So I was at Meijer when I happened upon the latest issue of Popular Science. Lo and behold, there was my good friend Danny's car on the front cover. Oops! nope it was not his, it was another artist who had taken his design and sold it to Popular Science.

Danny's car has had attention on the web at various times since 2007, when he created it. If you google image search Daniel Schumpert the first few links all go to different auto blogs linking to his pictures.

Attached is his comparison image. He was pretty furious at seeing the pictures. Talk about a used feeling: working on something you have pride in, only to have it stolen and credited to another person. yeesh.

Danny works for Jalopnik.com and they're going to probably run a piece on this. He is also going to look into any legal action that can be taken, the least of which proper credit being posted.

I will post updates here.

On a side note, how the heck are you supposed to drive that car with a huge metal strip down the center of the windshield?


-b0b
(.../random.)

So to expand on this:

In the August issue, Popular Science has issued a correction on the matter in the front of the magazine...

and also given us some work:



danny is still learning modeling so I ended up making the boat, and also did the spray, while he rendered and shaded it up.

Unfortunately for me my name is super microscopic cause it was a late addition after their layout was final.




and here's the untouched render:




anyway, they liked the image so much that we are now making something for Pop Sci every month, so hurray! The next one is already done and looks cool, but I can't show it yet.

Stay tuned!

Awesome work, Briney, and congrats on getting into PopSci!

X wrote on Jul 14^th, 2010 at 1:49am:


Can I "round" that up to $3.14159265?


-b0b
(...get it?!)

Wait, so the magazine gave credit to Danny as a correction?

As for the original article, it makes you wonder how much of your work is copied that you don't know about. Its a shame.

Popular Science has many rendered images throughout. They should consider renaming the mag to Popular Art.

Yea sure we won't see that stuff for a while or maybe at all, but where's the harm in dreaming? I'm pretty certain the automobile, computer, lightbulb, and flight, would all have been laughed at before their time. In fact Da vinci prolly was thought of as a bit off with his whirly-bird machine. But hey... helicopter!  

The human spirit (aside from committing random destruction) excels at imagination and striving for a better tomorrow. Sure we screw up at almost every opportunity but personally I love seeing all the dreams people come up with.

I love dreaming. I love making the dreams come alive visually. I don't care if they don't get made. Half the time when new tech comes out in the future , they make a reference to its origin in science fiction. But as long as someone is researching right now on how to get it done, that is science and it belongs in that magazine.  Sure most of the covers/articles end up being busts, but I bet quite a few turned out to be legit. And I also bet but can't prove alot of those illustrations/articles inspired current or future scientists to dream their own dreams and make cool things... like cell phones and... facebook. *shakes head* Just kidding. But you see my point.

Bring on the inspiration!

Quote:


Well, if pollution is a side effect of these technologies, they probably wouldn't think of that!  

I don't even think I knew what a pen name was when I was in high school...   shoot.