Commercial Art or Work of Art? [Discussion]
Gareee
names should be on the package somewhere (what's the point of a signature
series without the signature?? ;))
Course, if I worked for Exclusive premiers, I wouldn't want my name on those
either.. ;))
as for McToys, they let them work thier likenesses in every now and then,
but I wonder, if Todd wants each person to get compensated for thier work
properly, do the sculptors get a piece of the pie based on sales??
Is the angela sculptor makeing more because of the multiple releases os
angela repaints??
Are the Crutch/NoBody sculptors on welfare now, and carving bars of soap on
the street??
and are the sculptors of Viking Spawn, Exo Skeleton spawn, Dark Knight, and
Ogre Living on easy street now??
And is Chet compensated by his witty posts?? If he posts poorly, does he
starve for a month??
And is it quantity of his posts, or quality??
Gary Tabar Jr,
@ Da Mouzzz...
EMAIL: gareee...@worldnet.att.net
INSTANT ONLINE EMAIL: 188...@pager.mirabilis.com
HOMEPAGE (Custom Action Figures, Model Pics, Disney Oddities, Godzilla
Tripe, Lightwave 3D renderings, Wallpaper, Animal Kingdom info ):
http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/ellison/86/index.html
rro...@ix.netcom.com wrote in message <70kvrf$1ga$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>After spending a week in South Dakota I have a new appreciation of how
>exciting Minnesota can be. But it also gives me a perspective on sculpting
>action figures. Looking up at the faces of Mount Rushmore I had to think
‘who
>sculpted this and did he get the proper credit for it’. The answer isn’t as
>easy as it seems at face value.
>
>The faces were sculpted by Gutzon Borglum and then they used a pointing
>system (which acted like a Brobdingnaggian pantograph) to make the finished
>product. So the final product bears some resemblance to action figures in
>that one man sculpted it and a group of people (including the sculptor and
>his son Lincoln who finished the work) set out to actually make it. There
is
>a small museum at the site and the sculptor’s name is certainly not
forgotten
>so he did receive credit for his work (plus the satisfaction of a job well
>done). But all the t-shirts and puzzles and pictures and such are devoid of
>credit for the sculptor.
>
>So this has me thinking about the action figure sculptor. The work is
seldom
>credited and I have to wonder if it should be. Some of the sculpting on
action
>figures does approach art almost any way you look at it, but thus far the
>sculptors who are credited are few and far between. Are we merely looking
at
>commercial art or something more akin to a work of art.
>
>I would like to see sculptors be credited on the packaging of action
figures.
>I think it is the right thing to do in this case, but I can also see the
>problems that manufacturers see in it. They fear the proverbial ‘slippery
>slope’ that if they give credit to sculptors they will eventually be forced
>to pay them more and that is the bottom line - money.
>
>Now I understand their concern and I also agree with them in part. I don’t
>believe in royalties for sculptors of characters which they do not own. For
>example, if a sculptor makes a new Spider-Man I don’t think he should get
>royalties for it because he is merely interpreting another character that
>someone else (in this case Stan Lee and Steve Ditko) has actually created.
The
>truth is that they should see royalties although I think it’s a tragedy
that
>they receive nothing for it, not even a ‘created by’ credit.
>
>Another aspect of this debate can be seen in engineering processes. Look at
>the ‘Famous Covers’ body and you’ll see what I mean. It doesn’t really have
>fancy sculpting but it incorporates a number of innovations to the body
>design, especially the waist and shoulder joints. I would like to give
credit
>to the engineers who came up with it.
>
>And lastly, I understand there might be a problem with credit in that it
may
>be hard or confusing for crediting to be clear. Sometimes particular things
>may not be properly credited or with a FC style figure you might have the
>potential to credit the head sculptor, body sculptor and/or engineers and
the
>costume designer. I realize that this could get out of hand, but I figure
>once crediting begins the machinery to accurately credit the right person
>will develop.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Should sculptors be credited?
>
>What about potential royalties for the sculptors?
>
>Should the person who created the character get a credit and/or royalties?
>
>Are we looking at simply work for hire commercial art or works of art?
>
>And what about engineering designs?
>
>-Rob
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Viet-Nam
> Should sculptors be credited?
Yes, even if it's on the back of the card like with trading cards. They
are the artists after all.
>
> What about potential royalties for the sculptors?
Unless they create a new character (as in many of McToys' stuff-- why
Eric Treadaway doesn't just go and create his own toy company is beyond
me. Every time I hear Todd go off on his "artists' rights" stance, I
just want to laugh.), I don't think they should get royalties for
creating characters which are already owned.
>
> Should the person who created the character get a credit and/or royalties?
>
Yes. That's what it means to own your character. But then again, it
depends on the type of deal they arrange with the toy company. Most
companies pay a one-time license fee and that's it.
> Are we looking at simply work for hire commercial art or works of art?
They're really both in most cases (except for the sculptors at Jakks--
shudder!). After all, their intent is to be bought commercially, but
they can also be extremely beautiful pieces of art.
>
> And what about engineering designs?
Well, that's a bit trickier. I don't see that much innovation in body
designs. It just depends on how many points of articulation the company
wants to put in the body that makes a particular line popular IMO. I
can't see that it's changed that much from the classic bodies.
Viet-Nam
Grifter
>Should sculptors be credited?
Yes, I feel that this is an art form. Look at the traing that some of the
premiere sculptors have. Albeit a pop art form I feel it is art.
>What about potential royalties for the sculptors?
a deal with the manufacturer. A great sculpt of an unpopular character would
be about the same as a poor sculpt of a popular one.
>Should the person who created the character get a credit and/or royalties?
>Are we looking at simply work for hire commercial art or works of art?
>And what about engineering designs?
such by one of a mechanical mind.
I guess whether it be by the sheer look or it's
functionality(posability/engineering) the best will always rise to the top.
My $.02
Bill
gri...@ctel.net
atro...@u.arizona.edu
basis..
In article <362E0C...@vmmc.org>,
Viet-Nam <uro...@vmmc.org> wrote:
> rro...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> > Should sculptors be credited?
>
> Yes, even if it's on the back of the card like with trading cards. They
> are the artists after all.
Exactly! As a wannabe future sculpter I can relate to this totally. I want
my work to be known, not just a mask behind the scenes. However, I not
saying major exposure, maybe like on the back of packaging a little paragraph
about the creative team involved (Sort of like putting the credits at the end
of the movie). Also, sometimes pieces are sculpted by more than one
individual, ANY person involved with it should be credited,(Hey! just use
smaller fonts and include a magnifying glass :).
Some people will point out whats so special about action figures? What about
the rest of the industry? I have two different responses to this..
A: Action Figures are more along the lines these days as collectibles in the
same sense that comic books are. I mean sometimes people only buy (or not) a
comic book depending on the creative team involved. When you make the comic
book (or toy) stand only on its own merits, your loosing potential customers
who might only have bought it because of the people involved. (I mean say
Spiderman [the comic] without any merits to the creative team.. sometimes the
story/art is great, sometimes its not). Since the individual does not know
who is creating the good vs the bad story lines they are less likely to buy
the book because of this unknown factor.
Of course this could all work the opposite way. Say their is a creative group
who are known to have bad output. The toys would be alot less likely to sell
(and put these people unto the street).
B: Why not the whole industry? I mean even legos should have a portion of
packaging for some recognition of the creative team behind the sets.
> > What about potential royalties for the sculptors?
>
> Unless they create a new character (as in many of McToys' stuff-- why
> Eric Treadaway doesn't just go and create his own toy company is beyond
> me. Every time I hear Todd go off on his "artists' rights" stance, I
> just want to laugh.), I don't think they should get royalties for
> creating characters which are already owned.
It would be nice, but its not a big deal to me. I wouldn't expect it.
(Besides as someone else (Garee?) has pointed out if that creation didn't
sell well, and your salary came directly from the sales.. say "Hello
unemployment")!
> > Should the person who created the character get a credit and/or royalties?
> >
> Yes. That's what it means to own your character. But then again, it
> depends on the type of deal they arrange with the toy company. Most
> companies pay a one-time license fee and that's it.
Again this would be nice, but its usually more than one person to come up with
these ideas (group brainstorming). Why should only a few or an individual get
royalty for the idea of the creation when there were so many more people
involved?
> > Are we looking at simply work for hire commercial art or works of art?
>
> They're really both in most cases (except for the sculptors at Jakks--
> shudder!). After all, their intent is to be bought commercially, but
> they can also be extremely beautiful pieces of art.
> >
Yes, both. For the child wanting a replica of his favorite hero to imagine
his own stories with they could care less. For the extreme collector who
keeps them packaged up and mint condition while hanging them on their wall,
its a very serious issue to contemplate (especially trying to convince
friends their not crazy).
In these modern times when most serious art is only understood by a select
few, and only well of individuals can afford it.. Whats left for the rest of
us?
> > And what about engineering designs?
>
> Well, that's a bit trickier. I don't see that much innovation in body
> designs. It just depends on how many points of articulation the company
> wants to put in the body that makes a particular line popular IMO. I
> can't see that it's changed that much from the classic bodies.
I disagree, though many joints have to be made the same way, I still feel the
engineer is part of the creative group and should get some recognition for it
(hence my little paragraph on the back of cards). Think of it, they have to
figure out how and where to put joints and oddities, and still be able to
create the figure that will mold easily and cheaply in mass production (No
easy feat if you ask me).
> Viet-Nam
--
Drew
..to each their own...
http://members.tripod.com/~Free_Imagination
Rob Rooney
<VvxX1.1866$a1.25...@harpo.ctel.net>...
> >Should the person who created the character get a credit and/or
royalties?
Not for the majority of things that are made, and not for many of the big
items. The two men who are credited with creating Spider-Man (Stan Lee and
Steve Ditko) get nothing for any Spidey action figures, much less any money
for all the items with his (or a derivative) likeness on them. I know that
some Kenner DC figures have recently paid royalties to creators. Jack Kirby
got some for Orion from Super Powers IIRC and I know that Tony Isabella
received some compensation for the Black Lightening figure in Total
Justice. Sadly, these seem to be the exception more than the rule.
But, this might change. Marv Wolfman is suing Marvel Comics over Blade
because he was one of the creators (or perhaps the sole creator, I'm not
certain). Since they have a movie and a line of toys he wants a piece of
the action (to the tune of quite a few million dollars). So the outcome of
that case may be a catalyst for some changes.
-Rob