Originally Posted by SparkMonkey

I agree with this. Technique and practice can go a very long way, but it takes an inborn talent to really elevate it to art. I can wield a paintbrush, I can learn about the proper way to hold it and move the paint around the canvas, but I will never, ever be Rembrandt or Van Gogh.

I'm not diminishing what anyone does. I agree that every quilt we make is very personal and unique, whether the pattern is published or original. However, I can't compare anything I make to, say, one of Jinny Beyer's. Some people just have a unique vision when it comes to composition and design.

Originally Posted by DogHouseMom

I had a bit of a let down at the Paducah show this year. I saw one gorgeous quilt that was awesome and won the AQS Longarm Award - a top award. It was a letdown because upon further research I found that it was almost identical to a previous Paducah BIS winner! Even down to the "signature" Sharon Schamber's unique binding. In fact, when I first spotted the quilt I thought it was one of Sharon's. The previous BIS winner was Sharon's, this one was one of her students who pretty much copied the quilt with only a minor adjustment to color. While it was indeed a gorgeous quilt and exquisitely done ... I was a bit disappointed that it was almost and exact replica of a previous quilt. I personally place a lot more emphasis on originality. While OK and indeed encouraged to borrow ideas from other quilts, an exact replica was not my idea of a show winning quilt.

The "craft" to me is the execution of the item, the art is the originalality - even if it's a traditional pattern the colors etc must be pleasing. I look at a show the caliber of Paducah as an "art" show as much as a craft show. Something about it should be original.

Just my two cents.