2 for u thieving off of Enayla

[PirateOfMashedPotatoes]

I won't argue that, Pescado.  But there really is no concrete proof that that is what happened--proof that would hold up.  I know she is doing artwork for the fantasy film The Golden Compass.  Where in the world would she get photos of unreal, fantasy creatures, etc.?

I did the equalizer and levels bit on several digital artists' paintings, and I see the same thing that was being claimed as proof on Linda's.  That part doesn't make sense to me.  I see no concrete proof.  What am I missing?  lol!  I guess I just like to hear both sides of a story before condemning someone.

And I still stand by the fact that it is just wrong that she didn't want her free stuff sold and it is being sold.

However, claiming that you do everything by hand, and that you aren't using any references in any way is,

She's not done this that I know of.

[mando]

Hey, if she's admitting to using references then I have no problem with it (I don't know that she always sites those references, though). Plus, finding pictures (or drawings or paintings or whatever) of unicorns or mythical creatures doesn't take a genius. You can also easily use pictures of existing animals (i.e. horses, lizards, insects and so on) to mimic and create fantasy ones to have photographic references.

I can believe that she may not use an overpainting techniques for her full paintings, but I would be pretty dubious of any claims of not doing it with her textures. Although, you are right, she may never have said this, but I'm hardly an expert on her discussions about her work. Perhaps the confusion simply comes from a misunderstanding of what is meant when people say that something is handpainted.

[PirateOfMashedPotatoes]

What I mean is, she has said multiple times that she has used photos as reference in early work.  She's not lying or hiding it.

[mando]

What I mean is, she has said multiple times that she has used photos as reference in early work.  She's not lying or hiding it.

Wait, are you saying that she's claimed to only have been using photographic references in her early work, and not using them now?

[PirateOfMashedPotatoes]

I don't believe I said that, no.  The majority of the paintings being used to hang her with are earlier paintings.  She said she used photos far too often then.  She's not said how much or how little they are used now.

As I said, I like to hear both sides before stringing someone up.  I have seen a lot of people search and search trying to make people see something that may or may not be there.  You can be talked into seeing all kinds of things if you are told it's there long enough.  Since I cannot know 100% without a shadow of a doubt what Linda does or does not do, I'm not ready to hang her just yet.

One thing I do know, I could not create anything even remotely like her work if my life depended on it, and I create art on the computer for a living.

[mando]

Absolutely, she is a very skilled artist, there's no doubt about that. My only issue was with claims that everything she was making was created entirely from scratch or without references. If she admits to using references, no matter how she's using them, then I have no problem with it. Again, I think this might only be a misunderstanding over the term "handpainted".

[Xeon_Black]

PirateOfMashedPotatoes : Yes, I do realise Nelicquele is one of her older art, but if she did steer away from copying, why did she allow prints of Nelicquele to be sold? She would've at least not included it in the Ballistic Masters posters. And it was what she stated about how Nelicquele came about saddened me:

I started out on a dark brown canvas and doodled around until she started to pop out - at first the angle of the face and her expression, and then the shoulders, hip, and skirts.

Here's the link to it -> http://www.ballisticpublishing.com/articles/linda_bergkvist/index.php
No credit whatsoever to the photo she referred to.

And yes, Pescado is right about the tutorials. Should her technique be proven false, then it's not right selling tutorials that aren't real, profitting from many novice artists who aspire to be like her. On the other hand, I will not say her tutorials are completely useless, they do have some value in them, but it's still not fair and inaccurate.

Mando: I would also add "photo reference" as a misunderstood term. To me, photo reference is when one refers to a photo when drawing, use it as a guide, but not tracing over. I'm pretty sure others have their own definition of what that term is, and one of them is "to use a photo as reference which includes tracing". In the end, I'm not too sure what the term "photo reference" means anymore :?

[PirateOfMashedPotatoes]

Hmm, yes, I suppose it is all subjective then.  With my copy of Corel Painter, I got a set of video tutorials done by well- known digital artists.  They do talk about the great features of the tracing abilites in Painter, so I guess not everyone sees it as bad. lol!  

As also stated in the thread at Concept Art, her tutorials are not frauds.  If you have a talent for painting, you can follow them and achieve great results with practice.

Thing is, I may be playing devil's advocate here, but it is as I said before, I have yet to see proof that Linda has done anything wrong, immoral, or illegal. The equalize trick is just that--a trick.  It isn't showing anything.  People are caught up in the hype and seeing what they are told.  Plus they are not doing this on full-size artwork, but artwork that is saved for web.  If someone can come forward with inconclusive evidence, then I will see for myself.  I was never much of a good little sheep to just follow a mob though.

[Jojoba]

Enayla's early works to look very similar to Ren's, her laters have some small similarities. I really doubt she uses poser, poser skins do not suit sims at all - didn't Exnem use poser skins? If you ask me they looked bad. And this isn't really about bashing a creator is it...its about 2-for-u selling her skins

[Lorelei]

As an occasional digital and traditional illustrator / artist, I can vouch that it is very easy to paint over photo references. VERY.

This is not discouraged when you are new and learning the software and techniques.

It is GREATLY discouraged when you begin to sell your work.

She's revoked her newbie status, and that's been old news for many years now.

DO I think she lacks talent? Far from it.

DO I think she uses photo references? Yes.

I think the issue isn't with using references, but using a piece with a photo reference as a base as a tutorial demonstrating how she supposedly draws everything from scratch.

Sloppy, sloppy.

Also, if you are worried about others ganking your work, keep them in your portfolio, don't put the whole, un-altered and un-watermarked images online to be downloaded and messed about with. Sucks, but it is a fact of life. Holding back part of the original image helps prove provenance.

[mando]

I don't know what reference she used to create the painting "Nelicquele", so the best I could accuse her of is not being entirely transparent about the methods to create the piece. Her write-up suffers from being a bit flighty, silly and dramatic, but its function is as a description as opposed to being a technical how-to of how she created the image. It doesn't sound as good if you say, "Well, I was just starting out at the time, and while I was pretty good at handling fabrics and faces, I couldn't paint trees for shit, and the proportions on the body were messed up, so I had to go and find references to help me out and use as base images". Well, I might write that, but well, you know... .

Digital artists use a lot of tricks (again, myself included) to get things done so that they look correct and are finished quickly. It's not a crime, perhaps a little disingenuous, but not evil. Yes, she should reference images she uses especially in work she is selling as original artwork for sale, but the base of the work is done on her back and through her efforts.  

I'm pretty sure others have their own definition of what that term is, and one of them is "to use a photo as reference which includes tracing". In the end, I'm not too sure what the term "photo reference" means anymore :?

"Tracing over" something is not exactly what I'm talking about, but you're right it is a little convoluted and hard to understand. When I make textures I use photographs I've taken or found and frankenstein them together in order to get the image I need. If I'm "hand painting" textures, while I am not going for a highly realistic image I still want it to be recognizable to a viewer. At which point, I will handpaint over the original photograph as a guide because (and this is the only reason for me) it saves me wicked loads of time. The end result is not a duplicate image to the original photo in anyway(the original image is entirely painted over), but still references what I was trying to make. Keep in mind, however, that I am making textures and not fancy art pieces to hang on your wall.

[Xeon_Black]

I don't know what reference she used to create the painting "Nelicquele", so the best I could accuse her of is not being entirely transparent about the methods to create the piece. Her write-up suffers from being a bit flighty, silly and dramatic, but its function is as a description as opposed to being a technical how-to of how she created the image. It doesn't sound as good if you say, "Well, I was just starting out at the time, and while I was pretty good at handling fabrics and faces, I couldn't paint trees for shit, and the proportions on the body were messed up, so I had to go and find references to help me out and use as base images". Well, I might write that, but well, you know... .

:lol: rofl, no, I certainly don't expect her to come up with something like that, but I would've expected her to at least mention she used a reference for that pose or something like that, and it was traced from a photo that doesn't belong to her. I posted the link in my earlier post, here's the pic again --> http://conceptart.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1286070&postcount=41
I don't find a problem with the part comparing Linda's horse plate armour with a real picture though. As I mentioned before, I don't see anything wrong with using photos as references, and it doesn't look traced nor is the whole thing 100% copied from the photo.

And no, cheating in art isn't evil nor a crime, almost every artists do it, but it's another thing to hear one artist not applying to his/her own principles.

Well, I'm not calling for a "witch hunt" nor looking for a fight, just merely expressing my opinion on this new light shed on Linda. She may not use this "cheating" technique anymore, and I still love to look at her art, and still say they're beautiful, but part of me will feel a little disappointed over what she had done.

I apologize for derailing the thread. For the moment there I was treating this thread as an art thread. CaptainJojoba is right, the main issue here is about 2-for-u wrongfully selling Linda's sim skintones. I don't know what can be done about it, other than everyone bombing the site-owners's   email/guestbook with protests.    :!:

[ghengisjohn]

Ah, just finished reading all of this and all I can really think of that's relevant is: screw you, 2-for-U. And get a less crappy name.

[silver]

(applauds ghengisjohn)

Short, sweet, and to the point! ^^^

[MizzKitty]

Hmmm... Which ones are Enaylas skins? Are those the slightly shiny fantasy ones, cuz... I didn't like those very much. In fact, I keep going back to my Helaene skins, even though I tried out several "famous" skins... (I only use default replacements, I hate how custom skins will dominate genetics...)

Anyhoo.

I'm very disappointed in 2-f0r-u. I actually love a lot of their stuff. Not skins or hair (the one with three braids in a ponytail spells out major suckage) but they have some very nice outfits. I was even considering donating for one of their packs for the booty if it was wanted.

Now not so much. Mostly because that even though I share with the booty I prefer to donate to someone I actually can sorta like. I know, I have weird and twisted feelings on this.

I don't care how Enayla's ethics are - it's 2-f0r-us ethics that count in this instant. Lowering oneself to someone else's standards isn't really a valid excuse.