A question about sketching ponies: What is art to you?

[tulagirl]

I personally was never given the talent to think up a sketch of my own and draw it out.  I can think of enviornments for the subject of my sketch and draw them on my own...but the focus "ponies" I always have to look at my ponies in order to draw them.  I have always been this way. When I sketched my pug, I had to study her picture.  When I sketched a cat, I had to study a picture.  I could not decide today to sketch a pony and sit down withough looking at anything and sketch.  Instead I would have to have a reference of some sort to get started and I take a certain amount from my reference and then I expand on it on my own.  I do not sell my work and never intend on doing so.  I come from a long line of artists. Some of my family members can sketch from their mind and some of us sketch like I do..with a reference.  So does this mean I can't call my finished work my own because, I looked at a pony to draw it?  Or can I call it my own? I am wondering about this.  I love to sketch and like I said I have no plans to sell...but I prefer to set my favorite pony up in front of me and sketch how I see her. I do some realistic sketching and quite a bit of cartoon style.  Your thoughts?
I do know that many artists of the 1600's and later did have a point of reference when creating their paintings and they did call it their work and thank goodness for it as it shows us a world we will never imagine since we were all born way after..yet their art gave us a glimpse of what was important in their day.

[Sunset]

If you are sketching a real mlp right in front of you (or photographs of real mlps or real horses), then it's no different than someone using a bowl of fruit or a real landscape as inspiration.  It's every bit as legit.
 
Things get murkier if you are using someone else's artwork as inspiration.  I believe that the general rule is that it has to be at least 20% or more different from the original in order to call it a different peice of art.  That is provided that you are actually sketching it yourself and not just tracing the line art or something to that effect.  For, example, I have a couple of Monet inspired paintings in which I inserted ponies into a couple of specific Monet paintings.  I used his paintings as reference but they are different enough that I have no qualms on calling them my own or selling them if I wanted.
 
If your finished peice of artwork is close enough to the original piece of artwork, then that is what is called a study and the artist of the original artwork should be acknowledged.  For example, I also have a painting I did that is an exact replica of another Monet piece.  It is signed with my name and then says "study of Monet's "name of original painting"".

[Arkillian]

My first 6 years of art were all eyeballed art. Me just drawing for fun. I think drawing for fun is super important cause to improve with art, you need to enjoy it. Keep doing what you do, and if you post it, credit the original source. When you DO want to improve however, I suggest you look for tutorials and books on how to draw horses. Horses are the basis of My little ponies. When you can draw a horse, you'll easily be able to do the same thing with an MLP and make it look right. Animators do this, and professional comic artists & manga artists all draw from life as well as their more stylised approach. When you learn to draw a real pony, you may find you like longer legs or smaller eyes or something rather than the standard style. At this point, you'll get your own style of art.


As for your family not drawing from their mind, please don't underrate the ability to draw well without a reference. IT's HARD. IT takes alot of practice and understanding. It doesn't make you a crap artist. It's what you do with those references that makes you an artist. If you leave it as a lineart? Not so unique. Give it a backdrop, and a believable scenario that immerses the viewer? That's true art no matter how good you are  at it


Art is about conjuring an emotion, feeling, telling a story... it's not just about drawing something 'the best'. Some of my favourite comics have stick figures as the art style. IT's what you do with it that counts

[ZennaBug]

I think Sunset has said it really well.

It's fine to use a reference, but you don't want to be an exact copy.  I sometimes look at photos of real horses to help with my posing for ponies and I still consider the art my own.  But I wouldn't be comfortable making an exact replica of someone else's art.

[tulagirl]

Thank you I value all of your responses and it gives me a lot to think about. I appreciate your posts. Zennabug I totally agree with that.

[AmberMarie]

There is a prevailing idea that in order to make 'art' you must do it from your own head with no references. To me, there are two ways to look at it: technical ability (the ability to draw/paint/sculpt whatever exactly as you see it) and conceptual ability (the ability to conceptualize something in your head and then put it out). I have been told that I am not a "true artist" because I use reference photos. I call bull-hocky.

There is nothing wrong with taking a pony and putting it front of you and doing it your own way. Doesn't make you less or more than an artist than someone else. It just means you work differently.

There is something wrong with taking someone else's piece of art (this includes photographs) and copying them exactly and then calling it their own, for profit or not. You took their piece, their talents, ability and vision and you were able to technically reproduce it. For learning, not as big of a deal is made because you are learning. Its all about intent and what you do with it.

I have hundreds upon hundreds of reference photos on my computer. 60% of them, are mine. There is nothing you will find in my artwork that you would ever be able to point out and say, "Oh I've seen that!". I have certain ideas I want to portray with a reasonable technical proficiency.

I say whatever you dip into your soul and use to work with, don't worry. Take what you can work with, because a good chance is, in a year from now, you will not be working the same way, as long as you keep working on it.

[tulagirl]

Yea I agree you can't call something you copied your own.  I am not as good at art as most of you, but I do enjoy drawing. I can sketch really well when I want to but when it comes to ponies I am still in the beginner stages LOL  K ids could probably do a better job.  This is partly due to having worked on other animals and never horses.  I have a looooong way to go with my shading techniques and stuff and I have forgotten so much I learned in art school.  Maybe I need to go back and refresh my memory on how to do certain things..I feel I have lost some of it from being ill and not feeling like drawing for so many years.

[Lina]

It's fine to use a reference, but you don't want to be an exact copy.  I sometimes look at photos of real horses to help with my posing for ponies and I still consider the art my own.  But I wouldn't be comfortable making an exact replica of someone else's art.

couldn't have said it better!

personally, i have a hard time taking references, because they tend to change my style... it's pretty hard for me to stick to just one consistent style, and that happens even when i'm handwriting!

[Marlin]

I agree with so many of the comments already made!


I honestly don't see the problem with using references (unless of course you are doing an exact copy and then trying to pass it off as your own, as so many have already said).  If we didn't have references, how would we learn to draw, or even get inspiration?


As one develops their skill, you ultimately develop your own style too. I draw mostly from my mind, but I also look at a lot of photos (of subjects - e.g. horses) too, particularly if I need a little guidance or inspiration for movement. In those cases, I never draw exactly from the photo (unless it is a commission someone is getting me to do of their pet, for example) but develop my own drawing from perhaps the basic lines or form... again, it is really just an inspiration. My siggie over there (of Majesty) was just a sketch drawn from my mind, but I probably wouldn't have learned to draw like that without having studied horses and gained some understanding of their movement in the past.


With regards to your own artistic confidence - do what you love and get enjoyment out of - that's the most important thing. Everyone has different styles and methods; I don't think there is really any 'right' way to draw. I think that's why the word 'art' is such a generic term, too. Art is everything from a cave painting to a piece of trash stuck onto a post for some people!

[tulagirl]

Yea that is really true...about the meaning of Art. Like that Marlin.  I mean goodness people pay huge amounts of money to get paintings from that famous elephant LOL.  True..seriously

[Arkillian]

Art more about purchasing the name of the artist than it is about the art it's self. Anyone can make an aesthetic piece of art. It's the story that goes with it that makes someone buy it. If you can strike an emotion in those viewing your art, and they have the money to spend on quality, then you'll find that art goes for alot of money. If you don't strike emotion though your art, then the magic wont happen, and it'll be one of those 'well, that's nice' things. You can be a fantastic artist and make no sales for this reason. You guys would compare it with being in love with My Little Ponies.


Talent in art doesn't come from drawing something perfectly. IT's about stirring emotions and feelings in the viewer. There's FAR too much weight put on style of art to be frank. That can matter to some people, but if there's no emotion then it's really just another nice drawing.

[tulagirl]

Yea I never plan on every selling my stuff as its meaningful to me but I would never expect anyone to want it. My desire is not to do it for money but for pleasure and a hobby.  A lot of times too, people don't respect other's work until long after they are gone..sad huh.

[Arkillian]

That's half of the romance of art. IT's something that is limited edition and the artist was tragic and all that kind of stuff. It becomes exclusive at that point.


I'm the same. I don't like selling art, but prints are different. You still own the original. I also found that if I was drawing for another from the start then you don't put the same type of love into it. It becomes a gift rather than a declaration of your soul. At that point, I can let art go. Buying art I never intended on selling is a no no though. I've sold art in the past that I didnt' want to sell, and even the scraps I miss. I mean, the original of this (Warning, contains breasts but is tasteful) is somewhere in America and I'm happy with that. The purchaser loved it, and it's all good where as the original of this was a crappy lineart, and the purchaser REALLY loved it, but I still miss it terribly to this day and regret not offering to do a nice photocopy of it instead. I have an art appreciator putting heavy pressure on me to purchase my base pencils of this picture- She'd happily pay alot of money for it, and would love it, I know. It's also close to 10 years old now too. I still can't let it go, and I KNOW she wont settle on anything less than the original.


I know where you're coming from. Even a scrapy picture means alot. If it's a commission to begin with though, I promise it wont be the same I don't commission often, but I've never lost sleep over posting off a commission to someone. I ALWAYS get upset if I sell one I didn't want to sell.


Just in case that is useful to know.