[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Reductio Ad Absurdum. It is 1984 Dinosaur Time..!

<Isn't that how it works in every profession?>

No. Programming language is copywritten by the company: any part of a string of 
code is immediately prevented from being used, often with legal force, and is 
often very difficult to get at, with various protections in programs to stop 
people from seeing the source code itself. Not so the painter's medium, which 
must be displayed in all of its material, every stroke available to the 
analyst, who may then copy it. This is actually how art classes work: we are 
asked to COPY things, whether from life, from inanimate objects, from another's 
work. This is often instructed in the form of learning technique, adapting or 
blending of technique, and is a required practice in many art studios or 

I teach (when I have) that they should take someone else's work, and copy it, 
so that they may learn how to produce the distinct styles of each artist they 
admire and wish to emulate; but I also tell them that they have their own 
style, adn they should add that in, modifying their work. Too often, however, I 
see people take blatant thievery (some earlier work of a particular artist whom 
I will not name was a direct copy in a different medium of work by Paul and 
Skrepnick) and go the extra step. Some workers have a style so distinctive that 
their work no longer resembles workers they once emulated, and this is all to 
the good.

Programmers lack this ability; their work must match those with whom they work, 
so as the piece they are developing may work together. Artists compete with one 
another, sometimes friendly but sometimes not, and this leads to competition 
and therefore artists that develop the "popular" style become prone to more 
copying for the purpose of selling their work.


Jaime A. Headden
The Bite Stuff (site v2)

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)

"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a
different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race
has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or
his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion 

> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:12:23 +0000
> From: mike@indexdata.com
> To: bobtess@dinoart.com
> CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Reductio Ad Absurdum. It is 1984 Dinosaur Time..!
> On 15 March 2011 14:56, Bob Tess  wrote:
> > How will they make a living by undercutting prices?
> > Do they think they can have a mortgage by going cheap?
> > No, all they can do is ruin the field and live in their parents' basement
> > the rest of their lives.
> Really, Bob? Really? When you first entered the field, did you
> charge then what you charge now? Before you had a reputation and a
> portfolio to lean on? When you didn't have such heavy financial
> responsibilities as you do now? Or did you start at the bottom,
> charging lower fees to get your early work, and then escalating as you
> publicly earned the right to?
> When I started my own professional life (as a computer programmer), I
> didn't apply for jobs that pay what I am earning now; in fact, in my
> first full-time professional job, I was paid less than a quarter of
> what I earn now (and I couldn't afford a mortgage on that -- I had to
> rent a room to live in.) Over time, as my experience and expertise
> increased, I was able to apply successfully for more prestigious and
> lucrative jobs (and eventually to get that mortgage, support a family,
> etc.) Happily, it turns out that I didn't "ruin the field" along the
> way.
> Isn't that how it works in every profession?
> In insisting that people starting out in palaeoart not undercut your
> prices, you and Greg are trying to effectively make it that there are
> no entry-level jobs in palaeoart, and consequently no way for
> newcomers to the field to get a foot on the ladder. To speak frankly,
> whatever your and Greg's actual intention, this comes across as a
> self-serving attempt to erect a barrier to entry into the field, and
> to keep all the work for a small number of Boys' Club members. I hope
> and trust that I am misreading your intentions, but that's how it
> LOOKS, and if I see it that way then you can bet that lots of the
> up-and-coming palaeoartists will see it the same way.
> And whether you intend it or not, a mandatory minimum price would most
> certainly have a chilling effect on newcomers to the field of
> palaeoart. I don't think that's something that we as a community can,
> in good conscience, support.
> Competition for work in the field of palaeoart is by reputation,
> quality and price. You, Greg and other established names have a clear
> advantage in the first of these (and, if we take Greg's claims at face
> value, in the second, too). You can't just legislate that the third
> isn't to be a factor. When I apply for programming work, I have to
> compete on quality against less experienced candidates who charge less
> than I do. Why shouldn't it be the same in palaeoart?
> -- Mike.
> > On Mar 15, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Mike Taylor wrote:
> >
> >> On 15 March 2011 14:41, Bob Tess  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have become sickened by this thread.  I can think of no other
> >>> profession
> >>> besides art where people feel justified in telling other people they
> >>> should
> >>> not be allowed to make a living.
> >>
> >> I assume you're referring here to Greg's telling young artists that
> >> they're not allowed to establish themselves in the profession by
> >> charging less than him?
> >
> >
> >