Like most mornings, today I logged into my coroflot portfolio and looked at new work posted. It is a nice way to be exposed to different styles, work and subjects. So, while doing so I came across this image.
It was posted last January and is obviously a study (more precisely, a trace over) of this image I posted several years back.
If anyone knows me, you know I am all about design education and helping out. If any of my work can inspire, motivate or help someone to improve, then I am a happy camper.
So, this leads me to the question. If you directly use someone’s work (to post), should you at least credit the original in the description? I know that my own work is the result of others that have taught or inspired me…but, tracing seems a little too direct.
What do you think?
I know that my own work is the result of others that have taught or inspired me…but, tracing seems a little too direct.
I think you’re absolutely correct; reference material should be noted. I’d go so far as to say that this piece should not have been posted (by the individual that made it) in the first place; it wasn’t an “influence” is was a tracing pattern - no creativity required.
Without appropriate “credits” it is essentially plagiarizing another person’s work (especially so in this case). It shows a total lack of professional ethics.
I would even go so far as to “ban” anyone caught publishing another’s work.
I’ve come across this several times as well. Even so far as someone taking one of my line sketches and then rendering it in photoshop, leaving my lifework… and crediting me… I’m not sure what the hope was there.
As a learning exercise, yes, but you don’t need to post all (or any) of your learning exercises online. I don’t post all of my sketches, not even a large fraction of them… In this case, that kid should just not have posted that at all. It is clearly your sketch used as an underlay and done poorly. Imitating a style is one thing, but it is the same essential design.
LMO and YO,
Thanks for the feedback. I guess my gut feeling was correct.