Artists Using Doll Likenesses without Crediting [Mijn Schatje discussion]

It's people like Mijn Schatje that make people afraid to share pictures of their dolls online. My photographs aren't amazing works of art, but there are some people who do take fantastic portraits and scenes of dolls who might decide, after this, that displaying their art is just not worth the risk of plagiarism.

Plagiarism on this scale shouldn't be rewarded.

 

I belong to a group called Mixed Media Collage Artists and I just found a picture posted on there from a person called "Jeffy" from France...this image was the exact same one that was stolen from Kallisti...her Saint Trinian with the tea cups on her head...I'm not sure who to contact about this. It really stinks that someone is STILL using photos they should not be using!!!


Az

 

Use links and maybe PM this 'Jeffy' and see whether they know the image is copyright to Kallisti and contact Kallisti to see if 'Jeffy' has permission to post the work. Alert the relevant people

 

I just found a great site explaining copyright issues for collage artists. Though the author admits she is not a lawyer, I think her information is good and easy to understand. Though Mijn isn't considered a collage artist it seems to apply to what she is doing.

Copyright for Collage Artists

Specifically her Myths and especially her Derivative Works page may clear some things up.

Az - Since he (or she??) is using one of Mijn's photos, I would say that is wrong on 2 levels - one he took Mijn's work, and 2 (which he didn't have control over) that work itself is a violation of copyright. I would politely message him explaining the issue surrounding the image and that it would be best to stay away from using an image that has such controversy surrounding it.

 

I contacted one of the mods who is a friend of Kallisti's and I also contacted the owner of the group where the picture is posted. So far, it has not been removed from the site, however. Thanks for the link and additional info, Firefly. It's just crazy what some people will do...


Az

 

I was perusing YouTube when I stumbled upon this clip. It's an animation by Mijn Schatje herself. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZ-NCQrJiA

The head in the animation looks like one of those ball-jointed doll sleeping heads, although I can't even identify the mold--mainly because so many doll companies have come out with so many sleeping/dreaming heads that I've lost track. The buildings next to her head kind of remind me of the buildings I've seen in those SimCity games with the 3-D display angle. (If you've ever seen screen shots of either SimCity or The Sims, you'd know what I'm talking about.) But I can't tell if she directly traced from those games or if she's been merely influenced by the graphic design style of them.

Anyone willing to do an analysis of this animation?

 

The head does not look like one of the bigger doll companies mold, I would sugggest looking into the one of the smaller companies as I'm guessing if she is tracing over another doll photo, then it would be one that is not well known. (to avoid it being recognized taken off of youtube) or it may be a combination of several photos.

 

Ugh. Well, I don't recognise it... but as Elysion gear says, it could be a combination of other things. It could be an open-eyed doll she's just "shut" the eyes on, which wouldn't be too hard to draw. For a while, the nose reminded me of a Chiwoo... but... meh, the whole thing is so blurred. I guess she must be upping her game to make it harder to spot which doll it is...

P.S. why on earth did she tag that as "stop motion"?

 

Hmm... those lips seem very full... almost like one of DIM's sculpts? But the rest doesn't match.

Then again, she did put out a request for people to donate photos to her to use... there's always the possibility that someone has actually allowed her to use a picture of their doll as the base for this image.

 

Write a public Comment and ask where she got the image, & if the original photographer gave her permission! She'll be so happy to hear from you... I'll bet she was hoping that Those Awful Jackbooted Doll-Forum Thugs weren't watchdogging her all the way over to YouTube. XD

Naa, seriously, even if she DOES suddenly turn legit, and starts drawing & animating only from fully-approved images, I don't think I could let myself enjoy her work, not without snarling.

 

Unfortunately, she's being butthurt and only allowing comments telling her how great she is. I still fully support flooding her with comments though! Somebody ought to post a YouTube vid comparing her "work" with the photos and illustrations she's traced it from.

 

As long as it's presented in a factual, non-aggressive way I think this would be a good idea.

That video shows her tracing something (judging by the order of the shading she does), it's just a question of what.

 

Same here She had many, many chances to just own up, or apologise properly. To me, she's just one big smear of a nasty thief It would have been so much better if she'd just said SORRY. Argh.

It's very sad to see Barbara Canepa (book cover; bottom row) supporting her... I admire Canepa a lot... perhaps she hasn't realised yet...?

 

Same here... she's just been so unrepentant and trying to play the victim throughout this whole process, I've pretty much lost any respect for her. I would also never donate any of my images. I just meant that if it is someone who donated her a photo, we may never find the original image.

What really infuriates me about this is that she is working in the same medium I prefer... vector illustration... and her style does bear some similarities with my personal style though I don't trace. I'm afraid that this whole controversy will cause a negative connotation with other doll collectors, or cause people to wonder if I'm ripping off photos too.

 

I can understand how you feel to a certain extent... a while back there was a big fuss about "over-painting", mainly focussed around DeviantArt, in which some people specialising in super-realistic illustrations done in Painter/Photoshop got ousted as painting over existing photographs... thankfully a couple of them had the good grace to step up and say they had not been straight-forward in their method descriptions. There was a misuse of the word "reference" to sort-of equate "over-painting" for a while, which made me nervous as I use the term reference a lot for my drawings... but didn't want it to get confused with tracing... it's a different skill-set... tracing is tracing, imo.

Anyway, I tried to be as upfront about my processes as possible... might have appared a bit anal and descriptive to the max, but I hope it helped had there been any discrepancies about terminology and stuff...

Just hold your head up, 'cause you're not doing anything wrong!

 

What kills me about this, which is similar to the issue I have with Mijn and others that grab random images (of anything) to do this with, is that there are images it's absolutely permissible to do this with and they have -chosen- not to use them. You can even generate them yourself with something like Poser to paint over if you just need a basic figure/light reference. A number of my friends have used that method. I don't have any issue with someone using images licensed for use (stock with the proper licensing, their own photos, etc.) so it isn't even a matter of tracing -- provided that what someone is tracing is something they have the legal permission to use in that manner.

TheFontBandit, I don't think you'd have much to worry about, to be honest with you. Not only do I think you could readily disprove anyone making any weird claims, I also think most people are given the benefit of the doubt until proof of some kind is forthcoming, and since there won't be any, I'd think you'd be safe.

 

...................................................
Meh, useless post, sorry ^^;

 

I remember when 'over-painting' first kind of came to light. There are still so many people who do use that process, and I agree... there's nothing wrong if the person is using images with the proper permission (or their own image), and is forthcoming about the process if asked.

I will admit, at work I have traced photos, but they were always photos with the proper permissions granted in writing (usually a picture of the company's product that they commissioned in a vector style to use in ads, instead of a photograph).

To be honest, I was almost afraid to work on entries for the DoA 5th Anniversary calendar contest, because of the Mijn issue. In the end, I did submit a few and had fun working on them. It was the first time I'd done any vector pieces with dolls as a theme. To be honest, vector pieces take SO much time and detail work I rarely actually finish one when I do have the time and inclination to create one. So it's not like I'm trying to become a professional artist... just something I do for fun. But still... I don't want to be cast in the same category as Mijn. Thanks for the encouragement!

I just can't believe that she's still getting away with this, that people are complimenting her and even backing her up against "those horrible mean doll collectors". Reading the comments on the YouTube video or on her MySpace page just makes me frustrated.

 

Interesting to note now that at the very least, most bare minimum, has acknowledged she's using dolls: MySpace doll page. Hmph!

...also interesting to note that the only people/dolls she's listing are those who have (allegedly?) given permission ¬_¬; So, still no remorse shown for people she's already wronged. Bah. Also a shame to see that she still doesn't seem to get that the sculpts were also made by a person, too...

 

The bad news:
Now MS' images are being sold on pillows!
http://www.clickforart.com/artist/MijnSchatje/

The good news:
A little bit old, Oct 2008, art blog:http://rightsomegood.blogspot.com/2008/10/mijn-schatje.html
What's great is that in June 2009 comments were added alerting the readers to MS' thievery!

A free platform for creative professionals: http://rightsomegood.blogspot.com/2008/10/mijn-schatje.html
But the portfolio is empty. Can't tell when it was emptied or if ever held anything.

A personal site, recent entry Aug 19 2009 refers to MS copying: http://toysetc.livejournal.com/16767.html

I'm hopeful these are good signs more and more people are being made aware of the situation.
Everyone, don't stop--keep spreading the word!

An observation...on her Facebook, MS now has a category "Dolls Dolls Dolls!"
She mentions dolls that belong to "my friend Barbara (Canepa)" and "my friend Tanya".
http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/ind...r.viewPicture&friendID=199299&albumId=3539824
Anyone else besides me thinks she's trying to backpedal her way out of her thievery PRIOR to creating this category?