Musings

[wredwrat]

On the subject of style copying from another artist: once or twice is flattering, any more after that it would be a courtesy to mention the original artist otherwise it starts becoming awkward for people who can see where the influence stemmed from.

Thoughts?

Comments

[silverhalo]

... out of nothing more than curiosity, where did this thought stem from? (if you're worried about causing wank or something, feel free to PM me.) i'm just curious if it's some random rip-off artist you're speaking of, or a world-famous artist, or something else?

and please don't misunderstand this, but i think what you're saying is a bit unfair, since i really feel like influences are a subtle/subconscious thing for most artists? :< artists 'channel' many different styles in their careers, and sometimes they don't even realize it at the time. so long as the artist isn't actively LOOKING AT someone else's work while they draw, who is to say that they have stolen anything

[amei]

This issue was my fault, albiet not directly, but it has been resolved now

[silverhalo]

well sure, in that case then i agree completely~ :) but what you're describing sounds like an intentional rip, where the person ACTIVELY TRIES to emulate another artist's style - by studying all the techniques and materials they're using? perhaps i misinterpreted wredwrat's comment, but the implication seemed to be that since "once or twice is flattering," it couldn't possibly have been a full-out "style rip"?

these days, really obvious cases like tracing or stealing multiple concepts would just be "caught" right away, once someone recognized the source. and nobody is defending things like that. @_@ but if you view an artist's work, and then file away the knowledge gained for later use, i hardly think you are a thief! D:

annnyyyyway, don't mind me, i'm just having a bit of fun thinking about these things~ i checked out your journal and was rather impressed by your art, btw :) hope your fever gets better soon!

[amei]

but if you view an artist's work, and then file away the knowledge gained for later use, i hardly think you are a thief! D:

Yeap I agree with you there! I don't think anyone here would dispute this! (and given wrat's track record, certainly not her of all people!) If not we'd all be hypocrites and thieves! XD A lot of folks, me and wrats included, due to circumstance or geography, don't have any formal art education, so we learn by doing studies, then intergrating what we learned into what we currently know. So rest assured that's not what she meant by this post, though I can see how it might be read differently :)

The situation that triggered this post has been resolved outside of this entry so I really wish to avoid dragging it up.

Aw thanks, I'm really flattered. I shall now commence to be an openly creepy stalker, as opposed to just a creepy stalker. (has liked your art since months ago) :)

[blankd]

I think for an artist's majorly used style it is best to list the influences in a profile section.

If there are special liberties/efforts are taken to purposely emulate something then yeah, listing it would be best, especially if that artist respects that style or method. :)

Though personally I find where the influence came from doesn't really detract from the piece if the artists doesn't mention it. Of course if the thing in question borderlines some variation of tracing/plagiarism that's another issue entirely.

s/n: Uh hi, I lurk and watch you for your awesome postings so don't mind me too much.

[wredwrat]

hey there! Yea, when it boils down to it, I think that it's just a matter of respecting the other artist by just mentioning when their work influences yours. Thanks for your thoughts! :D

[_leareth]

Major influences should probably be mentioned in an artist profile somewhere, for interest's sake if nothing else. If a specific piece is heavily influenced from something or somewhere, put it in the piece's accompanying description. Helps ward off any claims of plagiarism and the dramu that tends to follow, whether it be at the internetz level or Wynne Prize level. Anything beyond emulating a style that crosses into actual copying, you might have a copyright infringement claim.

/need to turn off work brain

[miconazole]

If you're pretty much lifting the style directly from someone else then yeah I guess, if for no other reason then at least so anyone who digs the style can check out more of it. I wouldn't call it plagiarism not to, though. More just... bad form? It's like suddenly dressing exactly like someone else, kinda weird.

[wredwrat]

T^Tb You say it so succinctly, yes, that's exactly it. Nail on the head. Like a fashion faux pas.

[wensleydale]

I think many artists, when asked, will cite their influences. Though I might be giving people too much credit in this, considering how much plagiarism goes on over the interwebz (like Todd Goldman and recently Nick Simmons.)

I don't know if there's an easy solution to this though! I know dA profiles have 'favorite artists' which seems like the spot to put stylistic influences, though I'm with you that if a particular piece is an obvious attempt to ape another's style, it should be tagged as such. I mean, any musicians who sample other works are supposed to pay royalties, though even that system has obviously not worked out (and let's not get into shitty shitty watered-down versions of bands, like Owl City ripping everything from Postal Service).

[wredwrat]

oh man, the Nick Simmons case. *facepalm*
Yea agreed, as a general rule I feel that if it's way out of your usual modus operandi and it's pretty obvious, just cite the influence.