heartofglitter

I love this place to bits, I've gotten so much help here and grown as an artist just in the short time I've been here. But one thing I can't help but notice is how many artists here rip styles from already published and popular artists.
Ever since I've had my art online it's been clear to me that anyone copying someone's style has been shunned and looked down upon by the rest of the creative community, but here not so much.
Why is that? Why is a community like this with so many creators willing to support style clones and wannabes?
This community is about helping creators / writers and artists grow, but an artist cannot grow if they're imitiating someone else's style.

I don't want to turn this into a long-winded rant of mine, but after all the threads I've seen lately I just had to say something. I want to understand basically, without the whole line of, 'hey it's what sells!'
I'm an artist myself, and if I imitiate someone else's style just for the sake of my product selling I'd feel like the biggest sell-out on the planet. Besides, why should people pay for my work above the original work of the creator?

As an artist I'd also be upset if someone was stealing my style to make money, because it's mine. I would have been the one working hard and practising for years to get to where I was.

*ahem* Anyway I'll stop there, you all get my point of view. I just wanted to open an intelligent discussion on the issue; what is everyone else's thoughts and feelings about style clones?

sgm

IMO, it's unimportant in the larger scheme of things.

Many artists and not just those working in comic books start their careers with a style heavily influenced by another's work. The best of these absorb what they like and discard the rest, repeating the process with other influences. This process usually only stops when an artist becomes commercially successful.

The reason it happens is that a great amount of pressure is placed on the individual to maintain a consistent style to meet the demands of the publisher/patron and the buying public. Some artists have been fortunate enough to continue changing their style without a major commercial backlash, others have not been so lucky.

Scaleyinx

Style clones have been happening for centuries. Look at all the Michelangelo wannbe's that spawned during and after his personal style became all the rage. History even shows how the Romans took from the Greeks. They simple modelled their art because they found the Greek style beautiful. Do we call Roman art Greek clone art? (Or even Etruscan clone art for that matter?) The Roman art is beautiful, but it has flaws. They cut corners in their craft that the "precision perfect" seeking Greeks did not. Nevertheless, we still appreciate and admire Roman art.


I feel comic art is the same. Not every artist is going to be the next mover and shaker and come up with a new style that will become the "IT" style of the day.

__________________
Look at der slippery fishy - see him go!
´¯`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.´¯`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸ ><((((º>

sgm

I'd also like to add that stylistic choices in comic art are typically only an attempt to make oneself more marketable. The real value in a comic book artist is their storytelling ability. No matter how well they may draw, or ape an established style, their work isn't worth squat if they can't tell a story.

The way comic art is viewed by the buying public has changed considerably for the better since the days of the Image boom. By no means is it perfect, but at least there is a definite preference over story rather than flash.

Scribbly

How do you learn to play music? Playing others people styles, other peoples who are genius, recognized for everybody. Genies who did pass for all the steps of knowledge in their art and can bring their techniques to new artists.
To copy a recognized artist is an step to grab their technique and make it become part of your knowledge.
Sooner o latter you dont need that anymore. It is just an step. Sometimes is an imposition sometimes it is a limitation, sometimes is a kind of greed....

Agree with sgm concepts.

.

albone

You hit the nail on the head. With Michelangelo, you can see an entire succession of students or 'knock off's' and I found their work enjoyable. They certainly didn't get ragged for it. It was understood for what it was.

With the point of the thread, I don't know if I care who emulates who. I think people that dog other people for it, generally do so without risking anything themselves.

If it came down to what I would want, say a Jim Lee picture, or a Jim Lee clone picture, I'd take the Jim Lee picture. I have passed on artists work because they looked too much like another artists but that's more of a personal choice, than me being upset that they aped a style. Apeing a style isn't very imaginative, and really, you'd only be hurting yourself. I couldn't stand Larson's spiderman when it first came out.

I don't think I ape anyone's style at least consciously, but I'm sure you could compare mine to another's, but it would only be coincidence. That aside, if someone copied my style I don't think I'd care too much. If nothing else, it'd be a form of advertising for me. Think about this: The Wizard of Oz is public domain, do you think all of the countless sequel's, prequel's and revisions have hurt the original material or helped it?

And I'm not comparing my art style to the Wizard Of Oz either.

I will add that conciously copying a style to be like the original is counterproductive and should be discouraged.

LilGreenMan

Well let's look at it this way.

Your into comics to get a job in comics to make money. Style cloning is the easiest way.

Your an artist who just likes doing art. Cloning is a bad thing.


Personally I don't clone anyone on purpose. Last time I posted comic type art here I kept hearing Ed McGuiness. I never ever tried to be like him. Back in the way back day I wanted to draw like a combo art adams Mike Mignola....never happened. So, as far as in my case, it was UNintentional. I could try to change it but it takes alot more time to do that, time I don't have. This is one reason I decided to try the painting route.

chaosgoat

Hmm... I think if your style happens to look like another artists without any conscience effort of yours, it's cool. But if you are fighting against your own personal style to make your art look exactly like artist X or Y's, Houston, we have a problem.

LilGreenMan

I often wonder though. I did art when I started, without any influence (my mom showed me how to draw a very simple boat and car). From about 3 to 9 I was drawing my imagination but suddenly I fell into the comic book crowd. At first I was still drawing by my imagination and apparently was told I was better then my other friends drawing comic book stuff in the 6th grade. However, about 8th or 9th grade I got into noticing people as artists and started trying to copy what they did. McFarlane was the first. I kinda wish I never did that so I could see where my art would be now as far as comics. My non comic art has always been based on what I see but that's more of a realisitc thing.

Cat

Like someone said..you are going to draw the stuff you like from other artists when you start out..you will eventually take the things you like from them and mix them all together in the pot of yout brain and your own style will emerge..that is the natural way to go with this...

Now don't get me wrong there are folks out there who just copy for copy sake..becasue it is easy. They don't have to think or develop thier own. and just as easy as copying is saying someone's art looks like someone else..it is the easy way to go..you don't have to hink about what you like and don't like..just say oh it looks like so and so..and i don't like it/do like it for that reason. You will get nowhere fast imitating for imitation sake.

Now it does show up in the companies as well..Aspen for example..if you ever look at an Aspen profolio review..if your work doens't look like Turner..don't bother. Whether it be they have a style of art as a whole they want to maintain or they just don't want anything new or differnt..who knows. But either way it is ok.

You will pull influance from all over..everywhere you look..don't knock the style emulation(not to imitate but as an ambition to equal or surpass)....use it to develope your own.

JonHParrish

Even though I can't draw worth a damn, this same thing applies to writing.

When kids start writing, they're going to imitate the author they really like. When I first starting writing, I was heavily influenced by Brian Lumley because I liked his stories. I didn't have the same stories, but the style was almost identical. As I got older and read different stories by different authors, I started subconsciously pulling things from each that I liked and implementing them into my own style. This changed it into a different style completely, but that was at least two or three years down the line. If someone had read my early work, they would say that I was ripping Lumley off (if any of my friends knew who he was). My point is that some of the people that some call style clones or, as they say around my way, 'biters' might not have found those other styles to implement into their own to make it their style yet.

Just some food for thought.

__________________
Jon H. Parrish
My address for the e-mail.
My profile for the Facebook.
Before you ask, no I don't have the Twitter.

hellblazer72

when the comicbook bug bites everyone gets influenced by someone. i remember growing up and copying all kinds of people from bart sears to jim lee. there are some artist that will grow from who influenced them and do their own thing( charest, finch, mignola, hitch and so on) ...it all just comes down to the artist and his abilities to make that jump to where they are the influence to other people...the down side is you have the artist who will just jump from one hot style to the next because it's easier for them to sit with a stack of books and copy from them than to develope into something better(ed benes and billy tan come to mind)...usually you can look at someones artwork and tell what category they fall into...i remember looking at charest's artwork and seeing more than someone just aping jim lee's style...

Nick Pitarra

I think you got a few things wrong in your question. First, as mentioned above... everyone pretty much starts from somewhere...and that somewhere is the work that that person has experienced those far. As most of the people post on these boards are amateurs, its understood that their work will be associated with another professionals...its common for a viewer to associate a professional to an amateurs work, and the aspiring artist have no idea who that pro is....as the viewer himself will naturally look for a common frame of reference in his own mind, to better understand the amateurs work. Everyone here is in a learning stage....and work is generally rated on how close it is to being professional...not original. Once, things are published we then judge them on a new set of rules....its inherit that its professional quality (thats the starting point),from there the work is opened to a whole new can of worms...aesthetics i guess is the word...originality included.

A few other things.... an artist can grow by apeing another style...style is only the icing on the cake....all the work is put in the eggs butter and baking. In comic art terms that would mean underdrawing, perspective, and anatomy and so one. The style on top in my mind is only 10% of the actual art. Because, ultimately a good drawing can be popularly recognized as a good drawing by a whole variety of different people......no matter what the style. Also, working with a particular style enough, will open doors in the artist mind...he/she will find what really works...taking those parts and leaving the rest...and evolving the style into something he/she can call his own.

Last...i think as an artist...it is the ultimate compliment to have someone be influenced by you. It builds a legacy for whatever artist is being copied/referenced. Moebius has a huge legacy of artist that his work has influenced. Quitely,Darrow,Fisher,Manara,Charest,Leinul Yu,Timothy green...are just a few of the popular ones.....there are countless western… European…and asian artist that he has influenced as well. It should be noted that I'm talking about referencing said artist style...and not just lightboxing something they drew. Alright...i'm tired of typing now...thats just my 2 cents...well this is allot of typing...10 cents.

~nick

Scribbly

I was hanging in another thread when Stan Drake came up to my mind.

Stan Drake was an incredible artist, realistic style, disciple and follower of Alex Raymond.( Means clon of Raymond when he start.)

Neil Adams was a disciple and follower of Stan Drake as well. (means clone of Drake when he start.)

And so many artists did the same from Neil Adams.

Do you remember the Kubert brothers working in a Jim Lee style?
Why do you think they did that? Just to learn how to draw?

Did you read the Spiderman essentials, with all the artists keeping the Romita style?
Sometimes it is an editorial imposition to keep the style unity in a success.
The eye of the mass public is not the eye of the artist, neither the eye of the fans.

It is all part of the show!
Or it was?....


.