If you use a specific pose or a portion of someone else's work exactly, then that's bad. But if you're painting a tree, for example, and you go on google images to find examples of bark textures, then you don't owe those photographers anything.
I think it's something we all struggle with, but definitely tracing is to be avoided, as is modification without permission. Generally, when I think of referencing, I think of using multiple resources and inspiration, to create a unique composition and vision. If anything smacks of familiarity in the end, I always make sure to cite my references
Btw, just a tip: In the future when making your forum posts, you might want to put some spacing and paragraph separations in. It can be difficult to read a whole wall of text Good topic though
Sorry for the "wall of text" but formatting on these things is a pain because the margin changes from when you're writing and after you post so then the text gets all screwy.
yes there is the preview button but sorry I get lazy sometimes and I don't feel like having to go back and forth every time I type something to fix the formatting. It's extra work that shouldn't have to be done if the margins would just stay the same as before and after I post.
rustyironmongerFeatured By OwnerJan 2, 2013Hobbyist General Artist
IMHO it's best to use Creative Commons-, free- or GNU-licensed images from Wikimedia Commons, purchasing stock images from a reputable source like Shutterstock, 123RF and Getty Images, or use stock from here on dA, reference the original creator, any other sites the image is found on and any licensing terms, and if the stock is found here on dA, obey any terms that the uploader sets.
I would not mess around with ANYTHING from Google Images or any other image search engine unless it comes from stock categories or derivative works-allowed Creative Commons on dA, or is from Wikimedia Commons that has free, GNU or Creative Commons licensing allowing for derivative works.
That depends on the jurisdiction and how good the attorneys are. I remember reading about a rather ridiculous suit in the UK, where any pictures taken of a bus in front of Big Ben was considered to infringe if the image made use of selective color technique.
If you're copying the composition you run the risk of creating a derivative work and all that entails legally.
Really, it's better to squash things from 3 to 2 dimensions yourself, or make your own reference. That way you don't have to worry about infringement.
Blackrosekane89Featured By OwnerJan 3, 2013Professional General Artist
I remember that case! There was a bit more to it though then just the same composition. The issue really was that the guy had admitted to copying the man's work before. So when the big Ben/bus/selective coloring came about they didn't believe it was a coincidence since the man had admittedly copied the exact same photographer's work before.
Well, yeah, but it doesn't really change the fact that the judges gave ownership over an entire type of image to the plaintiff without properly considering whether or not it was justifiable.
Photography is a rather sensitive business in terms of copying, but the conclusions were utterly ludicrous. I saw both images and they both had buses, Big Ben and selective coloring, but compositionaly they were hardly identical.
I live in China right now and any DVDs I buy are counterfeit. I don't think you can even buy legitimate copies anywhere. Or at least I haven't seen any. They'll often times be ripped from TV stations complete with the network logo at the bottom. The quality of the packaging is often times fantastic as well.
I shouldn't derail things too much, but it's pretty much completely different in every way. Sometimes that's good, but sometimes it drives me completely nuts. I think the difference between relatively strict scheduling in the US and near complete absence of schedules in China is a good example.
What I mean is that even for things like their National Day which is the same day every single year, they can never seem to tell me when that's going to be until a couple days before. I'll regularly show up for classes and find that I don't have to teach at all.
And trying to set up a meeting, oh my, people will generally show up at + or - 15 minutes if they show up at all without necessarily any rhyme or reason.
Are you sure your "people" are not just taking advantage? Is there any risk that they'll lose their job? Are these meeting mandatory? What exactly do you teach? Also what do you mean by your "people". Do they work for you?
all kidding aside, this reminds me of something that occurred to me in Miiverse, on the Wii-U. i posted several doodles on there, some of which got terrific responses from players, the best of which seemed to be those that were copied from existing images, stuff like Dragon Ball and such. But then ONE little troll came along, and says "you should draw your own stuff instead of just copying"...which is funny, cuz not ALL my doodles HAVE been copies. Nevertheless the folks in the comments came to my defense, and i checked out this guy's own doodles, and while they were indeed very very good, there WAS one that was a copy of a Mario sprite, so i told him to practice what he preaches. To which he tried to justify himself by saying "that's different, cuz drawing straight lines is very difficult and time-consuming on this gamepad", which is just hiding behind an excuse. So i said "look, i put time and effort into my own 'copies', cuz it's not easy to draw ANYTHING on this thing. besides, these are just DOODLES. if i want to showcase my real art, i have a DA page for that." Not long after that, the jerk's comments were removed, i wasn't even the one who reported him.
Regardless, my copied doodles have gotten great responses, but i don't see them as infringement. They are most certainly more than 20% different because a) it's very hard to draw anything on the Wii U gamepad, the stylus has to be very precise, you hand can end up leaning on the screen which makes it thinks you're dragging the stylus, etc; and b) everything comes out pixilated on Miiverse. But the joy i get out of those is not to be able to say "hey, look what i was able to draw all by myself! i'm gooood!", but more to elict positive responses using recognizable imagery, and perhaps put a spin of humor on them by writing something next to them or something.
So if you want to copy from an existing image, which i did all the time back in high school, it helped me learn, it should be good as long as it doesn't look 100% EXACTLY like the original, if it looks like YOU drew it and not the original Artist. But there's a double-edged sword to that. This same troll from before, hiding behind his "straight lines are hard on this" excuse, said "if you were able to perfectly copy a Rembrandt, i'd have more respect for you." To which i realized, yea, there IS that. Artists CAN get some recognition and respect if they can perfectly copy something, as long as they acknowledge that it's a copy and not their original. Take a look at the ending of Monkey Business, the Marx Bros. film, the exact same thing happens.
well here's the damned thing: it seems to applying to the Z portion of the series, which i find outrageous. Not that i don't like Z, i love it, but here's the thing: in japan the manga was always...ALWAYS...known simply as Dragon Ball. Z was a title change they came up with specifically for the anime, and i can't STAND it when people treat Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z as two separate series, with Dragon Ball being labeled as "oh, that's the EARLIER series, it wasn't as cool as Z". *middle finger to those people* By that logic, we should all treat Sailor Moon, Sailor Moon R, Sailor Moon S, Sailor Moon Super S, and Sailor Stars all as 5 separate series.....oh wait, we DON'T. cuz it's the SAME damn series. so why does Dragon Ball Z get this treatment all the damn time? ><
That's a shame. Truthfully my Dragon Ball experience is rather limited. As a kid I watched DBZ but it was right smack in the middle of things so I never quite got what was going on. However I still say the theme song is one of the sweetest theme songs ever: Rock The Dragon. Also I read some of Dragon Ball the early volumes at the library at one point so I'm slightly more familiar with that but really I need to read the whole thing through and I like to do so by buying the volumes and reading the actual books. Though right now I don't have the budget to do so (and there's other series I want to get as well). Now I could just read it online and I'm not gonna lie and say that I'm above that. However from my experience I find that nothing beats print and it's worth the cost. Anyhow I'm just saying all that so you know where I'm coming from.
I see DB and DBZ as the same story. If I'm not mistaken Dragon Ball is about Goku's early life and then Dragon Ball Z is when Goku is older. I see it in the same way as Naruto and Naruto Shippuden. Same story but the main character is older.
Series where I would say it's a different story (I think) would be Yu-Gi-Oh as you'll have the original with Yugi Mutou and then there's Yu-Gi-Oh GX with Jaden Yuki.
Then you got stuff like JoJo's Bizarre Adventure where each part has a new protagonist and new enemy but all the protagonists are related to one another and all the villains are loosely connected somehow. However while you could read each as separate stories...it really helps to read in order as you won't be like "what the heck are they talking about?"
As someone who likes to read stuff from the beginning I too find it a shame that they are starting with DBZ. It kinda makes you feel short changed. Oh well.
While remember Sailor Moon on tv when I was little I don't remember that show (probably because I changed the channel) and I haven't read the manga of that either. Actually that is another I want to try reading. Now yes it is Shojo though as an aspiring comic book writer I think it's a good idea to read lots of different genres. Broaden my horizons. That said don't expect me to start reading Twilight or watch Brokeback Mountain anytime soon. Lol. I'm not THAT open minded.
Also I got an interesting question about Dragon Ball though I'll post it on your profile as to not derail this thread any further.
But what determines "looks like"? Because there's stuff that looks EXACTLY like the original work except for a minor tweak here or there and yet it does not violate copyright infringement and other stuff that is changed majorly but does get sued.
Ah, that depends on how good your lawyer is, and how good their lawyer is. There is some technical case law definition of how much must be changed, but that is really going to boil down to what the courts say.
Legal and getting sued are two different things. People sell pokemon fanart all the time, it is illegal, but I have never heard of legal action being taken against any of them.