Some tips on finding answers about beads

[theglasszone]

Kalera!!!

You're an angel for posting this - it's long over due, and sure to save feelings, heartbreaks and debates in a place where sharing, nurturing and support are the foundation of this great gathering of minds!

I do have a suggestion to add - please forgive me if it's been said already - here's the basic concept, and I expound a bit further in this post:

ONE THING, ABOVE ALL OTHERS, IS GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS PROPERLY DUE!!!

Now I'm not saying "Sure, go ahead and take (copy/save) someone's photograph, post a "How is this done?" question somewhere (here, or elsewhere) and it's "a-ok, as long as you associate that person's name along with the photograph". I just feel I should clarify to not complicate what I'm saying...

What I'm saying is..."IF YOU USE SOMEONE'S TECHNIQUE AND/OR SOMEONE'S MURRINI, ETC. TO ENHANCE your bead, USE SOMEONE'S ANYTHING, ANYWHERE, ANYHOW, BE SURE TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE!!!"

For example, in my Aquarium Beads, such as my Davy Jones' Locker Beads, I use Fish and Turtle Murrini by Heather Ferman, Ryan Turner, Mavis Smith, etc., and Jellyfish Techniques from Mary/Moth's Tutorials - and WOULDN'T DREAM of not acknowledging these "enhancements" of MY BEADS:




Likewise, if someone uses one of MY Skull, Bones, Bumblebee, Ladybug, Eye or other Murrini I've made and sold to them - WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING ME AS THE MAKER - they WILL be hearing from me!

It's THE RIGHT THING TO DO!!! Right?

De

[suzanne]

Technically Kevan could post saying from now on no one can use her info from that post cuz she developed it. Hope this helps clarify some important points and makes life easier for all

I'm not sure if I understand correctly but Sherry Belamy was the person developing the Chaos technique, she was the one who made the tutorial and all that

[Just Nancy]

Originally Posted by pinkcb

Thanks Karen for saying that. I'm a real noob and these posts have not been giving me a warm fuzzy.

I've missed the hubbub, but I'm with Karen. I say go ahead and start a post if you don't understand something. Word it carefully. I mean something that comes of as, Hey Sally, I'd like to make beads identical to yours to sell and undercut you, would come off poorly. But something like, I've tried searching (assuming you have) but I can't find how to make my beads uniform.

For the record, that is one that is here over and over. But I always feel someone might have something new they are doing that they didn't list last time.

I guess bottom line is try to look around and see if the question is listed with a 5 page thread of helpful info. But if you can't find the info, most of us will answer if we can.

[Kalera]

Yes, I didn't mean this as a "Don't ask questions" thread, but more of a "How to make your questions as effective as possible" thread.

[miahawk]

another tip on manners:

ALWAYS SAY THANK YOU.

I know someone already said it, but supposing you don't get what you want? do you just move on? if I take the time to reply to someone regarding a question and what I tell them is no, they could at least thank me for my time -- at least that's what I learned in good manners class. I had this happen when someone out of the blue asked to visit my studio. they apparently didn't have access to one but wanted to see a working set up. since I don't have guests to my studio, I told her no in the nicest way but suggested she visit Aquila glass since it's nearby and she didn't even bother to acknowledge that I took time out of my life to help steer her in a good direction.

not getting what you want is no excuse for rudeness.

also, I agree that when asking for information people should show and tell what they've already tried. as a technical support analyst for years, the starting point for getting anywhere was "what's your issue, what have you tried, what's your system configuration, what errors did you see?" then, "did you search the knowledgebase yet?" if I knew the information they needed was online, I gave them a link and told them to call or email me after following the directions. I loved the customers who, first thing in the conversation, gave me a complete rundown of what their issue was and what steps they'd taken to resolve it and where they were currently at. those were the easiest problems to troubleshoot, and those people tended to tell me "thank you for your time" even after I ended up telling them that their database was corrupted beyond repair and to restore from a backup.

[cadia]

Why is it "ok" to "pick up" someone's photo from the Gallery S & T and repost it in the same thread to comment on it? Why can't people refer to the beautiful bead and talented artist without reposting? Sometimes the same bead is reposted over and over again in the same thread. This has been irking me for a while especially when I had dial up and finally had to give up viewing the gallery due to the time it took to load the thread. I find it a waste of time and cyberspace and don't think it's appropriate to repost there anymore than in any thread, or other venue, if that's the agreed upon or "legal" standard!
It is easy to post a link to the thread or post instead when necessary.
Sorry if this is off subject, I will remove the post if it offends the integrity of Kalera's intended subject matter.
That being said when I ask someone about a bead technique or glass color I try to remember to say please and thank you as well as letting them know that if it's a
"trade secret" it's fine to not share!!

[Kalera]

Originally Posted by cadia

Why is it "ok" to "pick up" someone's photo from the Gallery S & T and repost it in the same thread to comment on it? Why can't people refer to the beautiful bead and talented artist without reposting? Sometimes the same bead is reposted over and over again in the same thread. This has been irking me for a while especially when I had dial up and finally had to give up viewing the gallery due to the time it took to load the thread. I find it a waste of time and cyberspace and don't think it's appropriate to repost there anymore than in any thread, or other venue, if that's the agreed upon or "legal" standard!
It is easy to post a link to the thread or post instead when necessary.
Sorry if this is off subject, I will remove the post if it offends the integrity of Kalera's intended subject matter.
That being said when I ask someone about a bead technique or glass color I try to remember to say please and thank you as well as letting them know that if it's a
"trade secret" it's fine to not share!!

Cadia, that's totally funny that you mention that, because that's one of my pet peeves... it's really hard on people on dial-up, waiting and waiting for the page to load only to see that half of it is the same pics quoted again. Yet, I know I've been guilty of doing it myself from time to time.

However, as far as legality, when someone posts a pic in a thread and another person quotes that picture in the thread, causing it to appear again, technically they're not really "reposting", they're just asking the computer to re-display the same post again, in the same context.

[patezd]

OMG! Leslie! That is such a good idea......save a forest (and all that storage space) and be able to access this stuff later! So simple I'm embarassed I didn't think of it myself! But.......do I have to make sure and credit you every time I copy and paste one of these gems to my word doc?

Deb

[Lara]

Originally Posted by cadia

Why is it "ok" to "pick up" someone's photo from the Gallery S & T and repost it in the same thread to comment on it? Why can't people refer to the beautiful bead and talented artist without reposting?

Oh thank you for posted this cadia, this is so annoying.

[SunDoorBeads]

Originally Posted by suzanne

I'm not sure if I understand correctly but Sherry Belamy was the person developing the Chaos technique, she was the one who made the tutorial and all that

Just to clarify before Sherry chimed in and let us know what she was doing Kevan using the term Copper Mesh Beads "figured" out how to get the same look what I meant was that if I am understanding people here it looks like she could take credit for figuring out a new way to do something and nobody should be angry about this it was several posts before Sherry's info on the tut. Also how great if we can put our own PPP into something and figure it out on our own the supplies are not "copywritten" just a particular technique I stand by an earlier post and congratulate Kevan for being able to do this through hard work. I have a motto " Through Practice and Thought Might Gradually Forge Many An Art" - Virgil I take that to mean that whoever puts their brain to work and achieves great results they should be commended for their efforts. Thank you for your question

[DesertDreamer]

Originally Posted by cadia

Why is it "ok" to "pick up" someone's photo from the Gallery S & T and repost it in the same thread to comment on it? Why can't people refer to the beautiful bead and talented artist without reposting? Sometimes the same bead is reposted over and over again in the same thread. This has been irking me for a while especially when I had dial up and finally had to give up viewing the gallery due to the time it took to load the thread. I find it a waste of time and cyberspace and don't think it's appropriate to repost there anymore than in any thread, or other venue, if that's the agreed upon or "legal" standard!
It is easy to post a link to the thread or post instead when necessary.
Sorry if this is off subject, I will remove the post if it offends the integrity of Kalera's intended subject matter.
That being said when I ask someone about a bead technique or glass color I try to remember to say please and thank you as well as letting them know that if it's a
"trade secret" it's fine to not share!!

When a post is quoted, everything including the picture is just referenced again. No extra bandwidth, no actual copying. That's just how the software works.

[BugNerd]

Originally Posted by squid

If you want to search on a 3 letter word like EDP or something similar, search for the word EDP* - the star makes it 4 "letters" and it will find any thread with EDP in it.

That's called truncation (since we're all about using the correct vocabulary) and it is super useful when search engines allow it.

ex. entomol* might bring up entomology, entomologist, entomological, etc.

[precious baubles]

It's actually called using a "wildcard".....

[Kalera]

Stop, you're both right! The asterisk is the wildcard, but using a shortened version of the word or phrase you want and adding a wildcard to the end is called truncation searching.

[FourTailsLampwork]

I have found people on the site overall very friendly and willing to share resources, help, ideas, knowledge, and the like. It does help, however, to ask politely and in a way that does not appear to be asking for something you could find yourself with a modicum of effort.

In my history class I hand out an assignment packet on the first night of class, with every single assignment spelled out in detail. Inevitably, I get several emails from students who couldn't be arsed to read the packet, and who want verbal instructions. My response is always the same: what does the packet say? (usual answer, "I didn't read it.") Me: Go read it and come back if you have any further questions.

That takes care of 99% of the problems! (Then there are the ones who don't include a required element in their paper or assignment, and who say in their own defence that I never told them they had to do or include X. My answer: Did you read the assignment packet? (Usual answer: no.) Me: (pointing out the relevant page in the packet, with the instructions clearly written) Here's the instructions.

End of problem.

Point being that I get irritated when people just ask for things that have been around forever, without doing reading or searching on their own. I don't mind in the least people asking by saying where they have looked and what they have tried on their own. I don't even mind people asking how a bead or technique is done--I've asked myself--so long as they acknoweldge that while some techniques are so well known as to be readily shared, others may be proprietary.

Basically, my rule of thumb is: ask away--but be polite and respect other peoples' hard work and skills both in your asking and in your thanks--and if you are told no, be graceful. Above all, keep melting!

[Hayley]

Originally Posted by SunDoorBeads

Just to clarify before Sherry chimed in and let us know what she was doing Kevan using the term Copper Mesh Beads "figured" out how to get the same look what I meant was that if I am understanding people here it looks like she could take credit for figuring out a new way to do something and nobody should be angry about this it was several posts before Sherry's info on the tut. Also how great if we can put our own PPP into something and figure it out on our own the supplies are not "copywritten" just a particular technique I stand by an earlier post and congratulate Kevan for being able to do this through hard work.

I beg to differ on this, Michelle. If Sherry did not come up with the Chaos technique in the first place, Kevan and the others wouldn't have anything to "figure" out how to get the same look. There is a HUGE difference between someone who develops and invents an ORIGINAL technique and someone who duplicates and copies an EXISTING technique.

[miahawk]

Originally Posted by Hayley

I beg to differ on this, Michelle. If Sherry did not come up with the Chaos technique in the first place, Kevan and the others wouldn't have anything to "figure" out how to get the same look. There is a HUGE difference between someone who develops and invents an ORIGINAL technique and someone who duplicates and copies an EXISTING technique.

I agree with you on this one. if they'd been secretly developing the same technique simultaneously, that's a lot different than seeing a photo and setting out to reverse engineer someone else's work. the first one puts you in the category of inventor, the second makes you a copier. if the technique is in tuts and being taught in classes, I'd consider it fair game to try to figure it out, but if the artist doesn't want to share it, it seems like poor taste to start making knock-off beads.

[theglasszone]

Originally Posted by kimberly

BUMP. Excellent post Kalera! It would be nice if this thread could stay on topic!!!

Kim~~~ (Hi Hun!)

I must admit I was a wee bit annoyed this a.m. when I came in here and saw your post (grumble, grouch, argh!)

Then as I read further, I see there's been some posts engaging on debate of proprietary rights and the lines between "origins of technique", "duplicating technique", etc.

BRAVO, Kim! I agree! This thread is intended to post suggestions to assist newer glass workers and lampworkers on how to properly find information or make inquiries! PERIOD!

There are plenty of locations currently available for open discussion on all other factions that fall outside the parameters of this particular thread, for example, here's some good reading:

http://www.lampworketc.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=82265

In addition, the article by Dick Lehman which is linked in Post #1 therein by Linda Campbell is so enlightening and spot on, it should be REQUIRED READING IMHO!!!!

I'm seeing some excellent and constructive suggestions here! Keep 'em coming!

De

[Hayley]

Originally Posted by SunDoorBeads

... Again I think this is wrong but if you share HOW YOU DID SOMETHING even if the end results are identical to someone else's, the technique you found out is yours to share. That is what Kevan did in learning the Copper Mesh Tech now known as Chaos- Originally it is Copper Mesh and anyone finding a way to do this other than Sherry's has the right to post it. However Chaos and her technique are copywritten. Technically Kevan could post saying from now on no one can use her info from that post cuz she developed it. Hope this helps clarify some important points and makes life easier for all

Originally Posted by miahawk

. . .if they'd been secretly developing the same technique simultaneously, that's a lot different than seeing a photo and setting out to reverse engineer someone else's work. The first one puts you in the category of inventor, the second makes you a copier. if the technique is in tuts and being taught in classes, I'd consider it fair game to try to figure it out, but if the artist doesn't want to share it, it seems like poor taste to start making knock-off beads.

My response was more directed to Michelle's earlier post (quoted and highlighted in bold) . . . to me, no one can say that the Chaos technique is theirs except Sherry, just as the Baleen technique is always going to be Michael Barley's. I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone using the techniques in their beads since both Sherry and Michael have "taught" others how to do them via classes and/or tutorials.

[miahawk]

ah, ok. I think I misread something but I don't think what I posted is contradictory, I just missed where you were going with it. I've been doing that a lot today.

[Kalera]

Originally Posted by kimberly

BUMP.

Excellent post Kalera!

It would be nice if this thread could stay on topic!!!

Thank you, Kim!

Yes, I would really appreciate it if this thread could stay on-topic so it would maybe stand half a chance of being stickied and remaining useful. It is intended as a "tips" thread, not a "debate" thread. As De pointed out, there are already "debate" threads on these topics.

[myrdlebp]

BUMP!! BUMP!!


This needs to be a topper!

[SunDoorBeads]

Please don't ask me again to clarify myself. You are free to your opinion but to all the people who are new to lampworking this thread is supposed to encourage you to ask questions the right way but to my understanding do some of the hard work as well to figure out how something is done or intergrate it into your own style this is what so many people have a problem with- People who just expect a recipe handed to them. Any artist can use whatever materials are available and "create" the same bead using your own time and effort if in your quest you hit a speed bump and ask a question about what you are trying to figure out ask politely and if there is an artist who "owns" the tech then accept that he or she might not want to share on the other hand an artist who says there is a tut coming means for this tech to be learned by those willing to pay for it like a class hence my original post in this thread supporting that. To end this particular subject I believe the process should go like this- See bead, like bead, wonder how it's done, take many hours to PPP on ones own, ask questions (politely), If there is another means of learning ie book, tut, class do it, end result you can now make bead. Maybe you will never get to step 5 cuz after PPP you did it!!!!! That is what I am in favor of and encourage!!!! If I put my hard work into something BEFORE a tut and figure it out I DESERVE just as much credit maybe not rights to the bead but please don't tell me you don't agree with your own hard work. This is my advice on asking questions not quibbling over details on a DEAD subject. ( PS Please read Sherry's blog if you haven't a lot of people like to speak for her but only a few have read and commented on her feelings about the chaos bead situation I think you will be surprised)

[SunDoorBeads]

Originally Posted by Hayley

I beg to differ on this, Michelle. If Sherry did not come up with the Chaos technique in the first place, Kevan and the others wouldn't have anything to "figure" out how to get the same look. There is a HUGE difference between someone who develops and invents an ORIGINAL technique and someone who duplicates and copies an EXISTING technique.

BTW I believe when it was first referenced they showed a picture of one of Anouks or someone elses (I know the name was NOT Sherry) beads and said yeah I love this effect someone else chimed in and said yes it's copper mesh here's how I've been playing with it to get the same effect. It snow balled from there and finally we all found out Sherry was doing a tut- NOT BEFORE THE THREAD WAS STARTED.

[SunDoorBeads]

I am sorry again Kalera- I do think however it is important that Newbies know the difference between a Style and A Technique it might help them ask the right questions. For example a proper question to finding out how a bead is made is to ask who people THINK is the original owner then a question can be directed to that person. If a Style of bead exists but has known artist who founded the tech (like "ripple" beads) then picking the brains here should be no problem even if there is an artist who makes that style as there signature bead. However, if by asking you find out that the TECHNIQUE to make a STYLE is COPYWRITTEN then asking anyone here how it is done is in bad taste- So rephrase your question to sound like this- I love how Michael Barley does the Baleen Bead does anyone know where I can take a class? Does he have a book out? I think this is really the basis for how questions will be answered if someone knows that you not looking for a handout but information that will be used in conjunction with hard work.

[Hayley]

Sorry - Kalera. I won't derail the thread anymore! Me bad!

[Kalera]

It's OK babe.

[Kalera]

Here is something I wrote a while ago, elsewhere, relating to simultaneous creation and the difference between technique and design:

If the technique defines the bead, is there really a "design" to copy? In my opinion, not really. If I posted this:

and a couple days later someone else posted some just like them, my thought would be "It must be the season, I just made some blue florals too!"

On the other hand, if I posted this:

and a couple days later someone posted a bead very like it on Etsy, my reaction might be more along the lines of "That can't be a coincidence, can it?" Even so, I might assume they were just practicing, or that they had been subconsciously influenced by my bead and already had the techniques in their repertoire and didn't even realizing they were making something similar to what I had posted.

But to take it a step further, if it happened with a bead like this:

I would probably not question whether it was a copy, because with so many different applied techniques being placed as elements in a completed design, it would be difficult to coincidentally just happen to make an extremely similar bead. If someone took all seven of the techniques I used in that bead and rearranged them, they would have a radically different bead... so it's not a bead which is defined by a technique, but by the design. There is no creative ownership over techniques, only designs.

If it happened repeatedly, and they were selling their version of my design in my sales venue, I would be pretty upset. Even if, right now, thinking about it, I didn't think it would upset me, I know that human nature is to protect one's own livelihood and territory, including creative territory.

[Kalera]

Dude, thanks!

[myrdlebp]

I am bumping this up! I would also like to add that it is a great thing to just go to the FIRST page in threads. This is where the people that you oogle over now started, it is all about learning! They have learned the same way. Trial, error, PPP and bunches of research including classes and probably some dopey questions. WE all have them, always will! Whatever, I think this is a very good starter thread for info!

Thank you Kalera!