Define:Cheating

Hey, I know there is no official meaning of cheating in automotive art but, surely there is a difference from tracing a car from a magazine and recalling how a car looks from your mind and putting it to paper.

Would You class "cheating" as...

Using a refference picture and copying it exactly

what are your thoughts, and what do you do when approaching a new project?

Why do u ask? and this topic, has been covered.

yeeah i would love to know too
is cheating the same as drawing a car exactly as it is in a refernce pic?

There is no cheating, only different methods of drawing which are frowned upon by certain people;

If someone traces a car from a magazine, you said, others may frown upon this as cheating, but i would not, as i think it is still a form of art, nonetheless. Whatever method someone chooses, they have their own right to, eventually, if they want, they will be able to draw freehand.

Now please, Mods, Close this topic.

thanks guys

"cheating" isn't a word prefessionals use. Cheat is a word people use out of fear.

There is no cheating in art. There's only deadlines and results.

The only cheat is internal. Keep telling yourself that tools and what not are cheating and you'll cheat your career. You'll cheat yourself out of the opportunity to step up to the next level.

Just draw...that's all that matters.

good advise good advise

Cheating in laymans terms in drawing cars would be called, "Plagiarism and copyright infringement."

yes I suppose you could call it a "method" as such as long as it didnt involve plagiarism

Cheating in laymans terms in drawing cars would be called, "Plagiarism and copyright infringement."

I mostly sorta disagree. I think "plagiarism and copyright infringement" is STEALING, not cheating. It's much worse than cheating. It's wrong period.

That being said when I started out drawing I used to draw the Bloom County (Opus to you young bucks) strips all the time. I would color them and put my name on them. I did not try to sell them or market them in any way. I likened it to the same thing the artists of old would do. I called them a study and as such I didn't do anything wrong. I would draw Warner brothers toons all the time just to learn. That was not stealing or cheating. It's learning to draw...learning art.

Like most things the act is secondary...it's the intent that defines what the act is at it's core. If someone is drawing a copy of my drawing to get paid off it then they suck...if they're trying to learn to get better and have no commercial intentions then they are cool. Asking permission from the creator of the art also clarifies intent and usually makes things ok.

but like I said...stealing is worse than cheating....farting is worse than both of those IMO :)

Hah, farting.

I never tried copying anything, from books, magazines and whatnot, i guess i should have. i've got pleanty of old comics lying arouns, looney tunes and whatnot.

lemmoris , I agree if you are just using the images for your own personal use and not gaining anything financialy, just learning it is cool. however if I were to trace something I wouldnt be learning anything so its jsut finding that line between copying and drawing.

actually you can learn a lot from tracing...especially a car.

If for example you were to trace your reference like 2 times or so then throw them away and draw it from scratch you would find that you have picked up on the lines of the car. You can train yourself in a vehicle like anything else.

How do you come up with ok toon lines? If you're struggling, trace the car a couple of times. Train your eye, hand and mind at the same time. Then funk it up. Try it...you'll b amazed at what you learn.

Tracing has been a viable part of the illustration process since it's beginnings. Many of the masters were taught by tracing and copying the works of their modern day masters. Delacroix is a great example of that. He studied the works of greats like Gericault and became a master himself as a result.

Now...I realize this is a discussion we have often on this board and it is getting a little old but the working pros like Bonzelite know. I'm not at their level but I recognize the validity of the methods. It's like Bonz always says in these threads. If you can't draw good, you can't trace good either so it matters very little.

Bottom line is results my man. Nobody cares about anything else.

Tracing is your friend. Don't let people talk you down about tracing. It's the basic element in learning car lines.

I will trace some later and let you know how I get on

tracing and using grid is cheating in my opinion

Cheating is also a tool--especially in tooning. If something doesn't work to how you know it works in real life you make it work yet it still looks right --mostly to the untrained eye. Or you might copy a front wheel to the back (as a guide) if it's the same perspective. Or perhaps flip a drawing (of say the front of something) over to trace through it to do the back view to keep it's volume--you didn't draw it from scratch you 'cheated it'---no big deal it's meant in a good way!
Cut yourselves some slack!

word

i use grids in my art GCSE for drawing rough outline guides, then dio the rest myself, i find it cuts down on time and gets perspective right when i need it most!

so how do you do the ol' grid method, put a grid on your ref picture and draw a grid of the same size and proportion on your paper? wouldnt it be quicker to trace?

comic book inkers "trace" for a living and are often held in as high or higher esteem as the penciler. They can both enhance a drawing by one person's def or ruin by another's. No matter what you might think of tracing or inkers, they are still needed and they are just another part of a much larger process. Also, on the grid thing, you could trace but you'd just have the same thing at the same size as your ref image. The idea is to maintain proportions and perspective but still be free to modify. I use a grid for the first 30 min of some sketches, erase the lines and continue drawing for hours without any more ref. You can bang your head on the wall if you like but there is a lot more work to do beyond the rough sketch for many artists and in the case of cars, all you wanted was say, a 69 Camaro as the base car, not the 69 Camaro in your ref pic. I think that when time and money are in play, you'll get this kind of answer and others have basically said the same thing. When you think of yourself as creating a unique piece of "art" that carries a personal meaning as a means of expressing yourself, then you'll get another answer. You can try to define art into categories like this but it's almost impossible. In just my personal opinion, whatever it is can be called art when you begin to realize your personal style. I think style makes art. Anyone can be taught to do exactly the same thing anyone here does and even do it well, but it is those little unique things that one person always does, and probably something that appeals to that artist, that makes it art. A large part of personal style comes from technique and just like handwriting, no two people do it exactly alike. And like anything else in the world, you have to justify it for yourself, there are no written rules. It wouldn't be art if you had to follow rules to do it.

comic book inkers "trace" for a living and are often held in as high or higher esteem as the penciler. They can both enhance a drawing by one person's def or ruin by another's. No matter what you might think of tracing or inkers, they are still needed and they are just another part of a much larger process. Also, on the grid thing, you could trace but you'd just have the same thing at the same size as your ref image. The idea is to maintain proportions and perspective but still be free to modify. I use a grid for the first 30 min of some sketches, erase the lines and continue drawing for hours without any more ref. You can bang your head on the wall if you like but there is a lot more work to do beyond the rough sketch for many artists and in the case of cars, all you wanted was say, a 69 Camaro as the base car, not the 69 Camaro in your ref pic. I think that when time and money are in play, you'll get this kind of answer and others have basically said the same thing. When you think of yourself as creating a unique piece of "art" that carries a personal meaning as a means of expressing yourself, then you'll get another answer. You can try to define art into categories like this but it's almost impossible. In just my personal opinion, whatever it is can be called art when you begin to realize your personal style. I think style makes art. Anyone can be taught to do exactly the same thing anyone here does and even do it well, but it is those little unique things that one person always does, and probably something that appeals to that artist, that makes it art. A large part of personal style comes from technique and just like handwriting, no two people do it exactly alike. And like anything else in the world, you have to justify it for yourself, there are no written rules. It wouldn't be art if you had to follow rules to do it.

Ahhh, Thats cleared a lot up, The grid can be used to change the size and make it your own...You're drawing the car and not the reference picture.
Im going to try out the grid method later Ill let you know about how I get on.
I now no there is no real meaning of cheating in art, only plagiarism?.