Silver Round with Perched Eagle Reverse

"Books", I actually believe it is YOU who is doing Dan's marketing work for him, by going all banzai on him. It draws more attention. Every time I stumble across one of these tirades, I end up going to Dan's site, just to look around. Sometimes I buy something, sometimes I don't. But without you, "Books", I might not ever be reminded to look.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

For those that do not respect DC and his restrikes... I sure hope you never go see a remake of a movie that has already been released.

 

I respect Dan just fine; it's flippers that bug me.

 

Glad to know I can get under your skin so easily

 

Oh, not just easily, but for so LOOOONNG, too. You should see the "PM" conversations coming from others who agree with me who got shouted down in the past, too. Not everybody treats low-level entrepreneurship with such "reverence". Some people get "cowed" by pushback. I ain't some people.

 

Unfortunately, I've seen many.... amd one thing most have is common is that they're nowhere as good or classy as the original. Funny how that works, isn't it.

 

I would agree with this, and I think most would, even DC

 

I've head it many times, usually said as if I should slink into a corner, but I'm well aware of this. I couldn't care less if you or everyone else on this board buy his products; that's your choice, you've every right to buy or collect what pleases you, and if that is his products, all the power to you and him. This isn't about anything other than calling a dog a dog as opposed to pretending it's really a princess. I refuse to be one of the Mighty Mouse schmoes here who, for whatever reason, apply a different standard to Mr. Carr and do so while slamming/degrading others for doing essentially the same thing .

You're obviously a very intelligent man, Mr. Bellman; if you wished to waste (far too much of your) life by doing so, you could go back to see what started this all. You would discover that defection has lead us down a path that was both never intended and is wholly unnecessary, but was Mr. Carr's choice. In this very thread, nothing would've been said had this gentleman given the same courtesy to others as he demands for himself, and is as simple as that. If "art" can be so wide and varied as to include copying, that's fine with me, but it should be applied to everyone. To see this man call the work of others "copies" and "fakes", even if in regards to "fantasy pieces" very similar to his own, or in any way disrespect the "work" of others is, well, ridiculous.

I gather you're a fan and do respect that, but if open to removing any personal feelings from the matter, you should be able to clearly see the over all point.

 

Haha. Believe me, I have had a few long conversations with people about you too

 

That is undeniably true in most cases. There are a few exceptions - darned few.

 

My feelings on this is.... his workmanship is usually pretty good, and the mintage number is pretty low. That means his rounds have a little more value than those that are a lot higher mintage and not done as well.

 

Not at all, Books. I see a key difference between inelegantly borrowing an actual coin design, as many many do, and I don't begrudge them that choice, because the federal government can't own a copyright, and the truer more fine craftsmanship that Dan employs. I buy his stuff because I believe he offers it as a form of ironic or sardonic humor, and I appreciate that in him, both for his Amero and his tribute stuff. I don't THINK I'm just imputing that onto him, especially when one takes a look at his "alternate" state quarters stuff. I don't take any of it very seriously; I like the humor aspect.

By the way, I view the obligation to avoid "subsequent confusion" as MY responsibility going forward, and less so Dan's. It's part of the risk I personally am willing to assume when I buy his pieces.

As for doing a thorough research into the genesis of the bad blood between you two, don't take personal offense, but I don't think I have the stomach for it. I appreciate very much of what you bring to the table here, and I like much of Dan's work. I don't want to choose, and I wish "Mommy and Daddy would just stop fighting!"

Does Dan have a dog named "Princess" maybe?

I also find the fact that Dan can and does own copyrights, as the government cannot by law, as a dispositive difference in these matters. You don't have to agree, but for me, it's a HUGE distinction.

FWIW, and I'm not sure it's relevant to this discussion, but I am NOT a particular fan of a fair bit of Dan's original stuff. The renderings are a bit cartoonish for my tastes in many, but not all, cases. Compare and contrast some of Dan's original Indian renderings and, say, a Buffalo nickel.

 

No doubt. I am a heretic according to both the "Church of Bullion" and "Our Lady of the Immaculate Vest-Pocket".

 

Trust me, no offense is or ever would be taken, and I had hoped to make that clear with the "waste your life" addition. I've lived it; I know.

I've never given anything but due and deserved credit for the quality of his work. If solely based upon craftsmanship, I certainly can appreciate and even see what he does as an "art form", but refuse to view the copying itself, coupled with the ridiculous deflection, as one and/or fall in line with lauding him for it, especially when the same consideration is not given (by him) to others.

As for the copyright issue, most here, including Mr. Carr himself, fail to either realize or simply accept that this has everything to do with the fact that copying by any other name is still, well, copying. Common sense and even his own explanation earlier in this thread prove that's what his "over strikes" are; the design was copied with the help of modern technology, yet some here will argue until blue in the face that it's anything but. I've used the example before, but if I scan or photograph a Vermeer, load it into photoshop, change a few elements, and call it my own while claiming not to have copied the original, I'd sincerely hope someone would see it as and call BS because that's exactly what it would be. I wouldn't consider myself, and certainly wouldn't expect others to see me as some great "artist", but apparently I'm supposed to see and praise him as just that, not based on his own designs but the copying. Not only that, but I guess I'm also supposed to look upon others who do the same or similar as being trash based upon their location (not an American), their tools (no surplus press), or even their choice of planchet material (not using junk silver, etc). I'm sorry, but I find the notion to be ludicrous.

His copies are nothing more than slightly different and high quality versions of the earlier-discussed "tribute proofs" so many of us see as a black eye on this hobby. The same argument he puts forth regarding his over strikes, that they should be "easily identifiable by the average collector of that coin type" (his exact words, not mine) should hold true for the aforementioned, yet they're marked "COPY" and for good reason. If the "average collector of that coin type" can so easily identify his small changes/differences, such collectors should also be able to easily identify items made of a different material without the need for the copy mark. Again, this is his argument and not mine, so unless he is to have special privilege not allowed to others, what's so terribly wrong about holding everyone to the same standard? If the threshold is knowledgeable collectors of whatever type, such people are not going to be fooled by his products, but neither will they be by a plated pot metal "tribute proof". Other than the choice of planchet material, what's the difference? However, if all comes down to planchet material, perhaps the tribute proof producers should start using Ikes and make them large, or halves and slightly small; at least that way they'd be an "alteration" and according to Mr. Carr, perfectly legal.... but something tells me that most involved in this hobby wouldn't be too accepting of it coming from them. Double standard, anyone?

 

.

 

Your hypothetical scenario is way off.
This would be more applicable:

Take an original Vermeer painting. Repaint over part of it. Then offer it as a modern "BB4C edition" of a Vermeer.

That would be an accurate comparison, not your ill-fitting scenario.

You're not "supposed" to like anything or do anything other than follow the rules here by not constantly insulting and inflaming other posters.

Why does the work of one artist sell for millions of dollars while a similar work by another artist less than $100 ? Notoriety, recognition, and history. Your implied Chinese coin maker has none of these characteristics. You may erroneously find the notion "ludicrous". But it is a valid notion nonetheless. The resale "market" prices tell the tale.

The type of collector that purchases my fantasy-date over-strikes is generally more sophisticated than the average. For example, one specialist dealer in high-end US Bust coinage has purchased quantities of several of my fantasy-date over-strikes including the "1816" Bust half. I don't know any of my numerous customers that would ever seriously consider buying a "tribute proof" or anything advertised on late night TV infomercials.

High-end collectors and dealers appreciate my fantasy-date over-strikes, due to the workmanship. None of them have any interest whatsoever in the "Tribute Proofs". You can argue it all day long, but that is the fact.

Planchet material is far from the only consideration. The use of a surplus US Mint press is another. That all mintages are fully disclosed and documented is another. No other private mints do that. And yet another aspect is that they are produced in the United States by a former designer of US coins. All of these things make a difference to the "market", whether you like it or not.

 

Your little scenario is far from fitting, as always. You oh so conveniently leave out the copying part, again as usual.

Okay... we take the Vermeer and not paint over it, but use a printer to print the same damn thing with a few very subtle changes. You don't strike over just part of the original, do you? Then why imply as much, especially considering the fact you KNOW these has been a misunderstanding about exactly how you "change" the dates.

As always, fluff, BS, and your own "ill-fitting scenario"...

 

I'm going to hide under my bed until you two stop fighting.

 

I hope it's comfortable under there; if history tells us anything, you'll be there for a very long time...

 

Perhaps others are not aware of this, but go back in the history here and on other forums. Many respected members have, at one time or another, voiced their opposition to your copies. Just because most do not wish to get into the deflective nonsense, arguing, and bickering, this doesn't mean your copying is anywhere near as accepted, even on the forums, as you and your fans make it out to be. Also, don't sit here and pretend that all high end and/or sophisticated dealers and collectors are fans of your work; you know that's utter BS as well as I do. Hell, one of your biggest fans on this board has a bad habit of stealing dealer/auction house photos to claim as newps; real "sophisticated", huh? Some may like it and others do not, but you know damn well your copying is nowhere near as widely accepted as you are now trying to imply. As usual, you're picking and choosing what best fits your narrative while ignoring what doesn't. You've your niche and that's great - I've told you many times before I respect your entrepreneurial spirit - but that's all it is; a niche. Some morons pay for Carvel ice cream that comes off the same line as store brand generics. Does that make them "sophisticated" or foolish? It's not my place to say, but neither is it yours.

That said, the buyers of your copies in no way changes what they are. You know this and is why you chose to deflect onto this instead of directly defending against the tribute proof comparison. Regardless of who buys them, the comparison was both valid and infinitely reasonable. They are what they are regardless of who likes, buys, or enjoys them; nonsense excuses do not change this fact.

As for your press, other than being a tool, it's a gimmick that you use to lend a false legitimacy to your products. If such a press was used for less noble purposes, would that make any difference? Of course not, so why would or should it here? Living where you do and considering the cost of such machinery new, buying surplus when the opportunity presented itself was an obvious move. If one of the Chinese producers you so despise purchased and used a surplus press, you'd simply point to some other convenient reason as to why yours are so super special and theirs garbage. Disclosing mintages, kept low to increase demand, also in no way changes what your copies are at heart. It's the same lame fluffery, plain and simple.