Not that anyone is still interested, but I was in a minor snit earlier this week because a gentleman from midtown Porlock suggested that I had not credited work properly. After all, I hadn’t even seen the model cited, let alone tried to duplicate it: my umber was quite burnt.
Eric, no doubt taking *cough* suppressants, discreetly pointed out that the model appeared over a year ago in a photo in an entry on a little known blog that I read faithfully. (I would point to the photo, but it’s on a host with an Observer Effect™ server and the act of looking at it will actually trigger the site to go down for days on end.) I have no clear memory of having seen the photo, but then, I have no clear memory of having traded arms for hostages, either. Yet, a few years ago, a friend at the UPI morgue sent me a photo of me, descending from a jet in Tehran, right behind Bud, carrying a chocolate cake shaped like a key. What was I thinking? Anyway, my point is, my credibility on having never seen the model is questionable.
Of course, I am properly chastened. That is to say, not at all. The models share a similar look and construction technique, but it’s like comparing a Bach fugue and a folksong: both may be excellent, but they are judged by different criteria. My model results from a relatively simple method involving circular arcs. I can’t say how the other model was made, but if I were to attempt to reverse-engineer it, this wouldn’t be the method I would use. Was I inspired by this other model? I can’t deny the possibility, but I rather doubt it. It’s important to credit other people’s work, but in this case, it’s not an issue.
The important thing is get the our methods out there, so that other folders can build upon them and so that we won’t be having the same silly discussions twenty years from now.