[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Coloring Original Art
I think in they eyes of the public, that's not really "right", nor would his
art technically be considered "origional" anymore... more like an altered
state if you ask me.
But then again, what's really important is that the art belongs to him now
and if he wants to pay Mark Evanier to hard coat it Cheese Dip, then I guess
it's just a matter of what turns him on... it's his "personal" thing and
whatever ads sentiment to it, the more power to him...
Then again, if this "altered" art ends up being auctioned somwhere, then his
natural intentions weren't from the heart and he should be slain. :)
This is just my personal opinion on this topic... don't get groosome with me
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Grossmann <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 6:11 PM
Subject: Coloring Original Art
> Now to me, hiring Tom to color a piece of unpublished (generic?) original
> art purchased from Sergio at a convention makes perfect sense and someday
> hope to do that. But for some reason, coloring the original art-even when
> done by Tom-that was used for a card or comic book or something like that,
> just seems not right. I can't explain why.