| Author |
|
Robert Shepherd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 March 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1268
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 2:19pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
This image was posted in another topic but it got me thinking. Is this a swipe, an homage, or just using photo reference?
I tend to think it is not a swipe or homage, and thusly using photo reference. I did overlay the photo over the illustration, in photoshop, and the proportions do not line up, so the artist did not trace the figure (as far as I can tell).
So what do you guys think? Swipe, Homage, or Reference?
I can see the photographer having a copyright claim made as the illustration clearly pulled enough of the photo that it is obvious the photo is the original source. Is it only ok to use photo reference if it was a photo you took? What about royalty free photos? Can they be used as reference so blatantly?
Thoughts?
 Save
Edited by Robert Shepherd on 29 March 2018 at 2:21pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Steve Coates
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 November 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 763
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 2:30pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
Remember the drawing is photographed on an angle, not perpendicular to the surface..
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Nathan Greno
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 9154
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
Personally, I'd call that photo reference.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robert Shepherd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 March 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1268
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 3:03pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
Remember the drawing is photographed on an angle, not perpendicular to the surface..
***
Yeah I thought of that too. Or the artist made some minor tweaks in photoshop, like the angle of the arms. So it is still possible he traced the pose.
Honestly, it looks traced to me, but I don't know the artist or his work - maybe he is that good.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Eric Ladd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4506
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 3:08pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
I would call the above instance photo reference. If the model was in studio while the artist worked would we be more or less forgiving? I struggle to define the differences between blatant swiping and artistic use of photo reference. But I will say that the controlled shading with a pencil is very skillful and impossible for me to discount. When drawing and rendering lifelike images, photo reference is very helpful to convincingly do the shadows.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15877
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 4:23pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
To me, it goes beyond photo reference.
Are the artistic decisions here made by the original photographer (who receives no credit from the artist) or by the artist?
For me, overwhelmingly every artistic decision about the pose of the body has been made by those who created the photo.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mitch Denoyer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 September 2006
Posts: 135
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 5:04pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
From my understanding, there would not even be s copyright claim. The artist could make a solid case there is a substantial difference between the two works. One is a photo of a guy in athletic shorts, the other is Batman with a cityscape in his cape. The average person would not be confused as to whether the two works were from the same source.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15877
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 6:53pm | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
The two works are not from the same source, because one is the source.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15877
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 6:55pm | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
And a swipe is not about legal copyright, it's about taking someone else's work and using it as crutch for your own. Which clearly, clearly is happening here.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve Coates
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 November 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 763
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 7:21pm | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
Considering the photo is from a supplier of stock photography, we must presume, with good intentions, the artist purchased the photograph and was using it within the licence agreement.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Robert Shepherd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 March 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1268
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 7:25pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
I think (for me) it all depends on if the artist freehanded this or not. Artists use photo reference all the time - even masters use reference. The challenge with this image is that it looks traced. So either the artist traced it (which is bad), or he may be good enough to replicated it (which is good). It's no different than an artist drawing an ultra real rendering of a black and white portrait. Some artists are so good you can't tell. They are still freehanded, so in my book counts as original art.
I have no clue if a judge would agree or not.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15877
|
| Posted: 29 March 2018 at 7:53pm | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
Considering the photo is from a supplier of stock photography, we must presume, with good intentions, the artist purchased the photograph and was using it within the licence agreement. ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------- Even presuming that, it covers the copyright angle only. It doesn't mean it's not a swipe. Covering the legal angle does not mean you shouldn't still at least mention the artist's eye that first lined-up the image.
Is it too much to ask that the artist make a note of 'after...X'
Edited by Peter Martin on 29 March 2018 at 7:54pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
