Found some stolen images

[Krakatoa]

When I first started collecting SB drawings 7-8 years ago, some of the early drawings did not have the SB watermark in the right bottom corner.

Having a quick look in the main archive none of the Italian cruisers look like they have the Shipbucket watermark. So unless the author knew those drawings came from Shipbucket, why would he give SB any credit?

[acelanceloet]

Since the new templates with the sb watermark have been introduced 7.5 years ago, I suspect basically all drawings you started collecting did not have it haha.

That said, this is exactly why the watermark was added, but what is implied here is the books author downloading the images from sb. Normally you should always list the image's source if you publish something, unless you created the image yourself.

[MihoshiK]

Just to give some people something to think about. Both the Astute Class Submarine Manual and the Type 45 User Manual contain shipbucket images, and the author, Jonathan Gates, was quite careful in obtaining permission from the artists.

Generally it's not hard to find us, and I think most wouldn't mind being published even if the only thing you get out of it is a mention in the book, and perhaps a copy of said book. I certainly think the above look cool on my bookshelf

If an author doesn't credit us, he's just being lazy, and you might want to wonder what else he's being lazy about.

[MihoshiK]

Hmmm... Paging Darth Panda.

https://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/page ... Ships.aspx

[heuhen]

https://gillianjonesdesigns.com/pages/military-arwork

come randomly over this website. It is not that easy to see/detect but if you know Shipbucket drawings quite well, you will notice that they have used shipbucket drawings and photoshoped them with flags on.


For example the link bellow, with the drawing of Fridtjof Nansen class. I recognise those lines from one of my drawings of the class. You can compare it to the drawing under the link
https://gillianjonesdesigns.com/product ... flag-print
http://shipbucket.com/drawings/2612/file

What they have done, is removing all railings, and all colors and photoshoped on the flag. They have done the same to multiple drawings.

They ask from 30£ for a simple version, and then they start to add on:
- Large size +30£
- Fram +38£
- Personalisation +7£

The website do also inform that all art they sell is signed by the artist. And they sign it with artist name "Gillian Jones" and not the original artist of these drawings. And they even appeard on BBC

I leave it up to admin to decide what to do, and or if there is something that can be done. I have at least not heard that Gillian Jones have asked permission to use our drawings for his modified version.

My question is: His drawings are modified shipbucket drawings. How close resemblance can a drawing be, before we should go "wait a minute!"?

[acelanceloet]

I am actually not 100% sure if they are shipbucket drawings. Yes things are the same, but there are also modifications done that are not as on the original drawing (note the liferaft on the helideck or the SPG's on your nansen. Did he use a shipbucket drawing as a base? Certainly. But a lot of modifications were done, for example he used a shipbucket drawing as a base and created vector art over it to create something not dissimilar to us drawing over plans. Proving these were shipbucket drawings at some point is hard, and the amount of original work done on it seems to vary between drawings. Not sure what to do here....

[heuhen]

And that what I was unsure on. For example on the Nansen, I can see several small details, that I have on my version of Nansen.

But where the lines is going, I don't know, how strict do we want to be. All I know is from my studies as designer, where we are constantly informed to always credit anything we use, even if it something small. (Some of it is to be on the safe side).