When I hear again and again someone telling phrases about anew good icon or fresco like: "Ah, yes, this is the monument to… and this is copied from …", I want to reply: "Please, just have a look at HOW it was painted…". As a rule a good artist taking ancient samples as a basis always reassesses them imaginatively. If you start simply copying works of ancient masters, in many cases it will look like a crude forgery. The main aim of modern icon painters is to reassess an ancient sample, to paint it the way you see it, to adjust it to the modern perception. Certainly the best ancient masters were not only open to innovations, but at the same time they paid close attention to their predecessors' creations. Reimagined older classic samples are easily recognizable in the works of ancient masters. Every good artist is like a talented exponent who plays the same symphony in his own way. You can't copy it precisely and reproduce this or that composition on the wall. Usually something is changed during the process, namely the colour scheme or compositional arrangements. Every type of architecture has its own rules. That is why the majority of artists note that in many cases church painting is more likely to be based on this or that memorial church. How masterfully the images are painted, how perfectly the artist mastered painting, how elegant the color combination is, how well the elements are organized in general — all these things play a crucial role here. You may take a work created by a genius as a basis and make just funny cartoon pictures by painting walls heartlessly. Or you may totally change the most basic architecture by creating a perfect composition. It's actually good that you can easily recognize this or that pattern. Unfortunately many distinguished fine art experts who have a profound knowledge of a tremendous amount of monuments often don't see anything new or outstanding that was brought by amazing modern artists who copy the works of ancient masters. But a little bit naïve and in general depthless interpretation of less popularized and not exactly classic examples are taken as an alternative to "copying" by these experts. In fact there is an overwhelming temptation of the contemporary modernism to achieve some efficient result with as few losses as possible. It's a kind of pretty "childish" simplification. Obviously this is not true for all the artists as there are masters who relate to that and find it quite consistent. But these cases are rare.