PDA

View Full Version : Which artists have you copied the work of?


paperclip
04-21-2005, 10:29 AM
I guess most of us have tried imitating works of others-- it's one of the ways we learn. I started off trying to imitate Herge and Goscinny. Then I went through a Michelangelo phase (in which I noticed that he often made his heads too small for his highly musculated bodies) At the moment, I'm trying to figure out how Craig Mullins does his lovely shiny floors and how Enayla does her skin tones and how Stahlberg does his wonderfully curved faces and how Lunatique does his atmospheres....i.e 'Memories of Hangzhou'. I love that one. I also love John Wallin's 'Cathedral 3' and its atmosphere etc.
How about the rest of you? What do you try to emulate in others' works?

jrr
04-21-2005, 04:23 PM
i am mad about travis charest, craig mullins and nivbed. i can't say i copy them much but there's definitly an imprint in my work.

Elaeria
04-21-2005, 04:44 PM
Personally, I'm still trying to develop my own style, but I've found Linda Bergkvist to be a huge inspiration to me as I have seen she is for a great deal of people. I have also been working on a couple of my favourite Monet paintings, but they will probably never be viewed by anyone but me since I'm too embarassed by the quality of them and Monet would be rolling in his grave if he ever saw them. *lol*

As far as the techniques you have been trying to master, Linda has a few GREAT tutorials on things like eyes and skin tones on her Furiae website so I would highly recommend checking it out. :thumbsup:

Also, the websites for the others that you mentioned are just as fantastic and can give you some insight as to their styles. The main thing I try to do is sit and just observe their works. I don't try to copy their works at all, but I do try to pick up on elements of their style. They contribute a lot to the communities that they are part of so you can always catch lots of wonderful insight into their genius in the many posts they offer here.

I can't wait until I reach that day when I can say I have a style all my own. Until then, I am more than content to observe the works of those I admire greatly and set them as my standards. I just keep pushing myself as hard as I can to reach the quality of art I would like to be at.

I'm not a big fan of imitating someone else's work. An artist puts so much of their own personal emotion and experiences into their work, I don't think anyone could ever claim to know what drives another artist when they are working on a painting. It just wouldn't be as satisfying as a concept that was my own idea. For now, I use the work of others to inspire my own ideas and to observe their technique.
(wow...think I rambled a bit much there..sorry :P)
~Ela~

jmBoekestein
04-21-2005, 04:52 PM
not a damn soul, but I did let myself get influenced on a conscious level. And I've indulged in "fan-art". Giger Aliens!!!

offbeatworlds
04-21-2005, 05:11 PM
Definitely Linda Bergkvist. I'm not actually copying more of just studying her art obsessively, trying to figure out how she does things and trying to be really good at digital painting (and most of the time failing at that). I just love how all of her faces are so beautiful and perfect, blended smoothly and show emotion every time, even if it isn't all that obvious. I love how she paints her skintones, because even is the shadows and highlights aren't picked out from the background, they still somehow match. Her background fascinate me. It blows me away when she puts a ton of detail into her backgrounds, such as the leaves and barks of the trees, and the textures of her rocks. Her poses are simple but beautiful, her hair painting skill are very admirable. I just can't help but dream about being as good as her some day. She's such an inspiration to me, as well as to so many other people.

So, yeah, I don't try to copy her, I just try to be like her, in a certain sense. Be as good as her at painting, but a style of my own.

sonicstrawbery
04-23-2005, 01:37 PM
I'm fan of a french comic writer, he's my master ... Marcel Gotlib (http://www.marcelgotlib.com)... :love:, i'm studying a lot from his drawing, character expression and story :buttrock:

Kamjar
04-23-2005, 03:13 PM
i am still mixing :thumbsup:

when i find the right recipe for myself, ill tell you :)

but it certainly has to have some Linda Bergvist in it :applause:

greetz kam

Notanymore
04-23-2005, 04:34 PM
Copying is a very good training. I copied:
Samwise didier, Holly Ramsdell, Armel Nicolas, Metzen, Sheil, and naturly Linda Bergkvist.

onlooker
04-23-2005, 10:45 PM
Pencils =/= Graphites - Travis Charest, Adi Granov, Adam Hughes, Alex Ross, Greg Horn, Billy Tucci. Those are my favorite pencilers.

I start everything with a pencil. :D Well... almost everything.

thethule
04-24-2005, 10:06 AM
At the risk of sounding very pretentious, i would have to say nature. Still the best artist there is out there in my opinion.

Well, that or Dale Williams. The breadth and depth of his work was truely astonishing. :scream:


Marc

Faber
04-24-2005, 11:31 AM
noone, not ever!

why would any artist copy another artist? if its allready been done in a great way, I cant see how you can justify to your self to waste time doing it and I cant see what your motivation would be. perhaps you want to be like someone else, perhaps you are a fan... in my mind its selfdefeating, a detour from honesty and selfconfrontation. an artist is by nature focused or just cant help expressing his or her own in his or her own way. the way he or she sees the world, hidden and solid. if your art doesnt read YOU all over, which means that its unique, you are not to consider yourself an artist yet in my mind. you might be a craftsman and a very skilled worker. like I would not call the people painting flowers or birds for books artists. they are intimidatingly talented craftsmen, but dont convey themselves and their view in their works, they replicate. artists are usually (I guess I know too many) totally obsessed with whats going on inside them selves and around them, but all seen through their own sensory equipment. its often a way to survive the madness to produce art, an unstoppable need to visualize, write, sing or play the inner struggles and chaos and joys, a way to understand oneself hence the universe. I guess different artist have different reasons and I am sure lots are also very harmonic beings, but I dont honestly think any serious artist would ever want to adopt someone elses. he or she has too much to say on his own for that.

cheers to diversity!

sonicstrawbery
04-24-2005, 12:56 PM
I don't think copying is a feebleness of our artistic mind... copying is not copying for feeling better and think we can do it... but for studying styles in depth, well that's why i draw characters from other artists personally.

You can compare this to life drawing... you copy to get the correct line later...

Learning to get a technique and then applying it for your own work, ideas... not copying the same things all the time and tell ur friend it's your own work :)

I take it as tutorials training... did you ever made a head or whatever from a tutorial ? It doesn't mean you're not an artist

CGmonkey
04-24-2005, 02:28 PM
I've been copying a dear friend of mine, been studying his pictures very intensly for the past year and .

here's some of his work online.. Daniel Rosenberg http://rosenberg.perfectcontrast.com (http://rosenberg.perfectcontrast.com/)

ThePhotographer
04-24-2005, 09:54 PM
I copied lifesize Rodin sculptures in Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen with charcoal in my younger days. It took months. That was mostly to learn to draw what I saw though. Sort of drawing from life with a model that doesn't move - very comfortable !

Kasper's point of view is very much mine. I would not waste weeks trying to copy someone elses work. I'd prefer working weeks on something of my own.

cha0t1c1
04-24-2005, 11:04 PM
I don't really copy, I get influenced by the piece...I learned to look at an artist's work try to understand the composition style, then use what I need from it...I guess that has already been stated by picasso(my favorite thief).

Pavlovich
04-25-2005, 12:54 AM
i seem to be going through a BROM (http://www.bromart.com/prints.html) phase that has lasted a couple of years now

Ariel
04-25-2005, 03:10 AM
I've copied Sargent primarily, but also Bouguereau, Charles Bargue, Vanderpoel, Bridgman. It is immensly helpful to do so becuase it has helped me acquire taste as well as problem solving skills when doing my own work.

guustje
04-25-2005, 09:05 PM
Copy ?? . Even if you have a great idee, someware in the world, somewone has done a look alike
or done an original before without you possebly knowing it. But the trick is to give it your personal touch, look an feeling. Thats wat makes something exeptional.
Thats the way I think.

Faber
04-26-2005, 02:35 PM
I think that there is a great difference between being influenced by other artists work and copying it consciously. Being influenced can be understood as a healthy sign, it tells the world around you that you respond, reflect and investigate the exterior world, at a conscious and subconscious level. Its almost impossible not to be influenced by the time we live in unless you make a real hard effort and stay in a hut in say northern Canada with no abilities to communicate with anyone ;) All Im trying to say is that I think its great that people get influenced, its also quite important from an evolutionary stand point. Perpetual feedback loops of visual information distorted by humans over and over again, its wonderful.

Copying however, I still dont see the point unless its to gain specific technical skills and learn about the "laws" of art. Its just a dangerous path, for me. I get locked in the belief that what I am presently doing is right and it starts shaping the way I think and process my own ideas, hence further increasing the gab between my art and whats true to me. Im not saying other people cant benefit or add to their total potential this way, I just get confused and lose sense of what I really want to achieve.

> cipher yes, I have done lots of tutorials, and they dont confuse me in the above mentioned way at all, but they might take away some of my own initiative for finding alternate solutions, or worse let me believe that this is the smartest way to do it. They are a great way to learn specific workflows and techniques, love them!

cha0t1c1
04-26-2005, 02:50 PM
I disagree with Faber just for the sake of disagreement and pissing him off( ;) j/k)...
wazzup Faber...:D

I actually agree with Faber Copying is useless it doesn't build your style, you just end up looking like someone else. but influence causes that slight delicious hint of difference that makes ur art unique...

onlooker
04-26-2005, 09:31 PM
I disagree with Faber just for the sake of disagreement and pissing him off( ;) j/k)...
wazzup Faber...:D

I actually agree with Faber Copying is useless it doesn't build your style, you just end up looking like someone else. but influence causes that slight delicious hint of difference that makes ur art unique...

I tend to agree, and I think the individuals speaking are all using their own definition, and interpretation of the word word copy, and it has blurred the lines of the topic a bit. I know I did.

asongforOphelia
04-28-2005, 09:24 PM
I'd say that copying is highly worth it. I am still trying to learn some of the "technical" skills, especially on balancing "real style" with "fun style", but I find that whenever I try to copy an image, it always changes somewhere around.

My main tasks now are trying to build up light in my pictures. Stark colors are important to me, and I'm in a Humanities English class at the moment, so one of our often used vocab terms is chiaroscuro. I'm looking into Baroque artists now that use a lot of that, especially Caravaggio and Gentileschi. I tried to do a sketch directly copying Caravaggio's "The Calling of St. Matthew" but it changed dramatically and ended up looking in copying.

MrGrinch
04-28-2005, 10:56 PM
This is, as you say Faber, the entire point of copying another artist's work or style, to "gain specific technical skills and learn about the "laws" of art." It used to be standard practice in art schools to have the pupils try to recreate works from other great artists. In fact, even those great artists themselves would tutor under other artists by copying the master's style to help paint their artworks.
That said, there is certainly a point reached where you need to start forging your own style. However I do find myself picking up certain stylistic elements of an artist when I've been looking at a lot of their work. Sometimes you do it on purpose because you really like the way they draw a particular feature and such. It all blends together to form your own style because certainly, no two artists ever draw exactly alike...and wouldnt it be rather boring if they did.
I was rather influenced by Eric Kincaid when I was a child. I had several books he illustrated and I spent a lot of time trying to recreate his style. It gives you a groundwork on which to build your own style, I think.

Pavlovich
04-29-2005, 12:56 AM
one of my biggest regrets is not copying more when i was younger. i should have been copying everyone--the masters, comic books, graphic novels, porn, postcards, magazines, F***, whatever. but there was a big taboo about not copying work when i was drawing (from like...8 years old to about 19) and now i feel like i'm playing catch up. so copy while you can, so you can have all that pencil milage and pencil memory to draw upon when you're creating something unique. hell, if anyone gives you s*** about copying, tell them you're doing a study, then drop an elbow into the top of their soft skull, because they deserve it.

just my opinion.

tonich03
04-29-2005, 01:57 PM
Pavlovich one of my biggest regrets is not copying more when i was younger. i should have been copying everyone--the masters, comic books, graphic novels, porn, postcards, magazines, F***, whatever. but there was a big taboo about not copying work when i was drawing (from like...8 years old to about 19) and now i feel like i'm playing catch up. so copy while you can, so you can have all that pencil milage and pencil memory to draw upon when you're creating something unique. hell, if anyone gives you s*** about copying, tell them you're doing a study, then drop an elbow into the top of their soft skull, because they deserve it. just my opinion.

of course,what schools of art are for? :)

nineinchneil
05-09-2005, 07:31 PM
as a child learning a language for the first time, you learn by copying the alphabet; alphabets that have been designed centuries ago. that doesn't mean that everything you write after your initial learning process is unoriginal.
copying is pretty vital to the learning process. no one starts off with a vast knowledge of art. you start by seeing what others have done before you; you 'copy' it into your mind. you exercise the techniques you witness, and slowly adapt by changing it, making it grow, evolve from your own experiences. that's where the individuality sets in; when you let your own experiences merge with the techniques you've learned from previous masters, books, school, etc. it's where the line between influence and copying blur.

Kargokultti
05-09-2005, 07:48 PM
I catch styles like flu. Copying is a guilty pleasure, I do it sometimes in order to see if I can, but mostly it goes so that I see something I like and then it's in my head and I can't get rid of it.

Like Jamie Hewlett's Tank Girl. I don't own any of the albums, but the compositions and postures were so delicious that they're still hanging around strongly, like a gang of Hell's Angels.

I think copying is often like fan fiction: they say that you sort of 'graduate' from fan fiction into a fiction of your own, but we've yet to see an internationally acclaimed author with a background in fan fiction. Copying is a time-honoured method in art education, but there's a fine line between developing your technical abilities and not developing your own thing.

Gord-MacDonald
05-10-2005, 03:19 AM
I think that there is a great difference between being influenced by other artists work and copying it consciously. Being influenced can be understood as a healthy sign, it tells the world around you that you respond, reflect and investigate the exterior world, at a conscious and subconscious level. Its almost impossible not to be influenced by the time we live in unless you make a real hard effort and stay in a hut in say northern Canada with no abilities to communicate with anyone ;) All Im trying to say is that I think its great that people get influenced, its also quite important from an evolutionary stand point. Perpetual feedback loops of visual information distorted by humans over and over again, its wonderful.

Copying however, I still dont see the point unless its to gain specific technical skills and learn about the "laws" of art. Its just a dangerous path, for me. I get locked in the belief that what I am presently doing is right and it starts shaping the way I think and process my own ideas, hence further increasing the gab between my art and whats true to me. Im not saying other people cant benefit or add to their total potential this way, I just get confused and lose sense of what I really want to achieve.

> cipher yes, I have done lots of tutorials, and they dont confuse me in the above mentioned way at all, but they might take away some of my own initiative for finding alternate solutions, or worse let me believe that this is the smartest way to do it. They are a great way to learn specific workflows and techniques, love them!

I think don't think copying is a bad thing - it just has to be kept in perspective.

David Hockney has said (and I have used this paraphrase before ;)) "copying is a marvellous way to learn, it teaches you to see through other peoples eyes".

Itten (and I have sited this example previously) had his students at the Bauhas, and later, copy (reproductions of) masterpeices, drawing over them using tracing paper to learn about composition, rythmn, light/dark etc.

I think you can gain insights by copying, that you cannot any other way - provided that the copying is understood as merely a form of study. Ultimately you have to know when to walk away from it.

The influence of other artists, upon one, is a very important step in artistic development, perhaps copying can be understood as sub-set of that influence, to be used at the students discretion.

Oh, and IMO, artistic "principles" are more important than artistic "rules"

Gord

ps: the people in Nunavit, and other parts of Canadas north, have satellite dishes just like the rest of us :) - and probably less problems with reception :D

dbclemons
05-10-2005, 05:07 PM
To add my own .02, copying another artist is a very reasonable approach to learning, but one has to be careful, or at least aware of the problems it can cause. Most likely that artist was also inspired by another, so your work would become even more diluted. Seek out the source instead, and you may find an even more original approach. Also, this artist has done most of the hard work for you. There are decisions to be made when starting a work that you would be bypassing if you begin from where they left off. This teaches you nothing. Analyse what it is that is exactly inpiring you in this artist's work, and go from there.

-David

-NG-
05-10-2005, 10:45 PM
I geuss the right word would be inspired by or not?As most of the time whe start of by letting ourselfs be inspired by others work and try to reproduce it, but in the process you develope your own approach and style. At the end it will offcourse be your intrepetation of the piece.

CTRLZ-DIGITALMEDIA
05-10-2005, 11:45 PM
I love the works by the boroque master Carravagio. He was working with the use of dramatic lighting of scenes way before there where test renders and quick fixes.

chow-mein
05-11-2005, 12:41 AM
Charles R. Knight. I stand in awe of the man's accomplishments.

gruvsyco
05-11-2005, 02:22 AM
<--- straight up inspired by www.boring3d.com and receiveda "thumbs up" from him too.

*edit* that's supposed to be pointing at my avatar

leeyiankun
05-11-2005, 03:14 AM
I have a set folder for a group of artist whose pictures I go through before I do any piece. It's not until recently, that I was able to break away from it. May be I'm finally growing into my own person?

But it's a sure-fire way to learn things though. Especially, when one's just starting on the illustration path.

IMO, the best thing you can copy, and no one would noticed is the color set.
But that may be me, and my belief that a nice color palette can be the holy grail to any color work. ^_^"

vinegaria
05-22-2005, 12:08 AM
the only artist i ever tried to copy was Michelangelo Merisi (Caravaggio) to whom, i believed many years, i was involved to in a special way :D

anyway. i never did a colour copy of anyone's artwork, i was only doing pencil sketches of artworks i liked. i definitely spent a lot of time drawing Merisi's paintings, but i also sketched durer, michelaneglo and such.. now i'm gonna learn on XIXth century art, it's my favourite at the moment..

i never sent any of these sketches as my own art, though. i only send them to my pencils section on my site, always saying that "this is a drawing of.." i think there's a big difference between learning on somebody's work and copying on purpose to make it your own - "a bit inspired" art..

Maidith
05-22-2005, 08:46 AM
I learnt a lot from copying the works of William Turner (1775-1851). He's one of my favorite artists and painted mostly seascapes :)

Dann-O
05-23-2005, 01:12 PM
Well I have done some copying but most of what I do is my own I find that copying a work gives you great insight into the creation of the original work. I have used Albrecht Durer, Roger Dean and Tony DiTerlizzi. I used to buy books wth Tony Diterlizzis work just for the pictures and would not bother with the written content.

CGTalk Moderation
05-23-2005, 01:12 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.