Unique vs Original

[LCT_m_a_d]

Another one of my weird topics I've been thinking about posting. Not sure if this is of any interest to the tapas community.

I've noticed sometimes artists interchangeably use Unique with Original when comparing good, or done.

While don't think it's a big deal for most people, I'm easily wondered by the difference between the 2 and what it means to my personal craftsmanship. I've sort of questioned my drawings as somewhat unique in how they look but lacking originality.

For me
Originality - What was the accumulative sources or workflows that lead to the development.
Unique - What was the Result Outcome of the idea, regardless of what methods used.

So I'm curious about you. How much of an interest do you have? Are they the same to you?
This is a completely open discussion.

[jermajay]

I always thought that 'unique' just meant one of a kind, in which case every comic is unique even if it's not original - and then originality was whether the idea had been done before in that specific way.

[LCT_m_a_d]

I like that perspective. I especially resonate with the idea that they aren't always mutually inclusive

[jensrichard77]

As adjectives the difference between original and unique is that original is (label) relating to the origin or beginning; preceding all others while unique is (not comparable) being the only one of its kind; unequaled, unparalleled or unmatched.
As nouns the difference between original and unique is that original is an object or other creation (eg narrative work) from which all later copies and variations are derived while unique is a thing without a like; something unequalled or unparalleled.

Original vs Unique - What's the difference?

[rajillustration]

I see it about the same as you, actually. You can definitely do something unique...but not original, although I think it is harder to do something original but not unique. While I'm sure the semantics and definition depend on where you're from and who you talk with, original seems to be more of a core concept--the meat and potatoes of the piece. Unique feels like how I would describe the execution of the concept (so the materials or programs I used to render it). If your original concept is very different, then often your execution will be different, too.

[LCT_m_a_d]

@jensrichard77 but what about your thoughts on the distinction? How do you think about this difference?

@rajillustration I've noticed times where I have taken an "original" approach to a problem and accumulated very non-unique results. Sort of a reinvent the wheel without knowing a wheel exists.

[Calculus_Homework]

Interesting discussion you've started. xD

Imo, it would depend upon what these words refer to.
Art has various aspects to it, so these questions come to mind when using those words.
Is the style unique? Is the way they colored it unique?
Are the characters original, or do they seem cut+paste from popular ideas?

Personally I don't really like the word "original." That refers to something as being the initial source--kind of what you were saying in your own description for it. Nothing is original anymore, but it can be unique. Like unique takes on stories that exist, or a unique interpretation of Lyndecker in someone's coloring style.

But if people use the word original to describe something, they most likely mean it as a compliment. So even though I don't use that word too much to describe others' art work, I believe most use it interchangeably with unique.

[Calculus_Homework]

Really like the way you put that.

[NickRowler]

When I think of unique, I think something that is more avant garde. Something that is way more "out there" than what we usually see.

Something that is original I feel may barrow elements but can still stand on it's own as something created by the author. Like when people create their own OC.

I don't think being 100% original or unique automatically equals "good". Someone can barrow or base their work off of something else and still be good and enjoyable.

[LCT_m_a_d]

@Calculus_Homework
I have heard many people said "nothing can be completely original because the idea came from somewhere".
I definitely don't see it that way but to your point if you are looking at original in terms of initial source material it's a fair argument for sure. Maybe New is another interchangeable adjective.
Now that's getting dicey.

@NickRowler That's a great point, sometimes unique can be problematic depending on the "form follows function". If something is so unique that everything has to change to accommodate it, it loses accessibility value. If the processes to produce something is very original, it may not be sustainable to scale or replicate.
For me, it was very difficult to get constructive criticism and also there was no data points why some drawings were style and others received little feedback.

[jensrichard77]

but what about your thoughts on the distinction? How do you think about this difference?

If I say: "I'm unique." then I'm unique until someone else says they are unique too.
Then I will become the Original that said he was unique

[smokesalty]

Honestly I think originality/ uniqueness comes from the execution.

For example, if you have a really unique concept for a story but the way events happen is generic, then I wouldn't say the story is original since it's based and similar to other stories.

Don't know where I'm going with this so I'll leave it here lmao

[jensrichard77]

If a story is based on other unique stories, I will say it is an unique take on those original stories that are no longer unique.

[fleurravenbooks]

Hm, i'd like to think original means it wasnt inspired by anything or is source of inspiration, but unique is something one of a kind, like fanfiction can't be original but it can be unique (My immortal for example lol, everyone knows about it, it really is unique in that field ,even if it might be bad)