Loaded Web

  • Blog Directory for USA
Blog powered by Typepad

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « pt at large – Good Source for Boston Area Art Reviews | Main | Still Life Spring 2006 »

    April 25, 2007


    Mick Mather

    I suppose the more appropriate place to respond to the question raised at Portals and KM over the Diggs controversy is here. In the time of the rennaissance, painting was taught from the basics - drawing first - where students did life drawing, for the most part, from sculptures, not live models. Once they progressed to pastel and, finally, painting, it was quite common to copy the masters who went before them - just as with your own exercise of learning how Gaugin mixed the paint, handled the brush etc. As for any copyright infringement as regards your copy of Gaugin? You have that art history lesson on your side along with the fact that Gaugin is well into the public domain even in light of the overbearing copyright changes that we live under today. That said, the elite mentioned in my Diggs Comment, are slowly attemtping to chip away all traces of Public Domain. Action now or bloody revolution later? Both have their strengths and their weaknesses.

    bill Ives

    Mick - Thanks for your comment and the longer one on my other blog. Here is the kink for any others to see what you said. http://billives.typepad.com/portals_and_km/2007/05/the_deal_with_d.html#comment-69652994 I see the Gauguin copy as a useful learning exercise and since it is long in the public domina there is no issue. At the same time, I treat if differently thasn a still life I might set up myself and acknowldge the source as in a creative commons license. .

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    My Photo
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button

    Share on Facebook

    • Share on Facebook