2007-01-20 [Linderel]: "- make a drawing/painti
2007-01-20 [Sunrose]: Using someone elses photo/drawing of a celeb/anime to make your artpiece of that celeb/anime, I think :)
2007-01-20 [Linderel]: My brain is going into knots trying to understand that sentence. xD Could it be expressed in a more simple way?
2007-01-20 [Sunrose]: I'll wait till Franzie gets here to make sure I read it right :P
2007-01-20 [Linderel]: Okies. :3
2007-01-20 [Ocean Soul]: Uh yes, you got it right.. sorry for making it sound difficult >_>
The point is to express there, that eventhough you used a reference, you weren't meaning to copy but to make your own thing with it. Like, if I used a photo on sunny to make a painting of marylin monroe, because sunny has this magnificent cool pose in one photo xD
2007-01-21 [Sunrose]: *^_^*
2007-01-21 [Linderel]: Okay. If it's so, I think what would fix the sentence. Not 'by' but 'from'. Would make much more sense.
2007-01-21 [Ocean Soul]: Go ahead ^_^
2007-01-21 [Linderel]: ^_^
2007-02-21 [Jitter]: <3 Will post that on my diary too Franz <3 you rock
2008-02-02 [Mordigen]: Could there possibly be some elaboration on the "copying" subject -- something to possibly include reproductions, as reproductions are legitimate.
Maybe something explaining the differences between a reproduction VS. plain ol copying/steali
2008-02-02 [Sunrose]: Define Reproduction @Google:
replica: copy that is not the original; something that has been copied
I'm not sure what you want us to do? A reproduction = a copy?
The rules for copying are on this page..
2008-02-02 [iippo]: Well in art education there is a long lasting tradition for students to make reproductions of famous works of art for practice. So they would say "here is my reproduction of a Turner" and show a painting that is as close to a Turner as they could make it - it is simply a test of skill. I think the difference between a copy and reproduction in this context is that you don't even try to claim anything of the piece as your own except the material/physi
I recall hearing it mentioned that ET doesn't hate copying/reprod
2008-02-03 [Mordigen]: Well, I know that a reproduction is a copy, but looking at it from a traditional or artistic aspect, it is regarded differently than just plain ol copying. It is indeed a matter of skill rather than specifically creativity or creation, but to be able to make a reproduction does show a lot of skill and talent, the term copy in itself sounds quite harsh, and almost of a cop out -- as in, if you say someones piece is a copy....it tends to sound like you are lessening the legitimacy of the work, time or skill put into it -- the terms described under "copy" on this page do pretty much refer to reproduction, but the point of me mentioning it is that the term copy itself can be misinterpreted differently, some people here "copy" and immediately think "stolen", some people here "copy" and think, referrence, or inspired. The term "copy" is vague on individual interpretation -- Besides, on a personal note, I tend to think copying more of ......well, tracing basically, and was wondering if there could be any lil bit more elaboration on the differences between copied work as in reproductions, and copied work as in tracing -- and what WOULD be allowed, and what wouldnt be.
IE-- copied work, as in tracing, is NOT a reproduction, it is a trace -- and just like in EW, traces would be rejected, I dont think traces should be allowed.....be
but copied work as in reproductions, as is already described on this page, are allowed so long as well credit is given.
That is what I meant by a little more elaboration.
And no -- I do agree that I don't think reproductive or copied work should be allowed in contests, unless it was a contest specifcially regarding reprodution skills.
2008-02-03 [Sunrose]: It would create an impossible situation for us if we'd allow reproductions and not copies.
People would start to claim their copy is actually a reproduction, and the difference between these two would be difficult to prove.
2008-02-03 [Mordigen]: Ah, alright -- well i definately see that point then, nevermind :P It was just a thought, but that is definately a very good point, I didn't think of that, sorry.
2008-02-03 [Sunrose]: I certainly understand this artistic wish too :)
2010-02-08 [Lord Josmar]: I apologize if I am asking a question thats already been asked and therefore answered. Using a photo or art as a reference is ok, but copying a picture outright is wrong but both are ok as long as the original artist is credited? Again i apologize for asking a question that may have already been asked.
2010-02-08 [moira hawthorne]: no it is not ok... many arttist dont want their art copied... so crediting them isnt enought,... your should have their permission... but still its a copy.. you cant claim it as your art..
2010-02-08 [Lord Josmar]: Cause I have seen a lot of pictures up where people flat out say its copied and a few of them are pretty obvious copies (the cover photo for the first twilight book for example). I just wasnt sure about whether its violating the copyright rules on ET.