Catgirl drama! -- Split from naked thread (NSFW)

[Komiyan]

Meh. It was a hot naked chick. I liked the differences between the images.


It's a bit rude to follow up any disputes about the copyright with extremely unflattering critique on her comic. It scares away the naked.

The problem is that the whole comic has this Greg Land-ish feel about it- The poses feel quite generic and don't fit what's being said. But yeah, crits on her comics weren't asked for, so I guess shouldn't be given.

If you're going to trace or reference in such a strong manner, please post the work you've used, it's only fair to theoriginal artist. You wouldn't like it if someone ripped you off and passed it off as their own work.

[YarpsDat]

did not trace

I'm getting curious. What technique did you use then, could you describe it in more detail?

[Kisai]

did not trace

I'm getting curious. What technique did you use then, could you describe it in more detail?

I'm curious too, is there a more politically correct term for it, umm let me see, oh I know "facsimile artist"

Call whatever you did whatever you want. Just because you keep telling yourself that, doesn't make it true.

Okay, let's approach this in a "what did you change/add/make-a-mistake on":
left foot is flat and too small (original has no feet)
right foot is too small
tail is too long and too flexible it resembles a monkey tail.
whiskers added
ears are growing out of her jawline instead of her head
missing hands particularly the left hand which is also missing in the original and the key to "where did I see this before"
breasts reduced (WTF?)
brutal line art job
brutal coloring job (how is it that the original part of the image has some depth, but the parts you added look all flat?), the shading on one part of the body conflits with the parts you added making it flat or jarring.

No really, there is no bloody way you copied 98% of that image freehand with your capabilities. The parts you added/changed are obvious, but the parts you didn't change are more obvious. As someone else said, the lines themselves suggest tracing.

If I was not given the original image to look at, I'd see tail, ears and feet problem right away, they don't look right. Especially the right ear which depth suggests it's at the bottom of her jaw.

I don't know why when you were copying, you only copied the shading from the front part of the body and somehow screwed up the back side.

And the breasts? WTF? It's like they went from the original image of being "possible breast implants" to your image of "they be growing out of the collarbone"

I do NOT like copying, and I also DO NOT like it when people refuse to admit they are caught in their web of lies. Stop insulting us by trying to pass of anything you draw as original.

EDIT: Why was I reminded of a scene from "Chasing Amy" ? I'm pretty sure it was that movie with the argument over "you're just a tracer"

[Linkara]

In all fairness, I don't think the breasts are growing out of her collarbone. I see the body as lightly more muscular than the original pic.

[[AlmightyPyro]]

And thus, with her mighty mallet of justice, Kisai once again lays right to that witch hath wronged.

Also: Looking at and copying is just the same as tracing.

[Orion]

I don't know if I agree with that AP, sure if you actually do look and copy and produce the exact same thing then it's stealing. But using another image as a reference for a pose or the shape of a hand, or something similar isn't the same (note, I'm not talking about tracing here, just visual referencing).

[[AlmightyPyro]]

I don't know if I agree with that AP, sure if you actually do look and copy and produce the exact same thing then it's stealing. But using another image as a reference for a pose or the shape of a hand, or something similar isn't the same (note, I'm not talking about tracing here, just visual referencing).

Oh no, visual reference is fine. I use references a lot. I was just trying to find another reason why she says she wasn't tracing. I can kinda see how she could've looked at that original an made the new (it would explain the breast not being perfect) and I was making the statement that it's just as bad.

Kinda like 12 year old girls looking at Inuyasha and Kagome kissing and then turning Kagome's face into their own, then posting it on their blog claiming it original.

[Orion]

Well, in the case of the breast, I imagine that she wanted the character's breast not quite so...turgid, and narrowed them down, seeing as they start from the exact same point but the lineart degrades the moment it leaves the chest.

[[AlmightyPyro]]

Ahh... good observation.

[Mo]

...Ah, I was wondering where the drama was at.

Yeah, tracing sucks, still, no need to gang up to bash her comic, that's kind of uncalled for, eh? I'm not saying I disagree, but let's not blow things out of proportion just because we're (rightfully) angry. Not worth it.

Whether this will affect the handling of possible future Genchans of this artist, will be discussed.

[Kirb]

EDIT:

What Cookie said.

[JessicaRaven]

Oh no, visual reference is fine. I use references a lot. I was just trying to find another reason why she says she wasn't tracing. I can kinda see how she could've looked at that original an made the new (it would explain the breast not being perfect) and I was making the statement that it's just as bad.

which is pretty much what I did, I had the two open side by side in Photoshop as I was drawing the one

[Keffria]

I think the comic-bashing comes with the fact that there are many, many panels in said comic that look very much like they've been traced, too. It's just a logical progression in the discussion.

[Sput]

Oh no, visual reference is fine. I use references a lot. I was just trying to find another reason why she says she wasn't tracing. I can kinda see how she could've looked at that original an made the new (it would explain the breast not being perfect) and I was making the statement that it's just as bad.

which is pretty much what I did, I had the two open side by side in Photoshop as I was drawing the one

BULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. I've done that. And unless you've used the gridding method there is NO WAY that the lines would match up so identically. Lawlerskates and fail. :s

[Mo]

I think the comic-bashing comes with the fact that there are many, many panels in said comic that look very much like they've been traced, too. It's just a logical progression in the discussion.

I wouldn't really call it progression.

I mean, we all agree that this wasn't a good thing to do, she won't admit she traced it even though the evidence says otherwise, what do you think you will accomplish by dragging things further and further?

[MixedMyth]

I do believe one of the How to Draw Manga books covered the difference between inspiration and copying. I am disturbed that I am referencing the atrocious thing. ;D

Firstly, many artists use stock photography as a reference. Nothing wrong with that. And it would be pretty damn hard to draw a piece of art completely severed from the art that you yourself appreciate. We all emulate what we adore. However, the difference here is how CLOSE the image is to something that another artist has done. If you draw a picture of the exact same subject, in the exact same pose, and merely swap the color pallet...that is not enough. It's still passing off a copywritten work that another artist has put a lot of time and effort into as your own. That fact that you used the image as a reference isn't the issue, really, it's that it's soooo very close to the original- same subject (catgirl), same pose, some of the same markings (around the eyes)...really the only major difference is, again, the color pallete. If you had simply used it as a general reference in order to draw a complicated pose in an otherwise unrelated picture, then it'd probably be different...although you'd be better off using stock photography over a copywritten piece of art anyhow.

[Robin Pierce]

From where I'm standing, I can see two reasons why people are getting so upset about this, and why it was split into a new thread to talk FURTHER about it.

1) This is a community of artists. We all take some form of pride in our work - work that we produce ourselves. Therefore, when we see another artist's work getting more or less ripped off, we get kinda ragey about it. It's basically nabbing someone elses work (exclusing permitted and credited use of stock photos here) and painting over it - while changing a few itsy bitsy details, then slapping your name on it. None of us would like it if it happened to us, so we don't like it when people do it.

2) Oh come on. Keffria showed the images on top of eachother. They match up EXACTLY. There's no way anyone but a trained artist could 'copy' that well - and even then there'd be differences.
People are getting up in arms because it is - to us - pretty clear that it's traced, and it's not being admitted. Maybe if you'd just said "yes I traced the pose, I'll start drawing my own poses from now on" or something (yes I DO see the highly unlikelyness of that), three pages of this wouldn't have been necessary in the least.

That said: I'm not sure if this is a case of wanting recognition from drawing well, and reaching for too much too fast, or if it's just taking the easy way out. Possibly a combination, maybe something else completely. The point is: the best way (and the only way to gain respect) to learn how to draw is by practicing. Referancing is okay - it's pretty much expected (god knows a whole lot of us couldn't get anatomy right without referancing), tracing is NOT. Nor does it help develop artistic capabilities, something that is clearly needed here.

You want respect and recognition? Stop tracing and learn to draw from scratch.

[MixedMyth]

WONDER TWIN POWERS ACTIVATE! FORM OF: RAGING ROBINS!

[Robin Pierce]

WONDER TWIN POWERS ACTIVATE! FORM OF: RAGING ROBINS!

ahahaaha! even better since we pretty much said the same thing in different words

[MixedMyth]

Great minds think alike?

The major thing at issue is how not just close it is, but you're claiming it as your own. Now, you may have a catgirl with that coloration, but the fact is that the image is by and large someone else's.

Analogy: Think of that Simpsons episode with the Flaming Homer. Homer invented a drink, and Moe stole it. He changed the name from Flaming Homer to Flaming Moe. There was a change, but not enough of one- just the name. Homer, of course, gets right pissed at having his brilliant drink stolen and particularly the CREDIT for having created it.