I take it this guy is a fan? Original: jollyjack(.)deviantart(.)com/art/Chloe-Sinclaire-What-we-know-296427858 Original: jollyjack.deviantart(.)com/art/Undies-Away-245678532 Original: jollyjack(.)deviantart(.)com/art/Mrs-White-49447082 Original: jollyjack(.)deviantart(.)com/art/Someone-needs-a-hug-74028952
This guy is known for tracing artist’s work and has been caught each time. This upgraded style he claims is 100% his own this time. The site he’s on, memecenter tends to praise him over the top and even when given evidence such as:
I’m tired of him stealing away artist’s hard work for a little “internet fame.” Not only that, but I know he also takes commissions. He could very well be tracing this person’s art and actually taking money for it.
I would make these links clickable but I'm unable to being I'm a new member. I'm really sorry if I'm breaking rules, I figured this was important and I'm trying my best to get people to see and just stop him.
That been said I think it's very clear that we need to clarify what tracing is. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines it as:
Tracing noun: a copy of a picture, map, etc., that is made by tracing the original.
Now by itself it doesn't sound as bad as it sounds. Because let's be realistic no one is born drawing. We all either learn or self teach us by practice. And it is because of that practice that we get to improve our skills. Nothing helps more an artist that practice and sketches. http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2009/357/8/2/Takei__s_10_years_of_Mankin_by_Wilkoak.png It's not only a tool of improvement but also as defining tastes. We change outfits, hairstyles and design to see which one likes us the best, is Hillary still having bunny teeth? Is Jollyjack (the hamster) still has dot eyes without sclera? For a more simple explanation check the hidden image above. But independently of the outcome the starting point it's the same. However in the society where we live in graphic media bombs us all the time. We are not only shown but also influenced with styles tendencies and shapes. But also in the eyes of the starting artist he not also sees that but he sees techniques, traces and shapes, since he is analyzing it from the visual point of view. So it's only logical that when that person want to achieve certain ever of technique using another work as inspiration it's only logical that he uses the same style of eyes, or body shape. And artists know this! What? You think they don't know this? They know it since there was a moment when they are like us. Beginners in the art of drawing. Not only that but there are artists that take this one step further and use what they have to teach others.
https://www.youtube.com/user/markcrilley https://www.youtube.com/user/Toonboxstudio There are multiple books and channels and sketches either for free or to sell in order to learn from the best. So tell me if I buy the “how to draw comic book” and I publish an artwork drawn by my own hand with the style and technique that are in that book is that considering tracing? Because I'm using that guys style, and Superman is legally property of DC comics. Am I suddenly a criminal? Artists and amateur drawers publish alike their works in order to promote their styles and techniques. And Jollyjack is no exception to that.
So what’s the big deal? But the real issue is when does it become a bad thing. I mean let's be realistic it's not like Picasso has the only license to cubism, nor the Japanese are the only ones who are allowed to make manga, nor Jollyjack owns every line in the body of Chloe. But personally I think there a limit to how much someone should use or don't use somebody else lines. But just because there are limits that doesn’t make it a bad thing. Anyone can draw Chloe. And using the style or shape of an existing image doesn't make it bad.
And this is the part were you say: How come it doesn't make it bad? What are you a criminal? And the answer it's no, but let's be all grown ups and understand the world were we live in. If I make a Wolverine sketch base on Imonen style am I breaking the law? And if it doesn't then were does it becomes a bad thing? Wen I used the same style of hands? The same pose? When I copy trace by trace the lines of a claw? Just look for the internet guys tell me how many X-men fan made replicas are out there. Personally don't think tracing it's a bad thing per se, however claiming originality, ownership after a clear sign of copy are a more delicate issues and despite how Mega-boy claims that he doesn't make any profit from it if he is taking the credit of this works this doesn't fall in the area of tracing. I think this is a case of alteration of work. Which I also don't think it's a bad thing, and therefor we start over the ethic of this matter. For example let's take this picture and se all the variations and alterations it has been made to:
Is this a crime? Is this a tracing horrible act as well? Because believe me there are people that have used this image either for personal use as for profit as well. So were does innocent fan art ends and were does plagiarism start? It's very simple actually. We(the creator of that work) are the ones who decide it. For example as you can see the picture has a clear watermark of the Zidneya logo on it for a simple reason guys, I put it there since this image is from my thesis. I mean there’s a limit were someone (and by someone I mean anyone) can claim this is a simple case of tracing. And that is when the creator has made clear the use and limits he gives to his work. I mean I'm pretty sure we all recognize this.
It's present in every image, in every promo and in every sketch. With these simple words he is telling us three simple things: 1) This character belongs to him. 2) It is wrong using this to make a profit without his consent, 3) This image and it's elements belong to him.
Now the first two points are very clear but what about the third one?
So I think that before accusing anyone of anything we need to see the evidence first.
Now like I said before I clearly saw evidence of tracing and copying here I'll share what I've found so far.
Now for the third image I couldn't find a medium size in order to compare it with the one from Jollyjack. Gear-Boy has already removed it from the web, so I'll just base my conclusion on the two images that I've seen. So I'll agree that this is a case of tracing. Even Gear-Boy claim and I quote:
Gear-Boy wrote:I admire your work and get a lot of tips from your drawings - but I assure you none of it is traced.
But I clearly see evidence of tracing. He even upload a video of how he draw the first image. In constant time during the video he clearly is seen changing between layers and copying the image from Chloe. And since the video speed is accelerated is a little difficult to see but not impossible. I'll show you one example: This is a frame-by-frame capture of the min 3:10 by millisecond; I divided the entire second in four frames. In here he is drawing the hand that is resting against the seat.
That is a clear evidence of tracing. He sees the lines and then as you can see he proceed to copy it. Yes you hear me people I'm accusing this guy of liar.
Now as I already cleared the nature of tracing itself it's not that big of a deal. But like I said before (and I want to be clear that this is my personal opinion) I will qualify this as an act of alteration of work. Since he isn't replicating Jollyjack work but using it to create a character different. And even if he is making his own version of Chloe that wouldn't be such a big deal. It will be considered fan-art. Because like I said before when we try to draw or paint an image of an already visual character isn't inevitable to try it to make it look like either the conceived idea that we have of that character. We have either traced or trying to replicate the certain traits of a draw in order to make a fan art. I myself am no exception to that(I mean just look at my avatar for crying out loud) and I have made fan-art of other popular characters and is some cases alter their clothes or looks. And in all those cases I make very clear whose character this belongs and that my work is fan art. And if this were the same it will be okay. Many of Philip M Jackson fans have done it before. http://mark-mrhide-patten.deviantart.com/art/JollyJack-s-Chloe-II-296274604 http://shonuff44.deviantart.com/art/Chloe-Commission-192393746 http://szara26.deviantart.com/art/chloe-444224439 And in all those cases they make reference in their comments that this is a fan art, alteration or recreation of Jollyjack work. And why wouldn't they? There isn't anything wrong with giving the credit to whom he deserves it.
There has even cases of artists altering Jollyjack work completely that even the characters don't look anything alike.
So either tracing or altering his work isn't so much of a big deal. The real ethical and real issue to discuss lies somewhere else.
It all sums up to two simple questions guys. *) What use are you giving to this art? *) And are you giving the credit to the ones responsible of the elements that appear on it?
Now Gear-Boy has said that he isn't making any profit from these artworks, which is great. He says that these aren’t really commissions but requests. And that he tagged them as commissions to avoid receiving requests all the time.
Gear-Boy wrote:The only reason I call them commissions is so people don't make requests all the time.
But if that's the case then why not showing them as they are, requests. And if he don't want to make drawing to all the fans and people interested in his works he doesn't have to. It's not like somebody is obligating him to do this artworks. And I don't see the problem of receiving requests all the time. Because it's not like somebody is obligating him to neither read every request nor reply them.
However tagging this works as commissions on the other hand I consider it a big problem and I'm going to tell you why. Because for me and any normal spectators after seeing this will assume that this are commissions and if I desire one as well will contact him and offer him money. So you see he in some way he is making profit from this works. Not as commercial works but as advertising. Because at the end of the day he is presenting this works as it’s his own.
So you see, the fact that he isn’t making any profit doesn't mean that what he is doing isn't wrong. Besides after reading the discussion he had with Jollyjack it seems he has made these artworks available for print. But that’s no longer relevant because I think Jollyjack convinced him remove that option from these images website. So let's examine these two pictures once again. The first one he says
Gear-Boy wrote:GearGirl was in a Bikini contest not too long ago.
Personally I find this improper independently either if he makes a profit or doesn't.
Tell me would you consider acceptable that somebody else participate in a contest submitting an artwork that it is an alteration of your work and submit it as it's own in a contest (independently if he wins or not).
And for the second image of the lady in the black cocktail dress apparently is a request for an acquaintance of him.
And here we go again: Tell me would you consider acceptable that somebody else creates and sent cartoon portraits using the line art in your drawings? Because if I'm going to receive an artwork based on Jollyjack works I would prefer asking Jollyjack to make it himself instead this guy don't you agree?
Now if this is only a friendly response to a request why not leave it like that. Because the basic of this concept is that once you deliver the final product to the addressee you are not obligated to do anything else. However he also published this image on Deviant art that clearly replicate elements and alter them and finally present them as his.
Now I'm not saying that this guy is stealing Jollyjack clients however I don't see him giving him any credit any more than just inspiration source when it's clearly using it's artwork for more than just inspiration. I can't confirm it but I think that the girl remittent of this artwork will be very interested in knowing this (that is of course assuming that she isn't unaware of this, who knows she might even have said, hey make me a cartoon drawing based on Jollyjack work).
Now as you can imagine this person has hear this accusations from other fans as well and I think it's fair to see what he's been replying don't you agree.
Now I wish to anylize this statement slowly in order to give my own conclusions.
Finding a pose isn't considered tracing at all however copying a pose along with the line-art, and the body proportions that is considered tracing. By simple logic you just need to compare the line-art that you made with the original to know that it's tracing. Also I'm very interested in what this guy definition of "getting some detail tips". Let's be realistic linking and therefor implementing somebody else style in our drawing isn't a crime. We all like how that artist draw that hand, or that eye or that silhouette and therefor we want to make something alike. However the main focus of learning to draw this kind of elements is to implement it in our work this on the other hand isn't implementation but replication because he is doing it by using the same pose, and other elements that I mentioned earlier. Right after that he raises the question that "if someone creates a strand of hair that it's similar to what somewhat else draw its tracing." That it's a curios predicament once you analyze it. It raises the issue: What if I draw Kats haircut and use it in another character for example? Is that tracing and therefor plagiarism? And what if I like that haircut independently if it's the same as Kat’s? What if I don't care who my character resembles because at the end of the day that is the same type of hair that I want to give it to my character is that tracing and therefor plagiarism?
We all seen character design coincidence independently if they are trying to replicate or resemble another character. Is that a crime?
My answer to that is: No. However this guy to my opinion its' only sugar coating the issue. He isn't just creating he clearly is replicating and not only a stray of hair, the pose, the lines along with several other elements. And as I already showed you in the video he is clearly using Jollyjack artwork not only as an inspiration but replicating it.
"I don't want to argue- the people can judge for themselves because I am to I'll to reason with you". That right there sounds like a compliment to us for not liking nor accepting his work when it's clearly that: 1) It sin't just his work. 2) The audience will always have the last word.
And on a personal level I think it's the obligation of every artist to back up his work. However I totally support his vote of silence. I like people to judge my work by itself alone during job interviews. So if he wants that his work talk for him I'm okay with that. But in most of this cases when this happens it leads to the misinterpretation.
Now for the rest of his statements he uses a more personal irritating tone.
It is you that needs to grow up and look at the facts He assumes that after people analyze this carefully they will agree with him but actually it’s th other way around.
I do speed paints and I do livestreams The artistic level of skills can be good or bad independently of how you decide to propagate your work. Making speed paints won't make your drawings any better. I can draw horribly and there’s nothing to stop me from making a live stream.
feel free to come and watch anytime A.K.A.: come and watch me I want more fans.
And for the record I made hill money of those commissions - the only reason I labeled them as commissions and not request is so people would stop messaging me requests. I already clarify the monetary implications of this act (although personally I don't think he receives many requests at all).
I put much of my life and time into my work just to make people happy -Ive sacrificed work time and my social life just to make comics for you folks - so I'm really not in the mood to given this rubbish.
Okay this all sound like some condescending attempt of pleasing everybody. But let's be realistic the one who need to be satisfied with the results it's the artist. Now I won't deny that in order to become a great artist you need to sacrifice time and effort but let's be realistic everyone who chooses this career does it because they enjoy it and if he has regrets that’s up to him to deal with them. I’ve seen cartoon drawers on the street and parks that earn cents for their work yet they haven't given up because that’s what they love. We should be receiving advice from them not the other way around. And I appreciate the effort that artists make in order to to enhance their drawings, however that isn’t exactly a requirement to publish a comic. I’ve seen many simple comics with drawings that don’t have a very good quality become popular. And blaming people for you creative inclinations isn't very mature "just to make comics for you folks?" I'm sorry but I'm trying to fin a more mature answer that isn't "who are you trying to impress and why?" but I can't.