| Posted: 29 July 2026 at 3:03pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
It has to be intention, right? Maybe?
This guy has inked over stats (or whatever). Then presented it as an original piece of art by JB and him.
There are plenty of times that has been done in comics, where original pencils were lost or delayed but copies were available to be light-boxed over.
So it feels like the act is the same.
The [professional] artist would have intended the [assigned] work to be inked as part of the professional production chain.
So in both cases [professional and ametuer], the inks couldn't exist without the original artist, but in both cases there is no physical attachment to the inked piece by the penciller.
So I think I've convinced myself that in both cases, the original artwork can not include the original artist as involved in the end art. To suggest so is duplicitous.
...Maybe?
This is why as much as I love the traditional media, I do all my inks over JB's work digitally. Can't sell nuffin! -LOL. Edit's in square brackets - [Like so...]
Edited by Darren Taylor on 29 July 2026 at 3:11pm
|