F-104 Starfighter

[Supah]

Allready have a guy at a Canadian museum who will take pictures of the one they have there Also planning metallic and tri tone canadian F-104's.

[Ugo Crisponi]

some samples

[Supah]

Nice! Thanks Ugo! Changed the red in the Canadian flag marking on the tail, better?

[santynus]

looking great

[inkworm]

try knocking the opacity down a shade, the white is still very strong, same goes for the roundel on the intake

[Supah]

You mean the text on the intake or the roundel on the fuselage Inky?

[Supah]

Modified the green basic colour and worked on the white bits.

[gamary]

Just a question: a few months ago, a customer asked me to do a profile of a Mirage 2000 with special markings (70th anniversary of the unit). I did it and informed the unit and received a "cease and desist" email from someone (presumably the creator of the livery, he never said so or gave me his name).

I removed the drawing from my website and informed the customer I couldn't sell this to him.

I think that the livery is considered as original art and therefore subject to copyright. In any case, I didn't want to bother with the whole business so I dropped it. I even offered the guy to give him the drawing and authorization so that he could sell it himself (the profits going to the unit), provided he sold one to the customer, who was really eager to get the print. He never replied...

I don't even know what the law says about all this. If what he says is true, a photographer would not have the right to show or sell a picture of this aircraft without his authorization, right?

I'm just curious. As I said, it's not worth the trouble. I don't want to get into a fight over a deal worth a few euros, so I dropped it. But I'm still wondering what the law says about this, and I've never found a clear answer.

I'm only mentioning this because of the striped 104 presented here. Can a profiler represent this without infringing copyright? It's a valid question IMHO. I'd be interested in what others have to say about this...

[Supah]

I think a art depiction of the scheme (especially as it is not a registered trademark like a airline livery) would constitute "fair use" or a "derivative work". Besides I strongly doubt copyright claims to paintschemes on military aircraft would hold up in court. I don't think there has ever been anyone found guilty for depicting one in this form. I understand a airliner artwork showing company logoes would be different as the logoes themselves are trademarked but this would be impossible to uphold. They'd better start sueing Squadron Signal Publications then! Airliners.net could close their doors because you can buy prints there too. How about Andy Warhol for his cans of Campbell soup?

[Supah]

Gaetan: Just asked company lawyer here, apparently a picture of a copyrighted work would not be a problem the moment the photographer adds something unique to it. If it is just a straight representation it would probably be a problem. Seeing how I drew the entire aircraft and paintscheme this wouldn't be problem. Basically if you redrew the entire paintscheme and not just bunged a photograph in there it wouldn't be a problem (even in the latter the shading work alone would make it your property).