Discussion in 'Gallery & Designs' started by Paragon, Oct 5, 2007.
New Web Site?
That is an excellent idea!
Good luck with that.
All the best,
I just made a list of all the models I've designed so far, which includes some of the variants (though not color variants). Its...impressive, now that I actually look at it.
16. E.E. Lightning
23. F-105 “Wild Weasel”
32. Boeing 2707-100
33. Boeing 2707-200
34. Boeing 2707-300
Paragon´s Card Models
Way to go, Paragon!
That is indeed an impressive list. That is material enough for a couple of web pages . . .
I look forward to your upcoming page. Perhaps there is also room for some commercial models, so you will get something back?
All the best,
You think people would pay for my models? I've been reluctant to consider doing that...simply because I personally have never bought a cardmodel myself, I've only built free ones so far. It would certainly be nice to have a little supplemental income, especially considering the time I spend on these... If anything, I might ask for donations.
great work, and in so little time! :thumb: i haven't been looking around the forum much lately, so i was surprised to see this explosion of aircraft.
i recommend that you release the MiG-25 Foxbat and the 2-seat MiG-31 Foxhound nonetheless. they are obviously different aircraft, and anyone who's actually interested enough to look for either an F-15 or MiG-25 could not mistake one for the other. there is absolutely no basis for his prohibition, ultimately the only one that can legally prevent you from releasing the plane is the Mikoyan-Gurevich Aircraft Corporation. he's out of line on this one, none of the aircrafts' designs are his, he can only claim the specific 2D patterns that he designed. just from looking at the photos, any structural similarity between his F-15 and your MiG would have to be internal. nothing of his F-15 pattern could possibly appear in the MiG. while i agree that there's a need to protect intellectual property rights, that protection should not be used in a way to stifle true creativity and free expression. if this is his position he might as well prevent the release of the Tornado for being similar to the F-14, or the YF-23 for being similar to the F-22, or any of the other aircraft you've done for having wings, fuselages, rudders, and elevators.
just my 2 cents.
Photos aren't really enough to determine how similar the 2D patterns are in this case, you have to actually look at the patterns side-by-side, and in this case I don't really think Ojimak is being incredibly unreasonable, especially considering that I specifically used the F-15 as a sort of base when I designed the MiG-31, to help with the shapes for the model. Ojimak employed a method of construction for the center fuselage plus the intakes/engines in his F-15 that was ideal for the MiG-31 as well. The result was my tracing the parts in photoshop, stretching them, and then inserting the new textures details for the MiG. Just to show what I mean, here's an image comparing the similar parts from both models. The colored parts are from the F-15, the white parts are from the MiG-31, and as you can see, there is more than a slight resemblance.
Here's the finished colored Vautour. I'm pretty pleased with it, I put in a lot of work.
J29 and Vautour are great planes you did design:thumb:
I broke my other projekts to do the Tunnan.
First I needed two tries; in the first I confused the upper and lower part of the rear fuselage... I didn`t reflect
Second try was without problems and I`ll post some pics when my daughter will bring me my camera back
btw: I built it in 1:144, meanwhile I love this scale
Paragon! Great Work in Vantour and J-29 I Loved this models. Congratulations for a fantastic work! My christimas wish is a see Vantour in other versions and a Yak-25 :twisted:
I think seriously you should consider the possibility to do a website to publish his excellent work better, after all his collection of releases is already quite big and diversified... :mrgreen:
I found some designs last night that I hadn't seen before, especially including usable 3-view drawings, and I really want to make models of these. I can't really decide whether I want to make them or the Yak-25 first. Chances are though, that I'll make a large number of them at the same time. I'll probably give them all fake names.
but please don´t forget the Mystere ;-)
Ok, a little update for those of you interested:
Yak-25 Progress: Prototype design complete, no test build
Su-56 - Prototype design complete, test build complete. Minor modifications required. This model is incredibly similar to Ojimak's Su-27 in structure and construction, however I have not, and will not ask Ojimak for permission for this model for the simple reason that the entire model is designed from scratch. While the parts may be very similar to Ojimak's, none of them originated in his models, all were concieved using only the 4-view drawings I have. That means I can probably design an F-5, MiG-25 and MiG-31 the same way from the blueprints and not worry about Ojimak.
Anyway, thoughts on the similarities between the parts as compared above? Once again, I encourage you to e-mail Ojimak about it if you feel the differences are big enough, because I would certainly like to release the MiG-25 and 31 as they are now.
You asked, so here's my thoughts.
Your decision to "not worry about Ojimak" turns this into pure plagiarism of his style, technique and material, where plagiarism is as defined here
plagiarism - Definitions from Dictionary.com
does ojimak use the same design process as paragon? and even if he does are we to now say that 2 people using the same design technique cannot share their work?if thats the case everyone shares the same techniques basically . so are we to pull all models off the web because of shared design process?that would certaintly narrow the feild. if paragon designs a f-15 on his own without using ojimaks parts. then it is a parogon design. ojimak has allready endorsed parogons design style.
and further more if i use paragons design style to make my own model, than it would be my model not plagerized. paragon is not realeasing ojimak models as his own. and im quite disturbed by this attempt to stifle the creative process!!!!!
Well, I totally disagree!
There are actually limited ways of building a model from a 3 or 4 view scetch and thus any method one tries will be prety close to any other guy's. This should not end up in the old debate over the Soviets copying the American designs in building the MiG 25 (supposedly from the F15) and the Su27 and MIG 29 (from the US F14!!! and F18!). In these debates it is easier understood that one must stop seeing everything as black and white. The russians developed their own planes based on their own research, making use of their own technology available. Since what we know over aerodynamics is pretty much common ground across the globe, the designs finally look similar. The are not plegiarised in any case.
i guess any one who uses a 3d program and pepakura to make a model are all plagerizing each other. its the same style. OMG we need to shut down this hobby ! we are all plagerizers!!stooges8aussiehamrpeasoup:lol::razz::flush1::v8:
actually the su-27 was developed from the f-14 that iran gave them.
there are other examples but............
Request for urls
Could you post the urls of the sites that you obtained the pictures/views from? Would like to get more info on a couple of them.
Which pictures and views? All of the ones I've used period, or the ones I posted a few posts ago, of the non-operational concept aircraft?
Here are the ones I typically use:
The Blueprints - Reference Image Database - 22750+ blueprints online
And this one is the one I got the new concept ones from. The page provides translations, but it changes the URL, so you have to go to each page from the Russian page, and then translate.
Real-life aircraft design "plagiarism" aside, (perhaps the Russian version of the B-29 would be more applicable), the definitions of plagiarism on dictionary.com do not appear to threaten my work in my opinion. The term typically refers to the realm of writing, not the design of objects.
Separate names with a comma.