To Copy or Non to Copy?

Is it okay to copy a photo when yous are drawing? Should we regard copying photos to make your own artwork equally adulterous?

I desire to give you my opinion on this rather controversial subject of copying. There is some controversy in the fine art community about whether it is acceptable to copy images from photographs or other artwork to make your own drawings or paintings. I call back that most artists would agree that copying from life (i.eastward. having the real object in front of you) is adequate and even encouraged, however there is sectionalisation in the community about whether copying a photo is the same or should be considered 'adulterous'.

You may think that copying from life or copying a photo is the same thing, since the field of study and image is the same and you are using the aforementioned powers of observation. So why is one considered 'cheating' while the other is considered normal? Is it okay to copy photos? Should nosotros just be cartoon from life or just our ain imagination? What situations is using photos considered to be okay? Some masters including Van Gogh used cartoon aids to help work out perspective, why aren't these considered to be 'cheating' simply equally much as copying from a photo?

Earlier I give my opinion, lets have a look at why it is controversial to start with.

photographer

I believe that the ultimate goal of an artist should be to create new ideas and/or stand for objects in unique ways that is personal to the artist. Throughout history people take used drawings and paintings to capture stories or moments in time or realistic representations of people. The appearance of photography has meant that there is less importance on using drawings and paintings equally record keeping devices. Photography and video has taken the function of capturing moments in time, peoples portraits and even tell stories with very accurate representations. So the function of painting has evolved, it is no longer the required method of capturing moments in fourth dimension. This means that personal interpretation of the subject has become fifty-fifty more of import in painting and drawing.

The central point to consider is that drawing is all well-nigh the artists interpretation of the subject field that they are cartoon (or painting). When drawing from life we are seeing things in iii dimensions. As an artist we need to translate 3 dimensions into a flat 2 dimensional representation.  How we interpret the 3 dimensional form of the objects is one of the ways that gives us our own unique fashion.

When drawing from 3D life there are challenges that makes the process hard. For case, depth and perspective is at work on every shape that we see and nosotros need to discover and discover a way of representing that perspective. Colours and low-cal can modify from one moment to the adjacent. The subject may also move during the drawing procedure. Even minor moves of the field of study tin can sometimes go far very challenging to describe.

lionDrawing_action

Cartoon a lion cub from 1 of my ain photos

When we re-create a photograph however, the prototype has already been flattened to a 2 dimensional representation. This takes some of the difficulty out of interpreting things like 3d space, perspective, changing lighting and the bailiwick moving. Photos can give united states of america an easy guide to the ii dimensional angles of lines past comparing a line to the vertical or horizontal edge of the photo. This can get in easier to work out perspective or angles. We also don't demand to be concerned about the subject field flight away or moving. We don't need to worry about the sun moving backside a deject and changing the light.

For some people these things are great, because it takes a lot of the difficult decisions out of the equation. Meanwhile artists that have already developed skills are feeling robbed that you don't accept to do all of that estimation that they have spent years learning and training to do.

copy frog

Copying a frog from one of my ain photos

There is a big divergence between agreement shape and understanding the form of an object. It is somewhat of an achievement to exist able to reproduce a shape as seen in a photograph. By learning to perceive the direction, length and curvature of a line, we can learn to reproduce the shapes that a photograph provides. However, interpreting the form of a 3 dimensional object into a shape takes even more skill. Understanding how a line that may be traveling towards or abroad from us should be represented by a 2d shape takes a lot more than practise and understanding.

During the process of learning to draw and while nosotros are learning to interpret shapes, copying photos can be useful to give us a clear thought of what it should look like already flattened out. When nosotros are focusing on reproducing shapes, photos tin can make the process easier to sympathise the shapes of objects and allow us to learn the skill of reproduction easier. We tin spend time evaluating the shapes that are already in a flattened state without fearfulness of the object moving. Copying from photos can therefore arguably be a very important part of the learning process.

Nevertheless, here'southward where I throw up a caution!…

To advance our skills further as an artist we likewise need to be able to extend our powers of observation to also interpret three dimensional objects. Cartoon from photos can limit our ability to do this. We can easily come up to rely on observing shapes that are already flattened out for the states, and not take whatsoever understanding of the 3 dimensions of the field of study. In my opinion it is really of import to first drawing from life early in your development of cartoon. This kind of interpretation from 3 dimensions to two allows the states to get a better understanding of the class of the object, which allows u.s. to likewise alter or distort the objects to our advantage. When nosotros can practise that, that is where our skills an artist can really shine.

In my view, the process of learning to draw is about creating a balance between copying from photos and copying from life. Both have their place in the learning to draw process and both are important for developing your skills.

I prefer to describe from life at any opportunity that I get. Studying shapes that occur around around you gives you a deeper understanding of the object. If often find myself studying an objects shape even if I don't take a pencil in my hand at the fourth dimension, hoping that I volition remember enough detail for when I go back to the studio. The kind of 'artists view' can prepare you for when you want to draw objects that you cant setup in front of y'all to re-create.

Often for the subjects that I draw setting up a real life scenario to work from may non be possible. Frequently the subject simply isn't available to just setup in front of me and draw. In these cases using photos to gain an understanding of what the object does really await like can aid. Still rather than just using the first photograph that I come across I volition research the subject as much every bit I tin can before drawing it to try and acquire how the subject looks in iii dimensions. I will find every bit many photos of the bailiwick as I can (using my own photos whenever possible) from different directions, unlike poses, dissimilar lighting. From this I can get an agreement of the form of the object and how unlike lighting can effect that grade. And then I will draw my ain version of the subject field from the understanding that I have gained, often referring back to various photos to become a deeper understanding as I am going. This manner I am proud to have a creation that is entirely my own and can't be considered a re-create.

Athyrium'sOffering_small

Athyrium's Offering by Murray Charteris

At the time of writing this I'm at the phase in my skills where I purposely avert copying photos for my finished pieces. Don't get me wrong, I exercise utilize photos, but non in a way that i would consider 'adulterous'. For almost purposes I don't use photos as a directly epitome to copy from (with some exceptions).  Before looking at photos of my subject I normally already have a very clear idea of what i desire to practise with the subject field. Usually even the best photos will merely give me a shut representation, but non close plenty for what I want to achieve. It is about impossible to find photos that exactly match the epitome that I want to create. Too, if I did copy a photo I would feel like I am cheating myself of the opportunity to do something that a photo can't practice, such as add together an impression of life/action, or even but my ain personal interpretation of the subject.

I am likewise very conscious about respecting peoples copyright. If a photo is my own and then equally photographer I feel that I take the right to exist able to follow the photo a lot closer than if I was using a found photograph on google. For case, the photo of the lion cub that I used for the demonstration video is my ain photograph from a trip to Africa in 2011. I avert directly copying any paradigm that is not my ain. Whether y'all cull to copy photos or non, there a couple of very important rules to consider. Most importantly, copying other peoples photos or drawings and claiming the image as your ain is a definite no no. We all demand to respect the copyright of the lensman or artist that created the original.

If you don't have your own photo to utilize, so ensure that you lot are only using other peoples photos equally a reference and avoid copying. Exist sure to create your own image with your own interpretation as much as possible.

VanGoghPerspectiveFrame


Van Gogh's Perspective Frame (Van Gogh Museum)

So that leads me to this question for you – If photos can brand it easier for an artist by flattening out the image and it is regarded equally cheating, so what most other drawing aids that give the artist a similar advantage? Drawing aids such as grids fatigued on a canvass of glass, or perspective frames such as those used by masters such equally Van Gogh have been used for centuries. These tools interruption downwardly the 3d view into smaller chunks and gives the artist a reference for the directions of line. In many ways information technology is doing the aforementioned every bit a photo by flattening out the epitome into a 2 dimensional view. Should these tools also exist regarded as cheating? I would love to hear your thoughts, tell me in the comments below if you lot think that drawing aids are cheating. I await frontward to reading your point of view.