Pls Write Warnings on Tuts

[pam]

Mary, I don't think you are either. I think you are a very generous person and I admire you greatly. I do think that we all need to think of the rammifications of what is being asked in this thread, though.

[ShellyD]

Originally Posted by pam

I think the tutorial is being made to sell the knowledge of how to perform techniques which the author demonstrates in an exemplar bead. You're exchanging money for knowledge of techniques. The bead is incidental to the teaching of the techniques used to make that bead. Obviously you are going to believe what you want to believe and I am going to believe what I want to believe.

There is only one tutorial that I am aware of that sells itself with regards to 'Technique' and starts of as the ??? technique - there are quite a few that are about how to make a specific bead and certainly not just about techniques. If they are only being sold for techniques then tuts should then be sold as "The Technique/s required in making (named bead).

[Jennifer Geldard]

Originally Posted by Sherry

I'm going to be brief here; (having some difficulties with my poor Mom, sigh. I can't believe that she's eighty, wish she lived closer. But that's a whole other subject.)

As for beads from my tutorial, (and my classes), make 'em, sell 'em, have fun with 'em. With my blessings.

End of story.

Ditto

[pam]

Hi Michelle, Yes, we are all still learning about tutorials, but if you take a look at class descriptions you will find almost the same thing and I don't think people leave a class they have paid $500 for with the idea that they can now go and make exact copies of the instructor's beads.

Let's look at a couple of examples that I can think of: Leah Fairbanks has taught classes for many years. When her classes are announced you will see a picture of one of her beads and the description of learning to make flower beads. Does a person then go into the class with the idea that they can learn to make that exact bead and copy it again and again and again, or are the taking the class in order to learn how she makes the flower beads?

Look at a class with Michael Barley, same thing, do people go into the class in order to learn to make exact copies of Michael's beads and then replicate them until eternity? No, I don't think so. The idea behind a class or a tutorial, in my opinion, is to pass on the techniques that you have developed to those that are interested in learning them.

[ShellyD]

Originally Posted by pam

Hi Michelle, Yes, we are all still learning about tutorials, but if you take a look at class descriptions you will find almost the same thing and I don't think people leave a class they have paid $500 for with the idea that they can now go and make exact copies of the instructor's beads.

Let's look at a couple of examples that I can think of: Leah Fairbanks has taught classes for many years. When her classes are announced you will see a picture of one of her beads and the description of learning to make flower beads. Does a person then go into the class with the idea that they can learn to make that exact bead and copy it again and again and again, or are the taking the class in order to learn how she makes the flower beads?

Look at a class with Michael Barley, same thing, do people go into the class in order to learn to make exact copies of Michael's beads and then replicate them until eternity? No, I don't think so. The idea behind a class or a tutorial, in my opinion, is to pass on the techniques that you have developed to those that are interested in learning them.

Yes, I actually have taken a class with Leah Fairbanks. Some of the most amazing 2 days in my glass making life, as well as those spent with Deb Crowley and a few days with another extremely talented Artist who took me into her home. As I can only speak for myself, I took those classes to learn and not to learn how to copy!!

Just maybe because tutorials are open to a wider group of potential consumers - maybe there needs to be more of explanation. And just as I don't know what is going on in the author's mind is the same as the author not knowing what the purchaser is thinking either. I have bought tutorials cause 1. It's cheaper than travelling to the USA 2. I get to pick and choose what I want to learn and when and 3. sometimes just cause I'm purely interested in the 'how do they do that'.

I am not arguing for every tutorial author to shout out 'go and copy and sell'. I just think that not all of us think the same and stating what you want or don't want on a tutorial is better than not saying anything at all.

[pam]

Well, at this point I think I will bow out of this conversation. The holidays are here for my family and I doubt I will have much time to continue this discussion with the devotion I think it needs. Do whatever you want, and everyone have a wonderful holiday! Thanks for the great discussion. I really think we have all learned a great deal from it.

[Moth]

Originally Posted by pam

So then, you are still wanting to be given express permission in a tutorial that says "go forth and multiply" which I hope isn't going to happen as it will, I think, destroy the art of glass beadmaking.

Ok, Pam. I guess I just took this comment too literally.

I think I'm done too, not because I'm having a tantrum or for any negative reason, simply because I've contributed all I can contribute. I've got nothing left.

And oddly enough, not anyone in this thread on either side has changed their mind about anything. We all still have exactly the same stance we came in with. How am I not surprised? LOL

I'm a Libra...I can't help but see and weigh all the sides, it's my nature. I've been telling people to do whatever they want since I gave my first tutorial, I think 4 (?) years ago and it hasn't hurt me or anyone else yet. Leastways not that I can tell. The people who aren't interested in copying beads, aren't going to copy beads even if I tell them to. The people who ARE interested in copying beads, ARE going to copy beads even if I ask them NOT to and some will tell us to kiss their ass while they're at it.

It is their choice, always has been their choice, always will be their choice. (Which funny to think that is exactly what Sarah was saying too, but different words have different flavors I guess.) I prefer to give them open permission to do it because there is no point NOT giving it and I don't have it in me to tell them what to do (or not to do). And frankly, I'm a buyer as well as a seller and I don't want anyone telling me what to do either. I wouldn't copy beads even with permission because that's not how I work. If it WAS how I work, the warning wouldn't mean much to me.

We all live with the rewards and consequences of our own actions. I'm not your moral compass and you aren't mine. (That is a general your and you...nobody specific.)

~~Mary

[Moth]

I think it has been months since I made a jellyfish bead for sale. Why would I care who is making them and selling them? I've already moved on.

Birds...well I still make those but I still don't care who else is. If they do it better than me...good, I musta done a decent job on the tutorial to get them started then their natural abilities and skills helped them surpass me. If they don't do it better than me...what is my problem? Either way I won't feel it.

~~Mary

[DianaDesigns]

Wow, wow this has certainly grew since I was last here.

I would like to add that the Hobbyist/Artist blurb, does sting, even thought it may have been meant in a whole other way.

I am an Artist, but I can only do my Art on a part time basis as I have to pay the bills and feed my family all the time. I cannot go without money for any length of time, nope not even a week.

So define artist and define hobbyist, please.

I once sold a painting for over 5 thousand dollars at auction and a wood sculpture just sold for over 9 grand. Does that make me an artist? Is it the amount of money that one gets for a piece that defines an artist?

Personally I think not. So please define the two for me as I am having trouble with the lines here.

Also I would like to add that most if not all the ARTISTS that I know of that are featured in the Galleries around here have full time jobs outside of the creative community, so does that make them a hobbyist? Also most of the well known artists from the past, only did their paintings part time and where starving on the streets...so does that make them an artist as opposed to a hobbyist?


Ooo or maybe its because you have become a well known name in this community that makes you an artist..is that it?

[DianaDesigns]

One more add.

Lately with animals being called Artists, yes see here http://www.tvthrong.co.uk/news/extra...iday-january-4

and there are more including Chimps, cats and dogs.

I might be tempted to now call myself a Hobbyist.

If flinging some paint on a canvas, or having a Mahout guide your Trunk around said canvas is considered Art, then who are we to judge what makes a lampworker an artist or a hobbyist?

[pam]

Originally Posted by DianaDesigns

Wow, wow this has certainly grew since I was last here.

I would like to add that the Hobbyist/Artist blurb, does sting, even thought it may have been meant in a whole other way.

I am an Artist, but I can only do my Art on a part time basis as I have to pay the bills and feed my family all the time. I cannot go without money for any length of time, nope not even a week.

So define artist and define hobbyist, please.

I once sold a painting for over 5 thousand dollars at auction and a wood sculpture just sold for over 9 grand. Does that make me an artist? Is it the amount of money that one gets for a piece that defines an artist?

Personally I think not. So please define the two for me as I am having trouble with the lines here.

Also I would like to add that most if not all the ARTISTS that I know of that are featured in the Galleries around here have full time jobs outside of the creative community, so does that make them a hobbyist? Also most of the well known artists from the past, only did their paintings part time and where starving on the streets...so does that make them an artist as opposed to a hobbyist?


Ooo or maybe its because you have become a well known name in this community that makes you an artist..is that it?

Diana, I think anyone who wishes to may call themselves an artist. Number of hours a week spent at the torch doesn't define whether you are a hobbyist or an artist. I think at some point in this long thread someone mentioned that we are not all artists who want to explore the infinity of glass. Some people are hobbyists and enjoy just picking up the glass and copying from a tutorial. I think that is where this hobbyist/artist thing came from, but I could be mistaken. As you said, this is a long thread. I don't think money has anything to do with whether you are an artist or not, but rather the way you feel about your work and the creative energy you put into your art. But again, that's just my opinion.

[DianaDesigns]

Originally Posted by pam

I think at some point in this long thread someone mentioned that we are not all artists who want to explore the infinity of glass. Some people are hobbyists and enjoy just picking up the glass and copying from a tutorial. I think that is where this hobbyist/artist thing came from, but I could be mistaken. As you said, this is a long thread. I don't think money has anything to do with whether you are an artist or not, but rather the way you feel about your work and the creative energy you put into your art. But again, that's just my opinion.

Thank you!....I think the bold might help answer the question.

It is about how you feel and how involved knowledge wise one gets into any one of the mediums. I can melt glass, I can make it do certain things, but do I understand why those things happen or do I care to find out why?

Still not sure that defines an artist, but it helps.

I think I am de-railing the subject and I will now stop talking about that issue.

So Sorry.

[DianaDesigns]

Lisa, I love what you said here in these few sentences. Sorry I am not good with quotes so I will bold it.

The result is, for the majority of the buying public, the original artist's bead ends up being part of the mainstream. That is part of the process of selling the knowledge and, for some here, it appears it is a part they want to ignore or try to eliminate.
The original artist chose to mainstream that bead. The results of that are part of the natural consequences of that choice. And, those natural consequences are the artist's, not the buyers/students


What great insight! I think some are going to have an Epiphany after reading that.
You have obviously put a lot of thought into this.

Makes sense to me, and I really think you have nailed it.

[Frogsongstudio]

My definition of a hobbyiest vs and artist. This is how I personally define it. That doesn't make it so, but seems reasonable to me.

Hobbyiest do it for their own enjoyment with no dreams of ever wanting to become well known or make a living on their art. It doesn't matter how bad or how good they are. They can be great artists, but only do it as a hobby. And occasionally they may even sell some of their work.

Artists do it because they have to. It's a burning passion for them. They live and breathe their art. They have an incredible need to make art, learn, grow, experiment, expand. AND they would love to become known someday for their work or at least their contribution to the art. And they would love to be able to make a living at what they love.

That's the difference in my mind. And like I said, it doesn't matter how long you've been doing it, how good you are, etc. It's the passion and the end goal that determines whether you call yourself an artist or a hobbyiest.


I think this is what the person who posted about hobby vs artist meant. It was not meant to be insulting to hobbyiest or to say that as a hobbyiest you can't make beautiful beads.

I'll also add that beadmaking is an ART to artists and collectors.

[yellowbird]

Deb that makes no sense to me .

Pam
I take a book with me to shows I have to so I can introduce this art to potential buyers .
even the other vendors have never heard of glass bead making. you are in a different arena. not the mainstream

[Asil4]

Thanks, Jen, yellowbird, Shelly & Diana!

Pam: I know you are off hanging out with your family and I hope you are having a wonderful time. Whenever you come back...

Originally Posted by pam

You know, Jen, I think this is where there seems to be a large separation between what you believe and what I believe.

Obviously you are going to believe what you want to believe and I am going to believe what I want to believe.

I think these two statements are very indicative of the overall state of this issue. Some folks believe one thing and others believe something else. There is no absolute and definitive answer, only opinion.

Because that is the case, I don't think it's fair to attach a negative label to folks in this community with regard to copying as it pertains to tutorials, based on a body of opinions.

[moondanse]

Hmm...well, what Deb wrote makes a lot of sense to me. I think being driven to create is a component of the artistic soul.
For example, do you guys remember Jampwork on eBay? She was truly an outstanding artist, but I don't think her beads were technically really difficult to achieve. There would be little she could have put in a tutorial that would teach anyone to have her talent, vision, and creativity. Ya got it, or ya don't. I was always in awe of her work and her beads and silver. She was an innovator; everything she did was fresh and inspiring.
(Many of you guys are artists--I used her as an example because she's not here.)

[DianaDesigns]

Actually Deb, for me and in my circle, many artists I hang with and those that I learn from, think Bead making is a Hobby and not an Art. Now these are painters and sculptors with a few Glass Blowers in the mix.

When I have shown them some scultping done with glass, they will agree that that sculpted bead or off mandrel form is considered Art, but when shown a lentil bead, or round bead.....it then became a Hobby. So does shape matter?

My example that I showed them of a sculpted piece was a form done by Angelina. I have to say that they were quite impressed and her recent TinCan piece is a great example of why she stands out as an Artist of Glass as opposed to others that are seen as Beadmakers.

My guess is that it depends on how the individual sees it. How we feel doesn't really matter. It's how the people who buy see us. I must admit though, I personally feel that certain Lampworkers are Glass Artists while others are Beadmakers.

Hope that makes sense and my bad for seperating the two, but I feel there is a distinction between them.

[DianaDesigns]

I must also add that by your definition, then I am a hobbyist even in my paintings and sculpting.

I do it because I love to, I have no intentions of becoming famous, or earning a living off of it. I sell occassionally, BUT I have been writtten about many times in the local newspapers and such with the headline being "Local Artist".

I give away more than I sell, to charity auctions and such. I have a few pieces hanging here and there, and I shy away BIG time form any fame that might come my way.

I do this because I love to, not to make money, or a living or gaining fame.

I will also admit that right now in Lampworking, I am not as of yet an Artist of Glass by my definition of what that means, but watch out....as I fully intend to become one...lol

[pam]

Oh, I'm back reading while waiting for the next child to hopefully arrive at the airport on time. You know, I think this is one of the most honest discussion I have ever participated in. Just, WOW!

[glasscove]

Originally Posted by MoltenMuse

What you speak of here - dots, cats, stripes, round beads, square beads, long beads, floral beads, etc. all fall under the realm of technique, not design. Standard techniques which have fallen into pulic realm by the sheer fact they've been around for so long, it's true, don't belong to anyone in specific. Design, on the other hand, that is -- how it's pulled together by an artist, certainly is owned. It's considered intellectual property and there are copyright laws which cover that.

You may wish to verse yourself on copyright law. By the sounds of it, you may become quite intimate with the ins and outs of it someday.

The attitude of your post sickens me. Did I say THAT loud enough?

Sorry but if any of you think that you truly have the protection of a copy right - think again. I have merely said what many many others think and don't want to speak up - mostly because somebody reading it might be 'sickened by their attitude'.
This has been a long going and disappointing debate mainly by beadmakers that somehow think they own techniques or designs. Can you imagine if the same nonsense was applied to the art of oil painting for example. Imagine if you will in your 'bitchest beadmaker voice' saying : "I paint mountains , they are my mountains, you can't do mountains or I paint a design of mountains with spruce trees and a lake so you can't.-" And the list can go on and on. Just as oil painting has been around for many many years - the art of beadmaking is 100's of years.
I lost all my patience for the beadmaker's ego of copying when I was once accused of copying someone who I had NEVER heard of NOR ever seen any of their work. After I was accused I did some research into the supposed artist that I copied and found out I had in fact done my 'design' many years before they did theirs. And just because someone sits in their studio creating glass instead of 'marketing themselves silly' so they can claim an idea etc does not guarantee they did it first or before the artists that doesn't belong to bead groups or forums. There is a big difference between getting it on the 'internet' first and actually creating it first. Techincally the artist I was accused of copying must have copied me since I did my design many years before her - but I am not stupid or ignorant enough to think that.
My point is: No matter what you think you have 'invented' there is guaranteed to be someone who has done the same thing before without the publicity attached to it. And considering the glass bead world has been around for hundreds of years - if you study the history of glass you'll find out that unless you are over 200 years old - you may think you have 'reinvented' the wheel - but you sure as hell didn't invent it.
What this copying crap accusations does is stiffle creativeness in new glass makers that get so hung up on the fear of copying someone. My message is get out there and have fun doing glass - and don't get hung up on the nonsense politics of it all. If someone teaches you a class - they have willingly gave you the information to you to do what you want with it. You've paid for that right. I certainly don't go out to copy someone nor do I live with the fear anymore that I might! I am creative enough to come up with my own designs but not arrogant enough to think I am the only one in thousands of flameworkers to have come up with exactly the same idea. That's my point. Did I say it loud enough??
And please don't get me on the nonsense of being able to copyright anything you do on a glass bead. And Moltenmuse if honesty sickens you - tough! Did I say that loud enough!

[glasscove]

Originally Posted by sislonski

Nancy, I'm just curious. You say that "None of this beadmaking is rocket science, It's not hard to figure out" and also you state" If I want to copy it I will".

If this is the case, then why have you even taken classes or consider taking classes? Since you seem to find it all pretty easy to figure out?

Also I don't understand why someone who finds this art so easy would even consider the idea of copying, why would you need to? Since it's all so easy!

Just curious.

Not everyone takes classes for the same reasons. I have taken classes where I learnt nothing new except to meet fellow glass artists and see a particular part of the country. I know when I signed up for those classes I would learn nothing new. It's a social life - it gets me out of the studio. I guess I'm lucky to have that luxury. And I still stand by my post - BEADMAKING isn't rocket science or brain surgery- learn the basics, whether self taught, by a book, class, video etc and you can probably figure it out.
Regardless, if someone takes a beginner class even, reads a few books, you can figure it out - even the techniques that some claim as their fame. Ironically the ones screamning the loudest about someone copying them are the same ones out there teaching classes. I am not alone when I say - I don't worry about copying, I don't worry about being accused of copying, and if I paid my money to take a class - I would NOT worry one single bit about using the ideas and techniques I just paid to learn to do whatever I wanted with. If you don't want to be 'copied' don't teach. And unless you are over 200 years old - you haven't done anything that hasn't been done before you in some sort of way. And if you are over 200 years old - I apologize that I may have inadvertently copied you while pursuing my artisitc endeavors

To all Newbies - forget about the politics and just do glass! Cause no matter what you do - someone's going to think you copied so and so. And please don't ever become so arrogant you think you 'invented' a design or technique. You may have been the first to get it on the internet, or in a book, or on a video, but I can guarantee you were not the only one amoung thousands and thousands of flameworkers to come up with the idea alone. To think so is the highest degree of arrogance in the field.

[Frogsongstudio]

I can show you several thousand paintings with mountains and spruce trees and they will ALL be different.

Obviously some people just don't "get" the difference between technique and design.

[ShellyD]

Originally Posted by glasscove

I lost all my patience for the beadmaker's ego of copying when I was once accused of copying someone who I had NEVER heard of NOR ever seen any of their work. After I was accused I did some research into the supposed artist that I copied and found out I had in fact done my 'design' many years before they did theirs. And just because someone sits in their studio creating glass instead of 'marketing themselves silly' so they can claim an idea etc does not guarantee they did it first or before the artists that doesn't belong to bead groups or forums. There is a big difference between getting it on the 'internet' first and actually creating it first. Techincally the artist I was accused of copying must have copied me since I did my design many years before her - but I am not stupid or ignorant enough to think that.

Yep, I think it would be nice if the copy police took a step back before throwing accusations around. I wonder if those that throw the copy accusations around actually contemplate the repercussions of their actions. They are just doing the right thing - I think they end up doing more harm than anything else!!

[glasscove]

Originally Posted by Frogsongstudio

I can show you several thousand paintings with mountains and spruce trees and they will ALL be different.

Obviously some people just don't "get" the difference between technique and design.

And I could probably show you several thousand of oil paintings that are direct replicas of work not their own. Oil painting was used as an example to show how ridiculous it is to claim any design or technique.
In beadmaking particular, there are only so many colors and so many ideas to cram onto a bead size 'canvas' and to think that someone alone has been the only one amongest thousands of beadmakers to come up with it - well ----- you have better chance of winning the lottery!

And you're right - obviously some people just don't get it!

[ShellyD]

Originally Posted by Frogsongstudio

IObviously some people just don't "get" the difference between technique and design.

Guess I'm one of those 'people' then. Oh well, each to his own!!

[Frogsongstudio]

There is a difference and that's all I'm going to say.

As for the "copy police" Shelly, as I said way, way, way, way back there. The tutorial writers have no control over what other people do or say.

And I'll say it again. None of the tutorial writers have EVER said you couldn't use what you learned in the tutorials. That's what I don't get about this entire thread.
The whole thread is based on "what ifs" and the tutorial writers are catching hell for something that never happened.

[glasscove]

Originally Posted by ShellyD

Yep, I think it would be nice if the copy police took a step back before throwing accusations around. I wonder if those that throw the copy accusations around actually contemplate the repercussions of their actions. They are just doing the right thing - I think they end up doing more harm than anything else!!

I agree. The crap and gossip surrounding the petty copying accusations and fears relating to beadmaking has been the blunt of more than one joke in the glass world!
Oh well - it probably won't change anytime soon

[ShellyD]

Originally Posted by jensy

O.k Im ready. I realize I am going to get alot of crap for this but here it goes.

Could the artist of the tuts please put a big warning on your promoting pages of whether or not we can make and sell these beads we just learned about.

I went on a tut buying spree this week some on Etsy and some off of websites. So no you wont be able to see who I am talking about nor will I tell you if you PM me.

I mean really I just paid for information on how to do something and now you dont want me to work at it and then sell them. Why do you think we are buying them.

Yes some of these tuts you can use different colors and make your own and some really you cannot. We are all using the same pallettes here.

How absolutly refreshing that one tut writers even says go forth and make them. That they realize this is a problem.

I think you have to decided what you want. Do you want to make alot of money selling tuts? Then if so dont guilt us out because we paid you money and we are putting out what you have taught us. Or do you want to be the artist to sell your type of beads. Please decide but you cant have it both ways.

All you have to do is write a big old warning on your page where you are promoing you tut thats says "You cannot reproduce and sell any beads you have made from this tut". Then we at least know if we want to spend the money first. No guilt trips for us then either. Then everyone is forwarned and can decide. Yes you may have a decrease in your tut sales but at least then you can make money with your beads and tuts with people that just wanted the knowledge.

I believe I am not the only one that feels this way but people on here sometimes get a little afraid to say anything. O.k let the flaming begin, I have big shoulders.


Jen

I got the impression that it had been said!! No 'what if' scenarios.

This thread has evolved - lots of opinions (mine included), and a few 'what if's' to try and make points. But I got the impression it started from a geniune situation. We've dipped into hobbyist vs. artist, copying, mind reading. You name it, I think it has taken place in this thread.

What fascinates me is that we truly don't know where everyone is coming from. What makes them say what they say or why they feel the need to say 'you can kiss my ass'.

But I get the anger - I get Nancy's anger now. I was like "Whoa" where did that come from in her first post. Like I said 'repercussions'.

[glasscove]

Originally Posted by ShellyD

I got the impression that it had been said!! No 'what if' scenarios.

This thread has evolved - lots of opinions (mine included), and a few 'what if's' to try and make points. But I got the impression it started from a geniune situation. We've dipped into hobbyist vs. artist, copying, mind reading. You name it, I think it has taken place in this thread.

What fascinates me is that we truly don't know where everyone is coming from. What makes them say what they say or why they feel the need to say 'you can kiss my ass'.

But I get the anger - I get Nancy's anger now. I was like "Whoa" where did that come from in her first post. Like I said 'repercussions'.

Thanks for understanding my anger. It's just that this copying crap, and you can't make and sell what I do crap, has been going on for years and years and I am sick of it. I want every new beadmaker or glassworker out there to feel free to do what they want, sell what they want, and not worry about being arrested by the Copy Police. I am appalled that there are beadmakers out there that have the audacity to 'sell' a tutorial and then state it can't be used to make and sell a bead. Arrogance at it's finest.
To the first poster of this thread: Honey if you paid for that tutorial - tell them to kiss your........LOL

When I initially typed "kiss my ass' I figured it would be bleeped out! hahah . But it wasn't and now I kind of like the looks of it! So I could say it again - butt I've said enough. Get it --- 'BUTT" I've said enough. hahaha