1981 M20J restoration

[jetdriven]

Scheme designers did a great job on the design as usual

Edited June 15, 2017 by jetdriven

[jetdriven]

On 5/9/2017 at 7:52 AM, jclemens said:

What I pay for paint and interior is probably not a good representation of what it would cost you. I send a couple hundred thousand a year in business to the shop.  Expect to pay around $14K for a good strip and paint.

Hawk is substantially less expensive than than this. 

[jclemens]

It is based on a scheme designers layout that was originally done by Hawk.  I got a quote from Joe at Hawk to reproduce it for $12,750.00.  I wouldn't call it substantially less.  They do fantastic work, no doubt.

[jetdriven]

9 hours ago, jclemens said:

It is based on a scheme designers layout that was originally done by Hawk.  I got a quote from Joe at Hawk to reproduce it for $12,750.00.  I wouldn't call it substantially less.  They do fantastic work, no doubt.

12,750$ is substantially less expensive than 14,000$ wouldn't you say? 

[jclemens]

The math definitely works out that way   

[jetdriven]

22 hours ago, jclemens said:

It is based on a scheme designers layout that was originally done by Hawk.  I got a quote from Joe at Hawk to reproduce it for $12,750.00.  I wouldn't call it substantially less.  They do fantastic work, no doubt.

It look like an outright copy of another 201 that was designed by scheme designers.  Not so much inspired as a carbon copy. How do you feel about that? Did you know?

[jclemens]

Yes, I am fully aware of it, I picked it out.  I even tried to get the same guy that painted that one to paint this one.  Is there a problem with that?  It's not a carbon copy, no checker board tail and the colors are not exactly the same.  Scheme Designers offers the same service, for $900.00 you send them a picture of a plane you like and they send your paint shop the drawings and stencils needed to apply it to your aircraft.  "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."   

[jetdriven]

I know. I used scheme designers. Their work is on my plane. But they are artists and it's their work. And I paid for that. I can't speak for Peter but I would be pretty steamed about someone without my knowledge, copying my plane. 

You didn't use the checkerboard nor the same shade of silver, but the other 95% is exactly the same.  Down to the specific drop shadow and font on the N numbers. Let's call this what t really is. 

Perhaps the right thing to do here is to either come up with your own original design or pay someone before using theirs. I tried the former but couldn't get it precise, and then used Scheme Designers.

what do you think?

[jclemens]

I think it looks great.  It's just a factory Ovation 2 paint scheme on a 201.  Not that original of a design, Mooney made a bunch of them that looked like that.  The only thing different is the checker board and the N-number.  

[jetdriven]

You do understand that the top two are virtually identical while he red one is only vaguely similar. Different waterline. Different stripes. Different colors. Different n-number font and shading.  Different stripes paralleling he C on the tail. Basically everything. 

You can't see that? Are you seriously trying to tell me that your plane was "inspired" scheme designers work and not virtually identical ?

 

i think your defending what you already did as original, which is indefensible. 

The reason I'm being a hardass about this is because I did pay the 900$ for the work, maybe scheme designers will have to raise the price next time around because of things like this. They have to make a living too.  

Put it the other way. Let's say you invented and STC'd a new type of nose gear door. Smoother and more speed.  Then I bought a pair of them and made some stamping dies and started making them for 1/4 the price   Or maybe I offered the use of the tooling for free to owners to "owner produce" their own.  How would you feel about that? 

Edited June 16, 2017 by jetdriven

[Guest Mike261]

8 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

You do understand that the top two are virtually identical while he red one is only vaguely similar. Different waterline. Different stripes. Different colors. Different n-number font and shading.  Different stripes paralleling he C on the tail. Basically everything. 

You can't see that? Are you seriously trying to tell me that your plane was "inspired" scheme designers work and not virtually identical ?

 

i think your defending what you already did as original, which is indefensible. 

The reason I'm being a hardass about this is because I did pay the 900$ for the work, maybe scheme designers will have to raise the price next time around because of things like this. They have to make a living too.  

Put it the other way. Let's say you invented and STC'd a new type of nose gear door. Smoother and more speed.  Then I bought a pair of them and made some stamping dies and started making them for 1/4 the price   Or maybe I offered the use of the tooling for free to owners to "owner produce" their own.  How would you feel about that? 

OMG Jetdriven...save it. go troll somewhere else.

[jclemens]

No, he has a valid point.  I already called the paint shop and scheduled it to be stripped.  This time I am just going to paint it white, hopefully no one has exclusive rights to that.  Maybe I should just get it primed only....

Edited June 16, 2017 by jclemens

[MB65E]

I'd be flattered if some one copied my paint job!  Scheme designers knows this. I personally like the old Porsche Mooney scheme. 

One day I'd like to do my own version of it with a vintage 65 Porsche flare for my vintage 65 Mooney. 

You all can copy it!

I would be mad at myself if I charged or paid $900 to draw up a paint scheme. I've done several aircraft for work and others. Not a dime my way. However, when asked on the ramp,  who designed the paint work. I kindly say "I did" with a smile! 

-Matt

[Mooneymite]

13 minutes ago, jclemens said:

No, he has a valid point.  I already called the paint shop and scheduled it to be stripped. 

It would seem more cost effective to work out a royalty to Scheme Designers if you feel there was an infringement.

[jclemens]

32 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

You do understand that the top two are virtually identical while he red one is only vaguely similar. Different waterline. Different stripes. Different colors. Different n-number font and shading.  Different stripes paralleling he C on the tail. Basically everything. 

You can't see that? Are you seriously trying to tell me that your plane was "inspired" scheme designers work and not virtually identical ?

 

i think your defending what you already did as original, which is indefensible. 

The reason I'm being a hardass about this is because I did pay the 900$ for the work, maybe scheme designers will have to raise the price next time around because of things like this. They have to make a living too.  

Put it the other way. Let's say you invented and STC'd a new type of nose gear door. Smoother and more speed.  Then I bought a pair of them and made some stamping dies and started making them for 1/4 the price   Or maybe I offered the use of the tooling for free to owners to "owner produce" their own.  How would you feel about that? 

I am in no way defending this as original, I literally told you I copied the paint scheme.  I think I will paint the next one exactly like this one.

[Bob_Belville]

11 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

It would seem more cost effective to work out a royalty to Scheme Designers if you feel there was an infringement.

Sarcasm alert

[bradp]

I've seen two other planes in the exact same scheme as Peters.  One in Virginia and another in Pennsylvania. Both I googled the N number wondering if Peter was on the ramp with me and no dice.   

Its like the guy that invented the members only jacket....

[jclemens]

So you decided to call Scheme Designers and "turn me in".  That was very mature of you...  I thought I had the only Members Only jacket?!?  Next your going to tell me this limited edition Tommy Bahama Hawaiian shirt is not unique.  The guy that sold it to me said he guaranteed I wouldn't see anyone else wearing it....

[jetdriven]

Well for one thing I didn't have to turn you in, you're advertising what you did and you're proud of it. Just be prepared to defend yourself. If you can't, ask why. 

[PTK]

4 hours ago, jclemens said:

Yes, I am fully aware of it, I picked it out.  I even tried to get the same guy that painted that one to paint this one.  Is there a problem with that?  It's not a carbon copy, no checker board tail and the colors are not exactly the same.  Scheme Designers offers the same service, for $900.00 you send them a picture of a plane you like and they send your paint shop the drawings and stencils needed to apply it to your aircraft.  "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."   

Yes, there is a problem with that. That scheme concept is mine. I paid Scheme Designers to digitize it so the shop can accurately render it on my airplane. Being fully aware and proceeding to copy it anyway is grossly unethical. You made a mistake to not even attempt to ask for permission. You can tell a lot about someone's character by how they handle mistakes they make.

[jclemens]

Look, I googled "Mooney paint schemes", scrolled through them until I found one I liked, hit print and took it to the paint shop. It's not like its a unique design, it's a late model factory paint scheme.  The tail pattern is unique, hence the reason we didn't use it.  The only thing unique about it is it's on a 201 instead of an Ovation/Bravo.  Sorry if it offends you, that was not my intent.  

[Bob_Belville]

Just now, jclemens said:

Look, I googled "Mooney paint schemes", scrolled through them until I found one I liked, hit print and took it to the paint shop. It's not like its a unique design, it's a late model factory paint scheme.  The tail pattern is unique, hence the reason we didn't use it.  The only thing unique about it is it's on a 201 instead of an Ovation/Bravo.  Sorry if it offends you, that was not my intent.  

Don't let 2 guys here get under your skin. They seem to take pride in being ill mannered.

Nice 201, thanks for posting.

 

[Bennett]

Interesting discussion, and I can see both sides of the argument. When I had my airplane repainted I first viewed just about every photo of Mooneys I could find, including the web. I liked the"swoopy" look on the factory airplanes and on the designer sites. I bought a set of generalized design studies from a designer whose name I don't recall, and then downloaded profile and top down generic drawings, and drew a composite of various ideas in color to bring to ArtCraft. Most of that went out the window when the head painter took a full day (Sunday) to create a far better scheme on the airplane itself. Many times tapes were lifted and moved to follow the contours of the real airplane as opposed to my two dimensional doodlings. The end result satisfys me immensely, and if it looks like other aircraft it is not because I was copying any single aircraft, or trying to bypass Scheme Designers. They were,and are, of great influence in the genreL aviation word, and if ArtCraft had asked me to obtain templates from them, I would have, but ArtCraft folks are artists in their own right, and I assume part of their painting fees include the custom "on aircraft" work they do.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[peevee]

Are we seriously arguing over paint?

[jclemens]

It would appear so, yes