Another person \"Borrowing\" someone elses skills

[Dammekkos2]

These two look remarkably similar. The newer submission hasn\'t any explainatory text and he has even branded the pic with his own mark.

http://www.coolminiornot.com/146190

Original
http://www.coolminiornot.com/69730

I dunno, I might be missing something (he also has what looks to be Templart\'s eclipsante, and other minis that I\'ve seen before like the Blood Angel standard that was on B&C some time ago), but I left a marginally derogatory comment anyway.

 

[Ritual]

It\'s hard to tell for sure as it\'s not the same photos, obviously. They seem identical though, especially considering all the stuff on the base is at the exact same places on both.

 

[Dragonsreach]

A hard call.
The pictures are obviously different but the subject looks remarkably similar.
Perhaps the piece has been sold and the most recent pictures are the new proud owners?

(or am I just being an innocent?)

 

[matty1001]

They have to be the same, look at the base\'s, it would be almost imposssible to crack cork in exactly the same way, or make the same shape with clay/putty.

My only guess is that the piece has been bought and rephotographed, hence the different positions.

 

[Hinton]

It\'s the same. The base, the blood on the blades, the \"wounds\"; they are all identical. It\'s so highly improbable to reproduce the exact same paint job that it borders on impossible.

As DR said, maybe someone bought this and then took photos of it to pass it off as their own work.

 

[Onis Lair]

Hard to say. I belive looking at the pictures that it is the same miniature but different photos. I thought maybe the original artist just created another CMON account but the small amount of info in the bios are no where close to a match, one claims 3 years painting and another 10 years painting. I\'m with the others thinking maybe it was sold and rephotoed by the new owner.

 

[Highbulp Billy]

I\'d say there\'s no real doubt that this is the same mini (as originally mentioned, there are others in the account too). Bearing in mind both submitters are from Poland (I think) there\'s a reasonable chance that the figure may have changed ownership. That still doesn\'t make it right to post it as your own work though if this is the case. :no:

 

[philologus]

At least it\'s a Rackham and won\'t wind up in the Golden Demons this year.

 

[Dragonsreach]

Originally posted by Highbulp Billy
I\'d say there\'s no real doubt that this is the same mini (as originally mentioned, there are others in the account too). Bearing in mind both submitters are from Poland (I think) there\'s a reasonable chance that the figure may have changed ownership. That still doesn\'t make it right to post it as your own work though if this is the case. :no:

There\'s no rule about it and we have had a few precedents in the past as well.

 

[Hinton]

Originally posted by Dragonsreach

Originally posted by Highbulp Billy
I\'d say there\'s no real doubt that this is the same mini (as originally mentioned, there are others in the account too). Bearing in mind both submitters are from Poland (I think) there\'s a reasonable chance that the figure may have changed ownership. That still doesn\'t make it right to post it as your own work though if this is the case. :no:

There\'s no rule about it and we have had a few precedents in the past as well.

While it may not break any rules, it still isn\'t right. Taking someone else\'s hard work and then passing it off as your own is just wrong. It\'s rude, disrespectful and deceitful.

I know that there probably isn\'t any way that every single picture can be checked and compared against those already posted, so it falls to the person posting the pic to be honest and honorable.

 

[Dragonsreach]

This is direct from the comment I have just approved:


This is of course my mini - I painted for different studios past but this one is definitely painted by only me!! there is another one which can be found if sought on coolmini now I paint as bevulf and it will be so !


So that is the end of this I believe.

 

[Highbulp Billy]

Originally posted by Dragonsreach

Originally posted by Highbulp Billy
I\'d say there\'s no real doubt that this is the same mini (as originally mentioned, there are others in the account too). Bearing in mind both submitters are from Poland (I think) there\'s a reasonable chance that the figure may have changed ownership. That still doesn\'t make it right to post it as your own work though if this is the case. :no:

There\'s no rule about it and we have had a few precedents in the past as well.

I didn\'t say it was against the rules, just morally wrong \"if this is the case\". I read the rules on posting recently and they state something like \"you must own the rights to the picture to post it\" so I guess it\'s up to the individual to make their own judgement calls.

That\'s all assuming that the ownership has changed etc.

[EDIT] guess that\'s all redundant now then

 

[supervike]

Originally posted by Dragonsreach
This is direct from the comment I have just approved:


This is of course my mini - I painted for different studios past but this one is definitely painted by only me!! there is another one which can be found if sought on coolmini now I paint as bevulf and it will be so !


So that is the end of this I believe.

Thats why I cringe when I see threads such as these.....Such matters are better handled through PM until they are determined. If there is a logical explanation, great, if not they maybe we can burn them at the stake....

 

[vincegamer]

too quick to judge

now pull your foot out of your mouth.

The first was posted by \"TemplarT\" which, if you look at the bio says \"see our website\" (though the website is defunct).
So it appears TemplarT is the name of a painting studio that posted here to generate some business.

Bevulf was a painter for the presumably defunct TemplarT who has just posted one of the pieces he painted for the studio under his own handle.

 

[Dammekkos2]

Originally posted by vincegamer
now pull your foot out of your mouth.

The first was posted by \"TemplarT\" which, if you look at the bio says \"see our website\" (though the website is defunct).
So it appears TemplarT is the name of a painting studio that posted here to generate some business.

Bevulf was a painter for the presumably defunct TemplarT who has just posted one of the pieces he painted for the studio under his own handle.

Perhaps you should pull your ******g foot out too. If you read the initial post again you\'ll see I gave him the benefit of the doubt in there, and also on the comments before anyone replied here.

 

[vincegamer]

Oh, so that would explain the 1 you left then?

 

[Dammekkos2]

No the comment left with the 1 explains the score. I\'m hardly going to write \"I don\'t think it\'s yours - 8\" (or something to that effect) now am I?

The second comment has the score for the paintjob by him.

Dunno why that needs explaining, it\'s obvious.

 

[demonherald]

now now ..honest mistake .........now all take a deep breath and a drink...

 

[supervike]

Dammekkos....would you like me to yank the comment you left with the 1?

I can certainly do that.

Its just a catch 22 situation with these some times....Its great that other folks look out for frauds and such (and we have had our share on those) but sometimes in our zealousness, it gets the best of us.

No real harm done, I think.

 

[Dammekkos2]

Yes I will gladly pull the comment (I guess you will have to ask the artist to do the same or it won\'t make sense).

When I made this post I knew there could be some legitimate explanation, that\'s why I made 2 comments on the submission and included the caveat in the post. You may as well delete both comments, because I probably wouldn\'t have written the second without the first.