Is tracing cheating?

[Gary David Bouton]

I saw a very relevant article in the Times today on the "Masters" and how they used photography as a basis for painting.

Aren't we, as modelers, using reference material in the same way?

Check out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/16/ar...daysheadlines, or snag my pdf of the article.

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]

I saw a very relevant article in the Times today on the "Masters" and how they used photography as a basis for painting.

Aren't we, as modelers, using reference material in the same way?

Check out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/16/ar...daysheadlines, or snag my pdf of the article.

My Best,

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

[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]

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.

[Ross Macintosh]

This thing is showing zero downloads. I downloaded it hours ago and found it to be an interesting article.

It reminded me of Randy's fairly recent thread where he noted how laypeople tend to dismiss computer graphics relative to "real" drawing or painting.

I found it interesting that the NYTimes article started off trying to explain the issue in an unbiased way but ended up making the same value judgements. -- something about real genius. I had to laugh! As if Thomas Eakins wasn't one of the greatest artistic geniuses the USA has ever produced. (If you aren't familiar with him - search his work out. His work was amazing!).

Regards, Ross

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

[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]

[dalel]

It was to reinforce the need to develop a good eye and drawing skills, and to not be dependent on mechanical aids.

I have done some pretty good art by tracing, and doing that saved quite a lot of time, but I feel better about my art if I draw it freehand, because I can practice my drawing skills and keep them honed. (Such as they are.) [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]


Eye Site Web Design
Why, I’m afraid I can’t explain myself, sir, because I’m not myself, you know...
- Lewis Carroll

[s.winders]

I also dont trace,but if I remember rightly it was through tracing I was able to improve my drawing skills to the point where I no longer need to [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img] Sometimes I copy and flip horizontal {cg} to speed up my creative process while working on an image,so is that tracing?,because if it was a pencil sketch of say wings I would probably copy one side and flip it and then lightly pencil in the other wing if I was sketching the whole image,and I think lots of people do this,so can we say then that with CG tracing is ok if you already have the skills and it is to speed up your workflow?


Then there is copying,copying is so close to tracing it is not funny,but most artists use a form of copying for reference material and would argue black and blue that copying is not tracing.I have heard of people who will not ever use a ruler,personally I think that is there loss and it brings us back to tracing once more which to my mind is more about elitism then it is about learning art.I dont feel learners should be totally discouraged from tracing as long as it is not relied on,but for instance there is no better way to learn to draw a cartoon when you are beginning then to trace the image over and over,after a while it becomes ingrained and you no longer need to trace anything [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]


There a few artists here in NZ whose paintings have sold for a million or so,but I dont like their work,70% of the population dont understand their work or like it,so is this common place because a - these are talented artists,personally I dont think so,but that is only my opinion,so is it b - desirable because people dont understand it and want something different,or is it c- people know other people dont understand it and desire it,so therefore it is an asset which appreciates,so I believe these people would desert these artists in a heart beat as soon as thier art became not of a stable monetary value anymore,so ipso facto elitism is about money not art.


An example of what I am speaking about would be dark paint strokes on a piece of corrugated iron,and people pay huge sums for this simply because of the name at the bottom,which again ipso facto equals dollar signs more then appreciation of the work itself,which is sad [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]


Stu.

[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

[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>