Is tracing cheating?

[s.winders]

Nothing Ross,theres nothing wrong with that [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]


So it looks like the people who brought this fraud angle in were simply jealous of his talent,reference or not.I would also asume that if it was not about photo reference the same people would find something else to moan about in his work...tall poppy syndrome.


Stu.

[Judi A]

Ahem! Ross I think using a photo as a reference vs. using a photo to trace are entirely two different things.

Photos used as a reference are sometimes the only way to go. Say you are doing a portrait of a celbritry or head of state. If you are lucky the person will maybe have time for a few sittings and the artist has to take mega photos to "refer to" to complete the picture.

As far as actually tracing I cannot pass judgement as to it being cheating, but it sure does say something about the artist's lack of drawing skills and lack of ability to really see what you are looking at and trnaslate that onto paper or canvas.

[Ross Macintosh]

My comments that follow aren't directed at anyone. I include them only to add to the discussion...

You guys write of being instructed at a tender age that tracing things was bad. That's probably true of most people - myself included. Who taught us that and on what authority did they have?? The idea permeates our culture. I think it is all tied up in the silly concepts our culture has about talent. It is incredibly popular to see talent as some 'God-given' ability. (Many of you probably believe you are talented even if you won't admit it - it isn't politically correct to claim talent: It amounts to saying that you are better than others. That you are a chosen one). "Talent" weeds out those with special God-given abilities from all those who are just wanna-bees. For many, it would seem, the badge of being described as talented by others drives them "appear" so. With God-given talent it isn't necessary to trace. Photographic references aren't needed either. The popular culture and view of artistic talent supports this attitude. Consequently many "artists" either have a deep aversion to such things; or do it, but hide the practice for fear of being thought of as some kind of fraud. Many artists have vast collections of reference clippings, and own slide projectors, opaque projectors, and now digital cameras for reference purposes.

In the article Thomas Eakins was 'exposed' as having used photographic references. The fact is he was perhaps the most brilliant perspectivist the world has ever known. He could, without any doubt, have painted without using photographs. The guy was one of the most technically perfect painters ever. His composition and perspective were incredibly studied aspects of his work. Incidentally, and significantly, Eakins believed (and preached) that practically anyone could learn to paint as well as he did if they had the right instruction and motivation.

Why did Eakins use photographic references? Why not is the better question. No doubt it was easier and lessened the time needed to create one of his realist paintings. I suspect the final result mattered to him far more than the route to it. I rather doubt he ever thought his using a photograph was cheating as he would have been well aware that he (and others too) were capable of painting the same scenes without them. His work had an agenda. That agenda wasn't to prove to others how talented he was. The final painting is what mattered. Photographic aids likely just helped to get the painting finished sooner.

Sooner equals more great paintings. What's wrong with that? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

[Erik Heyninck]

So this makes Titian a designer? Remember that when Emperor Charles Quint of Habsburg wanted Titian to paint his portrait he did not go himself but sent another painted portrait instead?

Ahhh, and all the paintings made by the sons, grandsons and sons in law of the great Pieter Brueghel the Elder are designers because they re-used their forefather's themes?

If I had to start again and had to study anatomy for the first time, I would LOVE to have this Poser4 with this DAZ Michael with the muscle texture. You can turn it around, see how the muscles bend etc in 3D...
I agree that I would not feel really comfortable with those "characters" because they would lack a foundation, namely: my inability to create one myself. (Fractal generators give me the same feeling: they make me feel tense because I can't write my own formulae.)
BUT it would give me the extra energy needed to attack the problem and do something about it. Too much art nowadays is based on what hasn't been done yet because the proud human mind always wants something new so as not to get bored. And it gets bored because it never ever observed something as it is, but only as it already knew it. It collects knowledge but art has got nothing in common with that. Knowledge is the surface, art is the ocean.

About Poser II: I know an incredible artist ( www.studioronin.com Christopher Shy) who simply states that he can't use a 3D app, so he uses Poser for his figures.

Besides: I challenge anyone to trace a black and white photograph and then to shade it with a simple pencil, with Photoshop or Xara or Illustrator or Painter. I say unto you: if you are not able to visualise the underlying structure of a skull and the muscles, the tissues and hairs you won't be able to get an acceptable liking.

Guilt and Pride, two concepts that will limit you forever and ever because they cling to ego. And when ego is involved, Inspiration is hiding in another galaxy. What we desperately *need* to find back is the ability to work together like the guilds of medieval times but then charged with the electrifying energy of contemporary life and its dazzling possibilities.

[Crow Haven]

for learning and performing music...think about all the works that are played that are not of the performer's own composing...there may be some variations and differences in style...but people don't get after you for playing another's composition...

Why is it so different for children to practice drawing by using examples to learn from? I don't know how it got started, but the "tracing is bad" is entrenched in the schools. If you take up music you are spared this treatment...I escaped via piano... [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

---As The Crow Flies!---
Maya

[Ross Macintosh]

Gary can you try reattaching the pdf. If I try to download it I get a "broken gif" error.

I realize I could follow the link to the NYTimes but I'd have to register - which I don't want to do.

Regards, Ross

<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>

[Gary David Bouton]

Hi Brett..

I think we may conclude then that Poser has a limited use in realistic works, and no use whatsoever in abstract expressions, right?

I have no problem digesting this thought at all, as an artist.

And lacking children, I don't get called on my originality very often, with the exception of my extremely precocious 7 year old nephew!


My Best,

Gary David Bouton
Gary@GaryDavidBouton.com
Free education! The Writings Web site
and the updated GaryWorld Gallery is pretty okay, too.

[Gary David Bouton]

Zipping or using StuffIt usually cures the "busted up file" syndrome with the net...

see attached.

Gary David Bouton
Gary@GaryDavidBouton.com
Free education! The Writings Web site
and the updated GaryWorld Gallery is pretty okay, too.

[Crow Haven]

but as you say, Ross, in the end the writer alludes to the same 'ol thing about "genius"...

The question of whether tracing is "cheating" is up to the individual. The question is put to you very early in life--or at least was to me in grade school--as to whether when you create something others really like if you "copied" it or "traced" it...almost as if they want to find a way to discount what you've done. From this early experience came a motivation to never trace anything...so many times the question would arise, and I had to "prove" to others that I drew without tracing. To this day, I do not trace anything...but not because I think it's wrong or some such thing, but because of what everyone "expected" of me in that regard and how people, and even other kids in school, perceived it.

The bottom line, it seems to me at least, ought to be about the final result of the artwork---no matter what tools were used, does it achieve what the artist desired? It's all I care about in the final analysis...but that "stigma" of tracing is strong and I still won't do it! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[randyrives]

Tracing is cheating if you pass it off as a drawing by you. (guess as Maya pointed out that has been drilled into my head all through school) Tracing is a great learning tool, and should be used as such. I should note that the above is referring to tracing someone else's work.

Tracing a photo you took and then painting that tracing is a somewhat different matter. The entire work is yours. You capture the image onto film, with your own view of the object. Then transferred it to another medium. While this may be grey area, I think it is ok.

I akin tracing, to using someone else's model in your 3D scene. Nothing wrong with it, but I think it should be noted that the model's were not yours, and give credit to the artist that created the model. For that reason I very rarely used pre-made models. I model everything my self.

This is all just my personal views. Art is to subjective to be so ridgely defined. I would not reject a piece of art that I liked simply because it started out as a tracing. I would simply admire it for its on beauty. I would however hold a higher opinon of an artist who did everthing freehand over one that traced, providing everything else was equal. For I feel it takes more talent, so therefore I would admire the artist more for his hard work.

--Randy R