Continuing conversations via email with Allesandro at the magazine mentioned here have been interesting.
I realise what a quandary he's in too!!!! It must be very difficult when you have little knowledge of a craft to start a new magazine aimed at new tatters. After all - learning to tat can only be rings and chains made with a double knot. Later the new tatter will need more techniques and then patterns with those new skills will be needed too. But at the moment let's just look at this situation from the copyright point of view of simple designs.
Looking round the internet (and in books) it's quite obvious that a lot of the patterns we see could easily have been used (not deliberately or maliciously) in a tatter's 'need' to create. They could have come either from previous patterns or from the imagination. This is because, of course, everything is made up from JUST rings and chains.
These are what I call 'generic' patterns. By this I mean that all of us could have easily 'designed' them!!!
For example look at the drawing below. This is a basic design seen regularly all over the place. I've seen it as a base for earrings, crosses, bracelets, bookmarks, fans, necklaces, edgings etc and all based on two rings back to back and a chain between. Add a few beads, change direction a few times and it becomes something else. BUT it is essentially just a very simple rings and chains design. Something a new tatter would be able to make.
So, let all of us who want to design something new keep a lookout to make sure we're doing something really new. Interestingly in the past nobody used to claim a design 'belonged' to them and I had several patterns published in magazines here in England without my name on them. I was soooo proud to have them there that it didn't bother me one bit. Actually it's only when I see people using my free patterns to make money for themselves (by re-publishing or selling things made from them) that I get upset especially as I have a Creative Commons Licence on the pattern site!!!
When I started designing (purely to amuse myself and the young children I was teaching) I only used rings and chains as that was all I knew at that time - however I learned very early on never to base anything on a pattern in a book. Imagination, persistence and a thorough knowledge of a craft are the requirements needed to become a designer - not the ability to copy from a picture seen somewhere!!!
One thing I have pointed out to Alessandro is that the ladybird and the interwoven celtic motif in the magazine belonging to myself and Rosemarie Peel might look simplistic nowadays but were, at the time of publication, innovative. Over the years they may have become 'old hat' but they do in essence have their birth in our two brains and it's nice to be mentioned for that!!!
Coming up with new ideas gets harder and harder as I try to go 'where no man has gone before'. Star Trek?!?!?! Does that last sentence make sense anyway?!?!?!
I realise what a quandary he's in too!!!! It must be very difficult when you have little knowledge of a craft to start a new magazine aimed at new tatters. After all - learning to tat can only be rings and chains made with a double knot. Later the new tatter will need more techniques and then patterns with those new skills will be needed too. But at the moment let's just look at this situation from the copyright point of view of simple designs.
Looking round the internet (and in books) it's quite obvious that a lot of the patterns we see could easily have been used (not deliberately or maliciously) in a tatter's 'need' to create. They could have come either from previous patterns or from the imagination. This is because, of course, everything is made up from JUST rings and chains.
These are what I call 'generic' patterns. By this I mean that all of us could have easily 'designed' them!!!
For example look at the drawing below. This is a basic design seen regularly all over the place. I've seen it as a base for earrings, crosses, bracelets, bookmarks, fans, necklaces, edgings etc and all based on two rings back to back and a chain between. Add a few beads, change direction a few times and it becomes something else. BUT it is essentially just a very simple rings and chains design. Something a new tatter would be able to make.
So, let all of us who want to design something new keep a lookout to make sure we're doing something really new. Interestingly in the past nobody used to claim a design 'belonged' to them and I had several patterns published in magazines here in England without my name on them. I was soooo proud to have them there that it didn't bother me one bit. Actually it's only when I see people using my free patterns to make money for themselves (by re-publishing or selling things made from them) that I get upset especially as I have a Creative Commons Licence on the pattern site!!!
When I started designing (purely to amuse myself and the young children I was teaching) I only used rings and chains as that was all I knew at that time - however I learned very early on never to base anything on a pattern in a book. Imagination, persistence and a thorough knowledge of a craft are the requirements needed to become a designer - not the ability to copy from a picture seen somewhere!!!
One thing I have pointed out to Alessandro is that the ladybird and the interwoven celtic motif in the magazine belonging to myself and Rosemarie Peel might look simplistic nowadays but were, at the time of publication, innovative. Over the years they may have become 'old hat' but they do in essence have their birth in our two brains and it's nice to be mentioned for that!!!
Coming up with new ideas gets harder and harder as I try to go 'where no man has gone before'. Star Trek?!?!?! Does that last sentence make sense anyway?!?!?!