i had a very big thing typed up i’d thought about for a few days then my computer crashed and i lost it so lets see if i remember ;w;

i feel like this is a case where the difference between copying and referencing isn’t really the point, it’s more about considering yourself what’s important to the piece you’re referencing, how you’re using it, and how is it important to your own work.

copying and referencing depending on the subject matter and need can be virtually the same so it really becomes case-by-case even if it’s photography. like are you drawing an arm exactly as you see it, or is it a completely different pose and you just want to see muscle groups?

i understand what you mean, but i would say too that any aspect of a photo can have intent or lack thereof and it also depends on the type of photography since it’s just as broad as any other type of art.

this is why i say it’s more important to consider the piece and make your own judgement as to whether or not your work breaches the other. if you copy a hand from a photo that’s usually fine, but what if the entire piece is the hand and you’re now reusing a large percentage of their work? but also you could argue a hand is a hand and not unique in that way. it varies.

everyone is going to have their own opinion on where the line is, that’s why this is so grey. when it comes to referencing a subject i’m unfamiliar with i find it helpful to pull from as many sources as possible, it makes it less likely i’m accidentally copying from someone else and means i’m actually working to understand the subject. that or i often just take reference photos myself wherever possible.