• I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...

bomber nose art / pinup girls..

Kottwitz-Graphics

Kottwitz-Graphics

New Member
I got a call from a customer on Friday, and he is looking for a pinup girl for his boat. I did a search, but didn't come up with anything.

Is there anyone that can I could sub this out to? Or somewhere i could purchase a disk of vector art.

Thanks
 
ProWraps

ProWraps

New Member
call a tattoo artist. for $100 an hour you should be able to get one custom drawn in about an hour. and it will be an original.
 
TyrantDesigner

TyrantDesigner

Art! Hot and fresh.
you might be able to find some half way decent stuff from psp tube graphics ... really though ... for stock art there isn't any. just make your own or higher an illustrator to digitally paint you one. If you search the deviantart resource pages for pinup stock ... some of them allow commercial use ... just use that as reference for a digital painting if you do it yourself ... for example ... http://browse.deviantart.com/resources/stockart/model/women/?qh=&section=&q=sea
 
TyrantDesigner

TyrantDesigner

Art! Hot and fresh.
ProWraps said:
call a tattoo artist. for $100 an hour you should be able to get one custom drawn in about an hour. and it will be an original.
Click to expand...

Must be a Cali thing ... because ever since I've moved to Texas ... All I've found are ink scratchers and tracers ... no one who can actually draw at a tattoo shop.
 
bob

bob

It's better to have two hands than one glove.
Kottwitz-Graphics said:
I got a call from a customer on Friday, and he is looking for a pinup girl for his boat. I did a search, but didn't come up with anything.

Is there anyone that can I could sub this out to? Or somewhere i could purchase a disk of vector art.

Thanks
Click to expand...

Google Alberto Vargas or George Petty. Between the two of them there's cubic yards of pinup images. Both of these guys are long dead, Vargas folded in 1982 and Petty in 1975, the copyright status of any of their work is unclear and probably non-existent.
 
OldPaint

OldPaint

New Member

Attachments

  • seaduced.jpg
    seaduced.jpg
    61.4 KB · Views: 140
SignProPlus-Chip

SignProPlus-Chip

New Member
bob said:
Google Alberto Vargas or George Petty. Between the two of them there's cubic yards of pinup images. Both of these guys are long dead, Vargas folded in 1982 and Petty in 1975, the copyright status of any of their work is unclear and probably non-existent.
Click to expand...

Nothing unclear about the Copyright on their respective works. They are not public domain and still protected.

Any published work before 1978 will expire in 2047 and anything from after 1978 will expire 70 years from the date of their death.
 
bob

bob

It's better to have two hands than one glove.
SignProPlus-Chip said:
Nothing unclear about the Copyright on their respective works. They are not public domain and still protected.

Any published work before 1978 will expire in 2047 and anything from after 1978 will expire 70 years from the date of their death.
Click to expand...

I'm familiar with and understand the various applicable statutes.

It's unclear in that if there is no interested party in the copyright then it's rather ambiguous. The point being, who, exacts, owns the copyrights to these materials? If there is no one to own the rights then where are you? If there is no one to enforce their interests what then do those interests actually exist? In order for there to be enforcement there must be some interested party to complain.
 
SignProPlus-Chip

SignProPlus-Chip

New Member
No, still not unclear. The Copyright exists and still extends even if there is no estate, or heirs after the authors death. Plus 70 years after their death puts it into public domain.

Just because nobody is around to try to enforce it, doesn't me the Copyright itself does not exist. That's EXACTLY why it's extended past an authors death.

The way your wording things, you seem to be saying that it's OK to use a previously Copyrighted work after the authors death because nobody will lay claim and you can get away with unfair use. This, is not the case.
 
bob

bob

It's better to have two hands than one glove.
SignProPlus-Chip said:
No, still not unclear. The Copyright exists and still extends even if there is no estate, or heirs after the authors death. Plus 70 years after their death puts it into public domain.

Just because nobody is around to try to enforce it, doesn't me the Copyright itself does not exist. That's EXACTLY why it's extended past an authors death.

The way your wording things, you seem to be saying that it's OK to use a previously Copyrighted work after the authors death because nobody will lay claim and you can get away with unfair use. This, is not the case.
Click to expand...

Try to follow along... No one is claiming that a copyright ceases to exist upon the expiration of the work's creator. Of course it exists. The question is if their are no interested heirs or assigns, is that copyright moot? Copyrights are to protect the author and its estate. If there is no author nor any estate, in other words, no one holding the copyright, who or what is the copyright protecting?

Many notables with copyrighted works fold leaving legal entities to hold and enforce those copyrights. Many do not. In the latter case, if there is no interested party then 'getting away with it' [your words, not mine] would seem to pretty much be the case. Just who would be coming after you? It is, after all, a civil matter requiring at least two parties to be in contention. Who would be the second party?

Could it be the case that if someone dies and no entity picks up the ball for copyrights held by the dead guy, ever, could those works then be considered to functionally be in the public domain? That is not to say that at some later date an qualified interested party may exist and enforce the copyrights even retroactively. But that may never be the case as well.

I have questions, not necessarily answers. I don't know, do you? Really?
 
Vinylman

Vinylman

New Member
Perhaps Fransico Vargas, the still living and well known sign painter/artist from [FONT=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Fresno, CA might take issue with you bob.

He is the son of the original Alberto Vargas. And I am sure if you truly cared you would want to respect not only the treasured works of said Alberto Vargas and the copy-write protection afforded under the law, as well as the intrinsic and real value that the estate of said artist is entitled to.

OR NOT!
[/FONT]
 
OldPaint

OldPaint

New Member
for those taking this on a totally different tack..........i dont imagine that the son of VARGUS is gona go to the same marina or part of the ocean where the boat will be and MESS WITH THE OWNER OF IT OVER A COPY WRITE of a copy of his dads work!!!!!
i have done copies of frazettas, and many other recognizable art paintings and NEVER HAVE BEEN hassled ahout the copy write. look up the MONA LISA, and many other famous art works...........how many copies of them have been made.............AS LONG AS you dont try to pass it off as YOUR ART WORK..............i dont see a problem.
 
T

Tigertron

New Member
To help the OP

IMO bomber nose art was mostly poor quality done by amatures who flew the planes but I think it's the style you are after. Now it depends on quality. Do you want clip art or more real? If real is what you need you may want to find a custom bike painter. Air brush artists will paint what you need for a fee. I'd do it but Im far away and I airbrush for a hobby not a profession.

Check Harley shops. Or www.kustomkulturelounge.com

As for "real" pin up artists in the Vargas tradition, my personal favorite is Olivia

http://www.eolivia.com/site/index.asp

Enjoy
 
Gino

Gino

Premium Subscriber
bob said:
Try to follow along... No one is claiming that a copyright ceases to exist upon the expiration of the work's creator. Of course it exists. The question is if their are no interested heirs or assigns, is that copyright moot? Copyrights are to protect the author and its estate. If there is no author nor any estate, in other words, no one holding the copyright, who or what is the copyright protecting?

Many notables with copyrighted works fold leaving legal entities to hold and enforce those copyrights. Many do not. In the latter case, if there is no interested party then 'getting away with it' [your words, not mine] would seem to pretty much be the case. Just who would be coming after you? It is, after all, a civil matter requiring at least two parties to be in contention. Who would be the second party?

Could it be the case that if someone dies and no entity picks up the ball for copyrights held by the dead guy, ever, could those works then be considered to functionally be in the public domain? That is not to say that at some later date an qualified interested party may exist and enforce the copyrights even retroactively. But that may never be the case as well.

I have questions, not necessarily answers. I don't know, do you? Really?
Click to expand...


I don't have a dog in this argument, but is this thinking something along the lines of.... if a bear farts in the woods and no one is around to hear it..... is there a sound ??

I'm not sure, but if something is said and understood to be protected by law, it is still against the law to use such matter. Regardless if anyone is going to benefit or not.... regardless if anyone comes looking for you..... regardless of any action taken against or for.... it is still against the law for said period of time. Sounds pretty simple to me.

If you had a problem... and took it out to the highest mountain and did away with it and in the process the problem died by your hands, but no one saw, heard or ever found out.... it is still wrong ?? :popcorn:
 
S

signswi

New Member
bob said:
Try to follow along... No one is claiming that a copyright ceases to exist upon the expiration of the work's creator. Of course it exists. The question is if their are no interested heirs or assigns, is that copyright moot? Copyrights are to protect the author and its estate. If there is no author nor any estate, in other words, no one holding the copyright, who or what is the copyright protecting?

Many notables with copyrighted works fold leaving legal entities to hold and enforce those copyrights. Many do not. In the latter case, if there is no interested party then 'getting away with it' [your words, not mine] would seem to pretty much be the case. Just who would be coming after you? It is, after all, a civil matter requiring at least two parties to be in contention. Who would be the second party?

Could it be the case that if someone dies and no entity picks up the ball for copyrights held by the dead guy, ever, could those works then be considered to functionally be in the public domain? That is not to say that at some later date an qualified interested party may exist and enforce the copyrights even retroactively. But that may never be the case as well.

I have questions, not necessarily answers. I don't know, do you? Really?
Click to expand...

What you're talking about are orphaned works and they're decided on a case by case basis, the regulations on what is considered an orphaned work is an area of law which is actively and rapidly changing. The scope of the discussion is way outside of signs101.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top