Are outlines cheating?

[bobweekend]

I am starting an art project where I plan on embellishing giclee prints with painted phrases written in my variant of Elian script. Would it be cheating to have the words already on the digital print and painting over them? It would allow more consistency from one copy to the next. The end result would still be a print with paint on it to make it an original.

Thanks,
Bob

[vmrs]

No, of course it's not cheating! Not at all.

[mariposa-art]

Nothing is cheating unless you are lying or pretending you did something one way (when you did it some other way) in hopes of looking more "impressive" or something. I see no reason why you'd consider this "cheating"!

[creativechrissy]

No, howver each print could be seen to be more unique written seperately with your hand touch. Though you said you would be painting over it anyway, it would still look 'manufactured'. Depends on your angle. Either way, no i dont think it is cheating -there are so many things we do to make our livs easier

[robertsloan2]

No, that's not cheating. That's part of the same technique you're doing in the first place, embellishing archival prints. If you want clean, elegant fonts that don't look hand painted then you either need to be a super calligrapher or use some kind of transfer or measurement method. Painting over printed text to change it and embellish it, that's cool.

You're not claiming that you designed the fonts or anything. Cheating is when it's flat out fraud, like using a font and saying you did calligraphy.

[bobweekend]

Thanks everyone. And Yes I did create the font/cypher. When I was in grade school I would read Scholastic magazines on the back of one was a decode this message puzzle. Research since determined it was a pigpen cypher. The code they had did not include numbers or punctuation. I created those myself. Moreover the order of the letters kept getting me confused so I re-arranged them to something I could remember easier. The end result is my own cypher based on pigpen which is based on Elian Script.

I have practiced free handing these and it was not nice. Getting each letter the same size and spacing is a pain. I will have the message on the print and just paint over it. The result will be much better. I will sign and date each piece as it is completed.
Thanks again.

[RobinZ]

How would it be an original, not an embellished reproduction?

[vmrs]

Thanks everyone. And Yes I did create the font/cypher. When I was in grade school I would read Scholastic magazines on the back of one was a decode this message puzzle. Research since determined it was a pigpen cypher. The code they had did not include numbers or punctuation. I created those myself. Moreover the order of the letters kept getting me confused so I re-arranged them to something I could remember easier. The end result is my own cypher based on pigpen which is based on Elian Script.

That's interesting, I hope you show us when you're done!

[AllisonR]

Originally Posted by bobweekend

I am starting an art project where I plan on embellishing giclee prints with painted phrases written in my variant of Elian script. Would it be cheating to have the words already on the digital print and painting over them? It would allow more consistency from one copy to the next. The end result would still be a print with paint on it to make it an original.

Thanks,
Bob

Bolding mine. It isn't an original. It is a print, with paint on it. It is a print, a reproduction. Nothing wrong with that. But it is cheating to say it is an original when it is a reproduction. However, your original question was is it a cheat to have words on the digital print? No. Why would words be a cheat? It is a digital print, you can print whatever you want.

[robertsloan2]

Originally Posted by bobweekend

I am starting an art project where I plan on embellishing giclee prints with painted phrases written in my variant of Elian script. Would it be cheating to have the words already on the digital print and painting over them? It would allow more consistency from one copy to the next. The end result would still be a print with paint on it to make it an original.

Thanks,
Bob

Not at all. Just be honest in explaining that it's a print with paint on it. The main difference between cheating and not is dishonesty about what processes you used. Someone doing realism by printing a photo on canvas and painting over it can occasionally get massive attention for accuracy specifically, only to get called a cheat for not saying the transfer was part of the process.

On text especially, it may be a lot easier to put them on the print. Since it's your variant on Elian script, that's original. You're just using your own material again in different ways. Best is to use your own photos for that paint over the print thing.

[RobinZ]

Again, I guess I'm missing how an embellished reproduction copy can be an "original".

[birdhs]

Eagerly awaiting a post from you, this sounds like an interesting comment.

If I understand correctly, YOU created the original the print was made from? if so, then you are modifying your own work, therefore it would be completely original art, much the same as a signed original print series, each one numbered and signed.

If you do not want to post the work here for fear of someone cutting and pasting it and stealing it for their own use, we understand. It can happen.

[Horsa]

If I understand Bob correctly he is saying that each print will hand embellished with paint individually. Thus making each an "original" because it will be intentionally slightly different to each other print in the series. This as opposed to making one original, adding the text and then producing a series of identical copies, each with exactly the same print.

He is asking if it is "cheating" to have guidelines for the script embelishment printed with the rest of the print, rather than laying out and painting the embelishment from scratch on each print individually after the image is printed.

I don't think this is "cheating" I think it is artistic process or method. It is the way in which he is choosing to incorporate the lettering into the work. It would be cheating if he were to call them "hand done original paintings by Bob" as they are prints not individual paintings. It is not cheating to say "This is a print of a hand done original painting by Bob" or "This is a print that Bob painted by hand on". As long as Bob is honest about what he is selling he is not cheating.

[AllisonR]

Originally Posted by Horsa

If I understand Bob correctly he is saying that each print will hand embellished with paint individually. Thus making each an "original" because it will be intentionally slightly different to each other print in the series.

This does not make them originals. This makes them hand-embellished prints.

Originally Posted by RobinZ

Again, I guess I'm missing how an embellished reproduction copy can be an "original".

Me too.