http://www.sfondideldesktop.com/Ima...../Red-Fox-5.Jpg

Oh hey, look what I found!

Referencing poses is not illegal.. sorry.

No, but Im pretty sure FA requires you to state your sources.
Not to mention that while referencing may not be illegal, tracing certainly is, and you do that too.

And if this was a commission.....its even worse. If I found I'd commissioned someone for something and they'd basically just copied, or even, given your history, traced over a photo, I wouldn't pay for it either.

How can you trace a photo? Photographs of animals and objects in the real world do not have drawn outlines. There are no 'styles' or anything. So unless you can copyright the anatomy of a fox, there's no way in hell you can possibly claim anything about photorefs being illegal. You used the pose...... so that gives everyone the right to baww?

You know perfectly well how to trace a photo, because you've been caught doing it before now. Put a layer over it, trace over the outline of the animal for instant 'perfect' anatomy. Sure beats sketching everything out yourself, doesn't it?

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y3.....snowl_fade.gif

Is it really that hard to come up with your own poses based on what you've learned and observed in ref pics, rather than just slapping a layer over it and tracing? Thats how you're SUPPOSED to use reference: look at a number of pics, take in specifics about the species, then draw your own using what you've learned.
You're confusing refs with traces. A ref is using a photo as a guide to increase your knowledge on something. A trace is what you see in the link above. One is considered fair play, even encouraged, in art, and the other is something a child or even a monkey could do and takes little to no talent.
I could trace when I was 4. I couldn't reference a photo and come up with something new based on it. One takes talent and ability, the other is lazy bullshit done by people who can't draw for themselves.

Again, there is nothing on the photograph that you can really 'trace' to get a style or anything of the sort.
Please discontinue the subject. I'm taking everything to the admins about this and if I get anymore harassment from anyone- member or admin, I am seriously considering major legal action.

You can trace an outline, as you have, how much clearer does that overlay need to be? What, photos don't have outlines or shapes? You're so defiant, its hilarious. People would have more respect if you just admitted it.

Bring your major legal action to me, I need a laugh.
You do realise that the original photographer probably has more grounds to bring legal action to YOU for tracing their work than you do to whine about being called out on tracing online?
Photographers are artists too.

Actually drawing a photograph is not grounds for legal action If you studied any kind of law, let alone the copyright law, you would know and understand this.

Sitting here harassing people for the LULZ however is grounds for legal action.

Why you? Do you NEED the attention? Are you that much of an attention whore? Did I specifically say I was going to take action against YOU?
Please stfu before I can't stop laughing.

Pointing out art theft online isn't grounds for legal action, Im afraid.
Jesus fucking christ, defiant art theif is defiant.

And pathetic. Just....draw your own images, otherwise I, and others, will have to assume you lack the ability to do so.

O hay look at dis, Jess

"Avoid copying or otherwise using images you find on web pages without permission of the copyright owner. These and other uses violate Federal copyright law. The copyright owner can sue infringers for damages (the owner's lost profit), profits (any profit the infringer made), statutory damages (up to $10,000 and as much as $50,000 for willful infringement), and attorney's fees and costs. They can get injunctive relief, and infringing copies and the equipment used to produce them can be impounded and destroyed.

It is also a criminal act to violate Federal copyright law (see 17 U.S.C.A.§ 506). It may qualify as a Federal misdemeanor (with a fine as much as $10,000 or imprisonment for up to one year.) "

oh and dis

"Modifying a work, say by cropping, coloring, distorting, enlarging, etc. is not a way around this law. Creating a derivative work "or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed or adapted" is an infringement."

oh and

"Copyright law does not protect sightings. However, copyright law will protect your photo (or other depiction) of your sighting."

"No one can lawfully use your photo of your sighting, although someone else may file his own photo of his sighting. Copyright law protects the original photograph, not the subject of the photograph."

So in effect...no, you cannot copyright an animal. But you CAN copyright the photograph that was taken of it, which includes the pose of the animal. :)

Was never paid for sadly.

Good. Pretty sure I'd be pissed if I commissioned someone for something and got a poorly (and obviously) photoshopped picture. Protip: Adding 348 filters and an outline doesn't make it an original piece of art. Try harder.

X3 Gosh so much fail...