Is tracing wrong?

Is tracing wrong?

Attached: Greg Land.png (959x913, 1.39M)

I honestly dont think so and don't see the problem with it. One of my favorite art classes (very intro level) I ever took involved teaching us how to write by tracing with lightboxes. While there is certainly tracing going on in OP's post (which alone would be fine with me), the artist obviously added a lot more to it than the source image of the bear. I take no issue with it.

if it is a minimal element in the piece that is traced then it doesn't bother me. Also it helps for comics because storytelling is more than half of the art and tracing helps tell the story faster.

To me, what matters most is what you’re trying to achieve, and if tracing gets you there, than trace. So long as it’s not passed as your own work

it's just sad at this point

lets see your work then

what bothers me the most is the fact that bear is mute, but what says.

>It’s another “user calls a bad reference “tracing”.” episode

Yes if you're not acknowledging it or the work you traced.
Reference gets a pass because at least you're subtly transforming the work when you transpose it.

To add, a comic artist doing it blatantly and then denying it makes said person a fucking faggot.

I'm fine with this one. I think what usually fucks with me is poorly tracing pictures of people making particular expressions that can be easily identified as traced.

Tracing from life is 100% fine as long as you still know how to draw well enough already and they don’t have uncanny valley doll faces. Tracing from other people’s work without their permission is totally awful though, never do it unless you use their work just as a reference.

Tracing is used to teach beginners but it's not something professionals do. Professionals use references. If this guy can't just put a picture of a bear in front of him and then draw it and get more or less the same results then he shouldn't have a job in art because he can't fucking draw.

this
Greg Land is a piece of shit and the alien deabacle from a month ago its fucking pathetic since he was lifting other ILLUSTRATORS not only photos.

Marvel is a shit hole.

Do we have the actual photo people insist was the original? Usualy people like you post in these threads because you see one or two differences and are entirely blind to how many lines completely line up, which would be impossible if referencing.

I'm surprised Marvel is still running. I wonder how much money they actually make? They purposely hire bad artists and bad writers to pay them barely anything, because they can't afford real talent because no one buys their dumbass comics because they're all low tier 'BUY ME IT'S GOT A LATINA IN IT' crap.

yes
and its a fucking famous photo HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Attached: 1601041748460.jpg (1729x871, 295.49K)

They're purely keep as optics, Disney won't shut down them all cause every now and then they can either test a dumb story and make it seem like creativity keeps afloat there by making the ART.

its fucking sad and pathetic.

>Even traced the snow
How the fuck are anons so goddamn blind that they say shit like this is a reference? Maybe it's just the equivalent of a person who doesn't speak a language hearing it as gibberish and I just can't imagine how someone who doesn't do art would actually process both photos?

Attached: t4334t3443.png (591x584, 657.41K)

Traced, or copied from a reference image, I don't care. As a biofag, I'm personally happy to see animals that actually look anatomically correct in comics; after a childhood looking at things drawn by someone who saw a picture of an animal on TV, once.

Attached: frilled shark.png (1005x495, 1.12M)

He even traced the FUCKING SNOW

That's clearly just heavily referenced. The proportions are all off compared to the photo, like the fin jutting out further than the tail and the bottom jaw being wider.

i think you got brain rocks biofag

tracing is whats being shat on, reference is very welcomed.

but pls die.

Is this cocainebear?

Looking at it some more it's obviously clear whoever inked/colored it wasn't given the reference and just winged it, though. They... Should probably have showed the color artist what the fuck the animal is supposed to look like.

It's pathetic, especially when it comes from something published by either of the 2 biggest comics brands ever. And as someone who's autistically obsessed with creature design and mecha/ship/tech design it only ever disappoints on those things.

Attached: he traced a fucking lego set.jpg (1988x3056, 735.8K)

Attached: larroca art star wars.jpg (1070x321, 85.83K)

Attached: larroca star wars art 2.jpg (720x1123, 156.46K)

Imagine being so bad at art that not only do you trace, you straight up just overlay the photograph you traced from because you can't even color what you traced.
Imagine being THAT bad at art, and somehow being hired as an artist by a massive company.

I do not feel strongly about it one way or another.

Attached: Wally Wood over again.jpg (3840x2160, 3.05M)

I don't fucking understand it. Why is it so prevalent? They don't have strict deadlines and they don't even do the coloring, they have separate artists for that, all in direct contrast to Japan where people have strict deadlines, just some assistants to help with inking, and a ton more pages to publish either on a monthly or weekly basis. So how the fuck is this so prevalent in the West? In Japan you only occasionally get dumbfucks like Toyotaro.
Contrast this to Toriyama, who's known for creating cool looking machines that are clearly purely from imagination but seem like they could work. I just... I don't understand it.
Maybe this just naturally happens when you assign an artist to write/draw for an existing series, rather than having someone create something from their own mind? That'd explain Toyotaro, too.

Attached: maru03_143.jpg (918x795, 157.9K)

I don't mind it for covers, depending how it's used. Everywhere else, it's aggravating to be taken out of a story when I recognize it.

I am an illustrator.
Tracing is for faggots.
Unless, you draw something yourself, need it at a different size, and either project or print it at the size you need and trace that.
References are okay, but should only inspire or help with minutiae like anatomy or perspective, and should only be used when absolutely necessary or else it becomes a crutch that only gets worse with time.
Real big brain is just drawing from imagination and having fun, not getting hung up on all the little imperfections.

>References are okay, but should only inspire or help with minutiae like anatomy or perspective, and should only be used when absolutely necessary or else it becomes a crutch that only gets worse with time
Post your art, user. Non-referenced art. Do you just have a heavily stylized style?

I googled "cocaine bear" and found this.

Attached: The-Curious-Case-Of-PABLO-ESKOBEAR.jpg (1200x628, 67.46K)

>just some assistants to help with inking
They do way more than that. They often fill in backgrounds and in general do plenty of detailed drawing themselves.

Wait, what the fuck? I don't read Star Wars comics - are these actually real?