The thin line between original and plagiarism

[Xaya]

well, what i want to know is,
if there is a border of copying "elements" of others artists work in your own.
When i look at some sketchbooks here,
and get inspired of doing something similar
and make it buyable is this acceptable?
I couldn´t do this, but i think really interested how you think about it.
So if you see a wounderful sketch by a artist for example
and work this out, ok? no?

Another thing is photography.
Copy elements or even poses from photos (professional ones)
Legal?

I myself want to do my own stuff,
without reference when possible.
But if you would take something from other work directly in your own (or with small changes...?
well i don´t know...?
what about copyright in this case?

THX

Xaya

[gasmask]

everyone is copying everyone else, their are no new ideas, everything we do is inspired by something, just as long as u dont make a direct copy of a piece.

[Imp Head]

Personally I'd have to agree with gasmask. We are essentially the sum of our life thus far. All of our experiences or influences, even our day to day actions play a role in what and how we produce. In fact I would further hypothesize that we are wholly incapable of producing anything that isn't cobbled together from bits and pieces of our lives. In short, how can you create something from resources you don't have?

So saying that, it's no wonder that elements of other's artwork appear in our own. We make art to express ourselves. If there is something in another's art that you feel a kinship to then it's not surprising that you then incorporate it into your own art to express yourself better. I myself can accredit many of the things I do in no small way to others that came before. Some of them are more readily apparent than other, (Thanks Jon Foster!) but they are all in there regardless.

The true key to the whole thing however, is to take those elements and create something new. By religiously mimicking another's style without taking it in a new direction or putting your own "spin" on it is pointless. In short, it's been done, why do it again?

In the end it's really the intent of the artist that's most important. The next time you find yourself copying a picture or finding yourself aping someone's style, ask yourself this, "Am I creating something new?" and if not then, "What am I, or anyone else for that matter, gaining from this?"

[darth massacre]

I kinda agree with both of em.

Gasmask simplified it though. I'm always looking at real world designs before restructuring it during drawing. Some concepts don't change, its the individual's way of interpreting it that makes a difference. But we're talking art here eh, once we get to patents its a whole different story.

[Red_Rook]

"Good artists copy. Great artists steal" – Picasso

its a very fine line, but nothing is original, were not that creative, even if you come up with something completely new its a recombination of natural elements youve seen to create somthing unique.

[GhostofMacbeth]

These aren't mine but are sort of paraphrasing from a couple of artists "Just draw, don't think about it or copy your mistakes and shorthand make a style of your own" and "No matter what, your infulences will be there, you wear them on your sleeve but don't try to copy, just draw and draw some more" ... I am sleepy so they aren't as correct a quote as I have remembered in the past but that is the gist.

[JoshuaTheJames]

I find the difference between people who say "everything has been done" and people who create great fresh work to be very interesting.


It's not as simple as saying everything has been done.

-JtJ

[Red_Rook]

im not saying that joshua, (if your implying me :O) People take elements that have been made to recombine em to make somthing new. Some people call it inspiration :)

[Prometheus|ANJ]

I think there was a similar discussion in a thread some time ago.

Regardless of how I come up with a detail (happy accident, copied something cool I saw) there's always a lot of tweaking and morphing that happens over time. After a few years I will probably have forgot where I got it from, and no one will be able to guess either.

Quite a few classical pieces of art might be the result of plagiarizing though? The artists back then often went to exibitions and 'studied' other painter's work. After 500 years, does it matter as long as the painting is good?

It's the 'stealing credit of someone else's research and profiting from it' part that's bad and unfair. Well, usually, if you can't come up with an idea of your own you'll do a bad piece anyways. If you're good enough at painting, you'll probably be able to come up with ideas aswell.


On the quote side:

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Albert Einstein

[Daunting]

I don't know many people that never ever used photo reference and still become successful in art. I mean of course there were because that's all they had back in the old renaissance days but for your own learning and study copy everything you want. But of course as everyone knows passing yourself stuff as your own original work even though it's someone elses idea and product is bad. I mean me personally even a finished peice off of a copyrighted painting or photograph for a face or something exactly like it is is kind of cutting it for me. But oh well retarded people will sell art to retarded people... Just hate it that most art patrons are retards...

[N D Hill]

I don't like the idea of people symplifying this issue so much by saying a little bit of stealing is okay or speaking as if there's some concrete rule. Yes everything is inspired in someway by what we observe throughout our lives. Naturally your work is going to reflect upon things that have some sort of impact on you. I had a sociology professor who unkowingly explained all of this perfectly. Basically it all ties into the concept of symbolic interaction. The only reason language of any kind works is because people observe a symbol and agree as to what meaning is associated with it. Art works in much the same way. If we want to evoke a particular response from a viewer, we need to be in agreement with our viewer as to what elements have the particular meaning we want to convey. The way I see it, there are two ways to handle inspiration: you can use it to expand your own horizons and to help you get your own ideas across, or you can simply try to ride on the coat tails of someone else and hope a little bit of their success will rub off. Let's face it. If you can't do something new, than what's the point?

[jfrancis]

If you were making a major computer-animated feature film about super heroes, would you design a character that stretches? or one that has the exact combination of powers being a mix of force fields and invisibility? Would you have a hero who can surf around on self-generated ice? Would you have one that can run really fast?

If someone here presented a bunch of heroes with those powers, what would you say?

Fair game? Or not?

[Xaya]

You have good aspects about this theme.

At my school, (german kind of secondary school of design called
Fachoberschule für Gestaltung), some student copy as hell
or are really supported to copy.
The funny thing is that when i walk through the hall of the school
and seeing the "work" of the young adults, one of four includes elements from famous photographies (the girl at the cover of National Geographic)
drawings of art-education books or all kind of illustrations.
Copied even in a horrible way.

Well i don´t know why this kids do this, to less imagiation to do some own stuff? Not skilled enough to draw human beings correctly so they think they have to copy?

I myself wouldn´t be happy about doing something like this,
because as artist (well i am not one) you want to create something "new".

At the end i have to say that only a few students who go to this school
want to do something artistic in their future... so perhabs another point for explanation.

Xaya

[Daunting]

Well when I say it's bad it's just my kind of bad. I have no influence over most people that will copy something so my view really isn't worth a grain of salt to most people. However... people like things simple and easy lol.

[JoshuaTheJames]

im not saying that joshua, (if your implying me :O) People take elements that have been made to recombine em to make somthing new. Some people call it inspiration :)


I wasn't pionting any fingers. I was just posting a thought. :teeth:

-JtJ

[Darrell Bowman]

my teacher did a book cover and copied the image from a photo exact
with out changing anything got sued a million dollars from photographer.
so ya u want to be very carefull.
getting inspired is one thing or getting reference but
make it ur own.

[emily g]

Xaya,

Young art students (high school to early university) will often go through a phase where they copy a lot of photographs. I went through this stage myself and did a few drawings from photos. Usually the student is just learning how to use their pencil (or paint), and they have just figured out that they can "make something that looks just like the photo!"
Now, I look at a lot of photos for reference, but I NEVER copy the photo exactly unless I took the photo myself. When someone looks at my picture, I hope they will never guess that I used a photo.

If I copy another artist's work, I will do it for practice only. I want to learn about how that other artist works. I am often inspired by other artists--I may think, "That's a great way to draw a nose," or "That's a really creative costume." I may incorporate this inspiration into my work, but I will never copy it directly.
Just about everybody looks to others for inspiration. That is how the art world continues to grow. If we were never inspired by another's work, we might get stuck doing the same thing over and over again. It's exciting to see how other people solve problems in ways you had never thought about.

emily

[jester]

We all are standing on the shoulders of giants.

Even this sentence isn't from me...

I feel as long as it's for learning purposes and as long as you don't decorated yourself with stolen feathers, copying is ok.

Jester