If a woman/man is drawn from a particular magazine, and the only thing noticeable in similarity to the actual photo is the shape and stance, is that copyright infringement if chosen to reproduce these images for commercial use? The entire image is completely different and very much altered other than the stance.

All Answers To Questions

Drawing an image would be an original source, so it would not be copyright infringement. If however you take the photo into photoshop and alter it, would be because you are using the original content owned by the magazine.

This is a gray area. If your drawing is so totally different except for the stance, then I think it is fine.

"shape" and "stance" could be considered an "idea, concept or principle" which are not covered by copyright. Why not simply find a similar photo from a source in the public domain (i.e., old enough that copyright expired or one that never had copyright)? Nobody owns the copyright of public domain photos, unlike the photos in any magazine published with copyright notice since 1964 (and earlier, if they renewed their copyright). Things published in the USA prior to 1923 have no US copyright. Things created by employees or officers of the US government have no US copyright.