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

Re: Notes on scientifically comparative paleoposes



Now here is the kind of question I like. It is pertinent, useful, and 
polite.  

In a message dated 3/17/11 11:51:45 PM, steve@dinosaurcentral.com writes:

<< Greg,
Firstly, and for what it's worth, I for one 
completely accept the current convention for 
drawing skeletal reconstructions is of your creation. No doubt.

You keep referring to the pose (in your case e.g. 
a sauropod reconstruction with right legs on the 
ground, left rear leg in mid-step etc.) that 
other artists imitate as being the issue. With 
respect, is this the case? Are most clients 
observant enough to notice if another artist uses 
a different pose? My point is, is it not the 
complete convention of drawing the skeletal 
anatomy on a black silhouette the real 
"infringement" here? If you were to protect your 
property and income would you not require other 
artists to develop their own method for drawing skeletal reconstructions?

Steve
 >>

In an interesting regard Steve is actually not right when he nicely says 
that he "completely accepts the current convention for 
drawing skeletal reconstructions is of your [GP's] creation." Awhile back I 
was the first to note that Knight did the black profile around white bones 
thing a couple times shortly before he died, and Scheele did it with 
dinosaurs and other extinct beasts a few years later. I pointed out that others 
are 
of course free to use this method in my first 3/3 statement. Where I am 
having trouble -- for serious economic reasons -- is when lots of people 
frequently pose their dinosaurs in side view whether skeletons or lifes they 
can 
be confused by others as being mine. 

There have actually been a few times when I have come across a dinosaur in 
side view posed as per my standard when I actually for a moment thought or 
wondered if it was one of mine, and had to do a mental recall seach and look 
closely. Come on guys, there is something wrong with that. 

Because it is becoming so hard for any of the paleoartists who put a whole 
lot of effort into restoring each and every dinosaur they have done and will 
do, then it is only appropriate and fair that all paleoartists do the same. 
If that means doing their own skeletons so be it. That way there won't be 
paleoartists taking the easy route of relying on others' work to reduce their 
workload so they can then underbid the artists who do do all the work and 
seriously degrading their income. If some are unwilling or unable to do go to 
such effort then they should seriously consider another pursuit.  

As I have noted earlier, if there was tonnes of tonnes of work and income 
out there and lots of people could do paleoart and make a good living, then I 
would not be raising this issues. Really too bad it is not that way. 

Thanks for the query, hopefully this is helpful. 

G Paul

</HTML>