PDA

View Full Version : My Portfolio




Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 12:57 AM
errr i hope this is the right place to post this?

anyways my name is chris, i use illustrator for the most part... and here il show you some of my work. il also update regularly with whatever im currently doing. feedback and discussion always appreciated.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/MichaelJackson2a.jpg?t=1247377946

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/MJyoung.jpg?t=1247377954

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/MichaelJacksonSillouettesweb.jpg?t=1247377957

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/Tupacwebcopy.jpg?t=1247377959

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/Aliwebcopy.jpg?t=1247377965

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/AmyWinehousewebcopy.jpg?t=1247377967



bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 01:56 AM
These are VERY well done. You clearly have a lot of talent. Can I ask what the process involved was? ie. did you scan images into AI and go over them or did you freehand these in AI? Either way, I am aware of the degree of difficulty in acheiving these kinds of results.

Have you had any formal training in freehand art?

btw, only 3 are showing, I think there is 6 going by the broken link icons...

Lukeyboy01
Jul 12, 2009, 02:58 AM
I LOVE the Amy Whinehouse one can i print it off and use it as a poster?

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 08:20 AM
bluetooth, these are done entirely with the pen tool in illustrator, over a normal photo.

i do graphic design and illustration at uni, but they dont really TEACH you anything as such. this is all self taught. and il get back to your message in just a min. and no idea why only three images are showing? they come up for me?

lol lukeyboy all my work is going on sale very soon.

heres some more;

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/jimmyhendrixwebcopy.jpg?t=1247404631

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/travisbicklewebcopy.jpg?t=1247404636

edit: its not letting me respond to you via email, but yeah im available for freelance work. you can always contact me through this site i guess, or directly through c_charalambous@hotmail.co.uk

jonnos
Jul 12, 2009, 10:19 AM
lol lukeyboy all my work is going on sale very soon.


question.. are these the images you are selling?

im also studying a design course, but i was wondering..

is it alright to sell these images that you have created? will this cause any copyright issues? do you need to get permission to use the original image? though you arnt exactly using it but reworking/remixing it into a different format/design?

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 10:43 AM
yeah these will all be for sale.

there isnt any copyright issues as im not using anything that belongs to anyone else, except as a reference.

theres a law which states that once you have changed an image to a certain degree, it is no longer the same original picture anyway, and so copyright shouldnt apply.

doesnt make much sense to me. i dont know the intricate details though, maybe somebody else does?

im not worried either way though, as i said; iv used other peoples photo's for nothing more than a reference.

jonnos
Jul 12, 2009, 11:02 AM
same thoughts as well.

we live in a remixing world.
http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/


i forgot to mention.. those images look great :D
i need to start using illustrator more.

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 01:02 PM
lol thanks for the positive feedback.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/Bobmarleywebcopy.jpg?t=1247421739

fluidedge
Jul 12, 2009, 03:10 PM
These are really nice and i'm sure they've taken a lot of time and effort but couldn't they be done with the CUTOUT or PAINT DAUBS filters in PS and then touched up a bit in a fraction of the time?

I suppose nothing beats doing it by hand.

macjram
Jul 12, 2009, 03:18 PM
I love vectors/vexels, but AI is too hard for me to learn, I'm too used to Photoshop. I do the same thing, but just for fun. Any tips on switching programs?

Designer Dale
Jul 12, 2009, 04:06 PM
yeah these will all be for sale.

there isnt any copyright issues as im not using anything that belongs to anyone else, except as a reference.

Hi.

Before you go further, take a good look into British copyright law. US copyright law has a clause called "derivative works" in which the use of an existing work to create a new one is not allowed. Famous people take great care in protecting their public image, and I'm sure MJ is high on that list. Running "Michael Jackson" through Deviant Art brings up a lot of work. Some are obvious digital copies but most seem to be hand illustrated.

Your Illustrator work is very good. My first impression was that it was done with Live Trace, which you say it isn't.

I'm not being a wet washrag, I'm just suggesting that you be careful if you intend on selling someone else's image.

Dale

bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 04:48 PM
These are really nice and i'm sure they've taken a lot of time and effort but couldn't they be done with the CUTOUT or PAINT DAUBS filters in PS and then touched up a bit in a fraction of the time?

I suppose nothing beats doing it by hand.

I'm not sure you would get the same effect, similar, but not the same - although I could be wrong. It also would not be a vector but then again, you could import it as an .eps to AI and convert to outlines, but again, not sure you would get the same effect.

bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 04:50 PM
bluetooth, these are done entirely with the pen tool in illustrator, over a normal photo.

edit: its not letting me respond to you via email, but yeah im available for freelance work. you can always contact me through this site i guess, or directly through c_charalambous@hotmail.co.uk

Cool, I bookmarked your site. Thanks.

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 04:52 PM
live tracing would still be vector, but it wouldnt look like that.

thanks for the advice anyways, im gona look into that law quickly. i cant see how this would be breaching any laws though.

edit: also, bluetooth, you mentioned you would add me to your 'list' if im avalable for freelance work? whats your line of work? out of interest.

kymac
Jul 12, 2009, 05:24 PM
live tracing would still be vector, but it wouldnt look like that.


im sorry.. but live trace would look exactly like that. with all the imperfect edges and everything.

Designer Dale
Jul 12, 2009, 05:40 PM
im sorry.. but live trace would look exactly like that. with all the imperfect edges and everything.

Ditto. Maybe it's a West coast thing. Assuming that Portland is Portland Oregon...

Been wrong before

Dale

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 05:41 PM
im sorry.. but live trace would look exactly like that. with all the imperfect edges and everything.

lol oh right ok, just give me a quick example of that please. heres a photo i referenced, live trace it and show me how alike they are

http://www.tupachq.com/magazines/tupac_covers05.jpg

and to the comment about photoshop and cutout tool etc. it wont look as good, plus itl be rasta based, no good for printing at such large sizes.

(theyr printed onto A1 btw)

kymac
Jul 12, 2009, 06:57 PM
lol oh right ok, just give me a quick example of that please. heres a photo i referenced, live trace it and show me how alike they are

not worth my time. also i wasn't accusing you of using live trace.. you just said it doesn't look live traced in any way, and i replied that i 100% didn't agree with that statement. but i will continue to think my own thoughts now that you're getting very defensive about an artwork that resembles the live traced look, but repeatedly claiming absolutely no live tracing was done.

panoz7
Jul 12, 2009, 07:10 PM
I ran your images through illustrator to see what a quick live trace would spit out. Didn't spend much time. I'm sure I could get it closer but there's no way a live trace is ever going to approximate the smaller details in your tracing. Yours is definitely significantly better but I can see where the comparisons are coming from. I think what makes your images look somewhat live traced are the lines created between the different colors. I've spent significant amounts of time doing similar traces in illustrator and know how difficult it can be.

If I were you I'd push your style to make it more unique. Right now you seem to be going for semi-realism... that works, but it might be interesting to push the boundaries and create something more expressive of the people your tracing's personalities. A prime example for me is shepard fairey's obama poster - which interestingly enough is currently in the middle of a lawsuit concerning some of the very copyright ideas discussed in this thread.

bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 07:23 PM
live tracing would still be vector, but it wouldnt look like that.

thanks for the advice anyways, im gona look into that law quickly. i cant see how this would be breaching any laws though.

edit: also, bluetooth, you mentioned you would add me to your 'list' if im avalable for freelance work? whats your line of work? out of interest.

I do design work, mainly print and web and also some freelance on the side. From time to time I have worked with others, such as web programmers and artists (I worked with a partner who drew a series of cartoon images for a children's book I put together).

I have had a client in the past ask for something like this as part of a project but I was not able to provide the service. My thought is that it is always good to have some contacts to contract more specific or detailed requests out to. That way, you become a lot more versatile with your services while you try to find the time to become more well rounded yourself.

Macky-Mac
Jul 12, 2009, 07:28 PM
....thanks for the advice anyways, im gona look into that law quickly. i cant see how this would be breaching any laws though.....

it would be the same laws that prevent you from printing and selling t-shirts with pictures of your favorite band.....they have a right to control how their image is used for commercial purposes

for example; if you were creating illustrations for a magazine or newspaper to illustrate an article, then you would be fine.....but printing and selling posters of those illustrations wouldn't be since it isn't anything that could be considered journalism

bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 07:38 PM
I ran your images through illustrator to see what a quick live trace would spit out. Didn't spend much time. I'm sure I could get it closer but there's no way a live trace is ever going to approximate the smaller details in your tracing. Yours is definitely significantly better but I can see where the comparisons are coming from. I think what makes your images look somewhat live traced are the lines created between the different colors. I've spent significant amounts of time doing similar traces in illustrator and know how difficult it can be.

If I were you I'd push your style to make it more unique. Right now you seem to be going for semi-realism... that works, but it might be interesting to push the boundaries and create something more expressive of the people your tracing's personalities. A prime example for me is shepard fairey's obama poster - which interestingly enough is currently in the middle of a lawsuit concerning some of the very copyright ideas discussed in this thread.

Agreed. It does not look nearly as professional, especially the finer details such as the eyes ete. Here is a Photoshop Tut that explains the process, complexity, time and details involved (tracing shapes, colouing etc.).

You can see that some of the examples at the end look pretty good, but even these results imo are not as good as the OP. It is not as easy as some people may think...it takes a lot of time and practice.

http://www.melissaclifton.com/tutorial-vector.html

http://www.melissaclifton.com/tutorial-vector3.html

Charalambous, don't worry about the posters that will pass your work off as something that can be acheived with filters and other quick features. The majority of us are aware of the time and skill it takes to create results like these. :cool:

In terms of copyright, I am not sure how that would work with renderings and as some have stated, it would likely have to do a lot with your state, province or country. I do know that here in Toronto, ON, I have seen a lot of artists selling paintings, drawings etc. of famous people on canvas and airbrushed on t-shirts etc. A lot of them set up stands downtown in the summer and display their work on the street or in shopping malls. That is not to say that they are not breaking the law however, we need someone with a law degree to chime in.

Charalambous
Jul 12, 2009, 08:38 PM
not worth my time. also i wasn't accusing you of using live trace.. you just said it doesn't look live traced in any way, and i replied that i 100% didn't agree with that statement. but i will continue to think my own thoughts now that you're getting very defensive about an artwork that resembles the live traced look, but repeatedly claiming absolutely no live tracing was done.

lol. constructive. thank you.

I ran your images through illustrator to see what a quick live trace would spit out. Didn't spend much time. I'm sure I could get it closer but there's no way a live trace is ever going to approximate the smaller details in your tracing. Yours is definitely significantly better but I can see where the comparisons are coming from. I think what makes your images look somewhat live traced are the lines created between the different colors. I've spent significant amounts of time doing similar traces in illustrator and know how difficult it can be.

If I were you I'd push your style to make it more unique. Right now you seem to be going for semi-realism... that works, but it might be interesting to push the boundaries and create something more expressive of the people your tracing's personalities. A prime example for me is shepard fairey's obama poster - which interestingly enough is currently in the middle of a lawsuit concerning some of the very copyright ideas discussed in this thread.

interesting, i didnt think you could even get it that good with live trace. thanks for the advice as well. i did used to try and express more, i fully understand what your saying, but these were done in partnership with a place in camden town, London, (dont know where everybody is from, anybody from london, england?) for them to sell. see even the ones with backgrounds; i just threw together because i was bored of the plain white background. tomorrow il post up some older bits and pieces. iv got ideas nicer than anything iv done though. its just a matter of time management lol.

it would be the same laws that prevent you from printing and selling t-shirts with pictures of your favorite band.....they have a right to control how their image is used for commercial purposes

for example; if you were creating illustrations for a magazine or newspaper to illustrate an article, then you would be fine.....but printing and selling posters of those illustrations wouldn't be since it isn't anything that could be considered journalism

hmm i see i see. well, the way these are being sold is not through me personally, im just the illustrator. so would the business who is actually selling them get in trouble (if at all) or would i still be held accountable? also, theres loads of pop art on ebay which is just live traced, or even just blown up pictures.... or even ******* processes which is bought and sold everyday and nobody is hassling anyone over copyright. its interesting though... definitely worth looking into.

Agreed. It does not look nearly as professional, especially the finer details such as the eyes ete. Here is a Photoshop Tut that explains the process, complexity, time and details involved (tracing shapes, colouing etc.).

You can see that some of the examples at the end look pretty good, but even these results imo are not as good as the OP. It is not as easy as some people may think...it takes a lot of time and practice.

http://www.melissaclifton.com/tutorial-vector.html

http://www.melissaclifton.com/tutorial-vector3.html

Charalambous, don't worry about the posters that will pass your work off as something that can be acheived with filters and other quick features. The majority of us are aware of the time and skill it takes to create results like these. :cool:

In terms of copyright, I am not sure how that would work with renderings and as some have stated, it would likely have to do a lot with your state, province or country. I do know that here in Toronto, ON, I have seen a lot of artists selling paintings, drawings etc. of famous people on canvas and airbrushed on t-shirts etc. A lot of them set up stands downtown in the summer and display their work on the street or in shopping malls. That is not to say that they are not breaking the law however, we need someone with a law degree to chime in.

glad you understand lol. very much appreciated. id like to see some of your work if theres anything you can link me to?

here is my myspace for anyone who may be interested in seeing some older work; www.myspace.com/c_charalambous i dont really use it these days, i check it about once a month and havnt updated it in about 2 years... but yeah, there it is. im going to be launching my website sometime in the near future though. theres nothing to really see yet, but; www.charalambousdesign.com lol i havnt done any work on the site in about 2 months now. really should get back onto that...

all feedback and discussion much appreciated people.

bluetooth
Jul 12, 2009, 08:53 PM
Hey, I'm not at my mac at the moment (on vaca) but will email you some samples when I get back next month if you are still interested.

Cheers

Charalambous
Jul 13, 2009, 11:23 AM
il be waiting lol.

here is some older stuff, all of this was done on photoshop, none of it was done for sale. just me teaching myself and err... i dunno. here;

http://fc06.deviantart.com/fs9/i/2006/010/b/d/Sway_by_Graffiti_Artist.jpg
January, 2006

http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs9/i/2006/015/0/c/Eminem_by_Graffiti_Artist.jpg
January, 2006

http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs7/i/2005/269/d/d/Top_10_Dead_or_Alive__Jay_Z_by_Graffiti_Artist.jpg
September, 2005

http://fc00.deviantart.com/fs8/i/2005/363/9/7/Plan_B_by_Graffiti_Artist.jpg
December, 2005

il soon start to put up some hand drawn work, cd covers and whatever else i can find.

G.T.
Jul 13, 2009, 12:48 PM
Here is my go but it is a bit more realistic, I have had no experience in this so thought I'd give it a quick go.

THX1139
Jul 13, 2009, 09:21 PM
You can't use photos that other people took to create commercial artwork unless it falls under fair use. While you can probably get away with it, you are breaking the law by selling if for a profit. No one is going to come after you unless you start making lots of money, or become well known. The problem is that soon as you start making money, someone is going to come along and sue your butt off and you could be liable for thousands of dollars unless you can prove in court that your artwork falls under fair use. Of course, you're also talking thousands of dollars of attorney fees to defend yourself. It's reminds me of illegal downloading of music. It's okay until you get caught, then you pay dearly.

The way around it, is to redraw the photos (not trace) and change them enough that they don't look exactly like the originals. Then use your derivatives for your vector traces. Of course, that is more work than what you are doing now, (just tracing existing images) but if you want to be original, then that's what you have to do. Otherwise, all you're doing is tracing and anyone who knows Illustrator can do that. It's not art, it's just copying and craftsmanship. If I was looking to hire you as a designer, I'd think that you were good at Illustrator, but not so good at coming up with an original concept. However, if you did them based on your own images, I'd be impressed. Otherwise.. meh.

Therefore, why don't you take your own photos and trace those? That would be more interesting and would keep you out of court.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Using-photos-found-online

bluetooth
Jul 14, 2009, 12:09 AM
The same could be said about tattoo artists because every tatoo artist will use a stencil, they get an image, trace it, sometimes manipulate it or enhance it (as you suggested) and then trace it with an ink pen onto/into your skin.

I know there are lots of tatoo artists that trace work and do stencils that are not their own artwork or designs, some of which are famous people, characters, team logo's, country flags, icons, symbols, even famous quotes and on and on...and they surely make a profit from it every time. I wonder how they get around this? Or perhaps the big arms covered in tats, bandana and handlebar mustache, <insert biker image> warrants them to be left alone... :p

rebecca.x
Jul 22, 2009, 01:18 AM
I'm in love with the Amy Winehouse one. I've always wanted to be able to do stuff like this but I have zero patience to learn how. Well done anyway, your work is great.

poematik14
Jul 24, 2009, 05:14 PM
I love vectors/vexels, but AI is too hard for me to learn, I'm too used to Photoshop. I do the same thing, but just for fun. Any tips on switching programs?

Haha Im the opposite, Im too used to AI.

MagicWok
Jul 24, 2009, 07:20 PM
I really like the Bob Marley pic ;)

decksnap
Jul 24, 2009, 07:33 PM
The irony of you watermarking your TRACES of other professional photographers' photos! :rolleyes:

This is not art... and you can't sell it on any sort of scale where you would get any notoriety. This displays a talent for.... nothing. You have learned the skill of the pen tool. Brilliant.

You should hook up with Shepard Fairey.

Charalambous
Jul 25, 2009, 11:52 PM
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i290/graffiti-artist/MarilynMonroewebcopy.jpg?t=1248583727

just finished it.

thanks for all feedback so far

Greedo
Jul 27, 2009, 08:13 AM
This is not art... and you can't sell it on any sort of scale where you would get any notoriety. This displays a talent for.... nothing. You have learned the skill of the pen tool. Brilliant.

agreed - this is a worthless demonstration of knowing how to use the pen tool. nothing is changing from the original image in terms of content, emotion, meaning, etc. all you are doing is stylizing someone else's photograph. lame.

fluidedge
Jul 27, 2009, 10:50 AM
why don't you try drawing a caricature of these people first then do the vector thing. At the moment, whilst they look nice, you can't deny they are just vectored photos and no company is going to pay you $30000 a year for these skills when they can pay someone in Indonesia $5000 for the same thing or better still pay for a photoshop plugin that can do the same thing.

wongulous
Jul 27, 2009, 02:00 PM
I see accuracy, attention to detail, and proficiency with the pen tool. That is it. I don't see how this is a portfolio. You may want to pay less attention to your self-taught skills and take on some new challenges in school, like breaking out of your box. You can do semi-realism illustration amazingly well, but your use of color, type, space, layout, and creative development are not readily apparent in anything you've shown. I'd go as far as to say that you may be struggling, because I see use of like one extremely tacky font with tacky effects and bad kerning, and obviously all in your interest area (hip hop music heroes). This should be a wake-up call to branch out and see what new things you can do: it's 2009, and you've been doing this since 2006 or before.

fluidedge
Jul 27, 2009, 02:56 PM
have you ever thought about going into rotoscoping? Anyone who can use a pen tool this well would be a useful roto artist.

stainlessliquid
Jul 27, 2009, 03:48 PM
The irony of you watermarking your TRACES of other professional photographers' photos! :rolleyes:

This is not art... and you can't sell it on any sort of scale where you would get any notoriety. This displays a talent for.... nothing. You have learned the skill of the pen tool. Brilliant.

You should hook up with Shepard Fairey.

Like that Andy Warhol hack

sarcasticdesign
Jul 28, 2009, 10:47 AM
Like that Andy Warhol hack

First off, if we're going to invoke the name of Warhol, let's concede that it's more likely that Warhol is called by Rolling Stone to do the cover art for their Tupac issue, where he'd likely photograph Tupac to use as reference for his cover illustration.

This, opposed to the OP googling "awezome pix tupac" and slapping it into illustrator, live tracing, and tweaking the details.

"You must first learn the rules to break them"

Andy Warhol learned the rules first. He spent considerable time working his way up the ladder of the arts world. Starting with his time at Carnegie Tech in Pittsburgh, now Carnegie Mellon University, an esteemed school that only picks the best and brightest for enrollment.

In the 1950s, Warhol freelanced for music industry powerhouse RCA records, designing some outstanding album covers for Jazz greats:

http://www.birkajazz.com/graphics2/basieWarhol.jpg
http://www.birkajazz.com/graphics2/shawWarhol.jpg
http://www.birkajazz.com/graphics2/warholCoolGabriels2.jpg

You can see an inimitable style beginning to form, a pure talent and originality on display, and a fine respect for other aspects of design (type, layout, composition) as opposed to just a focus on illustration.

To bring Warhol into a discussion about copy machines like the OP or Sheppy Fairy is an injustice to Andy.

Warhol could outdo the OP and Fairy Boy with a piece of paper, a quill and and an inkwell. The other guys would be lost without the google, let alone likely confused by the pen and the paper.

Our OP and Fairy boy owe more of their "success" to Bruce Chizen than to Warhol.

stainlessliquid
Jul 28, 2009, 01:48 PM
First off, if we're going to invoke the name of Warhol, let's concede that it's more likely that Warhol is called by Rolling Stone to do the cover art for their Tupac issue, where he'd likely photograph Tupac to use as reference for his cover illustration.

This, opposed to the OP googling "awezome pix tupac" and slapping it into illustrator, live tracing, and tweaking the details.

"You must first learn the rules to break them"

Andy Warhol learned the rules first. He spent considerable time working his way up the ladder of the arts world. Starting with his time at Carnegie Tech in Pittsburgh, now Carnegie Mellon University, an esteemed school that only picks the best and brightest for enrollment.

In the 1950s, Warhol freelanced for music industry powerhouse RCA records, designing some outstanding album covers for Jazz greats:

You can see an inimitable style beginning to form, a pure talent and originality on display, and a fine respect for other aspects of design (type, layout, composition) as opposed to just a focus on illustration.

To bring Warhol into a discussion about copy machines like the OP or Sheppy Fairy is an injustice to Andy.

Warhol could outdo the OP and Fairy Boy with a piece of paper, a quill and and an inkwell. The other guys would be lost without the google, let alone likely confused by the pen and the paper.

Our OP and Fairy boy owe more of their "success" to Bruce Chizen than to Warhol.
Did you not read the comment I quoted about not being able to sell traces of photographs or gain notoriety from them because its not art? A lot of Warhol's pictures had no drawing at all, they were just prints with the colors changed, so apparently they arent art or sellable.

sarcasticdesign
Jul 28, 2009, 02:48 PM
Did you not read the comment I quoted about not being able to sell traces of photographs or gain notoriety from them because its not art? A lot of Warhol's pictures had no drawing at all, they were just prints with the colors changed, so apparently they arent art or sellable.

Yes. And I agree with that comment. The OP's work is not art. It's copying/tracing. It's not sellable. It's likely illegal to sell.

To say Warhol's art has "no drawing at all, they were just prints with the colors changed" shows a gross lack of knowledge about the art world. You should stop posting.

Did you not see the album covers I posted? They're done by Warhol. They had to have been hand drawn. He has a WHOLE body of disparate work in addition to his soup cans and marilyns. did you know that?

Warhol painted the Campbell's cans. He replicated them with a silkscreen process and added in the different varieties of the soup. It's a stark contrast to the Monet's and the like who would do series art and show how light, time, etc can all affect a subject is a series.

There's alot more to it than googling "tupac" and tracing the pic and calling it art.

Now sure, you can say that Warhol's Marilyn Monroe came from a famous photo (which Andy did manage to purchase and own). But look at the original photo and Andy's painting of it. The original was a b/w photo. Warhol painted color onto it, gave it a completely different feel than the photograph.

http://www.webexhibits.org/colorart/marilyns.html

The op's stuff is just fancy traces of an already existing photo. I'd rather just buy the original photo! Is it real or it is memorex? Ya know? He doesn't ad. He just parrots.

But in Warhol's case, there's originality, creativity and addition to the imagery that he used. He enhanced, even if the enhancing was bizarre or jarring, the original image.

Does the OP own the originals/usage rights to any of the photographs he traces in his "art?"

Does Danny Clinch know that some kid is planning on selling posters of his Tupac photo? I digress.

fluidedge
Jul 28, 2009, 03:19 PM
Yes. And I agree with that comment. The OP's work is not art. It's copying/tracing. It's not sellable. It's likely illegal to sell.

To say Warhol's art has "no drawing at all, they were just prints with the colors changed" shows a gross lack of knowledge about the art world. You should stop posting.

Did you not see the album covers I posted? They're done by Warhol. They had to have been hand drawn. He has a WHOLE body of disparate work in addition to his soup cans and marilyns. did you know that?

Warhol painted the Campbell's cans. He replicated them with a silkscreen process and added in the different varieties of the soup. It's a stark contrast to the Monet's and the like who would do series art and show how light, time, etc can all affect a subject is a series.

There's alot more to it than googling "tupac" and tracing the pic and calling it art.

Now sure, you can say that Warhol's Marilyn Monroe came from a famous photo (which Andy did manage to purchase and own). But look at the original photo and Andy's painting of it. The original was a b/w photo. Warhol painted color onto it, gave it a completely different feel than the photograph.

http://www.webexhibits.org/colorart/marilyns.html

The op's stuff is just fancy traces of an already existing photo. I'd rather just buy the original photo! Is it real or it is memorex? Ya know? He doesn't ad. He just parrots.

But in Warhol's case, there's originality, creativity and addition to the imagery that he used. He enhanced, even if the enhancing was bizarre or jarring, the original image.

Does the OP own the originals/usage rights to any of the photographs he traces in his "art?"

Does Danny Clinch know that some kid is planning on selling posters of his Tupac photo? I digress.

I quite agree. A lack of knowledge about art is terrible and they should stop posting on a technical computer forum ;)

stainlessliquid
Jul 28, 2009, 03:52 PM
To say Warhol's art has "no drawing at all, they were just prints with the colors changed" shows a gross lack of knowledge about the art world. You should stop posting.

Did you not see the album covers I posted? They're done by Warhol. They had to have been hand drawn. He has a WHOLE body of disparate work in addition to his soup cans and marilyns. did you know that?
Or better yet, you could actually read what I wrote instead of trying to educate me about things I already know.

Your art snobbery is blinding your logic. What hes doing is not any different than what Warhol was doing when he first started messing with famous photos (WITHOUT the original photographer's consent). Is there a difference in quality? Absolutely. But legally and logically they are in the same category.

wongulous
Jul 28, 2009, 06:06 PM
I for one appreciate the art history. You can't build a house without a foundation, so this discussion with some added history about art greats and historic types of fair use definitely gives perspective to the issue. I wasn't offended at all. Who gets offended at someone being educational?

Macky-Mac
Jul 28, 2009, 06:08 PM
O....... What hes doing is not any different than what Warhol was doing when he first started messing with famous photos (WITHOUT the original photographer's consent). Is there a difference in quality? Absolutely. But legally and logically they are in the same category.

not necessarily......here's a court case from a few years back that uses Warhol as an example for part of the decision.

Gary Saderup vs The Three Stooges (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HMU/is_9_28/ai_78539043/)


A recent case in California has pitted the Three Stooges against artist Gary Saderup. Saderup, who has made a career of creating charcoal drawings of celebrities, was sued for damages and injunctive relief by the Three Stooges' agent, Comedy III Productions Inc. under California's Right of Publicity Law, for selling lithographs and tee-shirts based on the artist's charcoal drawings bearing the likeness of the Three Stooges. The problem is Saderup did so without securing Comedy III's permission. (Comedy III is the registered owner of all their rights.)

The artist ultimately lost on the facts......

....The Court found that when artistic expression takes the form of literal depiction or imitation of a celebrity for commercial gain, directly trespassing on the Rights of Publicity without adding significant expression beyond that trespass, the state law in protecting the fruits of the celebrities' labor outweighs the expression of the imitative art. On the other hand, when a work contains significant transformative elements, it is not only worthy of First Amendment protection, but it also is less likely to interfere with the economic interest protected by the Right of Publicity.....

....the Court held against Saderup because it found the design generated profits solely from the use of the likeness of the Three Stooges and the artist's rendition was not transformative. The Court used the silkscreens of Andy Warhol as an example of subjects who are celebrities, but through distortion and careful manipulation of context, Warhol conveyed a message that went beyond the commercial exploitation of a celebrity and became a form of social commentary.....

stainlessliquid
Jul 28, 2009, 06:55 PM
Keep in mind that Warhol was also sued, and if he was just a nobody he would have gotten sued a lot more than he did. Judges tread in murky waters when they try to define things based on opinion, the same cases can easily turn out different based on who you get. People can BS artistic meanings into anything regardless of the artist's intentions, they did it with some of Warhol's stuff and Im sure they can do it to these images.

Now could the OP get in trouble for selling this stuff? Probably.

sigmadog
Jul 28, 2009, 07:06 PM
I find the OP's technical skills to be impressive, but his artistic vision is undeveloped, and his intention to sell the images is legally actionable.

Since this is the "Design and Graphics" forum, I think such discussions of the legality and artistic merits of created imagery is justified and, indeed, demanded in situations like this, if only for the education of those who might consider such questionable actions themselves.

Apart from technical skill (which is admittedly impressive), the images do not have any message other than an apparent intent to commercially exploit a famous celebrity and/or image.

It is common to teach oneself skills through copying others work/images. This is a valuable and worthwhile activity. We see the results in the OP's images. They are well-done renderings of images owned by others and therefore have value to the OP only to the extent that by copying them, he learned a new skill. Because the images are mere copies, albeit in digital form, they have no merit, no message apart from the celebrity they portray and therefore cannot be legally sold for profit without the consent of the original image holders and/or celebrities portrayed.

I suggest, as others have, that the OP look to inspiration within himself, and use his skills to discover a personal vision and message beyond mere celebrity exploitation.

That's my opinion as a designer with 30+ years experience.

Who's Tupac? Gawd! I feel old.

Macky-Mac
Jul 28, 2009, 08:15 PM
......Now could the OP get in trouble for selling this stuff? Probably.

he would seem to fall into the same territory as Gary Saderup did with his drawings of the Three Stooges....plus he's got the potential copyright violation issue that comes from so directly using the photographers' work


....

Who's Tupac? Gawd! I feel old.

would learning that Tupac has been dead since 1996 make you feel even older? :D

sarcasticdesign
Jul 28, 2009, 08:20 PM
Keep in mind that Warhol was also sued, and if he was just a nobody he would have gotten sued a lot more than he did. Judges tread in murky waters when they try to define things based on opinion, the same cases can easily turn out different based on who you get. People can BS artistic meanings into anything regardless of the artist's intentions, they did it with some of Warhol's stuff and Im sure they can do it to these images.

Now could the OP get in trouble for selling this stuff? Probably.

I'm surprised Warhol wasn't sued more often than he was. You have that a little bit in reverse. It tends to be the somebodies who get sued alot. They just happen to be able to defend themselves better.

The nobodies get sued once and completely screwed from it. ;)

That said, the judge is pretty clear. Transformative is pretty much the key word and perfectly sums up the difference between the OP's work and the work of a Warhol.

sigmadog
Jul 28, 2009, 08:23 PM
would learning that Tupac has been dead since 1996 make you feel even older? :D

Yes. Thank you for that.

Actually, I Googled him, so I'm up to speed. Never been a big fan of rap, saggy pants, or wearing baseball hats backwards. I'm an old fuddy-duddy.

Charalambous
Jul 29, 2009, 12:35 PM
id like to point out its quite funny how people are telling me this isnt art, when i dont believe i claimed it to be? niether have i stated that this is all i can do lol.

i originally was going to post a whole portfolio, but i soon realised this site was full of those people who just spend their time looking for ways to put people down, and so there would be no point. i also noticed this section was very slow moving, so iv not bothered to hurry and get loads of work scanned and uploaded. one day i will though.

for you to dismiss this work though, is for you to show me you have no idea how difficult it is. it shows craftsmanship if nothing else and nobody can honestly tell me otherwise. criticism is always welcome, but if your planning on simply being a prick, try and do what iv done here better first. i realize the stuff here shows no artistic flare, i didnt claim it does. im just doing these under commission for a company which does plan on selling them. so im pretty sure i wont even get in trouble anyway.

this is all iv posted because this is all iv been doing as of recent. to be honest its KILLING ME doing this ****.

those andy warhol cd covers are HORRIBLE lol. there is nothing aesthetically pleasing about them at all. i knew his work was far from pleasing to look at but wow... the difference is that i KNOW this isnt art. whereas andy seems like he got real high, had some bollocks put together, then worried about labeling it art and attaching a deeper meaning once he was sober. **** andy warhol to be honest. the amount of essays iv had to write on this guy...

i respect him i suppose, but his time has passed and people need to get over his work. it really want anything that special. im sure im going to get slated for this but its just my humble opinion as someone who has had to study him for years.

one last note, remember everyone, judge the work that is here and that you can see... not me on the whole, because this is just a small aspect of what im capable of.

its just pen tool after all...

until next time...

THX1139
Jul 29, 2009, 02:49 PM
id like to point out its quite funny how people are telling me this isnt art, when i dont believe i claimed it to be? niether have i stated that this is all i can do lol.

i originally was going to post a whole portfolio, but i soon realised this site was full of those people who just spend their time looking for ways to put people down, and so there would be no point. i also noticed this section was very slow moving, so iv not bothered to hurry and get loads of work scanned and uploaded. one day i will though.

for you to dismiss this work though, is for you to show me you have no idea how difficult it is. it shows craftsmanship if nothing else and nobody can honestly tell me otherwise. criticism is always welcome, but if your planning on simply being a prick, try and do what iv done here better first. i realize the stuff here shows no artistic flare, i didnt claim it does. im just doing these under commission for a company which does plan on selling them. so im pretty sure i wont even get in trouble anyway.

this is all iv posted because this is all iv been doing as of recent. to be honest its KILLING ME doing this ****.

those andy warhol cd covers are HORRIBLE lol. there is nothing aesthetically pleasing about them at all. i knew his work was far from pleasing to look at but wow... the difference is that i KNOW this isnt art. whereas andy seems like he got real high, had some bollocks put together, then worried about labeling it art and attaching a deeper meaning once he was sober. **** andy warhol to be honest. the amount of essays iv had to write on this guy...

i respect him i suppose, but his time has passed and people need to get over his work. it really want anything that special. im sure im going to get slated for this but its just my humble opinion as someone who has had to study him for years.

one last note, remember everyone, judge the work that is here and that you can see... not me on the whole, because this is just a small aspect of what im capable of.

its just pen tool after all...

until next time...

Wow, your post! You really come across as a D-Bag dude. First off, I don't think anyone was saying you are not talented as a craftsman. They were saying that just because you are good with a tracing pen, doesn't make you an artist. And you haven't taken any steps beyond showing your ripped off traces to prove that you have any other talent. BUT, the biggest part of the discussion has been about whether you are violating any copyright laws- and I believe it HAS been established that you are are. At the minimum, you are unethical. Especially when you make the comment that you are doing the work for someone else who is planning on selling it, as if you are relinquishing your responsibility. "Gee your honor, I was only driving the get-away car, I didn't actually participate in robbing the bank." LOL!

And I won't bother getting into your inane comments about Warhol. I'll just say your attitude towards his accomplishments say a lot about you and your vision of art. But hey, not everyone understands art or how to create something original, they are just craftsmen who know how to use the tools. And that is all you are.

You didn't need to get so defensive. People where just trying to help you from getting in trouble- and even encouraging you to try something else with your technical skills. You are the one who started the thread called "My Portfolio" and that implies that you are showing a body of original work that you created. Instead, we see a bunch of very nice tracings of other peoples photographs that you claim as your own. I see nothing original, just the well executed work of a copy cat.

Designer Dale
Jul 29, 2009, 04:02 PM
clip/

i originally was going to post a whole portfolio, but i soon realised this site was full of those people who just spend their time looking for ways to put people down, and so there would be no point. i also noticed this section was very slow moving, so iv not bothered to hurry
until next time...

Design and Graphics is intended as a reference for designers and students, not as a free portfolio site. Find Blue Velvet's "Welcome to Design and Graphics" thread and read the mission of this special interest forum. Posting work for comments is fine here, but it is intended to stimulate conversation that is responded to by posting improved works. All you do is post what you do and get defensive. Why don't you take the comments to heart and rework one of your posts with more individuality and show it to us? That is all we want to see. What do you have and how can you make it better?

The first thing that caught me when this thread first went up was that someone had the gall to name a thread "My Portfolio". Look at the thread "First Proper Portfolio - Critique / help / advice please!" and see how that person has used the input of this forum to improve his work.

Dale

sarcasticdesign
Jul 30, 2009, 11:09 AM
id like to point out its quite funny how people are telling me this isnt art, when i dont believe i claimed it to be? niether have i stated that this is all i can do lol.

i originally was going to post a whole portfolio, but i soon realised this site was full of those people who just spend their time looking for ways to put people down, and so there would be no point. i also noticed this section was very slow moving, so iv not bothered to hurry and get loads of work scanned and uploaded. one day i will though.

for you to dismiss this work though, is for you to show me you have no idea how difficult it is. it shows craftsmanship if nothing else and nobody can honestly tell me otherwise. criticism is always welcome, but if your planning on simply being a prick, try and do what iv done here better first. i realize the stuff here shows no artistic flare, i didnt claim it does. im just doing these under commission for a company which does plan on selling them. so im pretty sure i wont even get in trouble anyway.

this is all iv posted because this is all iv been doing as of recent. to be honest its KILLING ME doing this ****.

those andy warhol cd covers are HORRIBLE lol. there is nothing aesthetically pleasing about them at all. i knew his work was far from pleasing to look at but wow... the difference is that i KNOW this isnt art. whereas andy seems like he got real high, had some bollocks put together, then worried about labeling it art and attaching a deeper meaning once he was sober. **** andy warhol to be honest. the amount of essays iv had to write on this guy...

i respect him i suppose, but his time has passed and people need to get over his work. it really want anything that special. im sure im going to get slated for this but its just my humble opinion as someone who has had to study him for years.

one last note, remember everyone, judge the work that is here and that you can see... not me on the whole, because this is just a small aspect of what im capable of.

its just pen tool after all...

until next time...

wow. you're a carbon copy of so many of the kids I went to school with. so boneheaded in the belief that they can do no wrong legally or aesthetically to the point that it stunts any potential for growth they may exhibit.

now that i think about it, we used to call them "the great re-purposers" because they tended to blatantly rip stuff off.

i feel bad for you.

Charalambous
Jul 30, 2009, 08:05 PM
lol i will take all comments on board

Charalambous
Aug 18, 2009, 07:16 PM
was approached about including my work in a book of michael jackson fan art. i decided to revamp one of the MJ vectors for it;

http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs49/i/2009/230/8/2/MJ_Illustration_by_c_charalambous.jpg

MattSepeta
Aug 19, 2009, 12:00 PM
Lets all get really worked up over this! Fun!


That aside, I really like your last MJ pic, but just like the other posters have stated, It is BARELY art. It is something that should NOT be made for profit, because you very well could get nabbed for ripping off original the content creator.

I recognize the incredible talent that went into this stuff, but, it ends there. Take a photo of something or someone, then trace it, and I (And everyone else, I am sure) will be highly impressed. Better yet, do one from scratch, with no photo to work from! Then, guaranteed, your skills and worth will skyrocket :D

Good luck!