PDA

View Full Version : Greg Land, Greg Horn, Mike Deodato jr


The Predator
01-20-2010, 06:21 AM
hi everyone.
I have read a lot of comments about Greg land on different forums and as i understand it he use photoreference in his art. i´m curious why he get so much negative comments and i can´t find any comments about Mike Deodato jr who also use references. I think everyone does it one way or another.
I suspect that Greg Horn, Alex Ross, Tim Bradstreet also use a lot of photoreference. So why does Greg Land get so much heat?
I liked his art in Birds of prey, I loved his art in Sojurn but today his art seems a little lifelees.
Funny enough, his pencils looks good but as soon it´s inked and colored it looks so "flat" and lifeless.
IMO
The Predator

galmando
01-20-2010, 07:26 AM
using reference such as a landscape, or maybe basing a character off an actual real life person is okay. Deadato Jr does this, such as norman osborn, Bryan Hitch does it as well.

Greg Horn however directly lifts a scene from a movie and then draws over it practically, basically uses work that is already out there and traces. that's putting it bluntly.

he has been know ot even trace over his own work, i'm fairly certain that there are some side by side comparisons out there

so that may be why, above all others, he gets the most flak

zcotty
01-20-2010, 08:13 AM
Yeah using photo referance is one thing. All good artisdts do it. Alex Ross actually has people come into the studio and he photgraphs them in superman suits etc.

Buut tracing is what i think has peopl frowining at Greg Land.

maverick
01-20-2010, 10:41 AM
I think Land is great, always liked his art, can't imagine what that would ever change. Boo to the haters.

Phatman
01-20-2010, 10:44 AM
Uggh

j giar
01-20-2010, 12:58 PM
Uggh

Double Uggh. :yuk:

NaveenM
01-20-2010, 01:46 PM
I really don't think there is any problem with this as long as the references are taken by the artist himself/herself. This is something fairly common in fine arts, and goes back to the Renaissance. Some of the great masters of that time actually used camera obscura techniques to trace images projected onto a canvas.

galmando
01-20-2010, 02:40 PM
absolutely, if you take the reference yourself that's fine, you put in the effort.

but in the case of Land, it generally isnt his own work he 'references'

TRIPLE UGHHHH!!!

onizuka43
01-20-2010, 03:03 PM
I use to really like Greg Land's stuff back on his time from Nightwing, except he is still using the same pictures as references from all the way back then. It's sort of the fact that he isn't even trying that I think annoys most people.

Photo reference is an excellent tool, even for more cartoonish artists, and should never be looked down on, but with Greg Land, and Greg Horn that is all they do. They aren't even taking their own photos either, they go pick up a porn mag and start ripping out pages. I think their art takes us really out of the comic because it does come off as cheap and that's why it's looked down on in their cases.

I know people like Tony Harris takes a ton of photo reference and almost sets up a page on indesign with those photos first and then works from there, but they aren't taking us out of the comic because of it. We don't know those people he is drawing so they can just continue to be the characters in their stories.

There is using photo reference to help your art, and then there is photo reference is your art. Alex Ross is a painter, not a penciler, we want his art a certain way and so he uses photo reference to get it there. I doesn't get in the way of us enjoying the comic. Mike Deadato and Bryan Hitch also do it to help them, not become their art. I believe that that is one of the biggest reasons that people like Land and Horn are disliked, they use the same stuff over and over again, we usually know the people in the comic, so it takes us out of it. For a comic book fan being taken out of the experience is big.

Biofungus
01-20-2010, 03:44 PM
Land is notorious for tracing images from adult magazines, as well. He lightboxes everything, and most of the times the poses aren't even appropriate for the scenes, so not only does he trace, he's lazy at finding the right reference material.

onizuka43
01-20-2010, 03:47 PM
I would hate to have to see the money he must spend on replacement bulbs. :laugh:

Biofungus
01-20-2010, 03:51 PM
Another reason people get pissed at Greg Land is, when all this came to light, Marvel announced a strict policy about their artists photoreferencing, and basically Land violated every single one of them. Yet he's still working for Marvel, so the double standard also pisses people off.

Biofungus
01-20-2010, 03:52 PM
I would hate to have to see the money he must spend on replacement bulbs. :laugh:
He probably swipes them from Marvel :p

Justice41
01-20-2010, 04:31 PM
using reference such as a landscape, or maybe basing a character off an actual real life person is okay. Deadato Jr does this, such as norman osborn, Bryan Hitch does it as well.

Greg Horn however directly lifts a scene from a movie and then draws over it practically, basically uses work that is already out there and traces. that's putting it bluntly.

he has been know ot even trace over his own work, i'm fairly certain that there are some side by side comparisons out there

so that may be why, above all others, he gets the most flak
Uhhh You mean Greg Land Not Greg Horn right?
Horn does licensed works so he is most likely given material to use for his stuff. I know Greg Horn, I know how he draws. I've seen him draw.

cheeseisgood1918
01-20-2010, 05:00 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGGNtPMZe2I/AAAAAAAAHLc/mdGnOh9dYkE/s400/GregLand_Wolv2.jpg
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SfDileXns1I/AAAAAAAAOCk/DFDcwWC_HYY/s400/UNCX509_LandTrace.jpg&imgrefurl=http://jimsmash.blogspot.com/2009/04/new-greg-land-tracing.html&usg=__pFGGe7h7LanBQ33c45h7Ibhqg8A=&h=315&w=400&sz=51&hl=en&start=8&um=1&tbnid=vDacdYNM3fh_9M:&tbnh=98&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgreg%2Bland%2Btraces%26hl%3Den%26rlz% 3D1C1GGLS_en-GBUS359US359%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g227/GCas/bbsoj.jpg&imgrefurl=http://boards.ign.com/comics_general_board/b5033/172574917/p1/&usg=__YX2H2brk4Y7M5rwGEaMRPD0VYGk=&h=279&w=400&sz=47&hl=en&start=18&um=1&tbnid=htL7nw1mWCspAM:&tbnh=86&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgreg%2Bland%2Btraces%26hl%3Den%26rlz% 3D1C1GGLS_en-GBUS359US359%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1
And perhaps most damning:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/8450/hmmmmm4kt.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php%3Fp%3D1805132&usg=__UrI1uWSD50mFn0OYxrqWfn_F03U=&h=241&w=435&sz=451&hl=en&start=65&um=1&tbnid=KLPwaA-T9IYizM:&tbnh=70&tbnw=126&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgreg%2Bland%2Btraces%26ndsp%3D18%26hl %3Den%26rlz%3D1C1GGLS_en-GBUS359US359%26sa%3DN%26start%3D54%26um%3D1
Another reason people get pissed at Greg Land is, when all this came to light, Marvel announced a strict policy about their artists photoreferencing, and basically Land violated every single one of them. Yet he's still working for Marvel, so the double standard also pisses people off.
http://marvel.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=120788

Phatman
01-20-2010, 05:05 PM
Every time that a Greg Land tracing thread is born, a Rob Liefeld Cap's boobs thread dies.

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/9941/liefeldpwned0fq.jpg

Biofungus
01-20-2010, 05:41 PM
As an artist who specializes in marker work, I feel almost offended that Liefeld has a couple of copics on the table near him :p

Paul Sanderson
01-20-2010, 05:45 PM
I find that Liefeld has become an offensive word in itself.

Vittel
01-20-2010, 05:49 PM
I just looked at the Liefeld Cap picture again.
And while he was the one drawing it.

WHAT THE FUCK was the editor thinking giving it the greenlight???

I mean seriously.
Editors can be really picky.
And then they let something like THAT pass?

I mean I get that he is a name and all but still.


And I dont think there is much wrong with photoref.
Unless you trace EVERYTHING

maverick
01-20-2010, 06:01 PM
Awesome, guys.

**applauds**

Who can we bash next?

This is great.

Keep it up.

:rolleyes:

Paul Sanderson
01-20-2010, 06:05 PM
Who can we bash next? You? :huh:

cheeseisgood1918
01-20-2010, 06:37 PM
I don't think we were "bashing" anyone. We were simply giving reasons why some folks don't like Greg Land. And I think most of those arguments were pretty fair. As far as Liefeld goes, well the man's body of work pretty much speaks for itself. If you don't like the way the thread is going, feel free to ignore it. Really, we don't mind.

Phatman
01-20-2010, 07:04 PM
What hasn't been discussed here a million times before?

Greg Land doesn't just trace photographs without permission or acknowledgement of the artist/photographer, he traces the art of other artists in the field.

He's a thief.

He's a hack.

Phatman
01-20-2010, 07:05 PM
Who can we bash next? You? :huh:

I decided to leave you alone for this decade or you would have been next.

Watch out in 2020 though!

Saul Haber
01-21-2010, 12:55 AM
I think Greg Land gets an overly bad rep. Yeah, he traces for some panels, but he still puts out high quality artwork and people must like it (I don't) , because he's steadily employed on pretty high profile books. I was just looking at the preview pages for his newest X-men issue on Newsarama and I remember thinking "Hey, this is pretty good."
And that Leifield Boob Cap is insanity personified. Totally unreal.

Phatman
01-21-2010, 01:02 AM
I think Greg Land gets an overly bad rep.

Not really.

Rob Norton
01-21-2010, 01:39 AM
WHAT THE FUCK was the editor thinking giving it the greenlight???

I mean seriously.
Editors can be really picky.
And then they let something like THAT pass?

I mean I get that he is a name and all but still.


well..maybe you dont "get" it. yes..its a horrible drawing.. and yes..in ANY other world...it would not have passed. but Liefeld at that time (and maybe still to this day) is a name that generates sales and buzz and interest (good or bad). and his name for SURE has to be bigger than any nameless editor who has the unenviable task of having that image placed in front of him and realizes that hes going to have to let it out..cause LIEFLED drew it.

its not how it should be. but it IS how it is. fyi...liefeld himself even admitted it was horrible. that may not count for much.. but.. its something.

galmando
01-21-2010, 07:17 AM
Uhhh You mean Greg Land Not Greg Horn right?
Horn does licensed works so he is most likely given material to use for his stuff. I know Greg Horn, I know how he draws. I've seen him draw.

yeah, i meant Land!!! oops

maverick
01-21-2010, 11:10 AM
For those of you who are so certain that Greg Land "traces" -- I challenge you to rip a page out of Playboy, put it on a light table, start "tracing," and see if your results come anywhere close to what Greg Land's art looks like. Because I highly doubt it will.

Phatman
01-21-2010, 11:23 AM
For those of you who are so certain that Greg Land "traces" -- I challenge you to rip a page out of Playboy, put it on a light table, start "tracing," and see if your results come anywhere close to what Greg Land's art looks like. Because I highly doubt it will.

How much money are you willing to put on that comment?

galmando
01-21-2010, 12:29 PM
can we do centre folds?

maverick
01-21-2010, 01:18 PM
How much money are you willing to put on that comment?

If you think you can do better, do it.

Do you really need me to offer you money for you to feel like you are justified in your gross accusations of a professional with some 20 years experience in the industry?

Art is subjective. That goes for all "art" -- drawing, painting, writing, sculpting, film making, dance, whatever. What one person likes, the next person may hate. If you don't like Greg Land's art, then great. If you want to bash his style that's your prerogative. But accusing him of stealing? That's just desperation on your part.

If Greg Land really is doing what you're accusing him of (being a "hack" and a "thief"), and you think it's so easy to "trace" like he does (you like you accuse him of doing), then let's see it.

zcotty
01-21-2010, 01:44 PM
I think the Greg Land thing is one of those internet witch hunts that started with one angry reader and just blew up. I haven't looked into that much, but I know some of the accusations against him and with a little photoshop and a couple of hours searching through photos on the web, can probably be made against a lot of artists.

I've read the statements Marvel has made defending him so it's hard to believe he's stealing other people's work. No matter how much his books sell.

I do agree about using porn as referance being kind of gross, but he's definately not the only one over at Marvel doing it.

Unfortunately.

I don't have a list of artists who use the porn referances, but it seems that everytime there's a big battle half of the woman are on the verge of orgasm.

I know there are dozens of blogs and forum threads full of links to examples, but I frankly don't trust anything I see on the internet so I can't say if he uses photo referance or traces or just plain steals.

I'm gonna have to trust Marvel on this one and hope I haven't placed my trust in the wrong place.






.
:sure:

Nick Pitarra
01-21-2010, 02:16 PM
I just looked at the Liefeld Cap picture again.
And while he was the one drawing it.

WHAT THE FUCK was the editor thinking giving it the greenlight???

I mean seriously.
Editors can be really picky.
And then they let something like THAT pass?

I mean I get that he is a name and all but still.


And I dont think there is much wrong with photoref.
Unless you trace EVERYTHING

I read that Jim Lee asked him to fix it, but deadlines were close and Liefield said it'll be fine and they ran with it. I'm glad they didn't edit it though...that one panel has been talked about more than almost any other I can think of...and the image alone always brings a little chuckle on everytime I see it. I'd love to have that original page.

carynord
01-21-2010, 03:16 PM
Maverick does have a point - tracing, without knowing what you're doing, is going to look bad. Greg Land, whether he traces or not, knows how to draw.

xombey
01-21-2010, 04:22 PM
agreed, just tracing usually leads to lifeless drawings. just lines that don't add up to anything. a person with enough skill would still have to punch up these tracings. but tracing is not referencing. also, the thing that gives value to this type of art is the technical skill needed to draw these imagined worlds. Tracing amounts to cheating when viewed this way. no? if i posted a tracing of my favorite comic book cover wouldn't you view it differently than if i used certain aspects of that cover to come up with something creatively different, or even if i tried to copy the cover without tracing it?

Phatman
01-21-2010, 04:38 PM
If you think you can do better, do it.

Nope. You offer up the cash, I'll prove you wrong and you can keep the art. In fact, what would stop me from tracing actual Greg Land art and adding a better background?

The point is it wouldn't matter when you add stealing the work of other artists to the equation. Anybody with a trained eye sees his crap for what it is. It may be commercial and draw a check, but he and his "art" are irrelevant.

I'd rather draw what I do the way I do and never make a dime than do this. A lot of people don't care and that's their choice. If Marvel wants to employ him or anybody else that's their decision. However, no great sequential art will ever come from the pencil of Greg Land working in this way. That's probably not his goal, but that's mine and a lot of other artists.

The money in his bank account will dry up someday and his legacy to comics will be of a hack who irked out a living on the backs of other artists---what a legacy.

cheeseisgood1918
01-21-2010, 04:46 PM
While I agree that it takes some skill to make a traced picture good enough to be in a mainstream comic book, the fact is it's still tracing in an industry that supposedly relies on talented original individuals to drive business and keep people reading. Just because he's tracing a photograph and not someone else's drawing (sometimes, I can post links to pictures I found where he allegedly traced over other artists work if anyone really wants) doesn't mean it's okay to do. That's like saying it would be fine if, say, Bendis copied a film script, and stuck it verbatim in a comic book starring Spider-Man. Granted, that's a different animal all together, but that's why it's a metaphor.

I'm not arguing that the guy isn't talented, but I understand why some people have a problem with him. It's kind of a slap in the face to those of us who are trying to become better artists to gain half the recognition and pay that someone who takes the lazy way to meet his deadlines. And I realize that deadlines are difficult to meet. And as far as non artists go, I can still understand the frustration, because not putting 100% into a book that so many people read is like saying you don't really care. To me, comics is the dream job, and if I ever made it to Land's level, I can't imagine giving anything but my best, because what the hell's the point of having your dream job otherwise. I suppose it's easy for me to sit and make assessments without ever walking a mile in the guys shoes, but that's just the way I see things.

Phatman
01-21-2010, 04:58 PM
I've read the statements Marvel has made defending him so it's hard to believe he's stealing other people's work. No matter how much his books sell.

Land on the left/Travis Charest on the right:

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/5/52975/1064001-landswipe_super.jpg

A bunch of other artists and tracing his own tracings of other people's art in the same pic:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGAVjtsKtXI/AAAAAAAAHJU/-R1XSWqZaMY/s400/land2_425.jpg

More Land fun:

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/1043/landwingedskateroi8.gif

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/1695/landhotrodtv1.gif

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/9525/landpatchek1.gif

http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/3126/landnevensy2.gif

BTW, photographers ARE artists. Stealing their images is the same as tracing from Travis Charest.


I'm gonna have to trust Marvel on this one and hope I haven't placed my trust in the wrong place.


Marvel's there to make money and artistic ethics aren't a huge concern IMO. Once somebody sues over Land's antics, he'll be history.

cheeseisgood1918
01-21-2010, 05:05 PM
Agree with Phats here. Some of the examples I've seen on the net might, I might be able to chalk up to using photo ref.... but not all. The problem with that is that if he's trace one pic, it throws his credibility into doubt. Who's to say he hasn't done it a lot more. Now, I can't even look at one of his pics without wondering if it was traced from somewhere. I'm not going to sit and dissect everything he's done in his career trying to find if it's been lifted from somewhere else. I don't have the time, patience, or inclination to do so, but I can no longer afford him the benefit of the doubt. Sorry, just the way I feel.

Phatman
01-21-2010, 05:08 PM
No toy pic from Wizard is safe:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGAYflWL-mI/AAAAAAAAHJk/Zpyo4BK3Czc/s400/apollovreedde7a.jpg

Porn anyone?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGAQrtb0-8I/AAAAAAAAHIk/XLHhDoinbUs/s400/land_p.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/R8C7aJyRODI/AAAAAAAAFq0/FylSyp8pV_o/s1600/hmmmmm4kt.gif

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SfDiqslMTfI/AAAAAAAAOCs/yeJrbfzIIvc/s400/UNCX509_LandTrace.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/R8C70JyROHI/AAAAAAAAFrU/zwYu-EHaif4/s400/eckspyerion.gif

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/R8C70JyROGI/AAAAAAAAFrM/AOncuTyp0nM/s400/1153634031712cy7.jpg

More?

Biofungus
01-21-2010, 05:14 PM
Imagine the day Land's kid gets into his porn collection...

Phatman
01-21-2010, 05:18 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGq579PpS9I/AAAAAAAAHSE/-A4VL_Ge2CU/s400/Land20.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGwAsun8qzI/AAAAAAAAHYU/FK4vPhKQBQ4/s400/Land37.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGwF0urF86I/AAAAAAAAHYs/lacxc4pUcVc/s400/Land40.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGwJnay-HWI/AAAAAAAAHZc/wzQi8QmUnZ4/s400/Land41.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGwePTR9UyI/AAAAAAAAHaU/qck51zACcJM/s400/Land45.jpg

maverick
01-21-2010, 05:26 PM
^^ I don't buy any of those.

But I say again, bravo, people.

I look forward to the next thread where we can all get together and bash a few more industry professionals.

Phatman
01-21-2010, 05:30 PM
^^ I don't buy any of those.

Why?

Newt
01-21-2010, 05:34 PM
The startled man by Hitch doesn't look like a direct swipe- I suspect Land and Hitch used the same photo for reference. But the rest are really not ambiguous at all. They are direct swipes from other artists. That's just not OK in my book. I won't be buying any book drawn by Mr. Land.

xombey
01-21-2010, 05:34 PM
Imagine the day Land's kid gets into his porn collection...
i suspect that part of using porn might be that people wouldn't be eager to say that they recognize it.

maverick
01-21-2010, 06:09 PM
Why?
Because you're trying too hard, and so is everyone else that decides Greg Land is the ultimate scapegoat.

You're seeing what you want to see, in order to justify your own insecurities and shortcomings (and jealousies?).

The Lee Weeks -- no, sorry. The hair is different, the forehead is different, the nose is different, and Weeks' head is clearly wider.

The Hitch -- no, sorry, not at all.

The Bolland -- uh, they have similar expressions but that's where it ends. The nose is different, the ears are different, the forehead is different, the lips are different....

The McDaniel -- looks like a pretty standard side travel on a pommel horse to me. Any reference image of a gymnast on a horse would look pretty much the same.

The Cassady -- no comment. The image is blown up and pixelated in an obvious desperate attempt to burn Land at the stake.

maverick
01-21-2010, 06:12 PM
But enough about Land.

Let's bash on David Mack for a bit, shall we?

David Mack New Avengers ----> Adam Hughes Gen13

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/7273/mack8oj8rq9.jpg

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/4735/mack3vo4ii1.jpg

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/5639/mack1ew2fv6.jpg

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/2729/mack4si3nu4.jpg


Happy? Is this what you guys want? Hate on some more pros? Who's next? Come on, keep them coming!

xombey
01-21-2010, 06:23 PM
^^ I don't buy any of those.

But I say again, bravo, people.

I look forward to the next thread where we can all get together and bash a few more industry professionals.
seriously? even if you like the end results, and even if some are coincidences, there seems to be an awful lot of evidence, what do you think is going on?

maverick
01-21-2010, 06:24 PM
Speaking of Cassaday ........

Astonishing X-Men @#15:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/60/172675035_1eeb365615_o.jpg

Not Astonishing X-Men #15:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/62/231371676_8c96cbe99a_o.jpg

Come on, don't let me post them all, you guys are the experts here.....

xombey
01-21-2010, 06:26 PM
it's not hate. it's the comic book equivalent of steroids--there are asterixes (?) all over those pages

Rob Norton
01-21-2010, 06:31 PM
alright... Maverick... you are seriously turning into the biggest idiot here. there is HUGE difference from an OBVIOUS story homage like the kitty pryde/wolive one there...and straight up tracing fromother people work.

but whatever right? its all just coincedence. these greg land images just HAPPEN to line up line for line everywhere dont they?

im NOT supporting or denying the validity of greg land with this post... im just flabbergasted that you actually post your nonsense where you say people are "seeing what we want to see". and then you have the audacity to post that kitty/wolive thing and think its somehow on a par with the discussion. as if thats some kind of "take that assholes" kind of statement.

eyes shut fingers in ears la la la la la la la la la.....


rob

Biofungus
01-21-2010, 06:46 PM
I think what's worse is, he feels it's okay for Land to do it, because others do it.

It's not okay when anybody does it, and the simple truth is that Land has made a career of it. I believe the last time a thread like this started, somebody also posted his "regular pencils", and it would take him days to do a page decently w/o tracing (which is likely why he started in the first place), but at a normal pace, his pencils are rough at best. Other artists have done it, there's no doubt, but when artists do a couple of poses here or there, versus line for line tracing on just about EVERY panel...

Phatman
01-21-2010, 06:50 PM
Son, your ego is writing checks your body can't cash.

cheeseisgood1918
01-21-2010, 07:00 PM
Well Mav, to each his own I guess. I don't think I've posted anything unfair to Land. The OP wanted to know why he takes so much heat, and MOST people(I enphasize the word most because I don't want any arguments to ensue when you quote 1 line from someone else's post and claim we've all been unfair the whole time) have given valid examples of why his art is sometimes criticized. If you don't like it, or you're a fan of his, that's fine. But add something useful to the discussion. All I see is you posting pictures from artists who have used similar poses. Maybe some of those other artists have traced maybe not. Is that you're point? Are you trying to make the argument that you can look at any artists work and get the same results? If so, I don't see it, and you haven't really made any coherent argument anyway.

I don't think anyone started posting in this thread simply to bash artists they don't like. You jumped to that conclusion all by yourself. Yes, someone made an off the cuff remark about Liefeld. So? Does it offend you that much? You seem to have the impression that just because someone is a professional in the industry, that makes them an ethical person. That somehow, there's no possible way they could have been a little less than honest to get where they are. That's not how the world works. I honestly don't mean that as condescending as it sounded, but I'm really having trouble seeing your side of things.

I'll say it again, the guy loses credibility if he's been guilty of tracing even one time in his career, and I've seen several examples in this thread alone that seem to be traced. So how can I trust him at all?

zcotty
01-21-2010, 08:02 PM
Now that I've seen even more of the evidence... I've always been a fan of photo referance. Ever since a kid when I saw a documentary about Norman Rockwell. And being a fan of him pretty much makes me a fan of Alex Ross.

But this is... pretty disturbing stuff.

Same with the David Mack -> Adam Hughes thing... what are comics coming to?!

Kind of depressing. Almost wish I hadn't heard about this. I just got the new Xmen in the mail (We're a year or so behind over here) and Greg Land's the artist... REALLY takes the fun out of comics. :(

The Predator
01-22-2010, 01:39 AM
Oh boy! What did I start here, sorry.
Okay I think I got my answer, but to be honest, this is not new in the art business. I remember an interview with Boris Vallejo, where he said that he trace his photoreference on to the canvas, not because he couldn´t do it by hand but it goes quicker.
In my honest opinion I rather read a comic that has perfect anatomy even if it´s "photoreferenced" than reading comics where the hero has to small head to a big muscular body, it sort of disturbs the story more for me.
Some of the witchblade comics had this "beautiful" heroine, but her legs was three meters long and her head was to small for the rest of the body. in those cases I rather read a comic where the artist has "borrowed" a little to make it look better.
like I said before Land was good but today it feels like his comicpages are very lifeless.
Also, it is not fun to find famous faces in each character in the comics.
He could just borrow the posé and then change the whole figure, make it his own so to speak.

Another question is, how in hell can you find all these pictures that he has used as references, it must have taken a long time to find the right one.
I mean internet is a BIG place with a LOT of photos :happy:
Thanks for the answers my friends, now I know.
Cheers
The predator

Justice41
01-22-2010, 02:42 AM
Land on the left/Travis Charest on the right:

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/5/52975/1064001-landswipe_super.jpg

A bunch of other artists and tracing his own tracings of other people's art in the same pic:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGAVjtsKtXI/AAAAAAAAHJU/-R1XSWqZaMY/s400/land2_425.jpg

More Land fun:

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/1043/landwingedskateroi8.gif

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/1695/landhotrodtv1.gif

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/9525/landpatchek1.gif

http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/3126/landnevensy2.gif

BTW, photographers ARE artists. Stealing their images is the same as tracing from Travis Charest.



Marvel's there to make money and artistic ethics aren't a huge concern IMO. Once somebody sues over Land's antics, he'll be history.
We call These LANDGRABS!!!!

The DarkMind
01-22-2010, 08:32 AM
Porn anyone?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rzdB5a4kLAo/SGAQrtb0-8I/AAAAAAAAHIk/XLHhDoinbUs/s400/land_p.jpg


:blink: ... um, just what the hell is she supposed to be doing in this picture anyway?

Justice41
01-22-2010, 10:14 AM
:blink: ... um, just what the hell is she supposed to be doing in this picture anyway?
If you rotate the pic back she's probably riding someone and doing the fake orgasm thing. click here and scroll around, I'm sure things will seem familiar soon.
http://tiny.cc/jaVxb

The DarkMind
01-22-2010, 10:22 AM
If you rotate the pic back she's probably riding someone and doing the fake orgasm thing. click here and scroll around, I'm sure things will seem familiar soon.
http://tiny.cc/jaVxb

:slap: i know what the reference used was doing. i want to know what the heck is supposed to be portrayed in the comic panel with that pose :laugh:

maverick
01-22-2010, 10:50 AM
I think what's worse is, he feels it's okay for Land to do it, because others do it.
No, not my point. Not at all.

Son, your ego is writing checks your body can't cash.
not sure what defending Greg Land has to do with my ego...?

Like I said, if you don't like Greg Land's art, that fine. But there's no sense in getting personally offended by it and raising a lynch mob in an effort to end the man's career.

I'm not a lawyer. So I'm done defending him. I'll continue to enjoy his work (as well as Greg Horn, David Mack, Mike Deodato, Steve Ditko, Todd McFarlane, and anyone else who has been "accused," even yes, Jack Kirby).

Scribbly
01-22-2010, 11:02 AM
Swipes are, apparently, a long timer comic's tradition
back to the time of the comic's creation.
Pre-Golden and Silver age.
Going from "homage" to plagiarism.
This is something that we could historically see.
Sometimes, this practice is sponsored (until today) by the publishers
of those artists, others by the swipe artists themselves.
http://www.greatlakesavengers.com/swipes/

How long takes to find the "correct" panel for swiping?
Due the level of skill these swipes have, compared
with the artists they sweep, why can't they make
something original by their own?
http://blog.adlo.es/swipe_of_the_week/2007/09/

And how long takes to these fan boys to find
the source material for these swipes?
That constitutes an entertainment by itself.

Usually people go to find graphics swipes.

But what about the “writing swipes”?
Ideas, concepts, phrases and expressions?

These are comics ideas swiped by
the TV serie Heroes,
http://www.ugo.com/tv/heroes-rip-offs/?cur=main

Biofungus
01-22-2010, 12:56 PM
No, not my point. Not at all.

You're defending Land, and trying to point to other artists who do it.

How else is that to be perceived then?

Justice41
01-22-2010, 01:19 PM
actually don't blame the thieves blame the idiots who don't care how it's done just that it's done and they get their silly comics monthly.

NaveenM
01-22-2010, 05:34 PM
Actually, what I'm curious is how people are able to spot these matches. Some of these pics are kinda obscure.

I understand the copied art, but not how people manage to match all the photo references.

Newt
01-22-2010, 05:53 PM
Maybe Land made those GIFs himself.

weshoyot
01-22-2010, 07:24 PM
Actually, what I'm curious is how people are able to spot these matches. Some of these pics are kinda obscure.

I understand the copied art, but not how people manage to match all the photo references.
i kinda think this whole thread is kinda funny. if folks only realized the way the comic book art field works, especially with pro's on multiple books, you'd probably be shocked a lil. it generally comes down to getting the art out there and making it look nice and finished. the final product is what's important, how they got there is secondary. many many pro's use photo reference, direct light-boxing over photos...computer layering of images from their own traced stock....assistants...etc. there are several books out there with creators names on them, while a large majority of the art was down by 'a shadow'.....just saying.

Phatman
01-22-2010, 08:00 PM
I think it's kind of funny when a noob pops in here and thinks that they are some sort of "know it all" and they are going to tell us "how it is" in the comic book business.

None of this stuff is a mystery. We all know how the game is played at the Big Two---they're a business---they have deadlines---we get it. What Land does goes beyond "getting the job done" and most artists don't follow what he does. Using Sketch-up or a modeling program isn't the same thing. Using a light box and a few pictures you took isn't the same thing. Hiring another artist to help with your backgrounds isn't the same thing. Stealing from other artists is wrong and unethical no matter how you try to spin it.

The people defending him and making excuses come across like idiots. Just have the balls to say that you enjoy the tracings and stolen work that Land produces and most people could care less. It's the defense that this practice is acceptable that causes the arguements.

Buckyrig
01-22-2010, 08:05 PM
it generally comes down to getting the art out there and making it look nice and finished.

Coulda fooled me.

Or did books start coming out on time while I wasn't paying attention? :huh:

Paul Sanderson
01-22-2010, 08:46 PM
I decided to leave you alone for this decade or you would have been next.

Watch out in 2020 though!

I think I'm safe, buddy ;)

Paul Sanderson
01-22-2010, 08:53 PM
I think what's worse is, he feels it's okay for Land to do it, because others do it.

It's not okay when anybody does it, and the simple truth is that Land has made a career of it. I believe the last time a thread like this started, somebody also posted his "regular pencils", and it would take him days to do a page decently w/o tracing (which is likely why he started in the first place), but at a normal pace, his pencils are rough at best. Other artists have done it, there's no doubt, but when artists do a couple of poses here or there, versus line for line tracing on just about EVERY panel...

Agreed. It's never okay. Ever!

weshoyot
01-23-2010, 02:13 AM
I think it's kind of funny when a noob pops in here and thinks that they are some sort of "know it all" and they are going to tell us "how it is" in the comic book business.

None of this stuff is a mystery. We all know how the game is played at the Big Two---they're a business---they have deadlines---we get it. What Land does goes beyond "getting the job done" and most artists don't follow what he does. Using Sketch-up or a modeling program isn't the same thing. Using a light box and a few pictures you took isn't the same thing. Hiring another artist to help with your backgrounds isn't the same thing. Stealing from other artists is wrong and unethical no matter how you try to spin it.

The people defending him and making excuses come across like idiots. Just have the balls to say that you enjoy the tracings and stolen work that Land produces and most people could care less. It's the defense that this practice is acceptable that causes the arguements.
i may not have a lot of posts here on DW, but i wouldn't quite consider myself a noob. im not pretending i know everything...not at all, and many people who have posted already have very valid points about the ethics of it all...but everything i wrote is based on experience i have had firsthand in the industry thus far. i understand the ethics of it, where i personally stand in my own head on it, but there's a very blurry border with a lot of the reproduction that goes into the art of comics....

chris stevens
01-23-2010, 02:33 AM
phatman, weshoyot worked for howard chaykin.

i think she has some idea what she's talking about, call me crazy.

classy thread here.

Phatman
01-23-2010, 02:49 AM
phatman, weshoyot worked for howard chaykin.

i think she has some idea what she's talking about, call me crazy.

classy thread here.

...and?

I agree with what she just said, and the point that most of the things she discussed are common practice in commercial art---I think this is common knowledge around here. What is happening in this instance doesn't fly outside of comics---not without industry scrutiny.

Anybody justifying this needs to take a freshman ethics class at the local community college.

Phatman
01-23-2010, 02:57 AM
i may not have a lot of posts here on DW, but i wouldn't quite consider myself a noob. im not pretending i know everything...not at all, and many people who have posted already have very valid points about the ethics of it all...but everything i wrote is based on experience i have had firsthand in the industry thus far. i understand the ethics of it, where i personally stand in my own head on it, but there's a very blurry border with a lot of the reproduction that goes into the art of comics....

I agree with your point, but IMO the line has to be drawn at reproducing another artist's work. Any method can be used or abused, but I get the reality of deadlines---everybody deals with this in just about every field.

Scribbly
01-23-2010, 04:18 AM
People should stop calling these practices "SWIPES"
and start calling it as what really is, "PLAGIARISM".

Just to be clever on what is this about.
But if publishers still paying for having that,
they will go in print.

As in TV business, if the numbers don't work,
they'll take you off the air.

Same thing happens in comics.
But, if people keep buying comics made
by these plagiarists, they will still making their game.
Maybe, is all part of the show?

People keep buying the work of plagiarists in amount
enough that justify their staying in printed comics.

For the other side, amazing artists with "own" approach and POV
are kicked off out of the comics business every day, because they
don't make enough sales.

Why this happen? I don't know

Biofungus
01-23-2010, 11:25 AM
You're missing a key point though, Scribbly:

None of the big two comics are done by a single person. Even if you could manage to stop buying a title (without hurting/breaking continuity in your reading and collection) to spite the one plagarist working on the title, you'd be hurting the other few contributors who are busting their butts to put out legit, mostly original work.

Scribbly
01-23-2010, 02:54 PM
You're missing a key point though, Scribbly:

None of the big two comics are done by a single person. Even if you could manage to stop buying a title (without hurting/breaking continuity in your reading and collection) to spite the one plagarist working on the title, you'd be hurting the other few contributors who are busting their butts to put out legit, mostly original work.

Well, what is the problem on changing the plagiarist by another
“truly”artist and keep the same team of writer, inker colorist and letterer working in the title?

It is a very common practice change the artist who produce low sales,
in the middle of the book for another artist who can invigorate
the sales on the same title.

What I meant is that plagiarists are consented by publishers, because their
work can match with the publisher’s sales prospect on titles they work.
And this happen, because the audience also, accept what they see,
and go buying these books.
With no problem whatsoever.
Why? Maybe, because plagiarists are chameleons always behind the work
of big mainstream artists who can produce good sales for the publisher as well.
And sometimes at first sight, we, as readers, don’t know who is who.

Unlike other artists, with own and more personal styles that
are flat ignored by the audiences.
Therefore, no producing the publisher’s expected sales.
Soon, these artists are kicked out of the books they are working.
And in an extend,from the comics business in general.

It is all part of the show. IMHO.

Justice41
01-23-2010, 03:10 PM
So what would marvel do with a star like Dave Finch?
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/1176/img0339biv8.jpg
who swiped Sergio Toppi.
http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/7915/05nh9.jpg

Scribbly
01-23-2010, 03:30 PM
Don't know. Dave Finch is a sales maker for his publishers.
Maybe that is an answer.
BTW, do you know "from where" Toppi copied these images?*
From photos that were published in the.....*

'Who sweep a swiper..."

Justice41
01-23-2010, 03:32 PM
Don't know. Dave Finch is a sales maker for his publishers.
Maybe that is an answer.
BTW, do you know "from where" Toppi copied these images?*
From photos that were published in the.....*

'Who sweep a swiper..."
Proof or your lieing

Biofungus
01-23-2010, 03:43 PM
Wasn't there something about Finch having actually gotten permission from Toppi to copy that piece? I thought somebody mentioned it near the end of the original thread that image begat...


Well, what is the problem on changing the plagiarist by another
“truly”artist and keep the same team of writer, inker colorist and letterer working in the title?

It is a very common practice change the artist who produce low sales,
in the middle of the book for another artist who can invigorate
the sales on the same title.

What I meant is that plagiarists are consented by publishers, because their
work can match with the publisher’s sales prospect on titles they work.
And this happen, because the audience also, accept what they see,
and go buying these books.
With no problem whatsoever.
Why? Maybe, because plagiarists are chameleons always behind the work
of big mainstream artists who can produce good sales for the publisher as well.
And sometimes at first sight, we, as readers, don’t know who is who.

Unlike other artists, with own and more personal styles that
are flat ignored by the audiences.
Therefore, no producing the publisher’s expected sales.
Soon, these artists are kicked out of the books they are working.
And in an extend,from the comics business in general.

It is all part of the show. IMHO.

The publishers change artists for many reasons, but lack of sales on major book is not one of them (since long running books routinely switch artists, but writers stay on for a lot longer on average). If the sales dropped that badly, you can bet they wouldn't be blaming Land for it.

Land would have to be outright sued for plagarism before Marvel would even consider what he does "wrong". And even then, he'd have to lose the case for them to replace him (for anything other than scheduling issues/artist needs some time off).

Justice41
01-23-2010, 04:19 PM
Wasn't there something about Finch having actually gotten permission from Toppi to copy that piece? I thought somebody mentioned it near the end of the original thread that image begat....
The guy posing as Finch in that thread admitted to swiping Toppi as well as Frazetta and others like Charest. If he wasn't Finch then maybe ask Finch at a con if he did do that. Otherwise who knows if he did or didn't but the image is there without declaration or acknowledgement of the person whom he took it from.

Scribbly
01-23-2010, 04:20 PM
Proof or your lieing
Toppi never denied his use of photograps as reference for his work.
If you follow his work in the serie "Um houmo une aventure" and
all his previous works for Corriere dei ragazzi, he always copied straight
from photos.
Of course, giving new life to them with his magic touch.

Mostly from the magazines National Geographic and Life.
And Europeans journals as well.
That picture, the one you show, is part of his book "Homage to Kurosawa",
where he took frames of Kurosawa movies as reference for
his illustrations.
Capito?



.

Justice41
01-23-2010, 04:39 PM
You use the right term, Photo Reference. Photo Ref is not litebox tracing. When you can take a Landgrabs and lay it over the source material and all the lines line up then we have a problem. Landgrabs isn't a swiper, he's a thief. An IP thief at that. Using a pic to draw from is as old as the hills. tracing others works is just theft plain and simple.

maverick
01-27-2010, 03:06 PM
The people defending him and making excuses come across like idiots. Just have the balls to say that you enjoy the tracings and stolen work that Land produces and most people could care less. It's the defense that this practice is acceptable that causes the arguements.
Again with the "him." Why are you so stuck on Land? You got something against him personally? I like his art. It is what it is. I never tried to claim he wasn't lightboxing/tracing, but I did stop short of calling it "stealing." But again, you seem to have some sort of hard-on for Land that I can't quite understand. Erik Larson puts it best: (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=15087)
I just find it peculiar that fans will praise one creator for doing something while condemn another for doing precisely the same thing.

That is my reason for posting images from artists other then Greg Land in this thread.

Don't know. Dave Finch is a sales maker for his publishers.
Maybe that is an answer.

That makes it okay? Are you saying Greg Land isn't a sales maker for his publishers?

Again, I just find it peculiar that fans will praise one creator for doing something while condemn another for doing precisely the same thing.

http://blog.newsarama.com/2008/04/02/brevoort-on-swiping/

http://forum.newsarama.com/showpost.php?p=5248035&postcount=210

ponyrl
01-27-2010, 03:35 PM
If a basketball player can't make a shot after playing for years, then he needs to go back and work on his game.

If an illutrator can't draw a scene or pose after illustrating for years, then he needs to go back and work on his game.

no excuse or reasoning will be acceptable.

xombey
01-27-2010, 03:52 PM
the main issue is that we're all confusing art with commerce. the idea that the end result is all that matters is what a lot of his fans will say. that's business--if it sells it can't be bad. i think those of us that are against it are looking at it as art and composing your own scene is part of the art of comics.

the other thing that people seem to be saying is that, because he changes nothing in the things he swipes, it doesn't jive with the story. a woman that's supposed to be running for her life looks like she's having an orgasm... things like that are why he's singled out.

marvel tho, should consider what this says to wannabe artists. all that bullshit the editors might tell you about life drawing classes. the new how to draw the marvel way is going to be about which search engines you use and software you can use to resize and manipulate "found" images to the desirable composition.it may even come with an automatic pencils button.

xombey
01-27-2010, 04:13 PM
i'm curious,has he ever addressed the readership about this?

Phatman
01-27-2010, 05:18 PM
Again with the "him." Why are you so stuck on Land? You got something against him personally? I like his art. It is what it is. I never tried to claim he wasn't lightboxing/tracing, but I did stop short of calling it "stealing." But again, you seem to have some sort of hard-on for Land that I can't quite understand.

Actually, I think what David Mack does is just as bad. Land is an easy target on this practice because his work is full of it. And it is stealing, which by definition is taking something that is not yours.

I really don't like anybody doing this stuff because it gives comic book art a bad name. I care about that. I don't care what Erik Larsen or Joe Quesada defend or justify---they'd be singing a different tune if one of us started tracing their work and making money off of it. Guys like Land and Mack must make them money, so it doesn't matter to them.

What is so hard about just drawing your own stuff and working to get better? Land has published work before he did this kind of thing. If he wanted to go more photorealistic he could at least do what Tony Harris does, and use his own source material instead of stealing from other artists.

To me, tracing and light boxing aren't even the issue---it's the theft of other people's art that is wrong. If you can justify this in your head and support it, it's your right, but don't expect everybody to agree with you. What's wrong is wrong.

Phatman
01-27-2010, 05:23 PM
i'm curious,has he ever addressed the readership about this?

I've heard a lot of people who have worked with him justify it by trying to muddy the terms photo-referencing or swiping with what he does.

Using reference is one thing.
Tracing is another.
Swiping is a different thing.
Paying homage is another.

What he does is steal. He gets away with it because his work sells, he hits his schedules and he's probably a nice guy (aside from being a thief). His writers and publishers don't care because of these three reasons. It's business---we get that. It's still stealing and unethical though.

chris stevens
01-27-2010, 05:36 PM
in david mack's case he was doing a favor for a friend--quesada--and a company that had been good to him. he had extremely limited time to turn that work around and he got it done the fastest way he could.

this whole thread is lame--how many times can the same old shit be stepped on here--but bringing mack into it, a guy who has done so much for modern comics, is wrong.

you don't like greg land's stuff? i don't either. i don't buy his books. you shouldn't either. simple.

xombey
01-27-2010, 06:00 PM
i don't buy his comix, mainly because i don't have any interest in the books he's on. but the issue remains. he's still one of the top "artists" and his work is currently out there, so discussing it seem relevant, especially on a site full of aspiring comic artists, many of whom post art looking for critique. shouldn't the "realities" of the field they wish to enter be something they discuss. and might it not make them change the focus of their development and portfolio. point blank--if you want to work in comics should you learn to draw or learn to trace really well?

Phatman
01-27-2010, 06:35 PM
in david mack's case he was doing a favor for a friend--quesada--and a company that had been good to him. he had extremely limited time to turn that work around and he got it done the fastest way he could.

this whole thread is lame--how many times can the same old shit be stepped on here--but bringing mack into it, a guy who has done so much for modern comics, is wrong.

you don't like greg land's stuff? i don't either. i don't buy his books. you shouldn't either. simple.

No it's not. His tracing of Hughes pages is ridiculous. And, yes, all of these kind of threads are lame.

L Jamal
01-28-2010, 12:28 AM
you don't like greg land's stuff? i don't either. i don't buy his books. you shouldn't either. simple.
I think that this is the simplest solution, but I can't excuse Mack's failings because of his successes. David Mack is one of the nicest guys there is. I sincerely like him and his work on Kabuki, but his "style" is not original as Sienkiewicz did it first (I prefer the Caliber and early Image Kabuki titles).

I can't imagine that trolling through a comic to make a pose work for a script is any easier than just drawing the script without the "reference." Ultimately, all shortcuts becomes crutches.

I'm not convinced that the Mack "swipes" are swipes. Give me any 2 superhero comics from the same era and I can find similar poses. That doesn't make them swipes.

What bothers me most about Greg Land's material is that the poses rarely fit into the scene and pull you out of the comic because they are out of place. Additionally, he depends too much on his "model" even at the cost of going off models with the characters from panel to panel as his "sources" change. To me that's just hack work as panel continuity and storytelling should be the primary objective of all comic book art.

Scribbly
01-28-2010, 01:12 AM
We shouldn’t be too hard with these guys.
Lets them be.
Who knows?
What if they actually had some kind of cerebral palsy
or other kind of disability?
We never know.

j giar
01-28-2010, 10:53 AM
panel continuity and storytelling should be the primary objective of all comic book art.
Wow. :thumbs:
Something so simple, that seems to be sacrificed so often. The most sensible thing in the entire thread.
I would add the word "good" to comic book art.

L Jamal
01-28-2010, 02:42 PM
Wow. :thumbs:
Something so simple, that seems to be sacrificed so often. The most sensible thing in the entire thread.
I would add the word "good" to comic book art.

Here you go :D

Panel continuity and storytelling should be the primary objective of all GOOD comic book art.

Phatman
01-28-2010, 03:03 PM
Here you go :D

Panel continuity and storytelling should be the primary objective of all GOOD comic book art.

This is why you get to wear the mod hat. This statement says it all.

Biofungus
01-28-2010, 04:17 PM
And Land is infamous for his *lack* of panel continuity.

So there ya go :)

j giar
01-28-2010, 05:23 PM
This is always an interesting question. I tend to focus more on continuity and clarity than I do...for lack of a better term...style. Flashy, squiggly lines, lots of bang...It's great for appearance but makes little sense to me. It becomes more about the artwork than it does the story. Which I've always been under the impression, is what's most important.
Myself, my work has been referred to, in all do respect, as boring. Not a lot of interesting angles or mix of panel designs. Which, when I look at it, is true. But again I'm more concerned about keeping page or panel movement than how I depict someone looking up to a window, as a poor example. I realize we want to give the reader something to do with their eyes, to make it more entertaining and interesting to read, and that's what I'm focusing on becoming better at, find that happy balance. However, if these gentleman are sacrificing that to give us that "in look". Well it becomes more self-gratifying, than having to do with telling stories.

maverick
08-12-2010, 12:29 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Hiroshige_Van_Gogh_1.JPG

left: Hiroshige, "The Plum Garden in Kameido"
right: Van Gogh, "Flowering Plum Tree"

Scribbly
08-12-2010, 01:17 PM
Yes, during his staying in Paris,Van Gogh learned of Japanese painted prints.
Making use of his meager income, he decided to do not eat,
but to buy hundred of these prints, that he copied only for experimentation and study purposes.
As he confessed publicly to his friends.
He was strong admirer of the Japanese artwork and painting techniques.
Later on, he will apply these concepts in his own painting motives.

In life, he never intended to sell or make profit from any of these copies.



.

MARK A ROBINSON
08-12-2010, 04:41 PM
Uggh


Hahaha.

Selling the drama one thread at a time.


M.

Kody
08-12-2010, 05:40 PM
I got no problem with referencing, tracing, or pasting in photos. If it looks good, it IS good. It's all about servicing the story. I once did an entire comic with nothing BUT photographs just to prove it could be done.

Personally, I'd like to see more experimentation in comics. Why not use things like photo collage, claymation photographs, miniatures, sock puppets, etc? Technically, I don't think drawing is a requirement for making comics.

Having said that, I do have a big problem when an artist traces someone else's art. That's not professional.

I think the problem many people have with heavily referenced art is that it doesn't work for the story being told. When you spot a Bruce Willis face on someone that isn't Bruce Willis, it's distracting. For me, it's an issue of quality. But if you can make it work, use whatever technique you want.

MARK A ROBINSON
08-12-2010, 07:48 PM
I happen to like the spit and shine technique myself.

Works every time.


M.

Phatman
08-12-2010, 08:59 PM
I got no problem with referencing, tracing, or pasting in photos. If it looks good, it IS good. It's all about servicing the story. I once did an entire comic with nothing BUT photographs just to prove it could be done.

Personally, I'd like to see more experimentation in comics. Why not use things like photo collage, claymation photographs, miniatures, sock puppets, etc? Technically, I don't think drawing is a requirement for making comics.

Having said that, I do have a big problem when an artist traces someone else's art. That's not professional.

I think the problem many people have with heavily referenced art is that it doesn't work for the story being told. When you spot a Bruce Willis face on someone that isn't Bruce Willis, it's distracting. For me, it's an issue of quality. But if you can make it work, use whatever technique you want.

I agree that the line has to be drawn at reproducing another artist's work. Any technique is valid to create artwork. Stealing isn't creating though. The guys that want to trace photographs need to buy a camera and take their own pics; it's that simple.

Phatman
08-12-2010, 09:01 PM
Hahaha.

Selling the drama one thread at a time.


M.

I want my excellent posts from this thread put into the archives at the Smithsonian. ;)

Thanks for resurrecting your pwnage Mav---you rock!!!! :thumbs:

powerbomb1411
08-12-2010, 09:13 PM
I can't add much new content to the thread, everything has pretty much been said.

Horn's work doesn't bother me, Deodato's bothers me sometimes. I'm OK with reference, but when it looks so obvious (Tommy Lee Jones as Norman & Land's work). it starts to take me out of the story. I used to like Land because if was photo realistic, I was new to comics at the time also, so I didn't know why. but honestly, once I found out I didn't care, it still seemed good to me and it came out on time. It wasn't until later and this even happens with writers now, where certain things are brought to my attention, and then I just get pulled out of the story.

Quick thing on Leifield and Caps boobs.

Check out this video. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFqXs6vYvO8)

He talks about what happened and makes no excuses.

Phatman
08-12-2010, 10:28 PM
I can't add much new content to the thread, everything has pretty much been said.

Horn's work doesn't bother me, Deodato's bothers me sometimes. I'm OK with reference, but when it looks so obvious (Tommy Lee Jones as Norman & Land's work). it starts to take me out of the story. I used to like Land because if was photo realistic, I was new to comics at the time also, so I didn't know why. but honestly, once I found out I didn't care, it still seemed good to me and it came out on time. It wasn't until later and this even happens with writers now, where certain things are brought to my attention, and then I just get pulled out of the story.

Quick thing on Leifield and Caps boobs.

Check out this video. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFqXs6vYvO8)

He talks about what happened and makes no excuses.

Honestly, I find the Liefeld Cap picture funny and more of a failure in editing than in art. Why didn't somebody who inked or colored it say something? Why didn't the editor have him fix this thing? Any artist can be in a rush and screw something up like this.

Lightfoot
08-16-2010, 06:22 PM
Jamal, I think, is right...what should count the most with any of this art is the story telling. Theft of ideas is terrible but in terms of storytelling many readers claim the huge schism from panel to panel in a character's appearance...plus facial expressions that were convenient for lightboxing, but entirely inappropriate for the situation...these elements are what make them question Land's use of the so-called swipes.

Yes the Land-bashing is now fairly old online; what I could not understand when I was looking at all the examples last year is some of his choices for these references. The Charest Spider-man, for example, I thought he could have sketched up in no time without replicating the original.

Barnaby
08-19-2010, 03:32 PM
Any artist can be in a rush and screw something up like this.

Nope... nobody does it like Liefield! Other may screw up things a bit, but only Liefield can screw up like this! :D

Barnaby
08-19-2010, 03:43 PM
About the swipes and all...

IMO the lack of professionalism in those guys is appalling... Land, Mack,... whatever. It's plagiarism, plain and simple.
Unfortunately, the books sell, which keep them in business... it's all part of the show. Marvel, DC and others couldn't care less about artist ethics, they care about money and keeping the shareholders happy, so they let them do it. But just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should...

I'm an artist myself and I wouldn't want to build my career by swiping other artists and photographers, but hey, maybe I'm wrong and the paycheck makes it worth it...

albone
08-23-2010, 02:33 PM
So....if say, Sports Illustrated was upset that an artist for Marvel, for example, swiped their cover for an illustration, what would happen? Would they have to stop printing? pay a licensing fee?

I'm just curious as to why any of them haven't been busted out in a court of law (yet).