Search result for: the-last-thing-you-aquired-
| # | Post Title | Result Info | Date | User | Forum |
| Another attempt at relevance | 1 Relevance | 21 years ago | Olive | General discussion | |
| Another attempt at relevance I have always had short-haired cats. Except for one of our current darlings who fooled us all by looking like a short-haired when he was a weensy kitten. He currently looks like lint with feet. He's a total fur-bag, good thing he's such a great cat. Now for relevance. Whitespike mentioned the hopsacking fabric and its undying love for cat hair. I have noticed this too, so when I can select my own fabrics, I choose things that are fairly tight and low-nap. Seems to help with hair and seems to make furniture less attractive as a scratching post. I have also made up some polar-fleece napping pads and placed them in the favored napping zones. That stuff is a magnet for fur and I just toss it in the dryer to remove the hair. The cats really think I do it to make them more comfortable so we're all good. My IKEA $20 sheep fleece rug is also a good napping spot and it de-furs in the dryer quite well too. I have also shamelessly 'knocked-off' PostModernPets.com and built a sisal, carpet remnant and corrugated carboard jungle-gym scratching thingie for the beasties. The PMP.com stuff was just too pricey, but the ideas were simple to adopt. Some conical legs, aluminum u-chanel, plywood, various remnants and the premade corrugated scratching thingies from PetCo and 'taadaa' Cat heaven! The object looks rather 1950's lounge-y and I can live with it in my house. So there are my humble submissions for living peacefully with felines in the modern world. | |||||
| Patent vs copyright | 1 Relevance | 15 years ago | Olive | General discussion | |
| Patent vs copyright I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong on that usage. In this case we would be comparing the definition of a Design Patent versus a Copyright. Since many of these designs are considered 'works of art' and also are way past the expiry of a design patent(14yrs) then the only thing that could possibly be left in force is a copyright. A design patent protects the unique look of a design not it's production and is often obtained in duplicate with a copyright of a work's artistic nature for the additional and longer lasting legal protection. So, I maintain we're talking about copyrights here. And I don't understand at all why you are mystified. Public Domain is in force if there was no copyright to purchase. I simply can't believe that Modernica, which is a highly visible company in the design community, would produce something with active rights ownership without proper permissions. That would indeed hurt them, and justifiably so. I don't think they're that stupid. If the Bubble Lamps are being produced with a license from the Nelson Estate, that means that the copyrights to that design are still in play, which seems quite plausible given the design's popularity. If I was involved in the Nelson Estate that is one copyright I'd be sure got maintained. Likely that was not the case with the Half Nelson Lamp as it was a much lesser known design. Hence there was no need to make any particular licensing claims. K+L could very well have allowed their copyright to the design expire and that's why Modernica has begun production. In that case K+L could certainly begin producing the design again, as it is now in the Public Domain but they would no more be the official producer than Modernica would, since there is no longer may be any owner of the rights. | |||||
| Maxfield P. | 1 Relevance | 13 years ago | Eameshead | General discussion | |
| Maxfield P. sometimes used up to 40 layers of the transparent "glazing" process that SDR describes above. (In a single painting!) Now lots of painters do 40 layers before a painting is completed, but its pretty cool if you can still see the first layer after the next 39. Now THAT is luminosity! And a thin transparent layer of color would indeed be a great way to tip the white in Mark's painting towards a warmer or more varied color of "white". But then again, it could be a slippery slope to start messing around with the painting. Even if only because Mark would know exactly what moves were his, it might change how the painting feels as a "found object". As found, the painting has a certain integrity as a set of decisions, for better or for worse, and there is a certain historical moment that it reflects along with all those moves. I value this aspect of art a lot, and I find that I value any moment in time this way, be it with everyday objects, or paintings or vintage pieces. A time or two, I have even tried to go back and "fix" a painting that I had completed years earlier, and for me, it always changes the way the piece feels as a moment in time. It may indeed "look better" or look more resolved, but it loses something too. I believe one not only LOOKS at a painting, but one FEELS a painting too. So to Mark, just knowing he did this stuff, would possibly change that feeling. I say this knowing full well that Mark is very talented, and could surely improve on most any painting that he has in his house. (After seeing those bird drawings, I am convinced that he has a great eye and could do whatever he wanted to, visually) But my feeling is that if Mark feels that changes are in order, it would be better to let SDR have a crack at it. That way it would still have that "special mystery" that exists only when you didn't do something yourself. (OR, perhaps Mark could do it-- but he would have to once again get so blazed that he would not remember one thing about what happened, once he awoke from the transformational state.) | |||||
| New to USA Fiat 500: Critiques please... | 1 Relevance | 17 years ago | dcwilson | General discussion | |
| Before its intro in Europe some time back, I found this a fun and interesting looking addition to the small car ranks. Now being promoted for 2010 roll out in USA, its little more than an oversized formal allusion to the old Fiat 500 (as is the new Mini to the old Mini) coupled with an uninspired pastiche of visual tricks and cues. Starting at the front with the sausage beveled fascia, and working back through all manner of localized surface angles and curves that seem to have almost nothing to do with one another, and nothing at all to do with the old Fiat 500, I get the feeling that the car has been Starcked--my coined phrase for an allusion-packed conceit of a car that does not really organically advance car design in any new direction at all...except toward allusion packed conceits, if you will. No basic new form organic to the chassis. No surface details evolving logically out of the overall form. No working out of a design problem from the inside out. Not even a thorough working out of a design problem from surface to surface. Just an attempt to take something old, and make it new again (not a bad thing in and of itself) by stealing and inflating the old form, then putting a sausage bevel on the front to conform to current EU saftey requirements, then surface tricks to maneuver the eye, or more accurately, the advertisers camera, over the surface for pictures. | |||||
| some thoughts | 1 Relevance | 19 years ago | NULL NULL | General discussion | |
| some thoughts I've been buying and selling on ebay since 1998 and have had over 7,000 transactions. I sell antiques and collectibles, some of it MCM smalls and easily-shippable furniture. I usually stick to 7-day listings but have done 10-day when it is better for my schedule. Sometimes I am out of town but need to have stuff listed so I just extend the listing time to have it end after I get back rather than waiting to list it. It's nice to have that option. Regarding reserves---as a buyer, I almost always assume that the reserve is more than I want to pay. It's a knee-jerk reaction, not always right, but there you have it. That reaction led me early on to decide to start all my auctions at $5 with no reserve. I've listed things worth many hundreds of dollars this way, even when I've paid way more than $5 for them myself. I think that seeing an Arne Jacobsen chair or a Stig Lindberg bowl for $5 inflames peoples' interest and gets them thinking that they have a good chance of winning it. They start to think of it as theirs already and get very proprietary. They bid and bid again when outbid, generating wonderful bidding wars. It's fun to watch but it also pretty much ensures that I'll get a good price in the end. I do get a lot of people asking me what my Buy It Now price would be. Hardly anyone offers me a dollar amount, I suppose because they think I don't know what the thing is worth since I started it at $5. They're hoping I'll say "Sure, how about twenty bucks?!?!" Ha ha. One person offered me a whopping $200 for something, telling me that she was in med school and couldn't afford it herself but that her family would love to buy it for her as a gift, kind of implying that I should be generous and maybe grateful for her offer and that she deserved to have it. I declined. It sold for $800. I also sometimes do 5-day listings if it's better for my schedule. I get about the same results as with 7-day. But 3-day listings mostly are a bad idea---you miss the people who only look once or twice a week. | |||||
| pt.2 | 1 Relevance | 18 years ago | dcwilson | General discussion | |
| pt.2 I believe what underlies Koen's and my differences on this, in addition to the fact that I am a relative ignoramus in comparison to him on such matters, is that he has more rigorously adopted a philosophy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," than have I to date. He evaluates Pawson more globally than I am. He gives more weight the value of continuity of working forms from the past in the trade-off analysis of how much to change a thing than I am. He is saying in that best of European traditions, "Yes, innovation is good, but we don't need to change something that works, even if we do not fully and rationally comprehend why it works." I am saying in that best of American traditions, "Yes, tradition is good, but we can endure a good bit of disconuity in tradition to get the benefits of innovation and development and evolution that adv advance the overall legacy of the tradition, even if we do not fully and rationally understand all of the possible unintended consequences of changing." Koen is a European who has entered the new world tradition to try to hybridize and at the same time preserve what he knows. I am an American (and I use this in the sense of North, Central and South Americas)who has entered the European tradition in order to accomplish the same (though, to be sure, I have not been able to do more than travel Europe and engage intellectually with Europeans as much as possible). Well, you can take the boy out of Kansas City, but you can not entirely take Kansas City out of the boy. Likewise, you can take the boy out of Antwerp, but you cannot entirely take Antwerp out of the boy. Koen almost certainly understands more deeply and subtlely the ways in which Pawson's design works for the brothers, because he is almost certainly more steeped in the monastic tradition of European culture and history. He grew up in its shadow, so to speak, whether he ever interacted with it directly or not. | |||||
| eames prototypes? | 1 Relevance | 12 years ago | bobbob | Identification | |
| Hi,A while ago I actually garbage picked four chairs at the side of the road. I recognized them immediately as Eames chairs. There was an armshell, two side shells with legs, and one side shell with no legs. They looked dirty and beat but I decided to grab them anyway. When I turned the side shell over I noticed that this was an x base but is completely different! What are these? They are Eames shells, and the dimensions of the tubing, the shock mounts, screws, are right on. The glue used on the side shells even looks like the same as on the armshell. I didn't even wash them in order to leave all the clues in place. Look close and you can see where the fiberglass was sanded to get better adhesion of the shockmounts. The one thing I think of is the footprint of the feet is wider making these more stable than a standard x base. Comments please!!! | |||||
| Making your own. What's the point? | 1 Relevance | 17 years ago | whitespike | General discussion | |
| An architect friend of mine and I plan on designing/building a dining table for myself in the near future. The original plan was to make a china cabinet for my Grandmother's dishes, but I found one in the meantime ... that may come later. In the past I have had many conversations with another designer friend about designing your own pieces ... and while I am not married to this view, but it seemed the consensus was "why design something for yourself, when so many good designs already exist?" It's a rather narrow view I know, but to that point, the successful designs that already exist have undergone so much scrutiny and testing and have stood the test of time. What's the point? Why not just buy something? On the other hand, why not make your own to suit your needs? I am not looking for acceptance for my project. As I will most likely go through with it at some point, but rather am interested in your view on the subject... Given that the budget was the same, would you rather buy an existing design ... or painstakingly design your own? In my instance I just have not found what I am looking for for a dining table, in my budget, to go with chairs that I am already married to. SO the idea was to simply make my own. We'll see as it could be a lesson as to why certain designs are so prcy and why certain designs are so visually successful. The main thing I notice between successful and non-successful designs is firstly, and most obviously, the materials. But the part that isn't easy, is the perfect use of proportions. So many "affordable" options (let's say 500-1000 USD) are decent but just miss the mark in terms of pleasing shapes, sizes, proportions etc. That price is great for a well designed table with solid materials. But expensive for something that misses the mark. | |||||
| Ol' Johnnie Rusk had his share of pecadilloes... | 1 Relevance | 18 years ago | dcwilson | General discussion | |
| Ol' Johnnie Rusk had his share of pecadilloes... That's for sure. As I let Lunchbox in on, he was also intermittently broken down mentally. But I submit that one is unwise to reject the remarks and/or work of a man or woman based simply on their infirmities and pecadilloes. If we all did so, I reckon we would all still be living short lives in thatched huts and relying on hunter gather techniques for our survival...and still have a tribe full of persons with infirmities and pecadilloes but without Eames chairs! 🙂 I mean, who wants to reject good old Starry Night just because Vinnie sought some aural asymmetry with a kitchen knife? Mozart was crazy as a loon. Nietzche, well, I don't need to master the obvious there. I just think a bunch of designers ought to give old Johnnie Rusk a fair listen. I'm not insisting you agree with either of his quotes, but I think we can "trust" that the man was a towering intellect and realistically dispense with him not being just a fruit cake. No less of men than Frank Lloyd Wright and Ghandi referred to Ruskin as among the greatest intellectual influences in their lives. Yes, Ruskin in some ways, paved the way for modernity, though I doubt that he did what he did in order for collectors of the modern to have some thing modern to collect. 🙂 Johnnie Rusk may have been dead wrong on these epigrams, but as they are often listed among memorable, or otherwise significant quotations, perhaps some might find it worth the risk of a little further reflection on the short chance that you have short-changed one of the ancestors of the modern. But perhaps not. He's dead. What has he done for us lately, right? 😉 | |||||
| Rep, which I suggested above, | 1 Relevance | 10 years ago | Spanky | General discussion | |
| Rep, which I suggested above, has the same appearance as twill without being diagonal---but the ribbing isn't lengthwise, it's on the cross grain, or "railroaded". To do that sofa without a seam down the center of the inside back and in the middle of the seat, the fabric would be railroaded---which would make the rep "ribs" run from top to bottom. That's what it looks like to me, anyway. Rep gets that look from fine textured warp threads woven over heavier weft threads. You can't see the weft threads at all because the fine threads completely cover them. There's a variation in this weave called "ottoman" which I think is just scaled up in texture---heavier threads both ways. (The first thing I ever upholstered was in some cheezy ottoman fabric that started shredding within two years. Wah!) Mens' ties are often made of silk rep and described that way in ad copy--though the ribs will always present as diagonal because ties are always cut on the bias so that they hang nicely. I think that's about the only time I ever hear the word "rep" in reference to fabric anymore. | |||||
| Sorry to revisit, but | 1 Relevance | 16 years ago | tchp | General discussion | |
| Sorry to revisit, but while it still baffles me that an attribution could get so messed up, it certainly seems like H. Moon has a point regarding the attribution of the J.L. Møller #71 and #55 chair to Arne Hovmand Olsen, insofar as the old 1950?s J.L. Møller catalog cites him as the designer of the chair. While the similar chair that Arne Hovmand Olsen designed for Mogens Kold is a very nice chair, I have to suspect that many people have long regarded it as being a bit too derivative of the #71 chair -- which is always cited as a Niels Møller design. But if Hovmand Olsen did design both chairs, then that whole perception is inaccurate. I know some people have even stated on this forum that they find Møller side chairs to be boring in general, perhaps as a result of their being encountered so often. But I do feel that the relatively early 1951 design date of the #71 chair, and its minimalist construction cause it to be a pretty influential design. If Hovmand Olsen did design the chair, I think it is a rather sad thing if he is not generally acknowledged for it, and that if it could be established that he was in fact the designer of the chair, it would be nice if he could get the credit for that. Given the citation in the catalog, along with the similarity of the #71 chair to the Mogens Kold chair by Hovmand Olsen, there would seem to be a lot of evidence pointing to Hovmand Olsen as the designer of the #71 chair as well. But I am not sure at what point one can flatly state that Hovmand Olsen designed the chair, when there is also so many other citations, even in J.L. Møller's own literature, pointing to Neils Møller as the designer. It would be great if someone with a connection to the company could clarify this. I have emailed J.L. Møller and Paere Dansk about it, but did not get a response. | |||||
| no royalties...now what? | 1 Relevance | 20 years ago | NULL NULL | General discussion | |
| greetings to the forum from miami, florida! I'm a new, fresh furniture designer about to do business with 1 of 2 furniture manufacturers (one is in N. Carolina, the other in Columbia)who are both interested in a stool I designed. My family owns a small (very small) scale shop where we have been manufacturing this stool (as well as kitchen cab, wallunits, tables, so on) for about 2 years and have sold over 500 (for private clients generally in sets of 4) I have read ALL the threads on royalties and from what I gathered it seems royalty days are over(WEEEP)soooo what do I do? My father does not want to commit to mass producing it ("we don't have the capacity" he says) and has suggested I seek a company that will (I did, actually one contacted me through aperson who owns a few of the stools)and they are both interested- one has asked me what are my terms (whatever that means and the other I have not yet heard from, other than that they are very interested and will get back to me)I'm not a good negotiator and have ZERO experience dealing with manufacturers,or big companies of such. As far as "developement","prototyping cost" etc. the stool has already been made, and er,um perfected (its actually so simple...)so its just a matter of handing over the specs and manuf. process (or am I being oversimplistic?). Is their a "standard contract", or a written commitment that allows one to be paid for this design? what is a stool design worth? (we sell our stool between $150-$225 depending on materials and quantity-our cost about $35-$50), another little thing that worries me is that one of the manuf. has shown interest in 2 other of my designs, so I do not want to come off as being to greety and scare them from doing business with me (now or in the future), also a few friends have said that they will just probably produce it as their own design (since they both have seen it firsthand) any DETAILED guidance would be appreciated. Gracias Cindy | |||||
| Knockoff vs. reproduction | 1 Relevance | 22 years ago | Olive | General discussion | |
| Knockoff vs. reproduction To me, this is really the heart of the matter. Was respect paid to the original design? Was the best effort made to craft a piece of good quality that is affordable to the average consumer? Or, did the 'copyist' just make it look like the original design...kinda. And did they use cheap parts/materials producing an inferior product that is an insult to the creativity and genius of the original designer? SDR, you have it correct to my mind, the only 'real' pieces are prototypes or early run production pieces. If over time the 'reissues' or later versions (by the original manufacturer, mind you)improve on the original design, that's great, but these are not 'real', they are 'improved'. Use cars as an analogy, no one would think that the original Mustangs are the same thing as the newer releases that attempt to recreate the look of the earlier models. It is my fervent belief that any and all manufacturers have the right to produce both excellent and miserable copies of designs in the public domain. It is up to us as consumers to exercise judgement and responsibility in selecting our purchases. It is also my belief that manufacturers have the responsibility to fairly market their goods. This should be true of HM, Knoll, Cassina, etc as well as the 'knockoff' company who shouldn't even attempt to call what they have made a 'classic' design. In this I am going to be dissapointed. Companies do NOT market fairly, they use every trick in the book to catch the consumer's eye and brand loyalty. But at least I have control of my own actions and conscience. | |||||
| Cado catalogues | 1 Relevance | 13 years ago | My Panton Home | General discussion | |
| As promised i would dig up all my Cado catalogues and post them here. Finally found them yesterday and scanned them this morning. Had not seen them myself for quite some time and it was a delight to go through them once again. I must say that the decorators for the photoshoots had good taste! Alot of cool furniture on these pages. Other cool things are the register of the different parts. A hang-on full sizd wardrobe anyone? Or how about that cool sofa that i have been trying to find for the last 20 years but never ever seen. There is also a very cool instruction phamplet on how to mount the different parts of the system. By the way, have anyone seen those pine walls? Ok, i hope you guys enjoy these as much as i do. I used to own a huge rosewood system with over 30 sections and most of the different cabinets and shelfes, but sold them a few years ago. Still love the system though. First out is the 2 page instructions for mounting the different systems, all in Swedish though. Also a small part of another edition of the same thing that has the mounting for the sofa as well. | |||||
| Can anyone help me know a little more about this piece? | 1 Relevance | 9 years ago | dirtydisco | Identification | |
| So I picked this buffet up from a post on CL. My wife fell in love with the doors on the front. The original plan was turn this into a TV stand in our living room. As soon as I picked this thing up to load in my truck I knew that it was high quality. This buffet is heavy! We knew that the piece had some damage to it and my wife had some really cool ideas on how to fix it up. So last night she starts to work on it some and find the markings "American of Martinsville" I did some research and figured out that "American of Martinsville" is a pretty regarded company in MCM community. (This is our first MCM piece.) I found an ad online from 1966 that shows this design and says that it is part of the "Consensus Collection" I have yet to find this exact buffet in my searches. I am wondering a rough idea of what it is worth. I would like to know before my wife goes to putting her magic touch on it as I don't want to devalue it. Thank you so much! | |||||
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com