--- Go to the Opening Page of the [Baren] web site ---

Message 1
From: "Sales"
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:20:13 -0600
Subject: [Baren 26728] RE: New Baren Digest (Text) V29 #2906 (Dec 30, 2004)
Send Message: To this poster

Hello to all Bareners -

I have been lurking a little more lately, since I figured out how to get
the e-mails over to my Outlook account. I wanted to remind all of you,
not that most of you need reminding, that the Southern Graphics Council
meeting is coming up in March in Washington, DC.

Quite some time ago, someone lamented that lack of space available for
Baren to demonstrate their techniques etc. I mentioned at the time that
Graphic Chemical would cheerfully (well, maybe I didn't say cheerfully
back then) donate a table at the product fair for you to use - either as
demonstration space or whatever. The space is now booked, so if you are
still interested in doing something, let me know. Whoever works that
space will have to be registered with SGC as an attendee, and
technically the space will be considered part of Graphic's space, but we
aren't interested in horning in on your activities.

If, for any reason, this is no longer a priority, don't worry about it.
We can always use more table space. But if you're going to give it a go,
let me know how we can help to make it happen, and we'll coordinate with
anyone who is interested.

Have a great New Year..

Dean Clark
Graphic Chemical & Ink Company

• [Back to message index]

Message 2
From: Bette Norcross Wappner
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:32:00 -0500
Subject: [Baren 26729] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ?
Send Message: To this poster

> PM-REF
> I think many early japanese prints were copies of japanese paintings.
> Makes sense to make them available to the public cheaply. Now we have
> the reverse,
> prints made into paintings...so we can sell them at higher prices ?  
>
> thanks.....Julio
>


Julio...your analysis is very interesting. sounds like the result of
westernization. :)

bette wappner
norther kentucky

• [Back to message index]

Message 3
From: "marilynn smih"
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 07:58:15 -0800
Subject: [Baren 26730] RE: Baren Digest (old) V29 #2906
Send Message: To this poster

Could we consider this copying of old work into new form IDENTITY THEFT?
Just teasing here. (O:

If you look at how people make money with "art" and what people buy you may
well go nuts. I think I will just be a mildly crazy artist and forget about
it all and do my own thing.

Marilynn

• [Back to message index]

Message 4
From: "Matt Laine"
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:20:32 -0500
Subject: [Baren 26731] Re: Baren Digest (old) V29 #2906
Send Message: To this poster

Bravo -- well said and on the nose!

• [Back to message index]

Message 5
From: Sharri LaPierre
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:50:31 -0800
Subject: [Baren 26732] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ? - Roosters deadline.....
Send Message: To this poster

Okay, I'll give Geo. Hull credit for saying "There's a sucker born
every minute" - which is the quote I alluded to in my comments about
people being willing to pay rather large bucks for one of the rip-offs
done by Birdsall, who has built his reputation on other peoples
designs, from icons to woodblock prints. My argument is not with the
skill exhibited, but with the original concepts - one shouldn't label
their art "original" if it isn't - but, there is one of those suckers
who will always come along and buy a copy or a monstrosity. (Hence,
large sales of Elvis on velvet & others.) My personal saying is "There
is a buyer for every artwork, you just have to wait a long time for
some of them to come along -" Some wait longer than others (and some
should wait forever)! LOL

As for "what" passes as art today - we are in a deconstructivist/post
modern period - expect everything (or nothing) to be art - maybe that
is what I will do - frame nothing, call it art, attach very large price
tag. Has anyone done that, yet??

Sharri

• [Back to message index]

Message 6
From: "James G. Mundie"
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:32:11 -0500
Subject: [Baren 26733] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ?
Send Message: To this poster

The whole matter of whether or not Birdsall used famous Japanese prints
of Mount Fuji as inspiration for his Mount Ranier paintings is irrelevant
to the images themselves. These are handsome works that acknowledge the
history of such representations. I think one can hardly call it
plagiarism when the reference is so obvious and the artist even names the
Japanese designers he 'lifted' from in the title. This isn't stealing,
it's tribute.

Heck, I do much the same thing with my "Prodigies" drawings
(http://www.missioncreep.com/mundie/images/), but nobody has ever
credibly said I was ripping off Rubens or Manet. We are all inspired by
what has come before us, and that inspiration, or a reaction against it,
comes out in our compositions - often unconsciously, or intentionally in
the case of Birdsall's works. My point is, there's nothing new under the
sun and artwork doesn't emerge from a vacuum. Much of what we look at as
'original' in the works of Michelangelo and masters of his ilk were in
fact copied from other painters. Entire compositions and cartoons for
frescoes were traded back and forth, and no one ever said, "Oh, he's just
copying so-and-so. Pfft!"

And thank you, Julio, for standing up for the good name of Phineas Taylor
Barnum - a subject about which I fancy I know a great deal. ;-D

Jim

_______________________
James G. Mundie
Philadelphia PA, U.S.A.
Prodigies: Drawings of Anomalous Humans
http://www.missioncreep.com/mundie/images/

• [Back to message index]

Message 7
From: FurryPressII # aol.com
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 14:19:09 EST
Subject: [Baren 26734] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ?
Send Message: To this poster

bravo

john center

• [Back to message index]

End of [Baren] Digest