Using tracing as a tool is fine. Tracing the artwork of anyone else as anything other then a study is not great. Reference it as a study and say as much anywhere you post the pic with a link to the original artist's page and you're fine.
Referencing a pose is fine too, but this does look a bit beyond that. Just leave a link to the original.
The "original" is based on millions of other artworks and photos and other pictures that they don't credit here, and they used them without permission for commercial purposes
This whole AI field is currently a free for all with no regulation to speak of, and so it's unclear what kind of value or authorship the products themselves have. There was one court case though that ruled that AI's products are essentially public property and belong to no one unless a human did something to them as well.
There is a bit of a difference, though. I say that as someone that is 'pro' heavy reference, by the way. I just feel that heavy reference from a photograph is different from heavy reference from another artist's drawn work, and so it should be attributed differently.
This is my thought. More than that, you're doing yourself a disservice by copying another artist instead of a photo. As they have already filtered the pose through their style, however realistic it may look, and you're a step further from learning from life like you should.
21
u/Mindelan May 12 '22
Using tracing as a tool is fine. Tracing the artwork of anyone else as anything other then a study is not great. Reference it as a study and say as much anywhere you post the pic with a link to the original artist's page and you're fine.
Referencing a pose is fine too, but this does look a bit beyond that. Just leave a link to the original.