Posted on 66 Comments

There is no such thing as a “GHOST SWIPE”!

Cathleen's Painting

Happy Friday, y’all! Don’t forget to check out my new video blog channel called, “Art Teacher Says What?” where I’ll highlight the daily goings on in my art room Monday through Friday along with some funny stories that inevitably happen along the way. 

Something has been weighing on me pretty heavily so, I’d like to share my thoughts on plagiarism and ownership in the art world, in light of some recent events. So… humor me.

There have been mixed opinions on this subject in regards to art over the years.

Salvador Dali said, “Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing. “

But then

Wu Guan-Zhong said, “If you plagiarize others’ techniques, you steal their emotions and tell your spectators a lie with your work. Works as such equal zero.”

Plagiarism is defined as the close imitation and publication of another’s work, ideas, or expressions and representing them as your own.

I would also like to start by clearly stating that I believe imitation is the highest form of flattery and when I see my viewers and friends try their hand at a painting inspired by one I’ve created it brings me great joy. The first goal of my channel is to spread my passion for art and show how accessible the medium of Acrylic Pouring can be. I love the open, generous and sharing nature of this community and hope it remains that way. We grow and learn when we are open with our techniques, materials and recipes. I have and always will share my recipe, pigments and ratios used in the description of every single video because I want you the viewer to try it at home. 

However, something happened to a fellow artist that I had to speak up about. There is a new trending technique called the  “ghost pour” by Julie Cutts over at Pouring Your Heart Out. 

I became aware of this term when people started referring to my paintings with my middle swipe as ghost pours in the comments of my videos. I thought it very strange to all of a sudden have my paintings, with my signature composition start to be referred to by some new trendy name I’d never heard of. I searched the term, landing me on the PYHO page. I saw several thumbnails with the swipe in the middle, her earliest being the beginning of September. I have done this middle swipe composition since last winter as most of you guys know and as you can see in my video from early December of 2018. 

BUT her work reminded me much more of a fellow artist’ work, Cathleen Ozmore at Coz Creations. Cathleen has been a supportive viewer of my channel and has even visited and purchased one of my paintings back in September. Cathleen learned from me and was inspired to try the technique but she took it in her own direction, chose her own colors, added her own embellishments and changed my approach to an alternating swipe that had great results! She named them “Ripple Swipes”. She doesn’t have a channel yet but a strong following on facebook and is working hard to promote herself on social media. Her ripple pours got a HUGE response. 

When I noticed the resemblance to her work on Julie’s channel, I texted Cathleen and she shared her story. And it goes like this;

 Julie at PYHO contacted Cathleen asking for the info on her technique and recipe. Cathleen was honored to share as she, like most of us, does not have a problem with sharing. Artists have copied other artists for centuries to learn from them and to grow. That is not the problem. Cathleen was excited that this big channel admired her “Ripple Swipe”, that they wanted to learn from her and take it in their own direction. Cathleen recorded a demonstration video just for Julie Cutts explaining everything she did to produce her Ripple Swipe paintings and shared it to Julie’s PYHO facebook page.

But Julie Cutts renamed Cathleen’s technique as “Ghost Swipe” with little or no mention of her in the resulting PYHO YouTube videos despite using Cathleen’s colors, her composition, and her technique down to a T. So now this technique is out there on this huge channel with much more exposure and Julie Cutts “forgets’ to mention Cathleen at all in subsequent quote unquote “ghost pour” videos, UNTIL Karen at “Waterfall Acrylics” and a few others call her out on it. Cathleen posted her painting on facebook, freely sharing all the info and the very next day Julie copied the painting and made a video, renaming the technique. She did this five times! Mentioning Cathleen minimally. 

Cathleen's Painting
Cathleen’s Painting
Julie's Copy
Julie’s Copy

For Karen at Waterfall Acrylics to call Julie Cutts out took guts considering the loyal viewership Julie has on her PYHO channel vs Karen’s own channel. PYHO put out an emotionally charged video, not apologizing but tugging at her viewers heart strings over being the victim of a hateful attack from Karen at Waterfall Acrylics and within days, Karen’s channel lost 800 subscribers. 

I understand the risk that I am taking here today. The same thing might happen to me. I might lose a lot of subscribers by putting this information out here, but I have to speak out when I see something that is not right. We have to stand up for each other.

It reminds me of a scene from a movie I can’t quite recall; The assistant is trying to scramble up the ladder at a big corporate office, working her butt off to get there. She has the heart and the talent to get there but is looking for the next big break. Then the Junior Vice President, assigns her a research report to be done at the last minute to be presented at the big meeting. The assistant stays up till the crack of dawn pouring over the data, producing the best research report this company has ever seen. She misses the taxi and runs to work, getting splashed by a bus and breaking a heel, finally passing off the report to the JuniorVP, only for the cover page to be ripped off and replaced by one with the JuniorVPs title and credit of authorship and passed along to the Executive Committee with little to no mention of the assistant’s contribution.

 It is an abuse of power. That is what it is. It is an abuse of power. Julie at PYHO changed the name of someone else’s technique, taking ownership of it and it’s not right! That’s where I have the problem. She changed the name “Ripple Swipe” to “Ghost Pour”. She came back in later videos and begrudgingly named Cathleen and myself but never acknowledged that she changed the name of the technique.

Maybe you’ve gotten to this point and you’re thinking what’s the big deal? Ghost Pour / Ripple Swipe, who cares? But if this happened to you, as you were trying to scramble up the social media ladder (which many dismiss as meaningless but is a legitimate form of marketing and promotion these days), thinking about starting your own channel and working towards potential extra income, sharing your work freely and someone not only copies you but renames it and “forgets’ to give you credit, wouldn’t you think it a big deal? If you truly care about this community of artists then you want everyone to improve and succeed. There are videos on YouTube with over a 100 million views. We don’t have to steal the credit from each other. When someone is at the top with over 100k subscribers and still steps on the little guys to stay there, it’s not right and I’ve got to point that out.

In closing, I want to make clear that I share my recipe, brands, ratios and pigments freely because I want people to try this themselves. I want people to learn to be artists. I am an art teacher! I am a public school art teacher! That’s my full time job. I am here to teach and spread my passion and to show that art is fun, cathartic and easy.  So please continue to send me your pictures of your lovely paintings. If you are using my exact colors, technique and recipe, GREAT! That’s how you learn! If you have a huge channel, plenty of success, fishing for new ideas, come on! That’s fine too. Just don’t rename my work and take ownership of it or anyone else’s. 

I love to see what you guys are making. I am super excited that this composition with a swipe in the middle is taking off so well. It is a strong composition because it uses pouring as a process towards abstract landscape, that’s why it’s appealing to everyone. This has been my personal goal as an artist for over a year now, to move towards Abstract Landscape. I wasn’t expecting it to take off as an actual trending technique though. It is not a new technique though. It’s just a swipe, a swipe starting in the middle. Swipes have been around forever, y’all. Swipe Away! Learn from each other and treat each other well.

Love y’all!

66 thoughts on “There is no such thing as a “GHOST SWIPE”!

  1. Well as a first time reader, I am dismayed at the feeling that everyone should gang up on an artist just because……….I am an ex horsewoman and I was picked on for being an unknown in a very petty competitive world. I will never forget how it made me feel to be isolated from a world that I loved, just on the say so of the usual winners on the most expensive horses.
    However, now an old lady, I am no longer fooled by people who judge others and expect the gang to go along with it. The world is not for people who bully others, in fact this turns around to them being regarded as pathetic and of no consequence to anyone in particular as we reach the later part of our lives. Please, live and let live, don’t envy.

  2. I basically stopped loading YT and FB videos because of this very situation. Not that mine were unique, just quite different to what was being done at the time. I am non commercial vs the clones that were. I did not call them out but it bugged me and I felt they should at least wait a few days before they did exactly the same thing without any comment of inspiration or credit.

  3. Hi Courtney. Thank you so much for shining the light on the abuse of power. I knew by calling her out that folks would be upset—most channels have loyal followings but it was the right thing to do…perhaps not in the right forum and I apologized to Julie for that. Like Cathleen and other artists, for months I watched my work be copied, and more subtly, my style, expressions and more be mimicked. It’s very noticeable to me , but I always sort of shrugged it off as “imitation is flattery.” The combined indiscretions of giving her paintings the same title as my own and what she did to Cathleen was too much to take. Scouring other people’s videos for ideas is one thing, renaming without credit is crossing a line and disrespectful to fellow artists. My mantra as always been “be inspired, but be your own artist.” Anyway, thanks again for the blog post—very much appreciated!! —Karen / Waterfall Acrylics

    1. Thank you too, Karen. We have to stick up for each other. Overwhelmingly the main negative comment I am getting is simply, “If you don’t want to be copied, don’t put your stuff out there.” Really? I loved this generous, giving community and was proud to be a part of a crowd of like minded teachers. But teachers know that you learn and grow from people through imitation, giving credit when you are imitating. If not, you are interpreting it, paraphrasing, making it your own. Otherwise you cite the source. It is common courtesy and the ethical thing to do. I am sorry to hear that you lost some subscribers over this. I admire you saying something when you felt the need to.

    2. I agree that Facebook was not the right forum to air a grievance. Kudos for acknowledging and apologizing for your error of judgment. After watching Julie’s video, I thought “great performance” but totally inappropriate for an instructional art video. That she named you as the author of mean and hurtful comments was inexcusable and could only serve one purpose…

  4. You may have noticed that I have replied and commented previously on this post defending not just Julie but the true meaning of copyright and plagiarism. I am a teacher librarian and teach students about these laws so I have a good understanding of them. Whilst I fully understand where you are coming from Courtney, I think there are some serious things to consider before making claims of plagiarism.

    Definition from the University of Canterbury; “Plagiarism: The passing off as one’s own work the work or ideas of another.”

    Thus, If Julie did not give credit to Courtney and Cathleen when she first tried the reflexion pour she would be claiming the idea as her own. However she did give credit not just in every single video (most of them though). I have watched hundreds of YouTube videos and giving credit for an influencing style is rare. The question is should Julie have given credit in every video? If you answer yes then Karen from Waterfall Acrylics and many others are guilty of not doing this and she is the one who started all of this controversy. Perhaps giving credit in the first few videos is enough as after this the artist is bound to have tweaked the style to make it their own.

    Changing the name to a ghost pour could be seen as plagiarism. However Julie did rename it after using the original technique name and explained why it seemed ghostly to her thus she created her own in interpretation of it. The fact that it commonly became known as a ghost pour is not because of Julie it is because her audience adopted this name.

    The question of original ideas and plagiarism: can Cathleen and Courtney or any other artist claim that their technique is truly original? You would have to see every artwork ever produced to make this claim and not just in fluid art. Many artists use a reflection swipe technique similar to theirs with other art mediums. How similar it is to the original may not matter to the first artist who tried it as an idea of swiping colours to create a reflection. They could claim it is plagiarism and many artists could be accused of this.

    The great masters were influenced and, copied to a degree, art styles off each other all the time and sometimes a label like Impressionism evolved for a whole “new” technique. Manet started Impressionism but artists like Monet and Renoir tweaked his style. Then Pointillism was born from impressionism by artists like Pissarro and Seurat who took impressionism and simplified the style. So copying techniques is not new and most importantly renaming a style copied by and artist is not new. Some of these artists gave each other credit for an influencing style, but not all. They did not announce who influenced them every time they produced a new painting. Unless you are completely certain that you invented a technique and copyright the name of the technique (which may not be possible) a claim of plagiarism may not be warranted.

    The digital world has exploded so quickly that definitive, easy to understand laws surrounding plagiarism and copyright rarely exist. A breach of copyright is easy to establish if someone copies an image off the internet, even photos belong to someone and they are not to be saved or copied which I am sure we have all done. However copying someone’s art technique and even renaming it is hazy. Enlighten me please if you have solid legal evidence of this being a breach of copyright.

    I think as artists we all need to be aware of what is acceptable and what is not concerning protecting the rights of other’s artistic property. With this in mind I will be bringing this post to Julie’s attention so she can address the issues expressed if she wishes which is only fair and I hope Julie was invited to respond to this blog at the outset as is right of reply. We should all take heed of this, whether we agree or not and do further research to fully understand if possible the ambiguous area of plagiarism in art.

    Finally, for those people making the claim that Julie is only doing YouTube videos to make money and that she makes “massive” (or any) amounts of money from it, be careful that your claims are not slanderous. Unless you have Julie’s profit and loss information in front of you, you have no right to make this claim and it is insulting to Julie if not legally slanderous.

    I have tried to be objective and can understand you feeling hurt Courtney and others but I think the best way to resolve conflict is through open communication not through posting blogs like this one where one artist is being vilified publicly.

    1. Cathleen tried to message Julie Cutts privately to discuss the issue when it happened and was blocked from her facebook page.

    2. This is what Cathleen is quoted as saying to Sharon in these very comments.
      “Sharon it was first shared privately. I reached out to Julie in a personal message. Not on social media. I was then blocked from her page. I was no longer permitted to post my art or comments. What did I do to deserve that? I taught her my style of this technique then was banished. That was so very undeserving and wrong.”

    3. Plagiarism and ethics are two separate things….

  5. Hearing this happened so many times to so many artists is disgusting, Julie has ruined her reputation in my eyes.
    Each and every artist who she did this to have to speak up, get pictures/video links/screenshots of messages together, and make it public. We are one community and need to support each other.
    I have blocked July from my Facebook Group.

  6. I learned everything about pouring from YouTube videos and adjusted my pouring mixes to work for me. Then I did a video of a pour swiped from the middle in July 2017. I didn’t get all pissy when someone else did something similar. A friend did swipes out to the edges from a circle in the middle back then and didn’t get all pissy when others started doing them.

    The reason art techniques are not copyrightable is becuz there really is very little in this world that hasn’t been done before. And that there’s no way to know someone saw your video or saw a video of someone else who saw yours or even if they just came up with a similar idea.

    If you’re worried about someone copying your techniques DON’T SHARE THEM. Otherwise view them as your gift to the world.

    1. I don’t think it was the fact the woman did the same thing, it was the fact that she did the same thing and claimed ownership, without acknowledging the fact that she’d interrogated someone for the technique.

    2. I totally agree with you. Art techniques art not copyright protected and can be called anything they like. Do you think the great masters didn’t copy off each other? In fact many of the world’s greatest paintings were partly done by apprentices who never got any credit.

  7. This was a well-written, thoughtful post. I’ve seen Julie’s stuff and like some of what she does. However, it is disappointing to know credit has not been given where it is due. We all learn bits and pieces from other artists, but true creativity (in my opinion) is using the inspiration to create our own unique creative pieces. Thank you for speaking up for fellow artists.

  8. Trust me, Karma will get her back.

  9. Fantastic post! If you lose people do to that post that they are not people that you needed to have anyway. I commend you for speaking out and admire you for the courage. As the owner of Pouring Artists INTernational I would like to say how very proud I am that we are having Cathleen herself at the conference teaching this very technique, The Ripple Swipe.

    1. I am very excited for her. Your convention seems like a wonderful opportunity and a fun time!!

  10. Knowingly taking undue credit is wrong, as is not giving credit to a creator. There is a quandary though for the new person who has overdosed on YouTube videos. I have very little knowledge of who did what first or what it was called. Watching five different artists use the same method and calling it a ring pour leaves me clueless on who did the first one or who I should mention as the creator of the method. I’ve been watching Cathleen’s work for a short time now and never picked up on her having a name for what she was doing. Did I miss that due to information overload? Rounding back to the main point – if a person KNOWINGLY takes something from another person, down South we bypass political correctness and call it stealing. And that’s a poor life choice because what you plant you’ll harvest in due time.

  11. I can’t believe that grown, middle aged women like yourselves would behave in such a childish manner. As women, we should lift each other up, instead of tearing each other down. To be inspired by other artists and producing work that comes from that inspiration should be viewed as flattering. Julie Cutts has, more times than I can count, given credit where credit is due. To accuse her of anything less, is shameful. How many times do you need to receive kudos for one style? To make it her own by giving that technique her own name, is because she puts her spin on it. My neighbor, who himself is an artist, takes inspiration from Jackson Pollock. You can safely say that his paintings are almost exact to Pollock. He sells them to many across the globe, including high profile people. Does anyone accuse him is plagiarism? No, because he paints with his interpretation. Ripple Swipe, Ghost Pour, whatever one chooses to call it doesn’t make claim to be solely one persons work. No one “owns” any of these techniques. They’ve all been done before at some point. Julie’s Ghost Pour was inspired by Cathleen Ozmore’s Ripple Swipe. Again, she DID NOT plagiarize anyone’s style. She was inspired AND she always mentions Cathleen. You call it an abuse of power, which is laughable, but I would say this is coming from jealousy. Julie paints for pure enjoyment and a willingness to share with others. She’ kind and very generous with her time. She doesn’t make money off of this. There’s a reason why she is so popular. She’s likable and friendly. She’s easy to understand and talks to viewers as if she knows them personally. I’ve watched her channel from the beginning and she always mentions the people from whom she finds inspiration. This is a prime example of cyber-bullying. She’s never said a cross word about any of you. She only stated what was on her mind because she was so troubled by a person she regarded as a “friend” who would not talk to her privately and only wanted to hurt her in a public forum and then block her from all social media. Shame on you for continuing on this path. Julie is hurt by a community she admires. I, for one, cannot support nor do I respect women who attack other women. Stop promoting keyboard thugs and come together as a community. There’s enough hate in this world to choke on. Why not try to be kind for once. There’s room enough for all artists to express themselves and be inspired.

    1. If a musician covers a someone else’s song, they don’t rename it. She DIDN’T put a spin on it, which is why I showed them side by side. She didn’t ALWAYS give credit. She DOES make money off her channel. I am not being childish. I am standing up for ethical practices in art.

      1. Yes but songs are protected by copyright. Your artwork image is protected by copyright. Your style is not. Julie forgot in one video to give credit because one of her new born puppies almost died and she had been up all night with it. Have you spoken to her directly about your opinion on this and given her a chance to apologise to you? She did apologise on her next video. Communication can solve most problems.

        1. Cathleen tried to message Julie Cutts privately to discuss the issue when it happened and was blocked from her facebook page.

        2. Quoted from previous commentary;
          Cathleen says, “Sharon it was first shared privately. I reached out to Julie in a personal message. Not on social media. I was then blocked from her page. I was no longer permitted to post my art or comments. What did I do to deserve that? I taught her my style of this technique then was banished. That was so very undeserving and wrong.”

    2. Well said. I agree

    3. Don’t think you have a monopoly on all art and design, we are all free to express ourselves, even if we do it because we get an inspiration from something we see.
      I completely agree with this post by Sharon.

  12. The videos that I HAVE seen of Julie doing a “ghost swipe”, she did credit Cathleen. I will admit I haven’t seen them all. Playing devil’s advocate here, but perhaps she hasn’t credited anyone over the last few videos because she did early on and assumed people will know already.
    I’m feeling terrible that all this has happened, I love Cathleen’s work, I tell her all the time. We’re even Facebook friends now, and if I try to do one of her techniques, I always credit her, and tag her in it when I do.

    1. I agree that at some point you don’t have to continue to credit a person BUT why rename her technique? How does she have that right?

  13. Bravo! I have always enjoyed Julie’s videos, but not if she is pilfering someone’s technique and not giving appropriate credit. Karma will come around and bite one when they least expect it. My first husband used to say, “what goes around comes around”, and I truly believe that. And I’m proud of Karen for risking losing followers to stand up for what was right. She will win in the long run. She is so delightful and talented like all of you.

    1. Can’t believe how you people believe the lies without having all the facts. The are 3 sides to every story.

  14. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! I’m a total rookie to acrylic pouring, still have a lot to learn and just subscribed to your YT channel on the strength of this article alone! I so appreciate people saying out loud, what so many of us are thinking. (Wish I had seen Karen call this out too!) For learning purposes and inspiration, I’m a member of a few Facebook groups (this link was posted on Smart Art Materials page), follow some YT channels and have to say, the shade some of these people throw, is very discouraging. I saw in an earlier comment about seeing a pattern of behavior. Well, I happened to notice that PYHO did a couple of pours that look JUST like a series Sarah Mack is doing. I didn’t hear her give Sarah credit for the “inspiration”, just that Sarah gets some kind of different result with a particular product. Sarah commented on the video, thanking JC for the credit, but I’m wondering if that was sarcasm? JC didn’t respond. Anyhow, thanks again and I look forward to following your work and articles!

  15. Going against the grain here…. Not sure how I feel about this, see you deleted the post from FB group…. Not sure what this accomplishes? Was the technique was shown on public media with a patent? That is the gray area to believe it was ‘stolen’ That’s the problem we face these days with social media being viewed around the world.

    1. I’m not sure you read my blog post. Also, I wasn’t the one that posted it on the group site, and I wasn;t the one that took it down either.

      1. What was your purpose for this post? You are accomplishing nothing positive by posting negativity. Are you jealous that she has a following? Are you feeling insecure? This should not have been shared on social media. It’s very one-sided.

        1. My purpose is clear. I am trying to stand up for a fellow artist that had the wind taken from her sails. Cathleen had a gorgeous technique that was getting her a lot of attention until Julie renamed it as her own.

        2. Sharon it was first shared privately. I reached out to Julie in a personal message. Not on social media. I was then blocked from her page. I was no longer permitted to post my art or comments. What did I do to deserve that? I taught her my style of this technique then was banished. That was so very undeserving and wrong.

  16. Wow… such deceit warrants a calling out

  17. Hi. Very interesting reading. I learnt earlier in that you must give credit to another artist, no mater what it is. I am on a sunset and sunrise group. Amazing photos get posted there. I fell in love with a camel silhouette in a sunset. I said to that lady. “I’d like to paint that” to which she replied “by all means, I’d like to see that”. “Challenge accepted” I replied. When I posted the painting she was quick to message me about giving her credit. I was so embarrassed that I immediately went back to my post and added her name as my inspiration. Lesson learned very quickly. If I paint any scene from a photo I can not sell it and won’t sell it, unless I get full permission from the creator, whether a photographer or artist. A great example of giving another artist credit is a recent video from Olga Soby who was showing the technique of another artist by having his name mentioned AND videos within her video showing him pouring at the same time she was. It was so well done and there was no doubt Olga knew the proper etiquette.
    Good on you for speaking out and I’m so sorry it has happened to you. Many people starting out may genuinely not know these simple rules or acts of courtesy but Julie Cutts surely should. If she is profiting from this then this can be turned in to a legal matter.

    1. She does not profit from her work. It’s her hobby, not her business. And she always gives credit to those who inspire her work.

      1. Yes. She totally profits from her youtube channel, the paintings she sells, and the workshops she holds. This is NOT a hobby for Julie. Have you seen her work space?

        1. She has told me how much money she gets from youtube and I have been to two of her classes where she charges $120 each for a few people at a time. This is a very reasonable price. She doesn’t sell many paintings as she is not actively pursuing this. She spends thousands on art supplies to produce her videos. I doubt she makes any profit at all.

  18. I’m not surprised reading your comments I noticed what was happening as I follow you both. I copied your center swipe style (it’s hanging on my wall) and posted a picture of it a while back. But that was before the “ghost pour” name was mentioned. I gave you full credit for my inspiration in that post because I loved it and the drips included! I don’t have a YouTube Channel. You’re brave for speaking out 👏🏻👏🏻

    1. I also noticed that Julie was copying, and it sort of put me off her a bit. The name ghost pour doesn’t really make any sense to me. But that’s neither here nor there. I love your work Courtney and I will continue to strive to recreate something even slightly similar lol. I want to make one for my daughter for Christmas and she has shown me one she likes. So if it works, or if it doesn’t I’ll show you 🙂 And when I saw this post I was like YES!!! my thoughts exactly, well done you.

      1. Thanks, Sandy. And yes, please send pics!

  19. Thank You, every time I hear “Ghost Sype” or see this I think it just a swipe from the middle, and I saw someone else did this before!! Because I did it way back last year!!!

    1. Me too!! I’ve done it a few times over the last year and it was just a “center swipe” done my own way with little paint sample cards of different sizes but inspired by many other artists and styles. When I posted it more recently many of the comments were about it being a “Ghost Swipe” and it irked me as it wasn’t at all inspired by JUlie’s work. She has lovely work but so do many others. Watch a lot and mix match and twist it up to be your own.

  20. I am only one person, but I have unsubscribed from Julie Cutt’s channel. That is sneaky and dirty.

    1. I don’t want to hurt her channel but she needs to stop doing this for sure.

    2. I am seriously thinking of doing the same. That’s not right.

  21. This is a grest article and I commend you for speaking out. On that note, back in June I watched a video of Gina deLuca try to creat a ‘Pearl Cell Pour’ and unfortunately she did not get it right, I tried and succeeded repeatedly. This kind of pour to the best of my knowledge had never been done before mine, can be found on withBade Art Youtube channel. After each and every video I uploaded, Julie Cutts from PYHO literally copied mine to the layering, colours, pouring, even repeating word for word what I had said. This she was literally doing after each and every upload of mine. During watching her copying my work I kept thinking, surely she is going to say, inspired by withBade Art but nothing. The 2 straws which broke the camels back was when she started using the Decoart 24k gold (not extreme sheen) that I have only ever used, and had many times showed and mentioned that in my videos. She then had a cheek to do a comparison pour with both the one I use and the extreme sheen she was using. The other issue is that each other pourer started giving Julie Cutts credit and not me. Julie Cutts has made a massive amount of money and subscribers off of my back. I really have had this hanging heavily on my heart, as a small growing channel I hit her up on it and of course her first response was to lie flatout. How do people like this sleep at night!

    1. This is starting to sound like a pattern. I am so sorry as I can imagine the hurt and helplessness you must have felt. I understand that we all adopt techniques and forget to credit the originator eventually but to focus in on the little guys that one knows the viewers will not know and therefor not recognize as being copied… That is just unethical.

    2. thank you ladies for having the courage to speak out with the truth. i never could quite work out ”why it was called a ghost pour’. i will now be watching you both on your channels and not ”the other persons”. i appreciate total honesty and maybe others will now become more aware of the correct way of supporting each other.

    3. You say massive amount of money. Have you seen her bank balance? Have you seen how much she spends on art supplies? Unless you have knowledge of her finances you can’t say she made a massive amount or any amount as you don’t know.

  22. Thank you Courtney for This well said post. You have addressed something that has plagued this wonderful community for some time. Peace and Happy Painting

    1. Apparently, it has happened to quite a few people, it would seem, Cathleen. Maybe others will feel emboldened and come forward.

      1. Yep, 2 years ago it started with me. Every video could be seen on Julie’s channel 2 days after mine. I called her out (not naming her) on one of my lives and everyone knew who I was talking about. I said I was honored that I inspired her, but she needed to come up with her own material……..see where it’s at now? She and I were never friends. I support all artists in our community until you cross me. This makes me so sad. As woman we need to build each other up, not tear down. I am proud of you for posting this article. Truth needs to be told. I hope the other artists speak up. We all know who she copies. We see it on our YouTube home pages. Karma, that’s all I’m going to say about that. Yes, she makes alot of money on YouTube with her views and donations.

  23. Cathleen is my FAVORITE artist in the paint pur world. I did not realize this was going on. I will be doing a large RIPPLE POUR today as she provides the greatest inspiration for me. Courtney….I have watched every one of your videos multiple times. You are a great teacher but I must say it takes practice to get what looks so simple, to look as beautiful as yours! Thanks for all you do😊❤🖌

    1. Thanks for saying so and thanks for your support, Vikki.

  24. I deleted the picture off the internet that I was thinking of. I mean if I wonder if it’s to close of a copy…then it probably is. I would post a picture of it here for you, but alas I do not know how!
    Again, I love your work, thank you for sharing of yourself to others.

  25. I will be the first to comment… also knowing that I could lose subscribers…. but I have to say I support this post.

    Yes, Sometimes it happens that we have similar “ideas” at similar times bcuz we are all working in the same medium and we all have same basic techniques as a starting point.

    You are not the first artist to use a swipe… and Cathleen’s work highly resembles yours, meaning you may have been a teacher and influencer for her.

    And while Some of these techniques have become So commonplace- like the ring pour, or the straight pour, that we no longer credit the original artist for the creation.

    However when I speak to artists who have been doing this for a long time, they do remember the originator of these techniques and have seen that overtime, crediting the artist is no longer done.

    However, with great power comes great responsibility.

    And for a channel like pouring your heart out with Julie Cutts, she has a mega following and with that comes a responsibility to be someone of integrity…. And that includes NOT stealing other peoples work without crediting them and trying to monopolize it as your own.

    In her own right, Julie is a great artist that she can virtually copy almost anyone’s style, and that is true talent. Kudos to her for having that skill set and ability.

    But NOBODY should outright ask for, and then knowingly steal another artists technique without giving perfect and true credit unless they are prepared for the truth to surface at some point.

    You can see on my channel, I give great high praise to those techniques that I imitate. And I am humbled by the sharing of information in this community in general. But honestly I have also been completely taken aback by the ruthlessness of this community as well….Especially with those who have large channels on YouTube and seem to be willing to do whatever they need to do to get ahead at any cost.

    Maybe it is social media in general, the feeling of security people seem to have by being able to say and do what they want without looking someone in the eyes…But This will never be my style.

    I will always be genuine, open, and honest as I can be without sacrificing my complete privacy or interrupting my artist muse.

    I appreciate you bringing light to this as it has also weighed heavily on my heart since I heard this story and saw this video and realized it was happening.

    We need to respect one another, remain in gratitude for our sharing of information, and remember that we are all connected.

    1. BRAVO! and HEAR! HEAR! You have said it all in a fair and eloquent response. Thank you so much for that, dear Heather. MI agree with everything you’ve just said. Much appreciated.

  26. Well said Courtney.. Glad you have spoken up. This is a large community and there is no need to copy or steal techniques..
    Cathleen.. you deserve credit for your design! Keep pouring!

    1. Thanks for your support, Gail.

  27. Thank you for this information. I knew there was some type of issue that had happened, but I don’t follow things close enough to know the whole story. Just that the way you and Cathleen swipe was being claimed as PYHO’s “original groundbreaking” new method.
    I have never liked swiping from the top, as it leaves the swipe color at the top or bottom, by its self.
    I always swipe either from the center area both up and down, or from left to right, add more swipe color then right to left…so that the edges of both sides have an area of swipe color.
    I certainly do not have the talent of either you or Cathleen, so I don’t think anything I have done looks like yours. And I haven’t actually seen Cathleens or PYHO’s videos. But I recently posted some items I did, and one is a purple-ish center swipe. I had a friend over to learn to paint and that was one thing I showed her. I hope it looks different enough that it looks like my own work, not a copy. If you happen to ever see it on the Acrylic Pouring site (sandra Jones or SAN415) and you feel it needs to be removed, I will do that. I might try someones tutorial but I would never post it online. I would only just try to learn from it.
    I normally do swipes to paint a foreground on….it’s a struggle to keep them from looking like a page from a coloring book…hahaha. My art teachers tried hard to get me to highlight and shadow better. In my 60’s and still trying to learn it.

    1. Cathleen doesn’t have a channel yet, so no videos except the one she did exclusively to teach PYHO the Ripple Swipe that she then renamed and passed off as her own invention. You can’t name something you didn’t create. So in regards to your concern about your own posts crossing the line, it doesn’t matter whether you tried something similar or copied it completely, Sandra, as long a you don’t try to rename it.

  28. Well written and well said

    1. Thanks, Kathie. We might be in for a $H!# storm from her followers but it needed to be said.

Comments are closed.