone who does it as a profession. Hence the term "professional artist". If you don't have the skills to back it up, having that degree doesn't grant you the title of a pro artist. I can call myself a doctor just as easily as someone who graduated art school but can't land a single professional gig can call themselves a professional artist, but that doesn't mean that anybody else is going to recognize it. Your wrong, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional


Get over it, because it doesn't. You're working your ass off to become a better artist, and that is what will land you a job. Does having a degree hurt? Hell no. Might it be of some very slight amount of assistance? Maybe. Nevertheless, if you and your degree are applying for a job and so is a better artist with no degree, the better artist is going to get the job.

I love that in the same paragraph that you're telling me to get over it because it doesn't mean shit, you admit to yourself some of its advantages...


No, they aren't. The degree is just the end-point. People go to art school to become better artists. Those who slide by and do next to nothing will still get a degree, but they will hardly be better artists. Those who work their asses off will get the same degree, but they'll also have what they actually went there to obtain; skill as an artist.

Skill as an artist with a degree > skill as an artist.


...Seriously? While YOU may have done those things to get your degree, a lot of people don't. It isn't hard to pass and get a degree. You can miss a lot of deadlines and make excuses. You can do the bare minimum and get a C on your art history exams. That piece of paper says "I got at least a 2.0 GPA."

Maybe you should just question your own sentiments and resentments against schools and students. You just sound so pessimistic.

What says, "I busted my ass and worked hard" is your portfolio. When your understanding of light, color, anatomy, and everything else is clearly visible in your work, they know that you've worked to obtain that knowledge. Your degree will look identical to that of the person who did the bare minimum.

Your portfolio will not.

If you want to waste more time telling us all how wrong we are and how little we know about the meaning of art degrees (despite the fact that Elwell is an instructor at SVA as well as a professional artists), feel free. I have no intention of coming back in here to debate it further.

However, if you're so hell bent on proving everyone wrong, maybe you should be focusing on what you need to be doing to become a better artist instead of repeating yourself like a broken record.

Great level of maturity.... To sum up your post... "listen to me okay, Im gonna tell you my 2cents and den walk away becaus you're just an ass tellin us we're wrong, well guess wut? you're wrong foo' "

I don't believe in antagonizing who ever disagrees with me. An argument composes of a big misunderstanding and two sides exchanging their points of view. I am slowly weeding out those who cannot debate in a mature level. Their (your) frustrations isn't necessary, as in dont take it out on me.

[nauvice]

"Im aware of the fact. But Im also know that at the stage I am right now, I am already better than the worst professional in any given field, the kind that makes me think how the hell did that guy get his stuff published, and the kind that makes me think I could quit school already if he's getting jobs."


...


I just stopped reading anything after I read this, and alesoun's reaction to it...

Just how deep a hole are you aiming for, my young friend? Maybe you should have read juuusttt a little further.

There's been an awfully large amount of assuming going on in this thread from the very beginning. It's the nature of the internet, unfortunately.

You should stop by and say hi sometime.

I know. And Im probably guilty of it myself though I try not to do it. Doesn't stop me from calling someone out on it.


It's really sad when "Family Guy" is held up as an example of the advantages of being "educated!"

Disney's frozen tin-foil coated body must be spinning in its grave about now.

ha ha ha ha. You're so cool to hate Family Guy so much you cant give credit to which its due.

[Ivory_Oasis]

You went into debt of 100k for your degree?...

Hehe, no wonder you want to believe it means so much ><

College can be good for some things (like contacts! job placement can be a great place to get introduced to studios and things like that).... but, the degree doesn't do too much (unless you want to teach, then degree is needed if you don't have real world experience). Ya, it might help a tiny tiny bit if you walk in for a job with the EXACT same skill as someone and they don't have a degree.... but portfolios are different from one another! It is a 100 times more important to improve that portfolio ...because if yours is a little bit ahead of the other guy, you will get the job (even if the other guy has a degree).

On the scale of things that get you work....

It's ability > experience > contacts > attitude > dress > hygiene > umm.... and then degree? maybe? I might be forgetting something!

[nauvice]

To the post above me, not going to even bother.

Just to get a few things clear as to why some of you are so frustrated:

1) Is it because you loved living under a rock where artists who dont go to school are the good hardworking citizens and those who do are spoiled lazy kids with a degree, but I contradict that?

2) Is it because deep down you know Im right when I say a hardworking artist with a degree has more of an advantage, and you hate the fact that Im so upfront about it?

Or 3) all of the above?

It wouldnt be so obvious if you had just said "well I dont go to school because I dont think its for me, best of luck to you, but I have my own goals." But noooo, comments were instead "Degrees dont mean anything LOLz, they're for people who do bare minimum! Im hard working artist!". "Hygiene is better than a degree! LOLz" You come off as bitter and secretly envious.

Like I said many times, I dont look down at you, I know plenty of Artists, Filmmakers, Bill Gates! etc. who dont care for school one bit. But when you're trashing those who do go to school and who do care about a degree, I am going to give my point of view. If you see it as me telling you you're wrong, Yes, I am doing just that. Be Happy with the fact that you dont need school, but dont trash those who do. And if you want to defend your choice, do it by mentioning the positives of it, not the negatives of the other choice like how useless a degree is.

[Ivory_Oasis]

Well, I am just going by what industry professionals have told me over and over and over (you know, the ones that actually do the hiring and the ones that have worked for a lot of top companies, that kind of know the business...I tend to trust them when they tell me something :)

As for me? Nope, I already have a degree (hurray!) ...though, not in art! It's a degree in accounting (wooooottt!). I know that I can get a job just with this piece of paper, I don't need to show I can actually do anything (double woot!! because I have forgotten so much! haha).

Why are you soooo confident in thinking that degrees are so important? Are your teachers telling you this?? Do they have real-world experience? Because, I haven't heard any real-world artists say "yes, a degree is important to landing a job"....

On the other hand! I have heard them tell say that being liked and "meshing" well is VERY important (so the moody anti-social artist that sits in a corner alone wouldn't be welcome to many art teams / jobs). Hence, hygiene and attitude and dress are very important! How you come across in an interview is going to go a LOT LOT LOT farther than your degree (just what I have been told by people who....have been there and lived it for years).

*shrug* but who knows. Maybe all those real-world artists have no clue what is really happening... maybe you, a student still learning, knows the industry better than those in it? o.O

[rinjii]

if i ever gave you the impression that a degree is useless, i apologize for that. heck, i'm still pursuing a BA in illustration because i know that's the only way i can both appease my folks who are preparing to fund me, and the only way my tiny country will know that i'm not talking out of my ass when i say i'm competent. but then again, as far as the arts are concerned, the bahamas is only just sticking its big toe out of the dark ages where only fine artists have their say in the world.

as it stands, i don't exactly plan on working in the bahamas in this stage of my life, or at least not by their rules- that's why my focus has been where my interests are, which led to my aforementioned information scouting from the various professionals both in my prospective fields and outside of it, and my receiving the info that where you've gotten your degree from doesn't guarantee you an easy job. and depending on who you ask they really won't give a rat's ass about what you have in hand [meaning the degree]. others may say that it does matter. it depends on who you're asking. most of the ones i've encountered have a 'meh, let's see what you can actually DO first' attitude to the age-old question about whether a degree matters. seems like this is the case for a lot of other CA members here, since we all seem to be aiming for the same line of work [sweeping generalization, i know- but it's not like we're talking about fine art here].

and while in a logical sense it may be that way in a lot of other jobs [like say, if you're trying to be an accountant- have fun trying for that job without a degree!], the whole degree > non-degree arguement just doesn't seem to work that way in the art world. all sorts of things can happen once we enter the working world- example: you can graduate top of your class with a masters in illustration, but your work may be shit- i mean REAL shit. and just because you have that piece of paper doesn't guarantee you the job some self-taught guy is eyeing as well. especially if their portfolio is far superior to your own. right or wrong?
you can also have the case where the degree may be the deciding factor- but it will only come down to that if there is NO way to tell who's artistically superior by portfolios alone.
you could even have the art student snob who thinks that their piece of paper is like gold itself and doesn't see the need for adapting their skills for their chosen field, and are then completely bypassed by the employer in favor of an almost-as-talented guy who is eager to learn and try new things and techniques to get the job done- and more importantly, doesn't have a stick in their ass about every little thing.

this one hiring scenario can go SO MANY WAYS. and it's really fucking pointless to bicker about petty things like that. criteria may differ, but that's about all that will differ. what IS set in stone that you gotta put up or shut up when seeking that job- and the ace in the hole is hardly ever the degree, but the portfolio you submit that'll truly say what you're capable of.

we are judged in school by the quality of our work and our work ethic and are graded, and one day even rewarded with the appropriate prize for that institution, be it a diploma, degree, or a simple certification and a pat on the back. we are hired based on our work ethic, our artistic ability and our willingness to do what may be uncomfortable/unfamiliar, and to employ whatever methods we may need to make what's unfamiliar, familiar. and if that ultimately means finding that perfect hand pose or profile to trace once and using that as a reference later on, along with practicing whenever you can get to- hey, do you gotta do. your employer isn't going to fire you for those few indiscretions. in other words, our ability to learn. there's no written guarantee that you'll automatically get that from anyone wielding a degree from anywhere. but you'll be pretty hard-pressed to find a serious, self-taught artist, or one who attended an institution that doesn't do degrees, that does NOT have any of those qualities when they're applying for a job.

by the way, i still haven't found the stats you keep asking for- any luck finding anything to counter what's been said yet? :)

[nauvice]

Ivory Oasis. Odd...you dont come off as boring (small accountant joke)

the only reason I sound like I'm so degree obsessed is because Im dont want to devalue it as much as sooo many people in this forum are doing. I was indifferent at first, but I felt it had to be defended.

But outside of that, the reason I am looking forward to my degree is I can show off to those who dont know the art industry (the ones who stare at abstract art and think "I can do this pfft", so that I wont seem uneducated in front of them; I'll have a degree from an accredited school. (But for those who dont even consider art schools as real schools I dunno how to deal with their ignorance yet.) A degree broadens my horizon basically. I can talk to people who would have otherwise judged and not take me seriously. Its just the name of the game and I'm conforming to it.

I agree with being social... Im trying really hard to stand up for myself while at the same time not come off as the Forum's asshole...

as for what the pros have said. Through school, I've met people who know the ins and outs of different segments of the Comic Industry. There isn't just one way of doing it, DC and Marvel's are not the Only definition of comic books. And those I've met have ranged from DC/Marvel background, Manga, Underground Comics, Newspaper cartoons, advertisement, TV shows etc. It helped me think outside the box, dream bigger... some people were offended because of my jab about penciling a superman comic... well what if you could create your own company and make your own comicbook character and have it become famous... I think the creators of your beloved superhero would be a lot more impressed in you if you could do the same thing they did rather than continuing the trend

[Arshes Nei]

I know. And Im probably guilty of it myself though I try not to do it. Doesn't stop me from calling someone out on it.



I agree with being social... Im trying really hard to stand up for myself while at the same time not come off as the Forum's asshole...



Try harder.

There were some posts that you were really insulting and rude to the people you replied to when they weren't that way to you. I am not talking about myself but you should look at how ugly some of your posts were to those members. You should apologize to those people.

Do that and you might lose the impression of being a "forum asshole" as you put it.

[Ivory_Oasis]

Hmm, if you are planning on starting your own company and comic and becoming famous out of school...well... that is really risky! (and you don't need a degree for any of that, you could try to do that right now).

Having big goals is good, but you have to walk before you try to run (along with having to pay the bills). Breaking into the industry (low level job) is normally the first step (and safest / most secure) ... and then you move your way up while learning the industry and making connections (working on your own projects if you can)... then, once you get a name and have sold something, you can split off and do your own thing.

It's not the only way to do something... but it is the most secure and I guess practical? Everyone wants to make it big, but there are bills to pay until that happens :P

[nauvice]

uhh wat? If I call out someone for assuming stuff, I am an ass??

If I offended people (And I mean them, not their ego...) they should call me out on it because I would and have already done the same, (I think one said I was being too defensive, and another kindly pm'd me and said not to get too frustrated)

rinjii, agreed. I think our misunderstanding is because I am looking beyond just the illustration/comic industries. Not familiar with Bahamas' rules, but yes, get experience where its available, and one day you will pioneer a new art revolution in that country.

uhh the burden of proof for those statistics is on you missy ;) ...I did look, I dont think there's something as specific as artists w/ degree vs artists w/out.