Banner Sponsors
For artists and collectors sponsored by Intercal...your mohair supplier and Johnna's Mohair Store
This is one of those, "you can't win" debates, or so it seems to me at this point, since I've seen it discussed a thousand times, and those who posted that there's no policing body for this are correct: there isn't, at this point. So there IS no "one" answer. But for what it's worth... my input.
I call my pieces OOAK because they are not alike, even when I reuse my patterns. Which I do, with regularity, often mixing and matching pieces.
I think the entire point of bothering to distinguish between OOAK and small editions, or mass-produced editions, is that a UNIQUE and ONE AND ONLY item -- bear, artwork, sculpture, car, whatever -- has more desirability for the collector, is more rare, and thus has more value, both sentimental, and monetary, than an item of which there is more than one... especially compared with items in ample supply.
I don't know that anyone is really interested in nailing artist's heads to the wall for re-using patterns. I'm pretty sure Nancy isn't trying to create rules, the breaking of which requires jail time.
When I see that artists claim never to reuse patterns, I think to myself, "Wow, what a lot of work he/she creates for him/her self. When all it would take to make a truly unique piece would be a different color mohair, or a 1/4 inch resizing of the nose." I certainly admire their work ethic and commitment to being truly and completely OOAK from piece to piece. However, I'm not sure that commitment makes their work any "better," or more sellable, or more artistic, or more beautiful, or whatever.
For me, the point in saying OOAK is to designate something I have made, which is, in most ways, entirely different from and dissimilar from anything else I've ever made, and ever will make again. And that's good enough for me.
Upstate New YorkThanks all. I'm feeling better now. Didn't want to commit a serious bear blunder and offend the entire bear making/collecting community. 
