This is great! Love this.

Nice bubble. I love the color.

I didn't copy any picture to make this :( I only looked at a lot of different bubbles to see how I could draw them. I had nothing to look at while I was drawing it. I never really had the chance to stop and study a bubble before, so the concept of drawing something that was mostly nothing was new to me. If one studies many pictures of cats, then draws a cat...without looking at a picture durring the proccess of drawing, is that a refrence photo?

If you have a photographic memory..... :)

I don't.

I always ask that. What's the difference between drawing from a photo of something, or from the actual object,..or from a memory of the actual object or picture. They're all references, aren't they?

Exactly Dave, all art is referanced or influenced from things we see or have experienced. We are all products of our enviornments. But in Kraisas' defence, you could say a loose referance to bubbles was used.

...in that respect why cite a reference used for a picture? I was under the impression that in the case of this site, a ref. picture was one you drew from...I make a point not to draw from photos that I didn't take my self, I feel as if you are implying that I copied this picture from memory or other wise. I feel insulted. :(

Why? All that is being said is that a reference could be anything from your experience. Unless you were the first person to conceive of a "bubble" and all that means, every picture of one must be done from either looking at an actual bubble, a photo of one, or a memory of lots of them. What differs is your interpretation of those references. You interpreted creatively by having the little dragon inside yours. There is no insult intended in any of the comments, just what we think a reference can be.

You can't possibly mean that drawing from memory is just as easy as drawing from an actual photograph. It's not the same thing at all. (I know you didn't literally say that, but you implied it.)

They're all references, sure. But it would be easier to draw from a reference that's right next to you than one that's 18 feet away right? You can't just say a reference is a reference is a reference. What most people mean when they say a work is referenced is that while drawing their picture they actively compared it to at least one specific existing picture. There's a world of difference between actively referenced work and the alternative, and any attempt to say otherwise is a mockery.

Nobody said anything about ease. All we said was that drawing from memory is also a form of reference. Unless you design a completely new object never before seen, it's from some kind of reference. Nothing more. It's just a clarification that everything is referenced in some form. I think Kraisa did a remarkable job in drawing this without actively looking at an example to copy. I can't do it.

You said: "What's the difference between drawing from a photo of something, or from the actual object,..or from a memory of the actual object or picture. They're all references, aren't they?"

That rhetorical question implies that there are no significant differences between them, and therefore also that the difficulty difference between them is insignificant. You didn't specifically mention ease but it was covered by the blanket implication.

_{(smartass remark retracted)}

The question referred not to how easy or difficult one might be to draw from over another, but rather whether the artist , indeed, had to look at one of them,in some form, to make the image. That was the only inference. Clearly it is harder to remember what something looks like than to just look at it, which is why I can't do it. None of the comments was to in any way detract from what Kraisa drew, they were just to say that everything is referenced in some form or other. The question of the difference between them is limited strictly to whether an object , physical, or remembered, was referred to. That's all. No other meaning was implied, nor intended. It was simply to point out that an object, a photo of an object, or a memory of either are all a form of reference. I would never say that it is easier to draw something without looking at a photo or physically at the object.

I agree with you that everyone uses references of some sort or another. But you need to be more careful with how you word it. There are specific associations with the phrase "referenced work." Unless I am mistaken, the general usage of the phrase means the work was actively compared to a specific existing picture during its development. Thus, an "unreferenced work" is not assumed to be a work that had no references whatsoever, but a instead work that was not actively referenced during its development. In that sense Kraisa's picture is in fact unreferenced.

The crux of the argument seems to be semantic differences between common and technical definitions of the word reference.

Just an observation.

All this can be avoided if you say; loose referance or faithful reproduction. The latter being an exact copy of the original. Of course, I don't mean to imply that these are the only classifications but they are the most definate. How about this; ref-er-ence b) a mention 4 a) an indication, as in a book or some other source of information. -Webster's Dictionary- As per this definition "to mention" something is to site it as a referance weither it's a book or otherwise. No insult intended simply stating my opinion.

I disagree, Sythe. As Zack described, there is a generally implied meaning of the word reference that indicates it was used and looked at while drawing. This is not a faithful reproduction or a reference, but rather an exercise in the proper placement of lights and reflection without the luxury of a model to follow. This is an unreferenced piece.

If your only argument is that you would want to know she looked at bubbles prior to drawing, then maybe you should also site your work as referenced because I'm sure you've looked at human faces prior to drawing.

Seems ridiculous?

Silly me. I forgot to say! You did a beautiful job with this. It's hard enough to draw things like that while looking at something, but you did an exceptional job even without that crutch.

Or you could just comment on the picture.
Nice bubble. It looks real.

"What's the difference between drawing from a photo of something, or from the actual object,..or from a memory of the actual object or picture. They're all references, aren't they?"

I see how you may think this quote would imply the 'difficulty' between references too, but when I first read it, I didn't assume that davinci was making a difficulty comparison at all. It was only assumed to be implied. Assumptions can always be cleared up by asking questions (whether it was actually implied). We're humans after all...we shouldn't assume everyone will always, 'always' keep on their mark to word what they say correctly.

In all this. I was simply saying that Kraisa did a wonderful job drawing this from her memory reference and that I can't do it without looking at a physical reference. As Zack said, its all semantics, really, I was just making an observation and in no way did I intend to disparage this wonderful piece ((Kraisa))

I'll just agree to disagree and say that I still love this peice. Sorry for being so anal.

LOL I never came back to see what happened after my last comment on this. It seems I sparked quite a debate! I appreciate the kudos for my picture. I understand the different points of view.

I had never seen someone told that a picture was ref. when the atist mentioned that it wasn't I guess that is why I was insulted. That and I was feeling particularlly moody that day.(I can see how it was most likely merely a way to play on words and their meanings)

Really really no hard feelings held towards any of you! Though it was nice to see people talking without coming up with crap like "yeah well your mom!" Each comment seems to be a well thought out statement of opinions! It was actually refreshing.

no kidding, that was one of the best debates I'e seen in picture comments in awhile.
Lovely picture Kraisa! The bubble is just perfect, very realistic lighting.