Red Baron's signature

Ivan Berryman · 8 October 2009, 04:57 AM

Well, thank you all for your systematic assassination of my character. How very sad.

Mr West, every village has it's idiot and you a are certainly it. How can anyone be so sure of themselves as to post such a nasty, libellous thread as yours. All you have done is demonstrate to all who read this how utterly lacking your knowledge of the professional art world is. Oh dear.

I have been painting professionally for over thirty years. My World War 1 series numbers over 100 paintings, all of which - except for five - have been sold to collectors and enthusiasts all over the world, all of whom are happy and content with their purchases. I paint in oils on canvas. Real art, Mr West, not the disposable, utterly forgettable sort that is conjured up on a computer screen.

If you want to see some of it, go the Aces High Gallery and visit the exhibition that is currently running there. You can see a fine selection of my original paintings which are on display.

Of course, some of my paintings are like other people's paintings and, of course, they may pay some homage to the photographic reference that was used in their creation. Show me an artist in this field that doesn't use existing photographs! We all do. With so many artists working in the same limited field with the same limited references, similarities are bound to occur. I have always been open about my working methods and never tried to cover anything up or pass anything off as something it isn't. If you don't believe me, visit my website at ivanberryman dot com and follow the links to any Work In Progress (that's a WIP, Tim) and you can follow some of my paintings from start to finish. You might even learn something!

Or you could go to ehangar and look there where you will find interested, like-minded enthusiasts who have something good to say about what I do. I would not normally take the trouble to reply to such petty, snivelling, discourses as yours, but it is such an unnecessarily nasty jab at me that I feel compelled to say something. I have never met such a sad, chronic malcontent as you and you need to be told.

As for the Red Baron's signature. I can assure you that it is genuine. I did not decide to 'destroy a piece of history'. The owner of the signature commissioned me to do the drawing on it which, incidentally, boosted its value and it was immediately re-sold at a considerable profit. One happy customer.

Doing drawings on pre-signed sheets is common practise in the professional world. Nic Trudgian does it and so do many, many other top artists. Would you like to have a go at them, too? I do what I do because I am commissioned to do it. I am as busy as I can possibly be with orders and I have little time to waste on rubbish like this.

My advice to you is grow up and shut up. When you are all grown up and professional, maybe you'll have something interesting and constructive to say. Or you could just move your bed so that you can get out the good side for once.

Chock · 8 October 2009, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivan Berryman

I did not decide to 'destroy a piece of history'. The owner of the signature commissioned me to do the drawing on it which, incidentally, boosted its value and it was immediately re-sold at a considerable profit. One happy customer.

Doing drawings on pre-signed sheets is common practise in the professional world. Nic Trudgian does it and so do many, many other top artists. Would you like to have a go at them, too? I do what I do because I am commissioned to do it.

With regard to the above point, it makes no difference whether one is commissioned to do something or not, you don't have to accept commissions if you feel it is something that should not be done, and you should feel that way if you have any sense of history. Accepting a commission is not compulsory.

It should be obvious that drawing on a significant piece of history is not something many people are going to look kindly on, and the fact that it is not the first time it has ever been done does not make it any easier to swallow. Would you paint a mural on the Pyramids, put a cartoon of Johannes Gutenberg on the frontispiece of Gutenberg Bible, or perhaps tickle up the Magna Carta a bit with a nice border around its edges if someone offered you a tenner to do so?

Pointing out that 'others do it too' is not going to make it any more palatable either, nor is the fact that you are taking money for doing so, which is tantamount to saying 'I was only following orders'. And where have we heard that defence before? So yes, I personally would have a pop at others who are doing it, you don't have to ape them, you could be better than that.

Disapproving of the defacing of things of significant historic interest is nothing to do with a need to grow up, or be professional. We do not have to agree to do it if we are asked, so if you feel your character has been assassinated, then you have to admit that you are doing a good job of providing the ammunition for such an assassination, by indulging in that kind of thing.

If people like your paintings and you are selling them, then good luck to you, I hope you sell loads of them I honestly do, some of them are very cool. But really, you don't have to indulge in defacing artifacts just because people ask you to. What happens if historians wish to X-Ray such a document in future, or perhaps radio carbon date it to discover more facts or corroborate some event - now they can't, because they'll detect that it was made the same time as an HB pencil and putty rubber which you bought last year.

As you say, 'one happy customer', but on the other side of the coin, thousands of unhappy historians. Think about it.

Al

JohnReid · 8 October 2009, 10:32 AM

don't you just love those "Real artists" ?

tcrean7828 · 8 October 2009, 11:30 AM

Mate,
Welcome to the flagship of the Aerodrome - where the greatest minds on the planet get together and talk about their favorite subject - WW1.

ttfn

tcrean7828

tom

P.S.

Werner Voss fan here.

Tim West · 8 October 2009, 02:44 PM

LOL..or is it some chump from Cranston?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivan Berryman

Well, thank you all for your systematic assassination of my character. How very sad.

Mr West, every village has it's idiot and you a are certainly it. How can anyone be so sure of themselves as to post such a nasty, libellous thread as yours. All you have done is demonstrate to all who read this how utterly lacking your knowledge of the professional art world is. Oh dear.

OH dear oh my....I've always figured my self more of a A'Hole than a idiot but every one is entitled to their opinions..Right? Like A'holes ...everyone has one

And I'm pretty sure of what I can see and your works look like A LOT like the works of real masters. Funny how you're the only guy I know with so many similarities to the works of others. That's a personal observation I've made after seeing your work. I'm sorry it upsets you.

I remember reading about Roy Grinnells piece titled" The Last Victory" and I swear it mentioned he took all the reference shots himself...uhmm So how did your Spad end up looking like Roys?

To be fair, lets say just for a sec that you and Roy "did" take the exact same photo of the same SPAD.... I know it's a stretch but how did you guys pick the same color for the highlight near the nose...just above the exhaust stack? Or why is the pilots scale and placement in regard to the wind screen...exactly the same? What coinkydink huh?

WHAT SAY YOU? Roy copied you? Lol right. You either used his drawings or painting. There are other examples I can post...you even copied mistakes made by the other artist. Now that's attention to detail!

Again...WHAT SAY YOU?

Quote:

I have been painting professionally for over thirty years. My World War 1 series numbers over 100 paintings, all of which - except for five - have been sold to collectors and enthusiasts all over the world, all of whom are happy and content with their purchases. I paint in oils on canvas. Real art, Mr West, not the disposable, utterly forgettable sort that is conjured up on a computer screen.

Lol, those people got ripped off then didnt they? You'd think after 30 years one could be more original in their execution huh? Real art is in the eye of the viewer, CG is here and will not go away..in fact old tools like you will slowly fade away. Please do bash my work. It's ok... I can take it

My field of art is rather lucrative and it is only getting bigger while traditionalist scramble to make ends meet. S'cool keep tracing chief.

And to all my haters out there.....I dont make money selling art...I sell models. The art I post here is all love baby! So crits and jabs about said art doesnt bother me in the least. Perhaps you..Ivan should grow some thicker skin. Maybe it'd make you a better artist.

Quote:

If you want to see some of it, go the Aces High Gallery and visit the exhibition that is currently running there. You can see a fine selection of my original paintings which are on display.

Of course, some of my paintings are like other people's paintings and, of course, they may pay some homage to the photographic reference that was used in their creation. Show me an artist in this field that doesn't use existing photographs! We all do. With so many artists working in the same limited field with the same limited references, similarities are bound to occur. I have always been open about my working methods and never tried to cover anything up or pass anything off as something it isn't.

None of this is noted along with the prints you sell. And the real masters I know, wouldn't sell prints of photographs they "COPIED". I dont care if some dullard did give a commission, it's a copy and nothing more. Maybe for instance with the Jacobs bit...you should mention you traced a photo..pretty much exactly. Lol and you still got the details wrong.

Speaking of that. What is with all the historical errors in most of your works?
Perhaps you should try reading more or have your gallery henchmen do a better job at researching.

Quote:

If you don't believe me, visit my website at ivanberryman dot com and follow the links to any Work In Progress (that's a WIP, Tim) and you can follow some of my paintings from start to finish. You might even learn something!

Oh..I thought it meant "Works I've Plagiarized"

Quote:

Or you could go to ehangar and look there where you will find interested, like-minded enthusiasts who have something good to say about what I do. I would not normally take the trouble to reply to such petty, snivelling, discourses as yours, but it is such an unnecessarily nasty jab at me that I feel compelled to say something. I have never met such a sad, chronic malcontent as you and you need to be told.

I've done that and so what. I've never said you cant paint...I just find your methods questionable. In fact at first I sort of liked your stuff till I started taking a closer look. And YES your stuff looks like CG to me. Which is cool. No problem. But since you assure me they are paintings...then perhaps having a CG feel isnt a good thing. I mean compared to the works of masters, like Russ Smith, Dietz, Grinnell, Mike O'Neal, Keithe Ferris, Gil Cohen, William Phillips, Robert Karr and many many others, I find your "paintings" to be rather flat and lifeless.

Would you like a tissue? Awe

Quote:

As for the Red Baron's signature. I can assure you that it is genuine. I did not decide to 'destroy a piece of history'. The owner of the signature commissioned me to do the drawing on it which, incidentally, boosted its value and it was immediately re-sold at a considerable profit. One happy customer.

See you are a sell out! ;-)

Quote:

Doing drawings on pre-signed sheets is common practise in the professional world. Nic Trudgian does it and so do many, many other top artists. Would you like to have a go at them, too? I do what I do because I am commissioned to do it. I am as busy as I can possibly be with orders and I have little time to waste on rubbish like this.

You ruined a piece of history for a buck. MvR did not sign that with the intention of you coloring on it.

And if your little painter pals exhibit the same lack of ethics and morals, then I will most certainly have the same OPINION I have of your work. I THINK IT"S CRAP. And luckly... in America... I'm able to freely critique your works and offer my opinions to others.

Quote:

My advice to you is grow up and shut up. When you are all grown up and professional, maybe you'll have something interesting and constructive to say. Or you could just move your bed so that you can get out the good side for once.

Lol..every side of my bed "is" a good side =D

My advice to you is this:

Do better research and try a little harder not to paint stuff that looks like the works of other artist. And if you want to sell your art here, then quit doing stuff like the MvR piece. You sir ruined your credibility among real historians and fans....all on your own.

Whelp.....I'm glad we had this little chat....

Don't let the 'Drome door hit you on the way out

Tim West · 8 October 2009, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chock

With regard to the above point, it makes no difference whether one is commissioned to do something or not, you don't have to accept commissions if you feel it is something that should not be done, and you should feel that way if you have any sense of history. Accepting a commission is not compulsory.

It should be obvious that drawing on a significant piece of history is not something many people are going to look kindly on, and the fact that it is not the first time it has ever been done does not make it any easier to swallow. Would you paint a mural on the Pyramids, put a cartoon of Johannes Gutenberg on the frontispiece of Gutenberg Bible, or perhaps tickle up the Magna Carta a bit with a nice border around its edges if someone offered you a tenner to do so?

Pointing out that 'others do it too' is not going to make it any more palatable either, nor is the fact that you are taking money for doing so, which is tantamount to saying 'I was only following orders'. And where have we heard that defence before? So yes, I personally would have a pop at others who are doing it, you don't have to ape them, you could be better than that.

Disapproving of the defacing of things of significant historic interest is nothing to do with a need to grow up, or be professional. We do not have to agree to do it if we are asked, so if you feel your character has been assassinated, then you have to admit that you are doing a good job of providing the ammunition for such an assassination, by indulging in that kind of thing.

If people like your paintings and you are selling them, then good luck to you, I hope you sell loads of them I honestly do, some of them are very cool. But really, you don't have to indulge in defacing artifacts just because people ask you to. What happens if historians wish to X-Ray such a document in future, or perhaps radio carbon date it to discover more facts or corroborate some event - now they can't, because they'll detect that it was made the same time as an HB pencil and putty rubber which you bought last year.

As you say, 'one happy customer', but on the other side of the coin, thousands of unhappy historians. Think about it.

Al

exactly.....regardless of my daft approach, Al mentions some real concerns over the actual topic of this thread.

People here can make up their own minds I guess.

Lol, and what happened to the OP.....I still want to know why he was forging MvR's signature.

Tim West · 10 October 2009, 12:42 AM

I meant to ask about the lighting in your SPAD piece. How did you and Roy end up lighting the scene exactly the same? The highlights fall in all the same spots as does the shading.

Maybe I'm just missing something.... it's probably just another coincidence huh?

rainbase · 10 October 2009, 06:39 AM

I enjoyed Ivan's post. It had occured tome that many of the aviation artists are probably referencing many of the same historic photographs. In the case of the two Spads, yes there are similarities, but there are also obvious differences. Look at the positioning of the elevator in reference to the tail skid, for example. This sure doesn't look like it was "traced" to me. There are other differences too.

Ivan just explained how he works. This seems right to me.

Just my two cents.

JohnReid · 10 October 2009, 07:08 AM

No one would trace exactly the work of another without making a few obvious changes, especially if you were trying to present your stuff as original art work.
It is all a question of degree.Artists have been stealing from each other since the beginning of time,no one is an island unto himself.We are all influenced by what has gone before us,some work is just a little more obviously copied than others.Why don't we all just admit that we do it and move on.

Chock · 10 October 2009, 09:29 AM

If an artist wants to trace bits off another picture or photograph, fair enough, but I think I'd make a point of taking the old adage: 'the secret of creativity is concealing your sources' to heart if I was ever going to indulge in it myself. Perhaps more crucially, I'm always aware of another important artistic consideration whenever I do an illustration...

One of the few aviation paintings I have ever bought, which is on the wall in my front room, is 'Coming Home' by Trevor Lay. It's actually not a particularly accurate profile of the Spitfire Vb it is supposedly portraying - the angle of the dorsal area looks wrong, sloping at a slightly 'off' angle - but it is nevertheless a wonderfully striking painting, and as I previously noted, I'm very much of the opinion that a painting is not meant to be a photograph, but something which evokes an emotional response of some kind. That painting certainly does it, and that's why there is a signed print of it on my wall, it being a good example of why I'll take an inspired bit of painting over millimetre-perfect tracing any day of the week.

Anyone who has ever sketched a Spitfire from life will confirm that it is easy to get it looking wrong, but sometimes the overall result can be right, even if the dimensions are not. I once got really lucky when sketching a Spitfire from right underneath the nose of it (coincidentally it was also a MkVb) - the perspective giving it a really 'wide angle' appearance that looks fantastic as the nose and prop blades loom overhead, but I know that was just one of those days where the pencil seemed unable to go wrong and was an occasion where I had the entire thing drawn in one sitting in a strangely empty Manchester Air and Space Museum one dusty afternoon, that being on a day when I was bunking off from art college years ago! Lucky days like that aside, as I know, and indeed as pretty much any artist will tell you, when you initially sketch out a drawing, it's often the case that something of the initial magic gets lost when you start tickling it up for a finished piece. The aforementioned Coming Home picture is one of the few I've seen that manages to avoid it in a finished piece, and for me it's a object lesson on how ploughing your own furrow and sticking with the original thing you got when you put pencil to paper can do the business despite dimensions not always being to spec. That's really where the art is a lot of the time.

Al