I'll just leave this here..

[AeonicSlumber]

Amorphis actually has it the worst, because even though their last 2 artworks use no creative commons materials, they look suspiciously like other artworks! Hahaha. The new one with Wolfmother, and the previous one with A Static Lullaby.

 

[Claus / Intromental]

It is a stock image purchased. In fact, I think the artwork for Circus Maximus' debut was already done before the band requested it. I could be wrong, but pretty sure that's the case.

Correct, Matthias had that cover ready for another band called ... Circus!!!

 

[Magius]

Two more. This does happen all the time, but the OT is rather ironic.

 

[1000 Faces]

That's exactly it. And yes, it happens in publishing all the time - I know that as I am part of the web/interactive team in a publishing company. As a matter of fact, I've been able to find that exactly image that both CM and DT artists used in the artwork.

I used to be the advertising coordinator for a company that publishes B2B magazines. I was laid off that job about five years ago, but I still constantly see images that were used in those ads in other contexts.

I guess what I'm most surprised about vis-a-vis this topic is that more people don't know about the nature of stock photography, but then again, I've been involved in publishing my entire adult life, so I guess it's just second nature for me.

 

[Comic Book Dude]

How is it lazy?

Instead of actually drawing/painting a unique and new image, a stock image was doctored up Photoshop.

 

[AeonicSlumber]

You don't seem to understand how album art is made these days, do you? And by the way, what's wrong with photoshop? If it's done tastefully, it definitely serves its purpose. Not everything should be an epic Dan Seagrave cover.

 

[Pellaz]

They shoulda just called Michael Whelan or something.... (Note: site has auto-start audio)

 

[YtseJammer]

Do you feel like a ProgPower/UM forum senior yet?

No, but the senior moments are becoming more and more frequent..

 

[Comic Book Dude]

You don't seem to understand how album art is made these days, do you? And by the way, what's wrong with photoshop? If it's done tastefully, it definitely serves its purpose. Not everything should be an epic Dan Seagrave cover.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with Photoshop...it definitely is a great tool for artists and designers. I just don't like it when it's used simply for a cut and paste job with stock images. I appreciate it much more when the artist actually illustrates the piece instead of using stock images....it's like composing music vs. using samples.

 

[mëtålspëd]

I didn't say there was anything wrong with Photoshop...it definitely is a great tool for artists and designers. I just don't like it when it's used simply for a cut and paste job with stock images. I appreciate it much more when the artist actually illustrates the piece instead of using stock images....it's like composing music vs. using samples.

I take offense to this comment. You telling me this isnt a MASTERPIECE?

 

[AngraRULES]

Claus's Jug Band was fucking amazing. I wish they had shot a DVD of that performance...

 

[Comic Book Dude]

I take offense to this comment. You telling me this isnt a MASTERPIECE?

I stand corrected....that is, indeed, freakin' awesome.

 

[J-Man]

I take offense to this comment. You telling me this isnt a MASTERPIECE?

OH MY GOD!!! That is so cool except Claus is bald now

 

[Metaldrumz]

I didn't say there was anything wrong with Photoshop...it definitely is a great tool for artists and designers. I just don't like it when it's used simply for a cut and paste job with stock images. I appreciate it much more when the artist actually illustrates the piece instead of using stock images....it's like composing music vs. using samples.

That's because you have graphic designers like what I am, and then you have graphic artists. A lot are both but there are many who do one or the other.

 

[DuchessOfDork]

That's because you have graphic designers like what I am, and then you have graphic artists. A lot are both but there are many who do one or the other.

Oh boy.. I could rant about this all day! You know a lot of graphic artists use stock photography for their pieces, and you wouldn't even know it! It all depends on how they're used.

 

[Metaldrumz]

Oh boy.. I could rant about this all day! You know a lot of graphic artists use stock photography for their pieces, and you wouldn't even know it! It all depends on how they're used.

Yea me as well. A TRUE graphic artist will create his own stock images. Thats what separates graphic DESIGNERS from ARTISTS.

 

[AngraRULES]

Yea me as well. A TRUE graphic artist will create his own stock images. Thats what separates graphic DESIGNERS from ARTISTS.

Gotcha. So you're saying the guys who created artworks for both Circus Maximus and Dream Theater aren't true graphic artists?

 

[The_Metal_Messiah]

Morbid Angel

Hexenhaus

 

[mëtålspëd]

OH MY GOD!!! That is so cool except Claus is bald now

I refuse to believe such things... that is just what he wants you to believe.

 

[Metaldrumz]

Gotcha. So you're saying the guys who created artworks for both Circus Maximus and Dream Theater aren't true graphic artists?

Well I can't really say that because it depends on who you ask. For me personally if you are using stock images to create flyers, artwork, covers, ads, etc...you are a graphic designer. If you are creating your own original pieces of art via digital outlet than I would consider you a graphic artist.