Tracing Photos

[Gear]

So, to create my sprites, I trace photographs I take of people I know, then trace them, discard the original, and color/shade. I've heard multiple times on these forums that the technique that I described is frowned upon. Of course, I have heard many say to use what I like, and I do like it, and I will use it, so you don't have to worry about that. However, I am curious as to why this style is frowned upon. I've been told that the sprites I create are highly emotive, something that many artists have difficulty doing. I like the style it creates, because the anatomy is right, but it still looks like a cartoon. But it's frowned upon? Is it considered cheating? Or is something else the issue?

Just a topic out of curiosity.

[Arcanum]

I don't know why it's frowned upon… Games like Hotel Dusk used a similar technique (of course, they were tracing people's movements,it was a little more complex). If you take the pictures yourself, from people you know, and they're okay with it, I don't know why it'd be bad. I know people (myself included) who frown upon traced drawings from other drawings( anime/manga), or when you trace from someone else's picture without authorization… But that's stealing from another source. If you aren't stealing anyone's property (or faces XD), I don't know why it'd be bad. I think most people fear some appropriation going on, but you aren't doing that.

[LateWhiteRabbit]

So, to create my sprites, I trace photographs I take of people I know, then trace them, discard the original, and color/shade. I've heard multiple times on these forums that the technique that I described is frowned upon. Of course, I have heard many say to use what I like, and I do like it, and I will use it, so you don't have to worry about that. However, I am curious as to why this style is frowned upon. I've been told that the sprites I create are highly emotive, something that many artists have difficulty doing. I like the style it creates, because the anatomy is right, but it still looks like a cartoon. But it's frowned upon? Is it considered cheating? Or is something else the issue?

Just a topic out of curiosity.

Well, from a production stand point, it isn't frowned upon. From an artistic stand point, especially for classically trained artists, it is frowned upon.

It's kind of like putting together a packaged desk from Ikea and calling yourself a carpenter. There ARE artistic considerations when tracing, but most people can manage it with some effort.

Artists that are traditionally trained study anatomy, composition, golden ratios, perspective, line weight, color, etc. So to them, they really do feel like a tracer is cheating by ostensibly skipping all that and calling the end result art. Regardless of whether it is a valid feeling or not, I think the disapproving nature comes from the same place that causes people to get annoyed at "posers". They feel like such people are disingenuous and "fake" and trying to belong to their same profession, etc.

And it doesn't look like a cartoon to me, it looks like a rotoscoped photo that has been colored with only flats. It would look more like a cartoon if you used proper varied line weights and had some form of shading or highlights present. Rotoscoped art can be quite beautiful, but it is always pretty evident it started as a real picture. It could be related to the uncanny valley - there is no individual style to the anatomy that an artist would add if drawing the scene free-hand, and it looks more technically perfect than any artist could hope to achieve. Hence it looks a little "off", ironically.

All that said, it is perfectly valid from a production stand point and saves a lot of time and money over traditional art. I've done thousands of hours of rotoscoping for movie productions - it is necessary to create digital or special effects, or 3D. So like you said, if you like it, and it works, keep on doing it. But I hope I've explained why some people may "frown on it".

[ScottySeng]

As stated above, it depends from which view you're coming from.
I'm an artist, so I poor a lot of time and resources in learning how to site measure (If you see people holding out pencils, then they're measuring proportions of what they're drawing).
I believe that art will have mistakes and their own styles, and that gives it a personal touch; your mark as we call it.

It hurts our pride when a person gets away with tracing and calling it art. Then once they are found out to be tracers, all artists get looked down upon.

In my art class back in middle school, one kid drew an amazingly accurate drawing, and won first place in the contest for sketching. I was second place. I was walking in the hall, and I saw him using a projector. He scaled the photo up and traced it on the blackboard. I spent 40 hours using site measuring and looking up guides on sketching and proportions.

Another problem with tracing photographs is that they look kind of flat (Like 3D renders). A trained artist's eye will find see that, and add in shadows/texture/color to dispace that flatness.

Simply put, it's frowned upon because it seems like a "shortcut" out of drawing.

I'm probably biased since I'm an artist though. I hope this doesn't offend anyone.

I don't mind if you use this technique at all since it saves a lot of time, and you can focus on writing the story much more.

[Omnificent]

I think tracing photos/photomanipulation is a perfectly valid art in its own right that requires a steady hand/its own set of skills to pull off. Sure it could look flat or lifeless, but so could any other piece from someone not professionally trained. In fact, someone who learns how to take an existing face/body and tweak it to their liking/into unrecognizability from the original may be just as much of an artist as someone who makes a living drawing the same standardized face and body with different hair and clothing.

[LateWhiteRabbit]

I think tracing photos/photomanipulation is a perfectly valid art in its own right that requires a steady hand/its own set of skills to pull off. Sure it could look flat or lifeless, but so could any other piece from someone not professionally trained. In fact, someone who learns how to take an existing face/body and tweak it to their liking/into unrecognizability from the original may be just as much of an artist as someone who makes a living drawing the same standardized face and body with different hair and clothing.

That's a pretty awful comparison for the tracing artist, since an artist that only draws the same face and body is (I guess arguably) a bad artist. Cause, you know, either that's a lack of skill, or (more likely) laziness.

Frank Cho, a normally good artist - hopefully just making fun of this idea . . . . soapbox indeed.

And related to the tracing issue (though not as big a deal for the OP since he uses his own photographs and friends) is the enormous controversy in the comic community about artists such as Greg Land, who obviously traces. Looks gorgeous, but also kind of . . . lifeless. Read about it here. He traces OTHER people's photos, and much worse, other artists' ART.

[Omnificent]

Well yeah, outright tracing other people's art is a whole other can of worms and I don't approve of that at all (though using other people's art as a pose/style reference is perfectly fine as long as it is not a complete copy). But something can and will still look good even if shortcuts like using a photograph as a basis/using the same face and body for everything are taken. Look at all the samefaec going on Leonardo Da Vinci's work, or Greek sculpture. It's all about technique.

Which is not to say I don't like characters looking at least facially distinct from each other, because that gives them more personality, but that doesn't mean that there is something inherently wrong with the paperdoll method.

[LateWhiteRabbit]

Well yeah, outright tracing other people's art is a whole other can of worms and I don't approve of that at all (though using other people's art as a pose/style reference is perfectly fine as long as it is not a complete copy). But something can and will still look good even if shortcuts like using a photograph as a basis/using the same face and body for everything are taken. Look at all the samefaec going on Leonardo Da Vinci's work, or Greek sculpture. It's all about technique.

Which is not to say I don't like characters looking at least facially distinct from each other, because that gives them more personality, but that doesn't mean that there is something inherently wrong with the paperdoll method.

Eh, to each his own.

The better I've become as an artist and the more advanced art training I've had the more I notice flaws, inconsistencies, or lazy shortcuts. It hurts my suspension of disbelief in the images, in other words. I found it particularly disconcerting when I started noticing errors, flaws, and problems in the work of the "masters" like Da Vinci and Michelangelo, since they are held up practically as saints in the art world.


Really, Mike? That's supposed to be a woman? Way to use the male reference there buddy. Any excuse to get one of his male studio assistants to get naked, I guess.

And yeah, Leonardo with his "same face" going on.



I'm not saying such things can't work or the end result can't look good, but it's just me as an artist trying to hold the profession to a little higher standards.

[DaFool]

http://www.posemaniacs.com/

Trace away to your heart's content!

One thing I noticed though is that after tracing, the body won't look 'anime-style' until you make the limbs more slender (it's just a couple of scalar adjustments, though).

As long as you own or have the rights to the original design / pose sources, I don't see anything wrong with tracing, in fact it may be the only way to crank out the hundreds of poses needed for event CGs.

[15385bic]

I dont think tracing photos is BAD
but usually traced photo's never look as good as what people want them to be. Usually cartoons/anime characters arent perfect - so artists usually adapt when they look at a photo reference - i think if you use sai - trace away ~ then adjust the lineart around until it looks the way you want - that way its not really a direct trace ;P
so i agree with Da fool in a way

[JustAnotherMe]

I'm not an artist, so I guess I'll ask this: Is it that bad? I guess if you are an artist, tracing photos will b frowned upon. But tracing in itself would b a good way to learn the perspective, the angle, the colors, the shading, the style. For me at least, I'm still learning on how to draw, so I usually look up on some photos as my references, then try to draw bit by bit while looking at it, then make some changes. For the color? I look up at some tutorial, then I'll try to do the same. And I think, if it's only within a non-commercial artwork, tracing photos is still ok. Especially if you're tracing your own photos. If it's for a pro... yeah... I think that's a bit like cheating... I know how it feels.
This is just my own opinion though ^_^

[Lennonhead]

I don't really understand tracing, unless you are rotoscoping an animation or something. Using photos as references is good, but I don't know how tracing can teach you anything about the actual composition of whatever you're tracing.

Of course, if you aren't doing it to learn, I guess it's okay...

[LateWhiteRabbit]

I'm not an artist, so I guess I'll ask this: Is it that bad? I guess if you are an artist, tracing photos will b frowned upon. But tracing in itself would b a good way to learn the perspective, the angle, the colors, the shading, the style. For me at least, I'm still learning on how to draw, so I usually look up on some photos as my references, then try to draw bit by bit while looking at it, then make some changes. For the color? I look up at some tutorial, then I'll try to do the same. And I think, if it's only within a non-commercial artwork, tracing photos is still ok. Especially if you're tracing your own photos. If it's for a pro... yeah... I think that's a bit like cheating... I know how it feels.
This is just my own opinion though ^_^

Tracing doesn't help you learn nearly as much as other methods.

What you are talking about, using photos for reference or trying to draw an image by only looking at it will do more to train you and teach you muscle memory, because you can't move as fast and you have to constantly think about what you are doing to replicate the image. Drawing it in a different size (usually larger) is a good method too. If you are just tracing, it is all too easy to just mindlessly follow the lines.

The practice you do has to be again to studying. As one of my art professors in school said, "Practice does NOT make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect." (Don't sweat being perfect though - always try, but know that you never will be perfect. As I pointed out above, even the Renaissance masters enshrined as "the best" screwed up. )

Something else I noticed when I was doing rotoscoping for films is that people trained as traditional artists with knowledge of anatomy and form were much better rotoscope artists than those who people that were not artists prior to working on rotoscope. The traditional artists could compensate and make corrections based off their knowledge of form, knowing what a shape or bodypart was doing underneath hair or clothing. They were also better at making the end result smooth and aesthetically pleasing, while the "non-artists" were far too concerned with capturing ALL the detail.

[J. Datie]

Well, tracing to make character art isn't going to turn you into an artist, in the same way that using the basic functions of Ren'Py isn't going to turn you into a programmer. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with it; no one's going to be an expert on every part of game making.

[Gear]

And my reasoning for using it is the same as J. Datie said. I'm not an artist. I'm not really inclined to try and learn how to draw. But the game needs art, and that's the best I'm able to do. I'm a writer and programmer first and foremost. VN's require art, though.

I can see how it would be seen as cheating, but my attempts at drawing are horrifying. It's the only way I can create character sprites that don't look like they were drawn by a six-year-old who doesn't even know what the word "proportions" means.