Jump to content

Stag antler netsuke

Ko Baas

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply


It is however important that you give credit to the original if you decide to present such work to the public


Don, can you provide us with a reasoned argument against following this advice?


I NEVER said anything about not giving credit to the originator of the design. I certainly wouldn't copy your work, for instance, and try to sell it as a Clive original. I would make it known that it was a copy, and probably a poor one at that, giving you credit for the design. I merely meant that I see nothing wrong with "copying" someone else's work. As a matter of fact I have never even thought of selling a copy as an original by someone else.


I learn a great deal by studying the photo's here and trying to duplicate the techniques. Since I have no one close by to study under and no real classes available locally, I must learn from books and this venue. Having something to look at and try to duplicate is, for me, invaluable.


I can understand the anger over someone trying to pass off a copy as one of your original works, but I feel it was not warranted here. I really don't think KO had that in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have had several problems like Clive's but my problems have never been corrected. Back in the 60's and 70's a major collector of swords and daggers asked me to create miniatures of his favorite pieces using the same materials (gold, silver, ivory, ebony and steel) as the originals. He would send me the original and I would make a quarter scale miniature. I signed all of my pieces on the tang of the blade. I also placed a monogram with my initials on the ricasso of the blade. When the collector died his collection was sold at auction. The miniatures I created became "period" pieces. They have been published in many books and the prices are astronomical. I wasn't aware that this had happened untill I started seeing my pieces in books. My monogram is even listed as a period maker. Another "problem" occured during the United States Bi-Cennital in the 1970's. I created Gorget's, Cross Belt Plates and other eighteenth century objects for a dealer who sold the pieces to re-enactors. I created all of the pieces in silver and gold. They were created by hand forming , chasing, repousse and hand engraving. The Dealer would not allow me to sign the pieces because he was afraid people would by pass him and contact me directly. I was a beginning teacher making about $8,000 with a family and I needed the money so I didn't object. The pieces are now being sold as original eighteenth century objects for thousands of dollars. There are other pieces that I made that I did sign and my name has been removed and an elaborate provenance has been created for the object. I have tried to correct the problems but once the pieces have been sold a few times there is nothing that can be done. I have even been threatened with lawsuits by some of the dealers. I no longer make pieces that can in any way be passed of as "original" antiques. The point I am trying to make is that anything made by an artist that is a "period" piece will at some time in the future be passed off as an antique when it has developed "age". Please sign your work in such a way that the piece can never be passed off as Antique. Please learn from my mistakes!




I undestand where you are coming from on this. Unfortunately, we have unscrupulous people in the art world as we do everywhere. There will always be thieves among us. We can only do our best to be honest and forthright ourselves.





Link to comment
Share on other sites



I was hoping that this discussion would not escalate, so have remained a silent observer. This is when being admin is no fun.


There has been precedent of images taken from catalogs and books and from the internet over the past years without discussion or reminder that such photos were taken without copyright permission.


In this instance, a member has serious objection to the photo of his work being posted without permission.


This is what I see: that Ko responded to Clive's invitation to find and post a photo of work that was copied... etc. The photo posted is of Clive's snail, but no evidence of it having been a direct copy.


Snails are snails, and many people have carved them, and many will be as much different as alike if you could compile a reference file of snail netsuke.


Please, lets us all cool down, and move on to other more thoughtful and helpful directions. I will try to sort this out privately, and hope to retain the good will of all the members.




I think the discussion here was a healthy exchange of thoughts. I was originally a little upset about the reference to my "character", but after rereading the posts and giving it some thought I decided not to take it personally. Clive has explained his reasons for his train of thought and I understand that. Moreover, I agree with his reasoning. We may not agree on "copying", but we all agree that copying with the intent to perpetrate a fraud is wrong both morally and legally. No harm done, no hard feelings and mostly we all agree.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Don,


While I completely accept the point you are making in your most recent reply and the sentiments that you expessed in your replies to Dick and Janel, I would invite you to consider just how somebody might read your origanal post in the context of the discussion... to quote the pertinent sentence,


I don't really care if they are copies of someone else's work. You have the skill to carve anything you want, so do what you like.


I hope you'll agree that this statement in the context it was given gives the impression that you believed that it OK just to do as you like.


Perhaps this is best illustarted using your first sentence in your most recent reply..


I NEVER said anything about not giving credit to the originator of the design.


I hope you will now agree that your emphasis on the word NEVER is now somewhat ironic since it is the very omission in your original post of any reference to giving credit to the original carver when making a copy that leads to the inevitable confusion of your meaning... as written your original post.. particularly the words... ""so do what you like" can only be taken on face value. My subsequent reply offering you the oppertuinity to respond to the the perfectly natural assumption somebody would make regarding this apparent disregard for established modes of conduct was not meant as a insult but merely to give you the chance to correct what might not have been your intention.


I hope this completely clears all this up and that we can now all move on..



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three posts were pertinent to the category in which Ko decided to post his stag antler netsuke info. The other two and a half pages were about splitting hairs, and information oneupmanship. Why don't you guys just meet outside at recess, in another forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...