what da hell is THIS cue ripoff !!!!
bruin70
ginacue.
someone has no qualms about copying the other's work. it is paul
mottey's second cue in his "gallery" and ernie's 18d. there are minor
detail changes , but i have never seen such a blatant copy of
another's work.
i'd sure be interested in who is copying whom.
lfigueroa
"Ginacue -- Often imitated...never duplicated."
Lou Figueroa
"bruin70" <bru...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:95513a07.02070...@posting.google.com...
Jim Buss
found no cue similar to any ginacue that I'm familier with. The
second cue is unlike any I've ever seen. Magnificient.
--JIM BUSS--
http://www.jimbuss.com
=============================
Joe Van
more intricate and has an immense amount of silver work that this cue
doesn't have. I have seen both cues, in person, and I can tell you that they
are very
different. It is a design based on the Gina "Feathers" cue, which will be on
our site soon. Whats more amazing is that Paul derived his cue from a single
photo, a bad one at that. Without ever seeing Ernies cue.
Now as far as copying designs, its been going on for years. From the most
simple cues to the most elaborate cues.
Joe
> bru...@mail.com (bruin70) writes:
Rich Shewmaker
--
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020708112208...@mb-cu.aol.com...
> The cue in question is not even close to the Gina. The Gina is much
> more intricate and has an immense amount of silver work that this cue
> doesn't have. I have seen both cues, in person, and I can tell you that
they
> are very
> different. It is a design based on the Gina "Feathers" cue, which will be
on
> our site soon. Whats more amazing is that Paul derived his cue from a
single
> photo, a bad one at that. Without ever seeing Ernies cue.
> Now as far as copying designs, its been going on for years. From the most
> simple cues to the most elaborate cues.
>
> Joe
>
>
If Paul's cue were an exact copy, and he stamped it with the GINACUE logo.
and tried to pass it off as an original, that would be a rip-off. But this
cue is signed "Paul Mottey," and this is clearly a case of "Imitation is the
sincerest form of flattery." In terms of craftsmanship, playability, and
value, Paul's cues are second to none, IMHO.
Nearly every cuesmith who owns a lathe has made cues similar to those of
George Balabushka, Gus Szamboti, and Herman Rambow. So long as they are not
actually counterfeiting, so what?
--Rich
Lou
It's hard to talk about copying in the world of custom cues. There are so
many classic designs, and these are the designs that sell. Just look at all
the cuemakers who are making Southwest style cues. I see them all the time
on www.billiardwarehouse.com, and they sell like hotcakes.
bruin70
> "Ginacue -- Often imitated...never duplicated."
>
> Lou Figueroa
this is very true. ernie has been often copied. but it has alsways
been that he INFLUENCED others. you're always aware of the influence,
but can still distinguish what is a gina and what isn't.
THIS is more akin to, an artist painting an exact copy of the "mona
lisa", maybe changing the river stream in the background to a road,
maybe adding a bracelet, and then advertising the painting as his
creation.
John Collins
"Lou" <lcac...@gol.com> wrote in message news:agcipt$rn3$1...@nnrp.gol.com...
Which in turn are based on Kersenbrock cues. Cuemakers routinely will
emulate other's work or sometimes downright copy it. Sometimes this is in
tribute to the original, sometimes it is a customer request and sometimes
the cuemaker may simply want to see if they can do it. Ernie Gutierrez
wasn't the first cuemaker to use points or butterfly layers and he won't be
the last. I personally think that Paul Mottey has done enough original and
inspiring work of his own that he has earned the right to emulate other's
work if he chooses.
John
Chas
> Which in turn are based on Kersenbrock cues. Cuemakers routinely will
> emulate other's work or sometimes downright copy it. Sometimes this is in
> tribute to the original, sometimes it is a customer request and sometimes
> the cuemaker may simply want to see if they can do it.
Every artist builds on what has gone before. Ernie G sets a standard
that is the *starting point* for the next notable effort by anyone.
In the applied arts, it's even more acceptable- the simple exercise of
the technique may be so difficult, that a repetition of a
sophisticated effort is laudable in itself. The 'style' may be *so*
attractive, that numbers of similar objects are made- each, a
difficult and intrinsically valuable object.
Also, within applied arts particularly, the inclusion of someone
elses's technical tour d'force *as well as your own* is considered a
step forward.
Ernie G's cues are *outstanding*. Anyone who can command the array of
skills and artistic requirements that he brings to his craft is a hard
act to follow. Just making something that people might *mistake* for a
piece of his work will take a decade of preparation and thousands of
dollars in tools.
For Mr. Mottey to produce such an object, as well as to exercise the
other wide range of skills he has demonstrated, is completely laudable
and not easily matched by anyone.
--
Chas Clements
casemaker 303-364-0403
ch...@kuntaosilat.net
http://www.kuntaosilat.com/
http://chasclements.tripod.com/index.htm
Rich Shewmaker
bruin70
photo packet that ernie sends out, so i can't see all the detailing.
obviously, there are imitations everywhere, and ernie's designs are
often copied. nonetheless, paul put very little of his own input in
modifying this design. as you say, it's a good flat out copy of a gina
photo.
artists are influenced by many things. the good ones incorporate the
influences to their own style. there was no such attempt here, i
think. but then maybe i am in err to call mottey an artist. an expert
machinist might be closer to the truth. :)
can't wait to see your new cues. when they go up, i think i'll travel
to your room.....milt
bruin70
sincerest form of flattery". but i think you all, except maybe joe,
would have to see the gina in question. even joe would have to admit
that this a ballz out copy(irregardless of the detailing in ernie's
work), and that if mottey had access to the original, he might have
copied it exactly just to show everyone he could.
the point is that in imitation, one tries to imitate "in the style
of,,,". there are artists, for instance, who are influenced by me, and
paint in my style. but no one would be brazen enough to try to COPY A
PAINTING of mine exactly, and show it as an example of their
handiwork.
we are talking about a highly regarded, quality cuemaker, with decades
of experience and maturity behind him, making no attempt to modify
another's handiwork. like i said, you have to see the gina that mottey
was trying to copy.
Chas
> Well said!
Just getting my argument together for when I make a 'homage' to
Fellini and copy his cases :-))
Rich Shewmaker
--
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D2A0D35...@attbi.com...
Can I put in an order for your second Fellini copy?
;o) Rich
Rich Shewmaker
--
"bruin70" <bru...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:95513a07.0207...@posting.google.com...
Brazen? The Louvre, on any given day, has a dozen or so painters copying the
masters. So long as they don't copy the signature as well and proceed to
Southeby's, what's the problem?
Mottey's copy was probably an exercise in technique--exploring Ernie's
methods and proving to himself that he can do it. I'm sure he meant
Gutierrez no harm, and I seriously doubt that Ernie feels threatened in any
way. I would be proud to own Mottey's cue if I could afford it. Come to
think of it, I would copy it if I had the skills, the tools, and the wood.
Rich
bruin70
> >
> >
>
> If Paul's cue were an exact copy, and he stamped it with the GINACUE logo.
> and tried to pass it off as an original, that would be a rip-off
> --Rich
beg to disagree rich. that's called "forgery".
bruin70
> Point 1. Copying designs has been going on for years and years. It is
> nothing new and everyone knows it. There are bunches of high end
> production designs that are copied from custom cuemaker designs.
> Similarly, other custom shops copy other custom shops' designs. When
> cuemakers go to the big shows, do you think they stand and look at
> their own cues all day? Heck no, they go see what the competition is
> up to.
the nature on imitation and influence are an established fact in craft
and art. i daresay, however, if an artist copied one of my paintings
exactly, changed a shirt color, or added a figure, and tried to sell
it as his own creation, i could sue him quite easily.
Joe Van
>artists are influenced by many things. the good ones incorporate the
>influences to their own style. there was no such attempt here, i
>think. but then maybe i am in err to call mottey an artist. an expert
>machinist might be closer to the truth. :)
>
>can't wait to see your new cues. when they go up, i think i'll travel
>to your room.....milt
>
Milt,
The buyer of this cue wanted a close replica to the Gina. Without the Gina
price tag. This is really the bottom line. So you have a cue that looks like a
Gina
and hits like a Mottey. But it is missing all the silver work which in my
opinion
is what makes the Gina what it is. (25k plus) There are other differences, when
we
scan the Gina you will see them.
As far as Pauls artistry, he conceptualizes all his scrimshaw cues. He may not
do the scrim, but the idea is his. He also is credited with starting or
perfecting the new style lizard wraps, which are popping up. He also was one of
the first to start using the burl family of
woods, thuryl, ambonia, walnut etc.. But truth be told, he also does alot of
Szambotiesque cues because he was a big Gus fan. That doesn't make him a
rip-off artist. Does this mean
everyone who splices points are ripping off Rambow and Brunswick? Of course
not. No one says Southwest ripped off David Kershenbrock, and they shouldn't.
Even though the 6 point design is very similar.
If I was a cuemaker looking to emulate a cuemaker.. Ernie would be in the top
3 of people
I would like to copy.
Milt, if you get into the area, drop me an e-mail. I will introduce you to
Mark, and you will get a feel for some quality and unusual pool cues. I was
there this weekend and had the oppertunity to shoot with three recently aquired
Balabushkas. All three made before 67 and all distinctly different. One was a
Spain blanked cue, one was an ebony titlist cue the other was a regular titlist
with a "grooved" wrap. All original. Quite the experience.
Rich Shewmaker
> I was there this weekend and had the oppertunity to shoot with three
recently aquired
> Balabushkas. All three made before 67 and all distinctly different. One
was a
> Spain blanked cue, one was an ebony titlist cue the other was a regular
titlist
> with a "grooved" wrap. All original. Quite the experience.
>
> Joe
> www.pooltablemagic.net / www.classiccues.com
>
I've never had the opportunity to hit with a Balabushka. When you say
"distinctly different" do you mean the hit is different, or just the design?
Does a Balabushka-style Mottey hit anything like (any of) the Bushkas? Of
all the cues you've ever hit with, what cues come closest to the Balabushka
hit? I know "hit is subjective," but, for you, do any modern cues actually
hit better? In other words, is the high price of Balabushkas more from their
rarity/collector value than from any real playability advantage over much
less expensive sticks?
I wonder, if it were possible to do a blind hit comparison of, say, a
hundred cues by a hundred professionals, with eighty of the cues being made
by the top twenty modern cuemakers, and twenty of them being the best
examples by Balabushka, Rambow, G. Szamboti, Paradise, and Balner, would the
sticks by the old masters hold their own, or might the modern creations
actually hit better?
--Rich
Chas
> Can I put in an order for your second Fellini copy?
I'm going to see how the jigs go- it'll take a while just to set up to
make the first. I'm experimenting with making some easier cases;
something I can offer a bit more inexpensively. Alternatively, I may
make them in Kydex(tm) which will keep them fairly dear in price.
Smorgass Bored
bruin70 roared :
(*<~ Whoowee ! I'm making a decision in this matter until I've heard
the final word.......... from JimboCT.
speaking of cues, I believe they had the second raffle drawing and
#368 came out. who has #68,
Doug
~>*(((>< Big fish eat Little fish ><)))*<~
bruin70
>
> Brazen? The Louvre, on any given day, has a dozen or so painters copying the
> masters.
those are execises intended for study. that is how art students have
STUDIED for centuries. maybe, mottey's was as well, though i find that
difficult to believe from an established cuemaker.
So long as they don't copy the signature as well and proceed to
> Southeby's, what's the problem?
>
well, you're right. mottey is not putting his signature on the cue.
THAT would be a forgery, not a copy. however, mottey does place that
cue on his "gallery of cues" page along with his other efforts.
therefore, it is promoted as HIS creation, and intended as a selling
point as such.
first, you have to let go of this signature idea. that just because he
doesn't sign it with ginacues sig, that everything is ok. the
signature is the least of it. as i replied elsewhere,,,it is closer to
this scenario. an artist copies my painting and maybe changes the
color of a shirt or two, then signs his name and tries to sell it.
every creation of an artist is automatically copyrighten. did the
copier use the original as an influence or did he simply copy it and
sell it as his? i bet i'd win this baby in court.
and as another replier remarked about cuemakers being approached to
create a copy of another's design......well, then i guess there is no
limit is there? you WON'T see black, tad, gina, southwest, or many
others do copies for their clients. mottey should be beyond this.
someone said his years in the business as a premier cuemaker had
earned him the right to do this. i don't think so.
i will say that mottey's copy is pretty sharp work. he takes his cup
to the well like other followers, but it's a heck of an effort
nonetheless.:)
bruin70
> John Collins wrote:
>
> Every artist builds on what has gone before. Ernie G sets a standard
> that is the *starting point* for the next notable effort by anyone.
> In the applied arts, it's even more ,,,,,,
> Also, within applied arts particularly, the inclusion of someone
> elses's technical tour d'force *as well as your own* is considered a
> step forward.
all you say is very true, but mottey makes no effort to take a step
forward, or include his own sensibilities of cuemaking. was it simply
an exercise for mottey to showcase what he could do versus
ernie?,,,could be. but he still placed the cue on his website as HIS
creation. as i have have said, you HAVE to see both cues.
Gerd Junker
i have a "hoppe-style" cue made by tim scruggs on order.
is this cue a copy????
i thought it is a original scruggs custom cue.
...........gerd
Joe Van
>I've never had the opportunity to hit with a Balabushka. When you say
>"distinctly different" do you mean the hit is different, or just the design?
>Does a Balabushka-style Mottey hit anything like (any of) the Bushkas? Of
>all the cues you've ever hit with, what cues come closest to the Balabushka
>hit?
Just the designs were different. They all hit about the same. They all felt a
little
different due to balances and weights. As far as the hit of a Bushka, I will be
honest
and say I have hit with ones I liked and ones I didn't. But this is true of all
cues IMHO,
you can get one you love and then try another from the same maker and say what
the hell
was he (or she) thinking. I would say Tascarellas play close with good reason,
I think the
big difference is Pete makes his own splices, and now does a full splice in
rosewood. Where George was dependent on outsourcing. But when your sources are
Burton Spain and Gus Szamboti, one can hardly argue.
>In other words, is the high price of Balabushkas more from their
rarity/collector value than from any real playability advantage over much less
expensive sticks?<<
Very few people I know play consistantly with Georges cues. I think for the
most part now they end up in special cases, and get taken out for an occasional
test drive. I will say the one cue I really liked, the ebony titlist, I could
play with on an everyday basis. The cueball seemed alive when I shot with this
cue. But this could be I was more comfortable with the thinner shafts of about
12.7mm vs the 13mm I normally use. Who knows...
Chas
> all you say is very true, but mottey makes no effort to take a step
> forward, or include his own sensibilities of cuemaking.
Impossible.
He's not a painter- this isn't a picture of something; it *is*
something.
Unless you've interviewed the artist extensively about his concept,
you're making the same sorts of assumptions/comparisons that someone
might make looking at your work- 'influenced by so-and-so', 'in the
school of so-and-so', 'homage to so-and-so'. Critical analysis
requires a bit more involvement than looking at a picture on a
website- or even handling them as a novice and not a well-informed
aficionado.
> was it simply
> an exercise for mottey to showcase what he could do versus
> ernie?,,,could be.
Great idea- mimicking someone else's tour d'force kind of puts
everything in place.
I mimicked a guys' work one time- showing off for his ex-wife, my
girlfriend at the time, and her father. They had been ragging me about
how good he was; so I did what he did, better than he did-
And he *still* couldn't do what I do-
Very satisfying stuff <g>
> but he still placed the cue on his website as HIS
> creation. as i have have said, you HAVE to see both cues.
It *is* 'his creation'.
As a visual artist, (didn't you say you are a painter?) you're
involved with how things *look*- not how they work, or how they are
constructed, or the various materials and their properties. You
generally are just making an image, nothing of substance. It's kind of
like making a Volkswagen, or painting a rock to look like a
Volkswagen- it doesn't matter what it *looks* like it might be, the
criterion for artistic integrity is far past just comparable surface
design motives.
Comparable situations exist in *many* disciplines.
Japanese swordsmiths used to put their teacher/mentor's name on
deliberate copies of his work. They figured that the homage wasn't
complete without the name- they just didn't sign it with the same
stroke pattern or whatnot- and everybody who was that 'refined' knew
exactly what they were looking at. Same thing with various
pottery/ceramic skills- the mark is what you look at- being able to do
it *at all* is the trick.
A cue is a *very* restricted canvas- they're always longer than they
are wide, they're always round, half of it is always pretty plain-
even replaceable (with some caveats). They have to be constructed to a
standard of 'playability' *before* any ornamentation is considered.
Ornamentation is restricted to traditional motives and variations on
them (points, more points, bands, more bands- floating this, hanging
that)- unless one is very conversant with the oeuvre, distinctions of
provenance are very difficult to make (without recourse to the
signature).
If you have a worry, worry about the guys that are making cues and
signing them with notable sigs and flogging them off as originals.
Counterfeiting is becoming a major factor with some of the early and
less technically sophisticated stuff.
Nah; no ripoff here- an outstanding achievement worthy of admiration
from everybody- including Mr. Gutierrez and the rest of the guys
standing around with their hands in their pockets watching them both.
bruin70
>
> Milt,
>,,, a big Gus fan. That doesn't make him a
> rip-off artist. Does this mean
> everyone who splices points are ripping off Rambow and Brunswick? Of course
> not. No one says Southwest ripped off David Kershenbrock, and they shouldn't.
> Even though the 6 point design is very similar.
> www.pooltablemagic.net / www.classiccues.com
i knew some responses would lead in this direction. IMO, early
cues(60's-70's) and cues of basic design(kershenbrock, basic hoppe
butt, basic 4 point, then veneers etc), like any other art or craft in
their early stages of development, become part of the trade lexicon
for following generations to build on. after all, we all have to start
somewhere. so, you have your dots, snowflakes, rings, diamonds,
notched diamonds, windows, stitching, et al.. maybe they were all
revolutionary when they were introduced, but they became elemental in
cue design and are now part of cuemaking abc's. so, in that respect,
following your kershenbrocks and szambotis are not copying or ripping
off. my favorite cuemaker was one who used basic designs, and szamboti
was his hero as well. but he worked with very basic machinery, so his
cues were not "imaginative",,,they had limits.
today's cuemaking, with all the technology at hand, and decades of
history to build on, makes copying a very advanced, fancy cue like the
gina more like copywork and will get no admiration from me other than
"he did a damn good COPY". mottey is not necessarily BUILDING on a
concept is he?
anywayz, it's not so much the copy, as it is that PM put up that copy
as his concept cue in his gallery. were i, say richard black, and i
did a copy for a client, i wouldn't put it up on MY site unless i
stated it as a copy and give the credit due it's originator.
bruin70
> bruin70 wrote:
> > all you say is very true, but mottey makes no effort to take a step
> > forward, or include his own sensibilities of cuemaking.
>
> might make looking at your work- 'influenced by so-and-so', 'in the
> school of so-and-so', 'homage to so-and-so'. Critical analysis
> requires a bit more involvement than looking at a picture on a
> website- or even handling them as a novice and not a well-informed
> aficionado.
it is de facto that all cuemakers make a different cue, even given the
same parameters to work with. give them the same design, same specs,
and they will still come up with "their" distinctive hit.
this thread is no more than a critique of the visual source.
Jimbo Ct
>the final word.......... from JimboCT
It took some time, but finally some words of wisdom. Sorry Doug can't help,
I've seen both cues, hell I've hit balls with the Gina version. All I can say
is that the cues are similar but I wouldn't call the Mottey a direct copy, just
a copy of style and it's already been brought up that this happens every day. I
believe Ernie is the most copied man in the cue biz. At the Orlando BCA show a
few years back I was involved with the confiscation of some over seas copies
from one of the Asian dealers, except they took pictures of cues from the
calendar and just made exact copies using decals. From my understanding there
was going to be a big law suite but I never found out how it turned out. The
thing I couldn't believe is that when I took the cues the guy didn't even try
to stop me.
Jim <---Just a pawn
Joe Van
>szamboti was his hero as well. but he worked with very basic machinery, so his
>cues were not "imaginative",,,they had limits.<<
Even with basic machinery imaginitive results can be achieved. Look at Ernies
silver
and ivory cue of 1965/1966. In the case of Szamboti, IMHO I think Gus worried
more about
playability than the design aspects of his cues. But occasionally Gus would put
out
his 8 pointer, or a box style cue, which for him was top of the line.
>today's cuemaking, with all the technology at hand, and decades of
>history to build on, makes copying a very advanced, fancy cue like the
>gina more like copywork and will get no admiration from me other than
>"he did a damn good COPY". mottey is not necessarily BUILDING on a
>concept is he?
Well I think admiration is a personal choice in this regard. But even with the
technology at hand, ala cnc equipment, not everyone uses it. I think we have
to look at why copies are made. In this case it was a customer request, and
Paul declined to make it exact. But in most cases cues are copied out of
popularity
more than anything. On ebay there is a Phillippi that is a dead ringer to a
Cognoscenti.
I think cues will always be copied and as long as they are not sold as
originals, I really
don't have a problem with it. But I would understand if a cuemaker was insulted
because
a "peer" borrowed a design.
>anywayz, it's not so much the copy, as it is that PM put up that copy
>as his concept cue in his gallery. were i, say richard black, and i
>did a copy for a client, i wouldn't put it up on MY site unless i
>stated it as a copy and give the credit due it's originator.<<
I agree, it would be great if Paul got Ernies permission to put a pic of his
cue up also, IMHO it
would benefit both Paul and Ernie. Ernie for his creative genius and Paul for
his
ability to reverse engineer and actually figure this thing out. But I am not
marketing for Paul lol.
Chas
> .......At the Orlando BCA show a
> few years back I was involved with the confiscation of some over seas copies
> from one of the Asian dealers, except they took pictures of cues from the
> calendar and just made exact copies using decals. From my understanding there
> was going to be a big law suite but I never found out how it turned out.
How did they justify a 'confiscation'? Were they marked forgeries?
Chas
> this thread is no more than a critique of the visual source.
Sure is an abusive and insulting opinion- founded on a very slight
understanding of Applied Arts.
Everyone has said now that it's similar, but not a copy. The
similarity may be implied by the viewer, may be intended by the maker-
the reality is that it's an outstanding piece of art from an
outstanding artist.
The Neo-Dadaist ideal rests on the Duchampian thesis that; 'It's Art
because I say it's Art' allowing just about any expression by an
artist, ranging from 'concept' at one end to 'homage' at the other.
This is no more, nor less, than working in a deliberate motif. 'Ernie
G.' has become an iconographic motif- a true compliment to a living
artist. One can work in the oeuvre without infringing on Mr. Gutierrez
in the least (failing that one puts *his* name on it rather than one's
own).
It's happened *a lot*; Charley Loloma's style of jewelry, the 'Begay'
family style, Bill Moran's Custom knives, Bob Loveless the same- the
instances are legion.
I'd like to critique *your* art for examples of 'influence' or
'concept theft'-
Sherm Adamson
God!
Sherm
--
Sherm Custom Billiard Cues by,
Sherman Adamson
3352 Nine Mile Rd., Cincinnati Ohio 45255
Shop (513)553-2172, Cell (513)509-9152
http://www.shermcue.com
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D2C74DD...@attbi.com...
> bruin70 wrote:
> > this thread is no more than a critique of the visual source.
>
> Sure is an abusive and insulting opinion- founded on a very slight
> understanding of Applied Arts.
> Everyone has said now that it's similar, but not a copy. The
> similarity may be implied by the viewer, may be intended by the maker-
> the reality is that it's an outstanding piece of art from an
> outstanding artist.
> I'd like to critique *your* art for examples of 'influence' or
Chas
>
> From what he's stated, if he painted a sunset, he'd be guilty of ripping off
> God!
On that Lord of the Rings case, I 'ripped off' the Book of Kells, the
Tara Treasure, celtic knots and motives from a thousand years ago. I'm
just getting ready to 'rip off' the Pegasus/Bellepheron story for the
winged horse and some Greek geometric stuff (3X5 case going to Hong
Kong)- you'll be able to see direct influences from the French
Romantic period as well- snorting, fiery eyed, wind blown mane, all
that.
Working in a specific style is not a rip-off unless it's done for some
sort of deceptive purpose- hell, I'd do 'big-eyed children as circus
clowns' if the mood struck me <g>
Sherm Adamson
this area! In your discipline of art, I'm quite sure you are right, but I'm
afraid you really don't understand ours! This type of thing is quite common
in the cuemaking world and is considered quite acceptable! We even have the
famous "George Balabushka" cues coming from Helmstetter with a certificate
apparently signed by George himself! IMHO this is taking things a bit far,
but it's already been argued here many times before! I just happened on this
item on ebay that could really get your bowels in an uproar
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1842073504
but it really shouldn't!
It's just a matter of understanding the artform! Paul is not stealing
anything from Ernie! When he makes a cue like this, it is a tribute, an
appreciation of Ernie's contributions to our artform! Paul is one of the
best cuemakers in the country and any of his cues are a work of art, whether
the original concept was completely original at all!
just more hot air!
Sherm
--
Sherm Custom Billiard Cues by,
Sherman Adamson
3352 Nine Mile Rd., Cincinnati Ohio 45255
Shop (513)553-2172, Cell (513)509-9152
http://www.shermcue.com
"bruin70" <bru...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:95513a07.02070...@posting.google.com...
Patrick Johnson
> clowns' if the mood struck me
I might strike you too...
Pat Johnson
Chicago
Chas
>
> > ... I'd do 'big-eyed children as circus
> > clowns' if the mood struck me
>
> I might strike you too...
Thanks; really-
I was overcome there for a moment ;-))
Murray Tucker III
"Joe Van" <class...@aol.com> wrote in message
> Paul declined to make it exact. But in most cases cues are copied out of
> popularity
noticed a kid screwing together a Southwest. I walked over to his table and
it wasn't until I was about five feet away that I realized that it was not a
SW. The overall look of the woods, the rings and the joint pin were pure
Southwest. The fit and finish were not. It is this kind of blatant copying
that ticks me off. If I were to see Paul's cue from across the room I would
not even think it was a Gina. If I got to see it up close then I would see
Ernie's influence, but I would not think of the cue as a clone.
Murray Tucker, III~still trying to developed a style that people can spot
from across the room
www.tuckerbilt.com/iii
i...@tuckerbilt.com
news:20020710090818...@mb-ba.aol.com...
bruin70
> 'concept theft'-
milt kobayashi..... meyer gallery and several others. just do a
search. until i put up a site, you'll have to settle on what my
gallery representation shows.
my influences are sargent, velasquez, whistler, van dyck, chase,
japanese prints, duveneck , sorolla, serov, manet, and degas. and i
didn't paint a copy of "las meninas", change some colors, sign it, and
pass it off as my own creation,,,,,in case you want to pull this
thread off into an area other than billiards.
bruin70
Chas
> milt kobayashi..... meyer gallery and several others. just do a
> search. until i put up a site, you'll have to settle on what my
> gallery representation shows.
Great stuff- you are to art as Gordon Liddy is to politics.
Just the ticket when the nineteenth century rolls around again.
Joe Van
>milt kobayashi..... meyer gallery and several others. just do a
>search. until i put up a site, you'll have to settle on what my
>gallery representation shows.
Mr. Kobayashi, I didn't realize it was you... welcome to RSB.. How are
things? Mark sends his best and says "your" cue is safe.. :) This is
a great forum and as you can see the debates range greatly..
Have fun here and try not to take everything you read to seriously :)
Best always....
Joe / Mark
www.pooltablemagic.net / www.classiccues.com
Rich Shewmaker
Good Point. Did Duchamp rip off the urinal designer?
Rich
Rich Shewmaker
Rip off Gaudi when you do my Fellini-rip-off cue case.
;o) Rich
bruin70
> things? Mark sends his best and says "your" cue is safe.. :) This is
> a great forum and as you can see the debates range greatly..
>
> Have fun here and try not to take everything you read to seriously :)
>
> Best always....
>
> Joe / Mark
joe. i'm just having fun. the exchange just seems heated. i learned to
take message boards with a grain of salt long ago. sometimes, though,
it feels like the other side can't see my point as i'm sure they feel
the same about theirs. i've seen all kinds of heavyweights here, which
is really cool. chas is as adamant as i am.
tell mark "by hook or by crook,,,,,by hook or by crook". that cue
would complete my collection.
bruin70
>
> Great stuff- you are to art as Gordon Liddy is to politics.
> Just the ticket when the nineteenth century rolls around again.
:D:D:D:D:D very good, chas
and when tijuana handbags, saddle-based lamps, and tandy leathercrafts
come back(on second thought, they were never in), you'll have a head
start.
bruin70
> Great stuff- you are to art as Gordon Liddy is to politics.
> Just the ticket when the nineteenth century rolls around again.
ok, chas, let's call a truce. actually, your stuff surprised me, as i
was expecting justis-type cases. your craft is well done.
and btw, realism was never "out". it just never got the publicity of
those dern abstracts, and never played to the "artsy crowd". realism
is, in fact, stronger than ever.
Jimbo Ct
The cues were exact copies, this wasn't plain jane cues they were very facy top
end cues, you can see the cues in the American Cuemakers Calender that came out
around 98. These cues were exact, except it wasn't inlays it was decals, the
cues were crap and No there wasn't copies of the signatures. I'm not really
sure how we could justify anything I was asked by a cuemaker to take a walk and
we went over and just took them, I didn't know what was about to happen I just
took a walk and the next thing I know there was some one sided yelling and he
handed me about 5 cues and we left. Together we took about 9 cues and he said
you'll hear from my lawyer and we walked off.
Jim <---Might still be wanted in Orlando, but not by Doug.
Donald Tees
> bruin70 wrote:
> > milt kobayashi..... meyer gallery and several others. just do a
> > search. until i put up a site, you'll have to settle on what my
> > gallery representation shows.
>
> Great stuff- you are to art as Gordon Liddy is to politics.
> Just the ticket when the nineteenth century rolls around again.
>
> --
> Chas Clements
> casemaker 303-364-0403
ouch! I felt that poke way over here <G>.
Donald
Donald Tees
Donald
"bruin70" <bru...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:95513a07.02071...@posting.google.com...
Jeffrey Weiss
> ...I was asked by a cuemaker to take a walk and we went over and
> just took them, I didn't know what was about to happen I just took
> a walk and the next thing I know there was some one sided yelling
I wonder why he picked you to come along. Were you wearing your
Powerpuff Girls T-shirt that day?
--
jw
John Collins
easier to see a wide array of designs in one place and get nice glossy
high-definition brochures to copy from. Before that most of the cues from
Asia were copies of McDermott and Meucci, the two easiest catalogs to get.
John
"Jimbo Ct" <jim...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020711044700...@mb-dh.aol.com...
Chas
> .......
> Rip off Gaudi when you do my Fellini-rip-off cue case.
My *fave*!
I'd put *neon* on them if I could figure out the electronics <G>
Chas
> ........Together we took about 9 cues and he said
> you'll hear from my lawyer and we walked off.
Ah; vigilantism- hell, I'm up.
Chas
> ok, chas, let's call a truce. actually, your stuff surprised me, as i
> was expecting justis-type cases. your craft is well done.
After 50 years, I'm beginning to get the hang of it.
I have a fine arts education (9 yrs. of art school)- my oeuvre is
'Macho Schlock'; the iconographicization of objects having to do with
'men's pursuits'; hunting, gaming, militaria, sports, tobacco/alcohol,
erotica, macabriana, liturgical art and so on.
Facility with the various media is important to me, as is the intaglio
sculpture aspect, and the painting done on the surfaces. It gives me
an opportunity to express in a sculptural manner as well as
graphically. The nature of containers opens a lot of conceptual
aspects, allowing comment on various social/political questions as a
function of the object that the container relates to.
> and btw, realism was never "out". it just never got the publicity of
> those dern abstracts, and never played to the "artsy crowd". realism
> is, in fact, stronger than ever.
I wasn't speaking to 'realism'-
Since we have a truce (that's an acquiescence), I'll spare you the
nasty lowminded critique that is possible with anyone's work <G>
I like your stuff too- but then, I'm stuck in a century ago and have
no intention of giving up my standard for good work either.
Best wishes- to you, Mr. Mottey, Mr. Gutierrez and all who love fine
work.
David Malone
>The nature of containers opens a lot of conceptual
>aspects, allowing comment on various social/political questions as a
>function of the object that the container relates to.
Huh?
David "The Hamster" Malone
Chas
> Chas <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote:
> >The nature of containers opens a lot of conceptual
> >aspects, allowing comment on various social/political questions as a
> >function of the object that the container relates to.
>
> Huh?
Artbabble <g>
If one makes a 'reliquary' for an object, it elevates the object to
the position of an icon for certain behaviour/attitude/belief.
Take a 'Single Action Army Colt'- you engrave it, ivory grips with
rubies in them, a heavily silver mounted buscadero belt. You have made
a statement about a number of societal attitudes ranging from 'gun
control' to the 'influence of Hollywood on society's icons'.
When you make a container for a pair of $10K *sticks* used in a
*game*, you're commenting on everything from the 'Pool song' in the
Music Man to the importance of Big Boy's Toys, and the aesthete of
fine craftsmanship for it's own sake.
One of the basic criterion for 'fine art' is it's complete lack of
utilitarian application- no one *needs* a painting, a sculpture, an
ornamented anything- it's an expression for it's own sake. To take a
useful object to an extreme of impracticality speaks more to it's
conceptual aspect than to it's utility.
Cellini made the Great Saltcellar- to hold salt; but, that's not all.
Chas
> ...........
> Good Point. Did Duchamp rip off the urinal designer?
The act of turning it upside down for purposes of 'reevaluation' is
Duchamp's trick.
I did a similar piece in art school- the same sort of urinal, but with
a false handlebar mustache- called it 'Dada in Disguise'. It was about
as funny as Duchamp's original, that is to say; once.
My trick is that each of my constructions is a unique object- I seldom
use the same pattern twice; even with things that look 'similar'. Each
object is unique- even mass produced ones. The attitude of making
*this one* special, by a 'precious' container, is a long-time art
specialty. The ornamentation of such a container is further expression
of the greater preciousness of the object- think of the wonderful
liturgical reliquaries- Dada as hell <GG>
David Malone
>Artbabble <g>
That explains it - I could tell it wasn't English. Can you do us all a
favour - the next time it occurs to you to write something along those
lines could you please whack yourself upside the head with a 2 by 4
first and see if it goes away? (grin).
BTW, did you see this news article?
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/
Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1026143314828&call_page=
TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News
(You'll have to concatenate it together)
David "The Hamster" Malone
John Collins
of packaging or casing of material objects. How things are contained seems
to be a projection of our ego as much as it is simply utilitarian in
function. Often the function is secondary to the decoration/declaration the
container has/makes.
John
"David Malone" <mal...@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:3d2dc67a.85199640@tornews...
Chas
>
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 18:40:00 GMT, Chas <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >Artbabble <g>
> That explains it - I could tell it wasn't English. Can you do us all a
> favour - the next time it occurs to you to write something along those
> lines could you please whack yourself upside the head with a 2 by 4
> first and see if it goes away? (grin).
heh.
One of the reasons I left the whole gallery/museum scene- the whole
artintelligensia bullshit is too funny to keep a straight face about.
> BTW, did you see this news article?
Yeah- what fun.
Mark0
Mark0 <--the 800 lb gorilla correlation
"Jeffrey Weiss" <Jeffre...@gs.com> wrote in message
news:d50f5c27.02071...@posting.google.com...
Mark0
Mark0
"David Malone" <mal...@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:3d2dd7aa.89599015@tornews...
| On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 18:40:00 GMT, Chas <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote:
|
snip
bruin70
> ,,I like your stuff too- but then, I'm stuck in a century ago and have
> no intention of giving up my standard for good work either.
that's a good philosophy, but don't align yourself to an era past
simply because you like good work. good taste is good taste.
John Collins
> anywayz, it's not so much the copy, as it is that PM put up that copy
> as his concept cue in his gallery. were i, say richard black, and i
> did a copy for a client, i wouldn't put it up on MY site unless i
> stated it as a copy and give the credit due it's originator.
This is a good point.
John