so i realized that photo-bashing is pretty much a required skill for the concept art industry. forgive me because i don't understand too much about it.
question about matte painting and copyright:
1. i used images off google for a matte painting: the artwork in question is not being sold anywhere, just going to put it up on my portfolio website and DA and such. will i get into trouble?
2. how much of the photo(s) can be manipulated until no one comes running at me with a lawsuit? like if i cut out a tree or a hill to use on a painting (like 15 to 20% of the whole photo), will people give a shit?
3. if i manipulate the area that i cut out from the photo enough (stretch/warp/adjust lighting/etc) beyond recognition of its original (no overlays will be able to justify the original) is it free from the copyright?
4. how much of the matte painting can be painted vs copy/pasted? is photo-bashing the whole thing looked down upon?
pic related, a practice piece. pretty much photo-bashed the whole thing, i think i used like 10 different photos
>>2595028
when the texture density of your regular renders approaches photo density you can blend them
fundamentals first. perspective, camera, lighting, fog, values, color
>>2595039
but that doesn't answer my questions at all
>>2595042
I answered your question
absolutely nobody should be able to tell
>>2595028
that perspective is a nightmare
>captcha: Select all images with mountains.
>>2595028
what was the point of doing that
>>2595028
>the artwork in question is not being sold anywhere, just going to put it up on my portfolio website and DA and such. will i get into trouble?
SHOULD you get into trouble? Legally, no. WILL you get into trouble? It's possible because no one understands fair use. Still, think of how unlikely it is someone's going to find a fraction of one photo they took in one picture on one guy's website they've never heard of.
>>2595049
op made a larry niven ringworld type structure right? shouldn't it look like that
>>2595043
so you're saying git gud at painting to a point that no one can tell you use photos? that's not really the point in my questions.
i'm talking about photo copyrights specifically. like "how much of a photo can i use before i get sued"?
>>2595049
kek yeah i was trying for this final fantasy warped perspective of world thing. i cant find the ref image of that though, i think it was a ff13 piece. if someone can find it for me that'd be boss, i wanted to ref it but i just shit out whatever i could remember.
>>2595050
for fun
>>2595052
yeah i guess so. but i heard betty jiang got into some shit because she used copyrighted photos and she ended up getting blacklisted. but that chick uses photos for all her art, and it looks pretty convincing as a painting so idk. meanwhile, frank hong doesn't hide the fact his paintings are 99% photos and he's doing fine.
just makes me wonder what's the fine line here or if there's any rules to this shit...
>>2595028
https://youtu.be/1X0Npd5REQw?list=PLvNv1kRvuSwLYS2CkHTDS6-zVKSoUYzJO
Watch literally every video of Feng and you'll learn the rules. Because he tells you them.
It basically boils down to blend it all in and as a result the original evidence is destroyed.
>>2595082
i guess that'd be the safest method, thanks
>>2595028
This looks horrendous. What is this even concepting? Art like this disgust me. I never want to be a concept artist for western games.
>>2595718
this is concept art for a japanese rpg.
>>2595727
no it is not, fag
You can't just manipulate the photo. You have to paint over top of it. Your work isn't done. Paint over it.
>so you're saying git gud at painting to a point that no one can tell you use photos? that's not really the point in my questions.
Anon you're replying to isn't wrong. I'm a different anon, but let me show you why by answering all your questions in your OP. You'll notice how repetitive this gets, real fast.
>will i get into trouble?
Paint over it and you won't. You're making an entirely new image with your resources.
>how much of the photo(s) can be manipulated until no one comes running at me with a lawsuit?
Use as much of the photo as you want, just paint over it. You can also just take your own photos if you really want to save face.
> if i manipulate the area that i cut out from the photo enough
No, you don't understand, photo manip is to save time on construction, not to be the final image. A concept artist tries to get into the raw idea of things as quickly as possible, and constructing is time consuming. Photo manipulation alone isn't a good concept. Paint on it.
>how much of the matte painting can be painted vs copy/pasted?
You do both. You copy/paste and then you paint over it, and then it becomes a beautiful unique snowflake. The entire thing can be a photo. Just paint over it.
The painting process is half the point of it. No one is going to hire you to concept art if you can't paint.
>is photo-bashing the whole thing looked down upon?
Depends who you ask.
