T'Jai
eclectic threadkiller
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,558
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
There has been an argument about the veracity of a claim made by a poster I personally know very well. The art in question was indeed stolen. I have seen the originals. As to why it happened, We fans may find it hard to believe but sometimes they just don't feel like coming up with and puting together another take on an old Icon. With that having been stated It was never stated or suggested that JC was incapable of producing the work in question just that in this instance he hadn't. I was around the work space of the Artist when the plagurization was discovered and as said individual is quite passionate about his work the theft was the cause of a great deal of irritation, Especially considering JC was given the works (yes there was more than 1 pic) because he professed that he was a fan and wished copies for personal enjoyment.
Before the editors stepped in the key piece showing that style costume was a traced drawing of WAMS art not just a design copy. Which wouldn't have been nearly as offensive. JC found a drawing he liked and traced it for his own book instead of putting in the time it would take to come up with it himself, not that he couldn't, he didn't. If it was some hack that was incapable of putting the work together it would have also been less offensive. How one can draw the "logical" conclusion that the theft of one piece of art is impossible if one is a capable artist is laughable, as is that one instance of theft cans be used as the basis to judge all of said artists work. At the time this took place JC was unaware of the level and number of WAMS connections, he was under the impression that the theft would go unnoticed by anyone able to generate trouble about it.
I believe that clears up the back story addressing all points without getting emotional or name calling feel free to respond in kind or if you want to dance the verbs I always appreciate a target...
T
Before the editors stepped in the key piece showing that style costume was a traced drawing of WAMS art not just a design copy. Which wouldn't have been nearly as offensive. JC found a drawing he liked and traced it for his own book instead of putting in the time it would take to come up with it himself, not that he couldn't, he didn't. If it was some hack that was incapable of putting the work together it would have also been less offensive. How one can draw the "logical" conclusion that the theft of one piece of art is impossible if one is a capable artist is laughable, as is that one instance of theft cans be used as the basis to judge all of said artists work. At the time this took place JC was unaware of the level and number of WAMS connections, he was under the impression that the theft would go unnoticed by anyone able to generate trouble about it.
I believe that clears up the back story addressing all points without getting emotional or name calling feel free to respond in kind or if you want to dance the verbs I always appreciate a target...
