Classic Cue Designs
- Thread starter Worminator
- Start date
kbooks3 said:
you sure????? Never seen a wrapless Balabushka....
I thought it was a Gilbert.
Mystick Cue Fan said:you sure????? Never seen a wrapless Balabushka....
that is not the same pic i originally quoted...
there was a second cue in the picture...
the cue pic i quoted is gone now..
but on the butt sleeve there were windows that curved around the butt
sleeve..
chris
AHHHH...... Thanks.
Tony
Tony
Happy New Year people.....as classic as it gets....
School Of Design
Before I start let me say. I applaud the creators. I do not want to own a knockoff. However I will buy an insprired version but do not want to purchase a direct knockoff.
Now don't take this the wrong way but before SW was Kersenbrock. That complete style of cue is Kersenbrock. I would say that set of ratios were developed by David prior to Jerry Franklin but I was not there to say for sure the same goes for the pin design. Either way I like both makers, I have owned DPK's original works and purchased brand new SW. BTW - I am on the list for another SW.
A direct knockoff is so obvious and is wrong / stealing whatever but a style is a style.
For example look at art how many impressionist painters came out of Paris in the late 1800's. Impressionist art is obvious when someone looks at it and it did not exist prior to that time frame. This style of art is still being "CREATED" by original artist and probably will forever.
On design there are certain concepts which make good designs like the golden section ((A+B) / A = A / B) if you use the concept it will look "right" meaning pleasing to the eye. Certain colors go well to together. I do not think you could own the Black-Red color scheme or whatever. A veneer combination is a veneer combination. If I see a yellow Vette with black strips and then I paint my Honda yellow with black stripes am I stealing or did the Vette painter steal from the CREATOR of the Bumble-Bee.
BTW - If a cue builder is robbing ideas, not having anything original then they are probably not focused on all of the other quality details either. That is the case for many of the knock-off cues that look a certain way but do not play well and are made of inferior components.
No doubt the original designers own the idea but I feel they are all fair game to be assimilated. People get inspiration and include thoughts and ideas and make derived works. I do not know that a derived work is a stolen property. I can look at an American car I have not seen before and give you the general decade it came from even though I probably could not say Dodge, Chevy, Ford. Obviously the car designers move through time as a herd and have similiarities however I can pick out any Vette as a Vette and there is no doubt in looking at Mustang vs. Camaro. Are they robbing each others ideas. Wings in the 50's were on lots of makers cars but were all gone by the early 60's.
As for myslf I write software for a living and I know that ideas are very dynamic. I would not want someone to disseminate my source code and let Tom, Dick and Harry knock me off. But if I do something and then Tom says I like that but I can make one better and he bangs it out then I guess Tom has a better widget. If I see something I like then I am thinking how would I do that or can I use that for my own projects.
Look at the following examples spreadsheets 1-2-3 versus Microsoft Excel. Photo-Editors - PhotoShop and the GIMP. Browsers - Internet Exploror, Opera and Firefox all of these are browsers some are more sophisticated but I would say there is a lot of original thought in all of these similiar products but the concept of each group is very similiar.
If I make a cue and it has a propeller design do I owe somebody an apology (Santos Dumont, Leonardo DaVinci or Szamboti) Can somebody copyright a color-scheme on a cue. A university prevailed on owning a color scheme in Board of Supervisors of the Louisiana State Univ. et al. v. Smack Apparel Co., et al., C.A. No.: 04-1593, E.D. La., July 18, 2006 however they had only ever sold one color scheme as the school colors I do not know of any cue maker that only ever used one set of colors for ALL cues they made.
I look forward to buying my Kersenbrock inspired SW (7+ years from today). I also have an Ed Young cue ordered and I know he has had inspiration from DPK and works with him every day however I know my cue will be an Ed Young cue. Those cues are all going to take a while to get, so I had local builder (Mike Stacy) make me a simple blond cue and it will use the same pin as a DPK, EY or SW but I know it will have his Stacey taper. It will be in my Justis case at the Derby and I look forward to hitting some balls with it. All of these cues I would say are in the DPK school of cues.
Engineers, Artists, Musicians and cuemakers (etc, etc, etc) all draw inspiration from a variety of sources as well as a great deal of internal creativity. I applaud the creators. Especially creators who can start there own school.
JimBo said:
Before I start let me say. I applaud the creators. I do not want to own a knockoff. However I will buy an insprired version but do not want to purchase a direct knockoff.
Now don't take this the wrong way but before SW was Kersenbrock. That complete style of cue is Kersenbrock. I would say that set of ratios were developed by David prior to Jerry Franklin but I was not there to say for sure the same goes for the pin design. Either way I like both makers, I have owned DPK's original works and purchased brand new SW. BTW - I am on the list for another SW.
A direct knockoff is so obvious and is wrong / stealing whatever but a style is a style.
For example look at art how many impressionist painters came out of Paris in the late 1800's. Impressionist art is obvious when someone looks at it and it did not exist prior to that time frame. This style of art is still being "CREATED" by original artist and probably will forever.
On design there are certain concepts which make good designs like the golden section ((A+B) / A = A / B) if you use the concept it will look "right" meaning pleasing to the eye. Certain colors go well to together. I do not think you could own the Black-Red color scheme or whatever. A veneer combination is a veneer combination. If I see a yellow Vette with black strips and then I paint my Honda yellow with black stripes am I stealing or did the Vette painter steal from the CREATOR of the Bumble-Bee.
BTW - If a cue builder is robbing ideas, not having anything original then they are probably not focused on all of the other quality details either. That is the case for many of the knock-off cues that look a certain way but do not play well and are made of inferior components.
No doubt the original designers own the idea but I feel they are all fair game to be assimilated. People get inspiration and include thoughts and ideas and make derived works. I do not know that a derived work is a stolen property. I can look at an American car I have not seen before and give you the general decade it came from even though I probably could not say Dodge, Chevy, Ford. Obviously the car designers move through time as a herd and have similiarities however I can pick out any Vette as a Vette and there is no doubt in looking at Mustang vs. Camaro. Are they robbing each others ideas. Wings in the 50's were on lots of makers cars but were all gone by the early 60's.
As for myslf I write software for a living and I know that ideas are very dynamic. I would not want someone to disseminate my source code and let Tom, Dick and Harry knock me off. But if I do something and then Tom says I like that but I can make one better and he bangs it out then I guess Tom has a better widget. If I see something I like then I am thinking how would I do that or can I use that for my own projects.
Look at the following examples spreadsheets 1-2-3 versus Microsoft Excel. Photo-Editors - PhotoShop and the GIMP. Browsers - Internet Exploror, Opera and Firefox all of these are browsers some are more sophisticated but I would say there is a lot of original thought in all of these similiar products but the concept of each group is very similiar.
If I make a cue and it has a propeller design do I owe somebody an apology (Santos Dumont, Leonardo DaVinci or Szamboti) Can somebody copyright a color-scheme on a cue. A university prevailed on owning a color scheme in Board of Supervisors of the Louisiana State Univ. et al. v. Smack Apparel Co., et al., C.A. No.: 04-1593, E.D. La., July 18, 2006 however they had only ever sold one color scheme as the school colors I do not know of any cue maker that only ever used one set of colors for ALL cues they made.
I look forward to buying my Kersenbrock inspired SW (7+ years from today). I also have an Ed Young cue ordered and I know he has had inspiration from DPK and works with him every day however I know my cue will be an Ed Young cue. Those cues are all going to take a while to get, so I had local builder (Mike Stacy) make me a simple blond cue and it will use the same pin as a DPK, EY or SW but I know it will have his Stacey taper. It will be in my Justis case at the Derby and I look forward to hitting some balls with it. All of these cues I would say are in the DPK school of cues.
Engineers, Artists, Musicians and cuemakers (etc, etc, etc) all draw inspiration from a variety of sources as well as a great deal of internal creativity. I applaud the creators. Especially creators who can start there own school.