I'll be starting a new art thread/blog thing:
http://fantasyartcollecting.blogspot.com/

Lots of old school TSR art will be up there as I get around to it. I'm kinda burned out on Dark Sun images too;) Note: By "old school" I mean early eighties as that's old school for me Into the 70's I'm more into Heavy Metal type of art... also more modern stuff and whatnot.



Cheers!

Clive Barker fans should check out my art blog

Update, Den Beauvais, Birthright Preview, hints about unveiling the Bullshit a lot of "respected" people here spew out as "fact"...
Oh yeah, selling art as well.
http://fantasyartcollecting.blogspot.com/

Tharizdun wrote:Update, Den Beauvais, Birthright Preview, hints about unveiling the Bullshit a lot of "respected" people here spew out as "fact"...
Oh yeah, selling art as well.
http://fantasyartcollecting.blogspot.com/

Here's at least one quote (I didn't look further):  

The guys on Acaeum make me smile bickering over negatives (thinking if they destroy the negatives of a piece of work commissioned for the sites collectors the piece cannot be easily reprinted...) sigh;)

Who thinks that?  

No big deal - the guy just needs to feel superior.  Let him.  

Small warning:  This site might not be safe for work for everyone.

A couple of pieces with nudity.  FYI.

FormCritic wrote:

Here's at least one quote (I didn't look further):  

The guys on Acaeum make me smile bickering over negatives (thinking if they destroy the negatives of a piece of work commissioned for the sites collectors the piece cannot be easily reprinted...) sigh;)

Who thinks that?  

No big deal - the guy just needs to feel superior.  Let him.  

Agreed.  However, for the sake of clarification….

The issue of the negatives was mooted quite early by the Committee.  Some members asked questions concerning the destruction of the negatives, but there was no bickering.  

The negatives were destroyed for two interrelated reasons:  First, the destruction of the negatives was part of our contract with Erol.  Second, the Committee wanted the simplest solution to avoid the minefield surrounding the ownership of the negatives--the idea of thwarting some unscrupulous moron is beyond our purview.

If one takes the time to read the Erol Otus thread, the facts are straightforward.

Paul

SimperingToad wrote:I do. We're in the age of digital. Negatives are not a requirement anymore. A good scanner or camera, direct plug-in to a computer, a digital press, and someone who knows his way around photoshop. Done.

As with all forgery-type endeavors, the skill of the forger is of the utmost importance.

Actually, you don't.

You are saying that a picture can be recreated without the negatives.  

That is exactly the opposite of what the blogger guy says you think.  

He's saying that you think destroying the negatives will keep anyone from reproducing the picture.  You don't think that.

He needs to feel like an expert, so he he's arguing with a straw man.

"I said to myself, 'These sacks of grain won't be hard to outwit.'"
                         - Baldrick, Black Adder Goes Fourth

"Perhaps you should elaborate on this"

I said I would Blackmoor and I will. It's not that I "should" do anything really... I do enough for the "community" as a general thing. At least as far as what I know about. Maunuscripts and modules and whatnot and I have no clue half the time It's my perrogative to set the matter correctly at some point in time and I said after BR (or thereabouts) I will do so. Keep in mind I'm moving into a new house, had a newborn... I'm a busy guy! I'll get there though. I think it's an important issue really.

"He needs to feel like an expert, so he he's arguing with a straw man."

An expert at what exactly? I'm an "expert" at some things... I was an expert at some things but not anymore I feel.
I used to have you pegged as being highly intelligent Formcritic. To be honest your sig there with the R.E.H. pic is deceptive in that it gives you a head start I'm unsure why I upset you but I apologize.
As far as arguing, no, I'm laughing... laughing at more or less.
I understand what's said on the thread and I also understand what's said about why there are x number of prints and I also understand why certain people are said to get lower #d prints and I also understand why the negs were said to be destroyed... the only difference between you and I is appears is that common sense prevails in my world man I have enough art though, and I don't give a shit really, so I'm happy for Jeff and happy for the people who are happy to be getting and or seeing a new piece of his. So I'm laughing at YOU right now and there's no arguement here.

You accuse me of feeling superior... try and think of it as more extravagent. I'm into this niche of this hobby for a LOT OF MONEY. This site is for enthusiasts in general and I'm happy to read about anything and everything pertaining to the hobby but in my little hemisphere I post and frankly there's a lot of $$ on the line. It is what it is.
I've got deals close to (probably over) 20K with Beaster and misterspock alone. 2 more members I've met through here I have another 20K in deals. Then I have maybe another 20K in deals... this is all art related stuff. I buy and sell maybe 1% of all my art on Ebay. I have deals happening on Comic Art Fans (more $$$ than here) and Pats site (about the same) and other places and in general it adds up. I've reached out to people I've never met before (misterspock) and hooked him up with thousands (many thousands by now) dollars in profits if he decided to sell. I've done the same for other people. You have me pegged as a dick right now but the only people I've had issue with are Pip (Den B calls him scum shit on the bottom of his shoe...) and some chick that uses no less than 3 aliases (not that that's wrong really but ...) My hobby is 100s of thousands of dollars man. If you had that much riding on your collection and maybe you do you start to think differently. Just the way it is man.
As far as my expertise...
I know where to get the art. Can you deny it??
I have thousands of conversations with (correspondances with) artists... this leads to me knowing all sorts of stuff. Just happens that way.
Bottom line, you quote great authors, I go out to lunch with great authors. To you that's me feeling superior. To me that's just being honest...
Anyways, I will anser those important questions (where did the old art go) and more in my future blog entries!!!  

Anyone know who has the original piece that was used for the cover of Shadowrun 1st edition? I asked Larry Elmore about it when I saw him last time and he didn't seem to know where it was and he didn't have any prints of it for sale either. That's the only truly original art I would consider buying -- everything else, I'm fine with a print.

Tharizdun wrote:"He needs to feel like an expert, so he he's arguing with a straw man."

Wait.  This is your blog, Tharzidun?

You should know from all our previous contacts that I am not your enemy.  

If you'll look at my second post, above, you'll see me ask you a question about a piece of art on that website.  From what I asked, you should clearly see that I did not recognize the blogger was you.

You had to know that no one on the Acaeum thinks you can keep artwork from being reproduced by destroying the negative.  

I thought this was some comment by an outsider - there are a few bloggers around who kop

I'm puzzled?  Why would you say that?  Why would you specifically point it out for people on the Acaeum?  

Were you coming back looking for a fight?  If so, I fell right into it.  

However, if you did come back trying to stir up a fight, then my comment was right on target, wasn't it?  You were trying to get a response you could get mad about because of some unfinished business with people on the Acaeum.

If you had some other goal than just getting into a shouting match, I encourage you to hang around and keep posting on the Acaeum.  I have enjoyed your posts about art and art collecting.

If I'm wrong about your motives, please accept my apology for jabbing you.