Is vector art overrated?

The one thing I’ve noticed when it comes to MLP Fanart is that a majority of it is just vector art. Why is that?
 
I mean seriously, if you type the name of your favorite pony in the searchbar of DeviantArt, Google Images, or even this site, you’ll notice that the first several results are vectors.
 
Not to mention that these vectors are just traced piece by piece from a screenshot, which is straight-up plagiarism; I’m honestly surprised that Hasbro hasn’t stepped in and launched their usual C&D assaults on these traced vectors.
 
And since all these traced vectors look the same, it makes it very difficult to determine who’s art belongs to who. It’s one of the many reasons why I support artists who actually use their own unique, non-vectored art styles to create pony art (Even though their numbers are few, compared to all the vector “artists”.).
 
So, do you think vector art is overrated?

(Disclaimer: vector artist)
 
I traced for a while to learn how to make vector art. Then I stopped tracing because it just didn’t appeal to me anymore; however, I did make some original stuff. People still randomly reuse my crap. I don’t really care anymore.

wh.. wat.

@DragonBoi471  
no.  
also, searching “twilight sparkle” on derpibooru brings up no vectors on the first page, so I doubt there is as much as you say there is.

You really have no idea what “vector” actually means, do you? Vector is a method of creating images using paths instead of pixels. Vector images do not have to be traced, it’s just often the preferred format for tracing.
 
There’s plenty of vector artists who do not trace. To name a few: Badumsquish, iOVERD, JunglePony, NightMareMoons, and ZuTheSkunk are just a few of many that come to mind (warning - all those tags contain at least some porn).

*Looks at entire gallery of work=  
I traced all that? Wow! Can you send me the version of MLP that’s full of living condoms, Stormtroopers, and shamelessly explicit pornography? I knew I shouldn’t have watched the censored iTunes version ;D

As I’ve said before. I don’t really mind the media used, as long as you try to put some effort into it.

@DragonBoi471  
Thanks for proving you have no idea what you’re talking about.

There’s a difference between plagiarism and fair use.
 
Say you traced a photograph that was a close up photo of a monkey and included it in a larger rainforest illustration. While you did use the monkey exactly, you added value to the photograph by giving context to the monkey. You provided him surroundings by adding in the flora and fauna of the rainforest. The more you transform the source image, the greater the likelihood of fair use. There’s an argument here that some vector artists copy the source material pixel by pixel, however they’re often isolating a character or pose from a single frame and enhancing that image to be a crisp and even if traced; freshly drawn vector. I’d personally say this is protected by fair use. (I mean for god’s sake, even this is protected by fair use: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Mona_Lisa_moustache.jpg)
 
In addition, the idea of plagiarism is on the basis that the source material is not cited, hence:  

@FillerArtist  

Pretty much this. If something is good, does it really matter if the method is derivative?

@TwistedScarlett60  
>(I mean for god’s sake, even this is protected by fair use: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Mona_Lisa_moustache.jpg)  
Errrrrr, the Monalisa was created centuries ago. If a copyright had existed over it, it would’ve died out a long time ago. So there is no need to use “fair use” to defend creating derivative works; it’s already in the public domain.
 
@Ebalosus  
>…does it really matter if the method is derivative?  
A little. I mean if I see an animation like this, my first thought was “oh dang, this artist is really good at staying on character!” Then I realized it was just traced straight from the show, and my corresponding impression of the artist’s abilities dropped.

Kinda, I do.  
It really is dependent on poses and stuff. Like, if all the vector artist is trying to do is be “cute” all the time, then it is overrated.

Vector artist here.
 
You’re talking about traced vectors like these:  

 
I always understood the purpose of these vectors to be to guarantee show-accurate assets with transparent backgrounds for use by other fans in banners et al. Being vectors, these images can be resized without a loss of quality and therefore used in a wide variety of media.
 
As stated by @Joey, a vector is merely a mathematical formula that (when graphed) corresponds to a line, curve, or filled-in shape. This allows artists to draw with vector at a fraction of the file size of an equivalent raster (pixel-by-pixel) image, and to resize those images with no loss in quality, other than a lack of pixels outright at very low resolutions.
 
Below are some images of mine made with vector that were not traced (the majority of my gallery is original work.) You may notice that all such images deviate to some extent from the show’s art style – since they are drawn and not traced, they are influenced by my art style.
 
 
 
 
 

@DragonBoi471
 
As a vector artist myself i can agree and disagree with you. But since i draw my own works and then scan and vector them.. For me its more of a controlled way for me to do my linearts. And many people use flash to do this and then color in photoshop/sai. Basicaly for me it all comes down to me bot being skilled enough with my tablet (yet) to get the nice, straight lines i desire.

It’s just a different tool. The result is the only thing that matters.