AW Cover (2/95)
7 messages in this thread
Amiga World didn't say so, but ALL FOUR fractal images on the cover
were created by FractalPro (the sphere is done by wrapping a
FractalPro image on it in LightWave). Most of the images used in the
feature article (February 1995 issue) are also FractalPro images and
many were taken from the FractalPro Image Library CDROM they
mentioned in the article (and SHOULD have been credited as the
source). I thank Amiga World for giving me personal credit for the
images but they should have given the credit to FractalPro and the
CDROM. When they wanted SUPER fractal images for their cover, they
chose FractalPro. Unfortunately Amiga World did not properly credit
the source for these most of the images they used as having come from
FractalPro and the FractalPro Image Library CDROM. Those interested
in spectacular fractal art and animation like you saw on the Amiga
World February 1995 cover, please EMail me for more info on
FractalPro and the CDROM. Also if you'd like more info on how those
specific images were generated in FractalPro, please EMail. Enjoy the
eye candy!
Dan,
Congratulations on the AW cover. It looks great and really shows off what
FractalPro is capable of.
Dave
Thanks, Dave – Just wish AmigaWorld had outright said that ALL the images on
the cover came from FractalPro and MOST of the images used in the article came
from the FractalPro Image Library CDROM. They gave me personal credit in a
couple of places, but I'd have much rather they credited the program – which
only got a fairly brief mention. The CDROM was barely mentioned but they used
about 20 images from it and FAILED to comply with the copyright agreement to
use those images. I have spoken with Tim Walsh and he has agreed to print a
more accurate credit, but of course that will be in an issue somewhere down the
line and that issue won't have any FractalPro images in it – so the connection
between the super fractal images from the CDROM and FractalPro and the program
name will be completely lost. I went to substantial lengths to supply
AmigaWorld with rapid response to their request for cover images and they did
not tell me they were using other images from the CDROM elsewhere in the
article and table of contents pages. I do feel they rather abused my
cooperation by completely failing to mention any connection between the images
they used and where they came from. They needed the cover images in 1536×960
res on a 24-hour emergency basis and I came through – but I feel they REALLY
let me down but totally ignoring the copyright agreement for using my images
-that is, they MUST credit the program and the CDROM for being the source of
those images and they completely ignored that requirement (technically
violating the copyright) as if they had the rights to do whatever they wanted.
They DID NOT have that right. AmigaWorld has been kind enough to publish press
releases, etc. over the years, and have also reviewed my programs and products
fairly. This time they wanted special artwork for their own use, though, and
they completely failed to abide by the stated conditions for its use. I
couldn't care less if people know I personally made the images – all I want
them to do is say they came from FractalPro and the FPILV1 CDROM. The CDROM has
very specific information on copyright compliance. Why AW would ignore it and
use those images without proper credit is completely beyond me. They had that
material for many months before they printed it and they only contact I got was
a request for emergency supplies of print-res images for the cover and
misinformation on what they were using. Boo-hiss.
Hey, that what media in general does. Hey, look what Connie Chung did when
someone said between you and me.
the difference is that conditions for use of FractalPro Image Library CDROM
images are SPELLED OUT in the ReadMe text file on the CDROM. And I don't think
AW was deliberate, just careless but in a most unfortunate way. A definitely
mistaken impression is left in their article. I don't think the impression
left by Ms Gingrich was in anyway mistaken and I don't think Ms Chung is the
one who needs to watch their manners.
Dan —
Didn't realize there was a "story" behind the piece. Sorry to hear things
didn't go as planned. I'm sure Tim had the best of intentions, tho; after all,
there is little to be gained from intentionally violating the copyright
agreement except an apology and lots of bad feelings all around.
Dave
I am not sure I'd say it so strongly again. I don't know if AW 'intended' to
violate the agreement or was just careless but they surely didn't give their
reader the information that was deserved. The article spends a lot of time on
Mand2000 and refers readers back to an old review on FractalPro but MOST of the
images used to illustrate their wonderful article on fractal art are from
FractalPro, and that fact is somehow conveniently overlooked. I think the
reader might get the impression that all those terrific images came from
Mand2000 or MathVision. The FractalPro image CDROM has a very clear usage
statement in the ReadMe. And it isn't like they hadn't had enough time to find
it …. Yes, I personally did the images and they did credit mebut that is
completely useless to the reader who MIGHT be reading the article to find out
which PROGRAM makes all those cool pictures! And I can't see how some 'oops'
printed in some remote corner of a future issue can undo the damage. With so
much time to plan and my complete bend-over-backward cooperation available,
what's the problem in communicating? It doesn't lie here.