Recurve Camber Snowboard Project
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
ok ok, its understandable. Well thats good though, cuz now ive got like 10ish more hours i can document towards making a graphic. lol. Its a graduation requirement to do a culminating final project. It takes up the whole year basicly and were supposed to have atleast 60 hours of documented work. Ive already got the 60 but having some spare hours couldn't hurt.
doughboyshredder, are you serious? it's not a big deal at all. I think it's perfectly fine to copy graphics... provided you aren't claiming them as yours and aren't selling them. He used the same mold shape as NS too, that's not an issue. Why are you opposed to using their graphic?
I assume the images of the topsheet have all been removed, due to your comments, so I can't see them. If they were entirely copied, like I said, it's fine, if you 'copied' them, but drew them/created them with InDesign, or something, I would go so far as to say that is a good thing. We learn by observing (and yes, in many cases 'copying') what other people have done. Artists in particular have been doing for ever, and it is perfectly legal. As a student, you can apply to set up in the Louvre, for example, and reproduce famous works. Obviously you don't sell them, but you can keep them yourself and say that it is your attempt to reproduce X's work.
Also, this is the 21st century and 'art' as well as copyrights are really being redefined right now. Notice the massive amount of appropriation and referencing and recycling currently going on, leading to amazing creations (often, credit is not given to original producers). Check out things such as creative commons if you haven't already.
I realize that this is not exactly what you are talking about here, but I think it is appropriate to mention these things in a discussion such as this.
I assume the images of the topsheet have all been removed, due to your comments, so I can't see them. If they were entirely copied, like I said, it's fine, if you 'copied' them, but drew them/created them with InDesign, or something, I would go so far as to say that is a good thing. We learn by observing (and yes, in many cases 'copying') what other people have done. Artists in particular have been doing for ever, and it is perfectly legal. As a student, you can apply to set up in the Louvre, for example, and reproduce famous works. Obviously you don't sell them, but you can keep them yourself and say that it is your attempt to reproduce X's work.
Also, this is the 21st century and 'art' as well as copyrights are really being redefined right now. Notice the massive amount of appropriation and referencing and recycling currently going on, leading to amazing creations (often, credit is not given to original producers). Check out things such as creative commons if you haven't already.
I realize that this is not exactly what you are talking about here, but I think it is appropriate to mention these things in a discussion such as this.
Yea well the image i found online and then exported it into a graphic design program. I also thought it was ok because im just a kid doing a project for school. Im not selling it, mass producing it, or claiming it as mine. Just a cool design i like.
Oh and btw i think when people are trying to sell their stuff without permission like the Gene Simmons and faction ski's thing then its more important. But when its just me and im learning and not selling then its no biggie. Heres that article with Simmons
http://www.skipressworld.com/ca/index.p ... -kiss.html
Yes i took the images off.
Ill just pm you camhard so you can see them.
Oh and btw i think when people are trying to sell their stuff without permission like the Gene Simmons and faction ski's thing then its more important. But when its just me and im learning and not selling then its no biggie. Heres that article with Simmons
http://www.skipressworld.com/ca/index.p ... -kiss.html
Yes i took the images off.
Ill just pm you camhard so you can see them.
-
MontuckyMadman
- Posts: 2395
- Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:41 pm
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
If it wasn't a big deal, then you could have called Never Summer and asked for permission. Hell, they prolly would have sent you a topsheet to use.
If someone used one of my friends paintings as artwork on a board without compensating them I would be enraged.
It amazes me that you guys think it's o.k.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106
as far as the shape, it's not patented, nor is it original, so I don't have a problem with it. Lib did it first.
If someone used one of my friends paintings as artwork on a board without compensating them I would be enraged.
It amazes me that you guys think it's o.k.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106
as far as the shape, it's not patented, nor is it original, so I don't have a problem with it. Lib did it first.
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
-
Head Monkey
- Posts: 310
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 4:53 pm
- Location: Carnation, WA
- Contact:
Regarding Adriot707’s board: I got to see it firsthand the other night and I have to say that he’s done a pretty good job his first time out! He especially did a good job with that funky mold profile and getting the base and core pre-bent to match. There is no way that the vacuum would have been enough to force the core to conform with out that pre-bending. I’ve not seen much discussion on pre-bending here, and I suspect some of the other vacuum molders out there would like more info on the technique.
There are a few issues he ran into that should make for some good discussion here, too, especially the bonding problem with the encapsulated graphic on paper (I’ve never done this, so all my advice to him was pure speculation, and not very good at that I fear). You’ve gotta post up some pics of that (graphics be damned!) and see what the others can suggest.
----
Regarding the copyright law issue I have a few suggestions that I hope will be helpful.
First is that legal advice in a forum like this is always sketchy. None of us are lawyers (at least I haven’t seen one post here yet), and although most of us are pretty darn smart, a reading of portions of the law (any law) rarely yields the whole story, even when a section seems really darn cut-and-dry. There’s the letter of the law, the spirit of the law, and the way the law is subtly adjusted by litigation over time. It takes a mastery of all of these to attempt come up with a specific answer in any given situation, even in Adriot707’s seemingly simple case. For instance, follow the link that doughboy posted, which is to section 106, and scroll on down to section 107 on “fair use”. Not so clear anymore, is it? At a minimum, this section clearly states that profit motive is a factor.
My wife, who is a painter and professional photographer and has taken many classes from lawyers on this very subject directed specifically at artists, figures he’s probably just fine under the fair use clause. Of course, you should all apply my previous paragraph to this: she’s not a lawyer, and neither am I
The very existence of all the classes and seminars that artists can take on this subject is a big hint that this stuff is never so clear as you’d imagine.
My second suggestion is that I think this group has given Adriot707 some pretty valuable advice, which is that issues such as this should be considered when choosing one’s top sheet graphics, and that overall it’s good to be original when coming up with things like this. It’s a good reminder for everyone, especially those who are building businesses and going commercial. I don’t think we need to beat him up about it, though… I suspect he’s gotten the point.
There are a few issues he ran into that should make for some good discussion here, too, especially the bonding problem with the encapsulated graphic on paper (I’ve never done this, so all my advice to him was pure speculation, and not very good at that I fear). You’ve gotta post up some pics of that (graphics be damned!) and see what the others can suggest.
----
Regarding the copyright law issue I have a few suggestions that I hope will be helpful.
First is that legal advice in a forum like this is always sketchy. None of us are lawyers (at least I haven’t seen one post here yet), and although most of us are pretty darn smart, a reading of portions of the law (any law) rarely yields the whole story, even when a section seems really darn cut-and-dry. There’s the letter of the law, the spirit of the law, and the way the law is subtly adjusted by litigation over time. It takes a mastery of all of these to attempt come up with a specific answer in any given situation, even in Adriot707’s seemingly simple case. For instance, follow the link that doughboy posted, which is to section 106, and scroll on down to section 107 on “fair use”. Not so clear anymore, is it? At a minimum, this section clearly states that profit motive is a factor.
My wife, who is a painter and professional photographer and has taken many classes from lawyers on this very subject directed specifically at artists, figures he’s probably just fine under the fair use clause. Of course, you should all apply my previous paragraph to this: she’s not a lawyer, and neither am I
The very existence of all the classes and seminars that artists can take on this subject is a big hint that this stuff is never so clear as you’d imagine.My second suggestion is that I think this group has given Adriot707 some pretty valuable advice, which is that issues such as this should be considered when choosing one’s top sheet graphics, and that overall it’s good to be original when coming up with things like this. It’s a good reminder for everyone, especially those who are building businesses and going commercial. I don’t think we need to beat him up about it, though… I suspect he’s gotten the point.
Everything I know about snowboard building, almost: MonkeyWiki, a guide to snowboard construction
Free open source ski and snowboard CADCAM: MonkeyCAM, snoCAD-X
Free open source ski and snowboard CADCAM: MonkeyCAM, snoCAD-X
-
doughboyshredder
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:37 pm
I interpret the fair use clause differently. My understanding is that all 4 clauses must be met individually. One of them being not intending to profit, one of them being how much of the original work was copied, one of them being if the use could harm the original artist, and I forget the other.
anyway, board looks good.
anyway, board looks good.
@Adroit707: could you explain how you designed the rocker/camber shape in your CAD program (which one?).
did you just approximate the shape by looking at the NV boards or did you have any exact values?
i'm planning on doing sth similar with the burton hero, so any advice on how to adapt a rocker shape would be great!
great work btw!
did you just approximate the shape by looking at the NV boards or did you have any exact values?
i'm planning on doing sth similar with the burton hero, so any advice on how to adapt a rocker shape would be great!
great work btw!