“The cartoon is a vacuum into which our identity and awareness are pulled… an empty shell that we inhabit which enables us to travel in another realm. we don’t just observe the cartoon, we become it!” -pg 36 Scott McCloud Understanding Comics, Chapter 2.
As a person who constantly indulges in cartoon style artwork, from animated cartoons on tv from multi paneled web comics, I never truly understood my fascination with the genre. Well in a sense I just thought that I was just attracted to the art style and nothing more. Than I realized it was far more complex than that after I read this short quote from Understanding Comics.
As a viewer we are not simply watching or observing but are also participating in the artwork. We fill in the open spaces between the few, simple lines and become the characters. This allows the viewer to easily relate to the character (if the character is also well written/developed).
However I am curious as to why cartoon/animation/anime are words that turn people off. Is it because of the over simplification of the art style it may be deemed “simple” or only for children? However if Scotts point is right than people who view this art style become -one- with it, so why do people feel negative towards it?
I constitute fair use of these various images because I’ve taken elements out of the original image and placed them into a new context. I used aspects of images from creative commons and manipulated other ones from google. The images that I manipulated from google search are the ones that are completely pulled out of their original context.
i.e, The whale tale is from an image where it’s swimming in an ocean. The pool is from an image of a luxury backyard. The woman is from a photo that’s created for reference drawing.
By combining all of these images I have created a completely new one.
(Layer mask: rectangle w/ circle on “Layers”, mergers one layer with another through selection tool.
~Can invert layer merging through “image”-“adjustments”-“invert”
~pressing shift and clicking on layer mask blocks it.
~using brush tool, white and black paint options can edit the places where the two layers merge on the image.)
The problem I have with adjustment layers is remembering to link them to the layer I’m working with.
“The use of a preexisting work, whether in part or in whole, should be justified by the artistic objective, and artists who deliberately repurpose copyrighted works should be prepared to explain their rationales both for doing so and for the extent of their uses. Fair Use for the Visual Arts”
This quote I find particularly interesting. I believe it’s what makes copyright so tricky to tackle for artists. I’ve read into several cases where a copyright infridgment was brought to court and depending on the artists reasoning alone, a case would be won or loss. If you’ve ever seen the movie, “Exit Through the Gift Shop”, an “influential” artist fills a gallery with artwork that was either copied or heavily influenced by iconic pop art. I discovered that not shortly after his showing, he was slapped with copy infringement and was sent to court and lost the case because he couldn’t provide a good reasoning for why he copied these artwork (other than profit).
However, I’m also concerned about this rule- if an artist is in court trying to fight for their claim of fair use but- ya know- they’re an artist and have no money, how often will they lose a court case because they can’t afford a lawyer that can support their claim properly?
“Artists should avoid uses of existing copyrighted material that do not generate new artistic meaning, being aware that a change of medium, without more, may not meet this standard. Fair Use for the Visual Arts”
I believe this limitation for fair use should protect artists from cultural appropriation. Though I’ve never heard of any cases where an artist from a minority culture sues another artist for cultural appropriation of their artwork. I’ve never looked into it either- I would hope that this limitation has been used several times to defend minorities.