Would it be "cheating" to use 3D models for 2D art?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

REPLY TO THREAD
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  01 January 2018
Originally Posted by circusboy: And there is the rub.
Is the OP modeling everything in 3d themselves and then drawing over them?
Or simply drawing over misc 3d models found around the internet -which if they are very new to CG could well be the case.
The latter is fine for personal use as long as the source for the 3d models has no objection...
We've taken the whole "you can't do this because I did that" too far, methinks. I'm going to take the "Disney vs. The Air Pirates" case, and the way things such as cars designs and clothing are routinely plagiarized with little objection.
I would prefer to make something myself. I would not use another's work to deny them gainful employment or recognition. I don't draw Batman because other people are paid to do that. I would not create something that could be confused by or is meant to mislead another into thinking it was made by someone else, neither to capitalize on nor jeopardize/damage their reputation. But should I choose to illustrate a part of my life, I feel it should be my right to reproduce the likeness of an '80s Ford Mustang. I feel that in buying the car to drive and be publicly seen in, I am entitled to use the image of that vehicle, flatteringly or otherwise, in as much as it pertains to my having owned one. And if I decide I need a proper 3D model to produce the image of that car, I'm likely to use the first one I find. I'm not redistributing the mesh, I'm not in competition in any meaningful way with the original creator any more than I'm capable of damages to Ford's image by using a Mustang. Sure, the original modeler built the mesh from scratch, but of a car designed by someone else. As the car was sold for public use I feel Ford has no right to restrict use of its likeness any more than the person who made the mesh should feel a right to object that I imported their car into Moho or ComiPo. I mean if it's acceptable for me to look at something and create an image or model of it, why is it not acceptable to simply use a model that exists? We made these tools to do the very things we are now quick to say should not be done with them. Being able to grab the first model of something you find and re-purpose it beyond all recognition is what these tools were made for... Should Star Wars have credited the manufacturers of all of the model companies that made the kits that provided the greebles they used?
We have this amazing ability to create derivative works, but I think machine learning will soon kill copyright as we know it. Right now someone is likely making deepfakes of real people and Poser figures... Who will we credit when the entire work is nothing but a machine-created synthesis of the "inspirations" the artist trained it with?

Last edited by moogaloonie : 01 January 2018 at 08:10 PM.
 
  01 January 2018
I do not feel it would be cheating. If you do not infringe copyright or you do not plagiarize any work I think every tool is suitable to realize your vision. If you want to master drawing 2D objs and you ALWAYS use 3d paintover probably it is cheating, but you are cheating yourself and probably won't hurt anyone else. Also if you make a 3d paintover and you submit an image saying:" everything draw from scratch" probably that's cheating, but. again.. you would be the first victim of this kind of cheating
__________________
"please be gentle I'm still learning.."
giorgioluciano.co.place
 
  01 January 2018
Its called reference material. Yeah tracing is cheating, I cant do that as I do street art etc. Sketching out the lines and perspectives from a 3d image should be easy to pick up with a little practice though. Its not that difficult to sketch out a frame from the reference, tracing just stops you learning this technique.
 
  01 January 2018
Originally Posted by moogaloonie: We've taken the whole "you can't do this because I did that" too far, methinks. I'm going to take the "Disney vs. The Air Pirates" case, and the way things such as cars designs and clothing are routinely plagiarized with little objection.
I would prefer to make something myself. I would not use another's work to deny them gainful employment or recognition. I don't draw Batman because other people are paid to do that. I would not create something that could be confused by or is meant to mislead another into thinking it was made by someone else, neither to capitalize on nor jeopardize/damage their reputation. But should I choose to illustrate a part of my life, I feel it should be my right to reproduce the likeness of an '80s Ford Mustang. I feel that in buying the car to drive and be publicly seen in, I am entitled to use the image of that vehicle, flatteringly or otherwise, in as much as it pertains to my having owned one. And if I decide I need a proper 3D model to produce the image of that car, I'm likely to use the first one I find. I'm not redistributing the mesh, I'm not in competition in any meaningful way with the original creator any more than I'm capable of damages to Ford's image by using a Mustang. Sure, the original modeler built the mesh from scratch, but of a car designed by someone else. As the car was sold for public use I feel Ford has no right to restrict use of its likeness any more than the person who made the mesh should feel a right to object that I imported their car into Moho or ComiPo. I mean if it's acceptable for me to look at something and create an image or model of it, why is it not acceptable to simply use a model that exists? We made these tools to do the very things we are now quick to say should not be done with them. Being able to grab the first model of something you find and re-purpose it beyond all recognition is what these tools were made for... Should Star Wars have credited the manufacturers of all of the model companies that made the kits that provided the greebles they used?
We have this amazing ability to create derivative works, but I think machine learning will soon kill copyright as we know it. Right now someone is likely making deepfakes of real people and Poser figures... Who will we credit when the entire work is nothing but a machine-created synthesis of the "inspirations" the artist trained it with?
All well and good. Fight the good fight and all that.

But if -and thats a big if its true -a copywright owner-Ford in your example- ever decide to come after you can you *afford* to beat them in court to defend your personal freedom? Little guys lose these fights rightly or wrongly because they cannot afford to win.

Its a risk you take no matter how you want to justify it.
 
  01 January 2018
Originally Posted by circusboy: All well and good. Fight the good fight and all that.

But if -and thats a big if its true -a copywright owner-Ford in your example- ever decide to come after you can you *afford* to beat them in court to defend your personal freedom? Little guys lose these fights rightly or wrongly because they cannot afford to win.

Its a risk you take no matter how you want to justify it.
I think the term "justify" is only applicable if I do assert a right to use something that goes against the creator/owner's wishes. I was expressing my personal view of fair use in response to whether a particular use of another person's creation respect their wishes. My opinion is that if I am not in competition with them, my work will not be mistaken for theirs, and I am not distributing it, I did not feel they had a place to restrict usage. Yes, I'm probably being more philosophical than practical here. Could someone like DAZ state in their EULA that not only are you not allowed to use their mesh in a game, but that you were prohibited from reproducing the likeness of the mesh EXCEPT when created in their program. Meaning you could render out an image and use it any way you liked, but you could not use it as a reference for a drawing? No one would agree to that, but then you look at the restriction on their character rig and it just kind of seems illogical. IIRC you can manually copy their rig, but you can not use (redistribute) the rig they provide. As you can use it as a template for copying it, I presume you can manually copy it exactly. So why necessitate the extra step?

I guess I am mixing two different things really, the idea of using someone's work as a kind of shortcut, as in a kit-bash, and whether a prohibition on using a mesh to create a 2D image is a valid restriction on usage of the mesh (in a case in which the creator of the mesh had modeled an existing thing they did not create).

Any discussion of using reference images just makes me think of how differently we perceive usage in traditional media vs. digital media. I can, for now, still draw a military helicopter for use in a comic. I can, for now, blow up a model helicopter in a movie (without having to either pay the manufacturer of the helicopter or of the replica). But I might get in legal trouble if I make and distribute a digital model of the helicopter as a game asset, even though the helicopter was designed with public funding. A military helicopter is not Mickey Mouse, but those corporations want the protection and ability to monetize the likeness of it as if they believe the two are equivalent. I just don't see where it will end. Imagine doing an apocalyptic movie climax and learning you need to license the likeness of every car on the street, the city bus, the bus logo, the distinctive architecture of all of the landmark buildings, the likeness of the newspaper boxes and power transformers, simply because each of those things' likeness has been trademarked by their respective creators. It would be as if you had no ownership of your own life experience.

Last edited by moogaloonie : 01 January 2018 at 02:13 AM.
 
  01 January 2018
What is your end goal? a 2d image a 3d image a keyframe illustration or just communicating an idea to be converted to 3d later
If you are doing matte paintings 3d can speed up the process and youll need to get decent at it but youll also simply have the need to
master perspective because perspective develops the eye to be able to successfully balance those 3d elements and photobashed pics to match up

If you use 3d in your 2d work eventually you will get to the point you need to get better at 3d

in production everything is about time and value but it sounds like your not there yet and just learning?

If you are starting out now and dont plan on being a concept artist then spend your time in 3d and work on getting good and fast there.
it is good to be able to sketch things out enough to communicate an idea but if it has to end up in 3d anyway then get fast at it.

modelers need to understand form and perspective but the only way to get truly fast at 2d is doing lots of fundamental 2d to the point it is instinct
before using cheats to learn the language.
 
  02 February 2018
I paint over 3d for most of my work. If it does the job in the half the time .. then its a means to an end. Take a look over my recent gallery submissions for many examples of just this.

David
 
  02 February 2018
Use it as a tool and it's a tool.
So some 2D are usefull to paint over and make texture even to be inspire for creating a sculpt of anything, it's kind of tools for 3D artist ( bitmaps, textures...ets)
So 3D object used as tool to have a base to work on, even with some Occlusion render, it's a tool too.

No cheating just tools everywhere,
 
  03 March 2018
I agree with the common sense.
Sounds like "would it be cheating to use a ruler to draw a straight line?"
it's just tools...Usewhateveryoucantoachieveyourgoals . Be focused in your art production, in your design, refine your technique, don't worry about that things.Rodin was accused of being a fraud because he molded directly on life models.
All artist "cheat", every time. VFX, Rotoscopy, Matte Painting etc, all these things are pretty much "cheating".
 
reply share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.