Is tracing cheating?

[Erik Heyninck]

And because we Europeans see nudity as natural: (besides: I don't suppose there's more of her left than a skeleton by now...)

When early nineteenth century's romanticism invented the superhuman creature called "artist", they reduced the inspired craftsman to something the bored bourgeosie could base their shallow daydreams on... I have photographs Mucha used, just like there are photographs Delacroix and Degas used...

Hey: we love when we play...break those rules that limit you. Do it. Now.



[This message was edited by Erik Heyninck on June 20, 2002 at 14:48.]

[This message was edited by Erik Heyninck on June 20, 2002 at 14:49.]

[This message was edited by Erik Heyninck on June 20, 2002 at 14:50.]

[s.winders]

Nice Erik [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]


The last woodcut is on fore shortening is it not?


Stu.

[bmh216]

Ross, I understand Poser better in the context of a "posing doll". But people have turned it into more than that, and not always do they admit that the model is not their own. Modelling humans is very difficult (for me at least) and complex, and using a pre-made model in that fashion reeks of plagiarism. It is someone else's model, even if it is packaged in a nice GUI that allows you to pose, move, animate, etc. Yeah, I know, royalty-free, yada yada, but I won't use them for that very reason. And, I don't consider that merely a "shortcut". A shortcut makes my job easier, it doesn't do the job for me. I could drive screws with my bare hands if I really had to, but ahhh, someone invented the screwdriver. I can use it without guilt, and still look at the deck I built with pride. Subtle but significant difference.

Gary, I didn't mean to attach a "bad connotation" to the Poser name. It has its' place. I just don't like un-credited use of it. The term "poser" is used by todays' youth in a "poseur" sense. In their jargon, a poser is someone who is attempting to be something he/she is not. I just thought the name kind of rang true to the concept, at least in the "plug the model into a scene and call it your own" sense.

You state "These products I speak of are assistants to the mature, competent designer--and not "push button art"." Which products do you mean? With all due respect, I lost ya a bit there. Also, I draw a (fine) line between "designer" and "artist". The designer might use elements of others work by necessity of their occupation, with total integrity to the "design". The "artist" is on his own. His choice to use/not use elements created by others is his own. I personally cannot use "pre-fab" to create an image and then shamelessly call it my own, without noting my use of (what I consider) someone else's model.

Gary, your image is nice. I like the composition, I like the concept, all very well done. However, if it were my image, I would have to note to whomever may give me credit for it that "I used pre-made models for the humans". Just my personal opinion. But the concept, execution, etc. is all your own, so the work you've done shouldn't go unnoticed just because of the use of Poser. It's a double-edged sword.

Enough rambling, (sorry so long), let's make art!

Brett

[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.

[Mike Bailey]

The poser program I have leaves a lot to be desired. The models look pretty screwed up and are not suitable to just plug into an image, They are bald and naked, the hair models really suck, so does the clothing. It usually takes a lot of work in a paint progam to fix one up. Getting a realistic looking pose is not as easy as you may think it is.

[Gary David Bouton]

Let me pleasae qualify what I posted earlier.
A "push-button art" program could be Poser, Xara 3D, CorelDRAW and its clipart collection (any clip art collection, to be fair), and the Gallery Effects filters that come with Photoshop. Oh yeah, and the autoclone feature in Painter.

All of the above can be used by a non-artist to create interesting stuff to inkjet print and then post on the refrigerator.

By "skilled and mature", I mean that I, and others, don't use the presets (remember when every picture from Bryce looked the same? That sunset with the mountains? Presert #23?), but instead take a look at the porgram's features for what they really are. A helpful shortcut here and there. Isn't computer graphics supposed to be a symbiosis where the artist saves time and agony by "plugging in"? If not, I'd best go back to my charcoals! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

As far as Poser goes, I invite everyone to try to do an animation, with sound track using the phonyme base Poser offers. It's not as simple as a program that generates plastic-looking bald people! I'm doing a little animation these days, specifically 3D animation, and I WISH I had a program that would help me track the camera while things animate--to get a realistic camera move while objects are moving.

All I'm trying to say is that it can be as hard or as simple as you make it.

Check out

http://www.daz3d.com/pages/gallery/gallerymain.html

to see what creative, skilled people are doing with Poser and DAZ (the model supplier now).


My Best,

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

[bmh216]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Isn't computer graphics supposed to be a symbiosis where the artist saves time and agony by "plugging in"? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I agree. I think "saves time and agony" does not equate to "uses someone else's model". Sure, it saves "time and agony". But I personally cannot consider it "my" work if I do that. And yes, alot of people can and do lip-sync in various 3D packages using their own models. I can't stress enough that this is simply a personal opinion, and has no bearing on what others wish to do with their talent. I have said it before: I cannot model humans. Therefore, I do not use them in my images. If I were a painter and had difficulty painting humans, I would paint something else. I play guitar, but can I play Bach? No. So, I don't. I follow my "talent" (as it were) where it leads me. This is the only way to preserve the integrity of my work in my own conscience.

Gary, I looked at the gallery at DAZ, images of the month to be exact. I saw some nice work. I also saw alot of "Terrain-app-generated-landscape-with-Poser-model-plugged-in" type images. Some of the images include only the naked Poser model with some image processing in Photoshop. This, at least to me, is not art. I would be ashamed to print this and present it as my own. If I were painting, could I paint a simple landscape, have another artist paint the difficult curves and nuances of a human, follow up by painting clothes on the human, and call it my own? I would, by necessity, have to credit the other artist. This is what angers me when I see individuals post images that are clearly making use of pre-fab models. Yes, Poser allows alot of variation in the animation process, boning, etc. Does manipulating those options make the character one's own?

I use Lightwave. It depends heavily on plugins to do its' magic. I am not at all opposed to using tools towards ones' ends. I use alot of plugins, but none of them says "press this button and a perfectly executed wireframe of a difficult to model object will appear". Sure there are primitives available, but that is a shortcut to something which is very simple to make, and save you the time of making a box point-by-point. This is the (my) distinction. I will model what I need, only for the fact that when it's done and people ask "is that your work?" I can honestly say "Yes, it is".

Erik, I'm sorry but I think you misunderstood my statement. I did say the line between designer and artist is a very fine one. Professional designers are rarely on their own (jens is an exception) and have to integrate the work of others into their design. That is all I meant, not that someone using anothers' "themes" would make them a designer. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes, Poser would be very nice to study anatomy, so that one could learn to model it themselves. Not to plug the model into a scene. I hate to keep driving this point home, but Poser models have their place. It is not in art. I have seen beautiful renders created with the app, but I give the creator no credit, because they used a model that isn't theirs. I might say "nice texturing" or "good job on the clothes" or "hey, nice landscape", but it lacks all artistic merit once you haven't created it yourself.

Are paint-by-numbers art?

Brett

[Gary David Bouton]

Brett--

I think this thread has gone to its logical extreme, and must be reeled back.

It's cheating if you take someone else's work, steal someone else's thought...in short, I feel Erik had hit the nail on the head: If you feel what you are doing is pure in your heart-you're on the right track.

I shamelessly, therefore, use parts of Poser models in my work, because life is too short, you know? Computers are indeed labor-saving devices, as were apprentices during the Middle Ages who served artist masters by painting in the boring parts of a painting.

I cannot, and do not wish to refute your posting, Brett, because a lot of it is absolutely true. But I don't get the "Bach" reference. Isn't it really what you DO with your self-expression, if it indeed pure? I play Bach and I also play the Beatles' songs on my guitar, and I make no pretenses that what I'm doing is original. It's just that I have a song in my heart and someone else wrote it. What's wrong with that, aside from taping and selling it?

Art was meant to be shared, and this sharing goes on every day, whether we, as artists, realize it or not. I have an album of unreleased original classical music I wrote and recorded, and anyone is free to play it. Dave Seigal designed the typeface Tekton and it's used millions of times a day. You could examine this right doen to: if you didn't wind your nickel strings on your guitar, then it's not totally original music you make.


Other people are involved whether one likes it or not in the process of creation. I need my publisher, or my writings would earn me zip income. Buildings must be built as a collaborative effort, or the architect has nothing to tout around except blueprints.

And DAZ makes the process of adding remarkably lifelike people to a scene. Don't think of it as an application, okay? Think of it as a clip art catalog that you are free to modify and encorporate in your design work.

Enough of my hot air...

Peace,

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

[Earl]

Wow...long thread. (I just tried to catch up on all of it this morning). Well, I just wanted to say one thing that caught my attention.

It's concerning Brett's point about Poser. I've seen some great things created with Poser - and I've seen some horribly over-used images created with Poser. There have been times, when I looked at an impressive piece of art, that I could not tell that the person was from Poser. It looked that different. Then, of course, when I learned the person was from Poser, I quickly lost interest. I'm not against people using Poser. As Brett has pointed out, modeling humans is an incredibly tough task for any 3d modeler. I've used LightWave heavily for 7 years or so and I'm still not happy with my human models. I probably never will be.

However, I must agree with Brett on his point. For my own personal uses, I could NEVER feel good about what I create if I used other people's models. Even packaged models from 'royalty-free' programs or what-have-you. If I can't create it on my own, from scratch, I feel my creation is a fraud. I even go as far as not using any textures made by other people. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

However, I don't look down on the use of these programs (such as Poser). Some people simply don't WANT to learn how to model humans, etc. And that's fine. When it comes to 3d, most people cannot specialize in everything - and that's totally understandable (I say most, because I still strive to master all aspects of the realm - as unrealistic as that may be).

[bmh216]

Gary,
I was referring to my limitations: I cannot model humans (yet) and I cannot play Bach--therefore, I do neither. There is nothing wrong with playing Bach, or Beatles, or any other music someone else has written. But, isn't it understood by anyone listening that you are not playing your own composition? Is anyone fooled that this is your own work? This is the issue I have: individuals who use Poser in their work without mentioning that they didn't create the model themself. I'm not talking about an architectural rendering in which the human(s) are incidental to the scene. I'm talking about compositions that rely on the Poser model.

I am always impressed by a good anatomical human model. Those who can model humans amaze me. I have attempted it, with limited success. Maybe in time I can create such models, but until then I will continue to go where my level of talent takes me, and refuse to use someone else's talent to get there. If I were to collaborate, that would be a different egg altogether, as everyone involved would receive the credit they deserve.

Hope I've made myself clear; I wasn't comparing playing Bach to cheating.

{Edit}
I just noticed this, and it is relevant to this discussion:
http://talkgraphics.infopop.net/1/Op...1&m=7201992815

The defense rests, your honor.

Brett

[This message was edited by Brett H on June 23, 2002 at 12:25.]