I’m going to respond to a comment made on the previous blog post in a separate post as I think it deserves it.
I didn’t publish the comment immediately as I was in two minds whether to do so, which, since it is my blog is my right to do so. However, everyone is intitlted to their opinion whether we agree with it or not.
Here is the comment in its original form:
This is ridiculous. The design company obviously used the image as a starting point, but it was changed, most importantly in tone and also was apart of a bigger, different and, in my opinion, better image. You could never mix the two up. She hasn’t lost out on anything at all. I can’t remebemr who said ‘its not where you take it from, it’s where you take it to’ but he/she was right. If you’re against this you’re also against collage and sampling.
Firstly, it has been debated to great length elsewhere about how the image was “dervived”. Most artists and illustraters believing it is a classic example of tracing. Yes, changes were made but mostly superficial, the colours/pattern of the dress altered to fit in with the rest of the new colour scheme, and the hair lengthed.
Julia Odell, who is a painter and sculptor, does a quick breakdown of the image on her blog.
The You Thought We Wouldn’t Notice Blog highlights examples of a similar nature.
Tracing to the layman may not be such a big deal at all, but to artists and illustrators, tracing and then passing off the whole work as your own is considered extremely uncool. It is like not bothering to cite sources for an academic paper. Put another way, it also suggests that you can’t actually draw a figure free hand, or can’t be bothered to take the time to. Those who can draw properly make it look easy and like it only takes a moment to do but take it from me, it is not easy, and is not a case of drawing a few curves, check out http://tearain.tripod.com/hp/draw/draw.html which takes you through the steps to draw just a simple Disney-esque character. The principals are the same whatever the style of figure
As to whether the original or the Paperchase image is better is another matter entirely. Personally I prefer the original and this is not because of the current situation. I’ve had some of Eloise’s artwork in my own workroom for a year now and her style, palette and subject matter appeals to me. I found the Paperchase design to be brash, loud and busy, not to my taste at all. But then again to my, classically trained, ear rap music and some pop is an anathema, it isn’t so for everyone.
Eloise may not end up losing out on this, but this highlights an issue which worries anyone who is self employed and trying to make a living out of items they design and sell themselves. Putting images of their illustrations on line doesn’t mean they are releasing them under a GPL so anyone can use them as a ’starting point’ or otherwise. And even with GPL you are expected to include the copyright notices of the authors of the code you are using in your GPL application.
The quote is from Jean-Luc Goddard and the context was most likely cinema, which some might argue is not exactly the same as the one in point. It is an interesting quote in the situation but there still exists the manner in which the source material was taken and the lack acknowledgement of the original artist. Also note that the quote does not mention ‘how’ something was taken. People like Goddard are usually quite profuse in the praise of their sources of inspiration, the other film makers/dramatists they pay homage to in their work.
Collage and Sampling are very tricky beasts. Sampling in general is the use of sounds loops to create pieces of music. In general a reputable artist will use sounds loops which are in the public domain for that purpose or license loops from the original artist. They too will end up creating a work that maybe a million miles, indeed a polar opposite to the original in tone. There is an interesting blog thread dealing with Collage which I am in the process of tracking down.
But we aren’t talking about either Sampling or Collage here. What is in dispute is that a central motif from one piece of work was traced and used as the central motif for another without any reference to or permission from the original artist.
To the non artist this whole issue may indeed appear to be a storm in a teacup and ridiculous, but I’m afraid that there are those to whom this is a big deal, and worrying. I’m happy for the commenter that they don’t seem to be in a field where a a story of this nature causes them pause other than to shake their head in bewilderment.
As always visit Eloise’s Blog for news on what is actually happening with this particular story.
