Just say the word and blammo, I'll pay faster than a sham-wow can soak up a 2 liter.

benjoshua wrote:It should be noted that wherever the original goes, there is always the possibility for additional attempts at profiteering by producing more prints or using it for other purposes. The committee feels that, other than destroying the original, the art is safest with its creator.

Actually, once the original has been scanned and the high-res file is sent to the printer, anyone who gets their hands on that file can easily reproduce the art however they want.  The original can be thrown away at that point.  EO will have that file, the people who scan the original will have that file, everyone who works for the printer will have that file.  All it takes is for any one of those people to share that file with a friend, and its all over.

I imagine EO wants the original for his own wall. But like I said, the physical painting is moot once that high-res scan is produced.

PaulKM wrote:...If we use an offset printer...

I'm hoping for this... can I suggest something other than standard glossy or aqueous finish... maybe uncoated stock with a matte varnish...

I worked in printing and would love to know what stock and finish you guys are planning.

Cheers,
D

A number of people did not receive the user group PM for one reason or another.  The following users had their messages bounce:

jonjhargreaves
Ethesis
shaggymatt36
Ekim Toor

Some servers have the Acaeum blacklisted us because of an improper DNS entry for example, so they didn't receive my mass message.  The good news is that most people received my message.  If I use the message system in the future, I'll state that a mass message went out in the thread so those who didn't receive a message can be contacted by me individually.  I don't anticipate needing to send out many private messages anyway.

Kingofpain89 wrote:The notifications being blank wasn't what concerned me....it was the fact that Hotmail identified it as malicious content.  I've used Hotmail for ten years and never had that happen.  I didnt open it so I had no idea if it was blank or not.  Thought it might be some sort of attempt at spoofing until I logged onto the forum and compared time stamps.

Hotmail filtering it may have had something to do with the blank subject or blank content.  Dunno.

Foul

TheMilford wrote:
80-100lb Cover stock is the way to go but is heavier and expensive. Potlach's McCoy comes in two colors to my knowledge... they do a natural and a ultra-brite white... which is a little bluish. The Ultr-brite is good for matching colors (PMS) more accurately and tends to help a little against yellowing over time... However I'm not sure how acid-free their paper is.

I'm psyched you are considering uncoated with matte.

Whatever you guys decide to do should be great. It sounds like you know exactly what you are doing

Kudos to Paul.  He's giving us all quite an education when it comes to printing methods; what I know/knew about it could fit on the backside of a postage stamp.  Paul has had to learn quite a bit about the process while researching prices and it's serving us well.

Mike B.

megnelwil wrote:
Ben, is there any specific reason for persisting with the idea of this being an "Acaeum Community" project, considering quite a few Acaeum members who have expressed a desire to be included continue to be excluded?

That has been brought up a few times before.
The EO committee is not going to commision more than 50 copies.

I was close to missing the cutoff myself.
I got lucky........

Several reasons for the 50 copies cutoff were given..... and they are deeper in this thread for the reading.

Badmike wrote:
Kudos to Paul.  He's giving us all quite an education when it comes to printing methods; what I know/knew about it could fit on the backside of a postage stamp.  Paul has had to learn quite a bit about the process while researching prices and it's serving us well.

Mike B.

D, thanks for the encouragement! Mike, thank you for the kind words.

Best,

Paul

Badmike wrote:
The idea was thought up by Acaeum members; first discussed here in the Acaeum; is being implemented by Acaeum members; the majority of the individuals getting the prints are Acaeum members; Foulfoot has graciously allowed us to use the "Acaeum" name on the drawing itself.  The entire thrust of the project is a desire to create a keepsake of our memories of gaming, which is a goal of websites like The Acaeum.

Sounds pretty closely related to the Acaeum community, in all aspects. Without the Acaeum this project would have never happened.

Mike B.

Hi Mike, apart from a couple of points, that seems to be an accurate commentary on the facts as I understand them. However, your use of the term, "community", and the way you relate it directly to the Acaeum still confuses me. Most certainly a subset of the Acaeum community has been invited to participate in this project. Would you agree, therefore, a clear distinction between this subset of Acaeum members and the wider Acaeum "Community" ought to be acknowledged rather than the former continue to be applied as the latter despite the indisputable and fundamental difference? Is there a suitable term that could be applied to this subset of members so confusion over the idea of what the Acaeum community refers to might be resolved? I believe Ben's original suggestion when this thread was created was very much focused on the community and no ambiguity existed. But I'm sure nobody is under any real illusions as to the transformation in the nature of this project that has been detailed in subsequent contributions and agreed to by the subset of members. Which leads me to the other point you have raised which seems to stand at odds with what I am witnessing in this thread, "The entire thrust of the project is a desire to create a keepsake of our memories of gaming". I take that in the tongue-in-cheek manner it is surely intended and with good grace. I'm not angling for a copy of the print, starting an artwork collection would surely finish me off financially . But both of us know what's happening here because it has been clearly developed and laid out in the thread. No problems, the subset of members has reached agreement and for my part these are merely my opinions and I'm not directly involved so pinches of salt all around. But I am still interested, as a member of what I understand to be the Acaeum community, in what's going on and was invited to comment by Ben. Genuine regards as always.

Actually there was one other point, "the majority of the individuals getting the prints are Acaeum members". Clarification might be useful here as any recipients other than the artist himself and Acaeum members would seem unreasonable given there is a waiting list and in light of the points you have detailed.