Cheating in Art

I read this blog post and that got be thinking this might be an interesting topic to discuss. Here was my response:

'I think there are always consequences to "cheating". For instance, if you trace, you're not going to really learn how to draw. 

Part of appreciating art is knowing how the artist made it.

Some "cheating" is necessary. I mean, how far are you going to take that term? Is it cheating that you traced your lineart using a lightbox from your own sketch? Is it cheating that you didn't make your own supplies? Is it cheating to use digital software at all? Is it relying on technology like artificial light so we can work late at night? The term is so undefined in art that I shy away from applying it to something that by nature is meant to be abstract.

I think two things are important: informed consumers (that know generally how the art process happens), and honest artists (who are willing to admit if they used a reference, etc.). That being said, mystery in the art process to consumers is also an important element. "Cheating" is just a method for an end product that, no matter which way you put it, is cool. If you use "more reliant "cheating" methods, such as tracing a photo, the corners you cut are only going to hurt you as an artist. That's something you have to take on yourself.

Perhaps it is important to go back to think about what are actually is...an expression. And that can be done any way, really.'

Practicing as an artist REQUIRES "cheating" by using references, etc. And as artists, we are always working to become better. I see no shame in doing this.

Feel free to add your thoughts in the comments below.