The Real Mauve

[Jagdpanzer]

Many,many thanks! A most informative thread....

[JFM]

jumpinjan,

I forgot to ask you earlier...

Could you please post the straw yellow 3B4 and whitest greenish gray 29C2 to which Dan-San referred earlier?

JFM

[Craig]

Guys, please remember that you are all looking at these images on different monitors.

[jumpinjan]

A drop of a yellowish-green (lime green would probably do) into your gray mixture should give the results that you are looking for.
Yes, I would like to see the 6-camo patterns rendered too. Perhaps, Mark Miller?

[paule]

Many,many thanks! A most informative thread....

indeed!

[JFM]

Originally Posted by jumpinjan

A drop of a yellowish-green (lime green would probably do) into your gray mixture should give the results that you are looking for.
Yes, I would like to see the 6-camo patterns rendered too. Perhaps, Mark Miller?

Thanks, jumpinjan!

Here are at least two patterns. These are Pearson profiles which credit Dan-San as the source. In color and Greyscale versions--don't know if those grayscales are representative of the b&w photos taken during WW1 but they do illustrate how darker colors are difficult to differentiate when color is absent.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Jumpinjan:
That is two of the 1916 Alb.D.III patterns. There are six that I have identified, there may be more.
I am at a loss how Robert Pearson gets my drawings, I don't remember ever selling him one drawing. Also I informed him at Dayton in September 2003 that he in in violation of copyright laws. What jerks my chain he has never bothered to ask. Plain and simple he is a thief by any description. Benefiting financially from someone elses work compounds the theft! He is selling CDs with my work in it. He has the temerity to claim copyright. The above drawings for example. Yes, he does give as the source. He has not said thank you or whatever. I guess this is all part of NAFTA, better known as, Screw America! I'll be coming out out with my own CD, the first will be Albatros Camouflage Schemes.
Bitter skies,
Dan-San

[Chicoartist]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

I am at a loss how Robert Pearson gets my drawings, I don't remember ever selling him one drawing. Also I informed him at Dayton in September 2003 that he in in violation of copyright laws.

Dan,

As an artist myself, I certainly feel for ya ... some folks feel that as long as they cite a source, they can use copyrighted material any way they see fit. That's not true, especially if the violator is making money at it.

My friend Keith Ferris runs into this all the time. Usually with lazy saps who use the "outline" of his B-17G from the NASM mural "Fortressess Under Fire". They'll 'mirror' image the outline and call it their own ... *Wow . . . you're talented!*

Point is that after excellent legal advice, he's gone after folks like that, and gotten PAID! If you can prove he's using your drawings, and he *does* acknowledge your 'assistance', I'd go after him in a heartbeat, and you'd WIN. As Keith has told us in ASAA Forums, the law is on your side. Keith has usually simply sent an official letter to the violators, and not only do they cease and desist, but they PAY a license fee, which is demanded in Letter no. 1.

FWIW,

Wade

[Jagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

Jumpinjan:
That is two of the 1916 Alb.D.III patterns. There are six that I have identified, there may be more.

I'll be coming out out with my own CD, the first will be Albatros Camouflage Schemes.
Bitter skies,
Dan-San

Dan let us all know when you do come out with your CD. I for one would love very much to have such a valuable reference in regards to color schemes....

[NeilE]

Originally Posted by Dan_San_Abbott

Jumpinjan:
That is two of the 1916 Alb.D.III patterns. There are six that I have identified, there may be more.
I am at a loss how Robert Pearson gets my drawings, I don't remember ever selling him one drawing. Also I informed him at Dayton in September 2003 that he in in violation of copyright laws. What jerks my chain he has never bothered to ask. Plain and simple he is a thief by any description. Benefiting financially from someone elses work compounds the theft! He is selling CDs with my work in it. He has the temerity to claim copyright. The above drawings for example. Yes, he does give as the source. He has not said thank you or whatever. I guess this is all part of NAFTA, better known as, Screw America! I'll be coming out out with my own CD, the first will be Albatros Camouflage Schemes.
Bitter skies,
Dan-San

Dan;

Perhaps someone can set me straight here but what is actually copright here?

Are you saying that the computer generated profile that is shown above is actually your direct work? Or has Bob used your historical research to create the profile? - which he acknowledged in the profile. If that is the case I fail to see that is any sort of copright violation.

For example, if I research the coat of arms of Sir Roger De La Pole from 1434 (using the 1484 work of Brother Matthew of Kent as my source) and publish this somewhere and John Smith comes and produces a profile based on that research and acknowledges this then that seems to be legal. Also the colours of the coat of arms of Sir Roger De La Pole from 1434 are also part of the legitimate historical record. They are not 'owned' by any researcher. The same can be said of WW1 pilots' colours and markings, they entered the historical record the moment they were devised. And following that, historical researchers have used information on the colours in a number of ways and in a number of sources. Quoting from existing sources (Ie You) is quite legitimate research.

Maybe the copyright exists with the surviving members of the pilot's family or whoever designed the pilots markings, and also whoever designed the general camouflage arrangement for the airforce involved. But with a researcher? I'm not so sure of that.

Unless of course the markings are totally of your own devising (NB: I am not saying they are in anyway) - then you may have copyright perhaps.

Of course I could be completely wrong and would be the first to acknowledge it if I am. What say the multitudes?

Regards

Neil