Hmm... I'm hardly one of the better artists here >.> But I'm feeling ego-tastic enough to answer <,<
For myself - I'm totally fine with it; but I would prefer people ask >.>
I have no problem showing people my early work personally; but I'm sure that varies greatly by artist.
I personally would be 'slightly cheesed' if someone went ahead and did it - but I'd also have that slight ego buzz of "someone liked my stuff enough to do something with it?! <@.@>" - again, thats all just me; I hope that helps some ><
A Warrior's Friend: ID 335212 - Help Infernal save Valkyrie from Battle Maiden.
Above Mars Part 1: The Wellington: ID 159769 - Save Mars by destroying a monstrous battleship from the inside!
>.> My DA page, where I attempt to art.
as you mention...the right thing ta do is ask. personally, I love seeing the various steps but I can also understand artists not wanting to show their work until it is finished. either way...long as the art is shown in some fashion I am a happy camper. 
~
...the sword is truth...
~whiteperegrine~
quick answer: IF and only if, asked politely first - then I would most likely be willing.
longer answer: it might depend a bit on the art piece -- how happy am I with the finished piece? How much did I struggle with the piece along the way? Was there some really embarrassing mid-point in the piiece that I came to and wasted hours and hours on, but makes me look like a complete hack? --But, in general, I like to see the "process" because I am an artist. And animated/time-lapsed photographic show of from start to finish would be a gas.
-- BUT! I bloody well better be asked for permission first! I'd go ballistic if someone posted such a thing withOUT my prior consnt.
Anytime anyone does anything with someone else's art, they should ask - regardless of how well-inteded the use might be.
1)It depends Rowr if someone paid me for a sketch after im finished I have no more intrest in it and they can use it what ever way they please .
2)If I had posted a few pics on the boards for friends and they suddenly showed up on the web in a video montagecreated by someone I don't know as a friend I might be Irked If I wasn't asked first or credited .
3)If it was a piece I did for Rowr for free as a friend I wouldn't care what you did with it as well
it sounds like an intresting project tho I have seen a few you tube videos of similiar projects
I'm strange in that I enjoy being used and abus... oh wait. *sheepishly looks around*
I enjoy it when people do things with my art. I love it when people re-post it, or do projects based off of it, or anything else you can imagine. Art is meant to be shared and doing so makes the world a better place. If I wanted to control my art in any way whatsoever I wouldn't *ever* post it online. It's completely out of my control as soon as it hits the net and I know better than to think anything else.
Of course, I'd like to get credit where credit is due, but nothing more than that is neccessary. Besides, from the sounds of it, it's all the same artist's works, so in essence there's no extra offending work being inserted into it. I for one, love the step-by-step process animations and would love it if someone did that with my art.
http://www.virtueverse.net/wiki/Massacre_Melanie -the original Fire/Dark Corruptor -
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=115217
The Guide to BURN
[ QUOTE ]
So I'm wondering, just to get a general 'feel' on what the community thinks at large.
...
Would it be polite to ask the artist's permission first or just go ahead and do it?
[/ QUOTE ]
I tend to think this comes down to artist's rights vs. 'rights' of culture.
Yes it is always polite to ask the artist for permission. However, and this is the tricky part, once a person has adopted a piece of art into his or her personal culture, there is a strange form of 'ownership' over that piece of art that comes into play, an ownership that can feel perfectly self-justified without permission.
I might argue that legal definitions of ownership simply cannot reach into the jurisdiction of a person's brain or soul or whatever a person uses to store all the cultural cues from which he or she derives a personal identity. Certainly legal definitions can be brought to bear on a person to claim 'fair' damages after the fact, but they simply cannot themselves force a person to relinquish that strange ownership.
It seems to me that the phenomenon of fans slipping into the behavior where they think they have the right to expect actors of their fan-favorite characters to be always 'on' in the fans' presences, is basically a natural result of confusing this strange ownership for legal, or at least righteous, ownership. This phenomenon applies not only in acting, but in music and literature and sports and politics and law and science and CoX; in fact any field where people can rise above the average and flirt with stardom.
I also tend to consider that this artist right vs. cultural right paradox is what drove the whole Napster rise/collapse chaos. People loved music they heard, and really built a lot of their own identities into it and from it, and many came to feel like they owned their own personal versions of them, so they felt like they had the right to just get the music in the most direct form it was available and the law had no jurisdiction to say otherwise. Should artists be paid for their works accessed in this manner? Not by the consumers supposedly because they already owned that music.
Now... Part of this confusion comes down to the way new pieces of art tend to be released into general culture. New art and new music tends to be fashioned to be appealing, to be expressive in such a way as to encourage people to be pleased with it. This is pretty natural, but success means thrusting the art dangerously close to the line separating what the audience considers external influences and personal influences. It can be very easy for the audience to confuse whether an artist means 'look at this but don't touch' or 'please please touch all you want if that'll make you at least look'.
I know that last point hints at a claim that perhaps artists are guilty of complicity when they want to claim that an audience has stolen their work. I would rather substitute a more intentional hint that artists can very well do more to ensure their audiences grasp intended limits-of-use on their works, but artists should likely not be required to do so. It doesn't seem fair to insist a person should be forced to be a click-EULA lawyer as a requirement before engaging in any personal or artistic expression. It also puts artists in a terrible position of trying to do things that naturally alienates art audiences (like plugging analog holes) just so that they can present things to which they hope an art audience will bring open minds (like plucking analog strings over a reverberating hole).
So basically, there's no real solution, except for the paradox of artist with/versus culture to just keep chaotically coexisting. Arguably both artist and culture own the same art. Just make the best choices you can from whatever side of the paradox you find yourself. Find the biggest nerf bat you can find if that's the choice you want to make and start swinging as hard as you can, but in general those choices come too far after the fact.
[ QUOTE ]
But how would you feel if someone didn't ask and went ahead and put that up ?
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally... I guess potentially I'd let them and move on, on the theory of trying to respect their freedom to choose, but I'd be depressed for a while.
But what about the complimentary question? How does culture feel when an artist tries to deny, or rip out, already-completely-integrated art?
Fred Astaire dancing with a vacuum cleaner. Make your choice. I'll trust you as much as I can.
personnaly I would rather be asked. But as long as no one is trying to profit from it and also that whatever I did is not changed horribly I would not mind.
One thing to keep in mind is what was the spirit in wich you go the said piece of art. If you bought / comissioned it the artist probably informed you of what rights they were giving you over the picture and wich one they kept. Very possibly an professional artist would retain all publishing rights to the picture or at the least not let you make money out of it .
If on the other hand it was a gift from a friend then the situation may be different. If you know that friend well it is possible that you could rightly assume that they would agree.
This being said the polite thing to do remains to ask.
I am wondering though What brought up that question?
Proud Member Of the Paragons of Justice
Kidraid, Golden Guard, War Emblem, Eridani, Greymist, BabyTank and more many more.
My Gallery (There I am KidRaid since Greymist was already taken)
[ QUOTE ]
So I'm wondering, just to get a general 'feel' on what the community thinks at large.
Would you, as an artist, be opposed to having a 'beginning to end' montage of a commissioned or fan art piece published on the web? I.e. going from sketch phase, to pencils, to inks, to colors, in some kind of say, animated gif or whatever? Would it be polite to ask the artist's permission first or just go ahead and do it? Of course in my head the 'right' thing to do is ask. But how would you feel if someone didn't ask and went ahead and put that up ? Do you as an artist not want people to see those early sketch phases or is that kind of thing ok?
I know. Odd question. I've been up a long time this morning.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is something I would want to do myself, not have someone else do for me. I would entertain someone asking me for permission, but would be red-faced angry if someone did it without asking me first.
Well the reason I was asking, is that I'm planning out yet another gallery revamp 
and one neat thing I thought I'd do is take all those WIP's and progress sketches, and string them together, either side by side or in an animated gif, to show beginning to end of a piece. I have about... 10-12 pieces that I can do that with. But I don't know if I'm going to do it at all, but if I do, I will definitely be asking permissions
Just thought it'd be neat to see.
That would be neat to see...especially for all of us artists! I agree with the consensus that it would be correct to ask the artist first, and it would be great to give them credit in the gif.
GHOST ZERO! Avenger of the helpless dead!
So I'm wondering, just to get a general 'feel' on what the community thinks at large.
Would you, as an artist, be opposed to having a 'beginning to end' montage of a commissioned or fan art piece published on the web? I.e. going from sketch phase, to pencils, to inks, to colors, in some kind of say, animated gif or whatever? Would it be polite to ask the artist's permission first or just go ahead and do it? Of course in my head the 'right' thing to do is ask. But how would you feel if someone didn't ask and went ahead and put that up ? Do you as an artist not want people to see those early sketch phases or is that kind of thing ok?
I know. Odd question. I've been up a long time this morning.