|
Post by meatbag on Jul 29, 2009 16:31:47 GMT -8
Definitely a let down for those of us who have been waiting for a big return. Really bummed.
|
|
|
Post by LeBasse Projects on Jul 29, 2009 16:37:55 GMT -8
What I really don´t get about this is, he must have been aware of the risk of being caught. Why take the chance? It seems like he has been quite productive in the past, have a pretty solid fanbase, so why steal other peoples work and risk all that? Seems like a very dumb move to me. Sam based several of his "Japanese" styles on Jakuchu Ito, a Japanese artist from the 1700's, as well as several other Edo period painters i believe. I don't have the time to get you images, but i am sure someone else will go look. He basically did the same thing that he did with Foster's work. Trace out and slap his character on top. Homage or plagiarism?
|
|
|
Post by origo on Jul 29, 2009 20:45:32 GMT -8
Well, it´s kinda hard to ask an artist who passed away.
But to steal a colleagues work and sell it as your own, is just bad moral and poor judgement.
In this case, definetely plagiarism and then some.
|
|
|
Post by celluloidpig on Jul 29, 2009 21:17:04 GMT -8
This just came from a comment Sam made on OMG Posters. Hey people make mistakes and I really don't think this one should ruin his career... I forgive the guy:
First and foremost, I’d like to offer my sincerest apologies to anyone I’ve offended regarding a mistake I’ve made recently reinterpreting a Jon Foster image. Before I explain the carelessness that led to this, I want you to know that I have already contacted him directly and offered all compensation made from the posters, as well as a public apology for not thoroughly researching my source of inspiration. I was looking online awhile ago searching for old illustrations from the 1900s and came across a small image of a tree painting that I dragged to my desktop. It was on the same page as Arthur Rackham’s paintings, and my mistake was assuming it also belonged to Rackham, and revisiting the image without thorough research, i wanted to have one of my characters visiting his painting as sort of a homage not to pass it off as my own. There’s absolutely no excuse for this neglect on my behalf, and I’ve learned a huge lesson in all this to always do your homework. I never intended to deliberately use his art and pass it off as my own. My biggest regret, however, was meeting such a talented artist under such unfortunate and preventable circumstances, and undermining his work on account of my negligence. Once again, I apologize if I let anyone down and promise to be more responsible as a working artist humbly in the presence of exceptionally talented peers.
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Jul 29, 2009 21:44:13 GMT -8
It's good that he decided to speak about this so humbly... though if he's going to be lifting images from his betters, he should probably know a little more about them first. I'm pretty sure a t-shirt and khakis were not standard costume in Arthur Rackham's time. Rackham's aesthetic was fairly dissimilar to Jon Foster's, as well. Arthur Rackham – "Siegfried Kills Fafner"
|
|
|
Post by sebreg on Jul 29, 2009 21:52:26 GMT -8
Great to see Flores speak out and clear the air.
and I love Rackham's work, just got a book on him a little while ago. Beautiful style.
|
|
|
Post by svenman on Jul 29, 2009 23:44:10 GMT -8
Glad that Flores has made an apology about this situation. The fact remains that this issue has raised awareness that Flores traces The work of others in order to create his output. Looking at this particular piece, I'd say that foster's original work was taken into a computer program such as illustrator and Digitally layer traced. Does anyone know if there is an original artwork for this Flores piece or if it was created digitally as an editioned image only?
|
|
|
Post by warrenb on Jul 30, 2009 0:12:34 GMT -8
Wow I am a big Sam Flores fan, I own one of his paintings and it is still one of my favorites. I met him and he kind of seems like a stoner / party animal type. I really do believe him when he say he didn't know exactly what he was doing here. I totally agree with what Chet said and I hope Flores truly realizes how disgraceful this is. I forgive him this time but he better not do it again!
|
|
|
Post by jemappellekat on Jul 30, 2009 2:57:10 GMT -8
And for anybody who doesn't think it's a total rip off, look what somebody just posted on that other board: Whoa... I really hope that the public apology to JF was sincere... and that the cheque really is in the mail...
|
|
|
Post by chetzar on Jul 30, 2009 9:52:50 GMT -8
I am glad Sam responded, so I'll give him kudos for that. But I don't entirely buy the explanation. Homages to a dead artists work should only be done using paintings that are well known, or if not, then it should be indicated that it is an homage in the title or in some other way when the work is presented. I mean, if nobody knows the image and nobody knows it's a tribute, then how is it a tribute?
|
|
|
Post by muschelschubser on Jul 30, 2009 10:09:56 GMT -8
I am glad Sam responded, so I'll give him kudos for that. But I don't entirely buy the explanation. Homages to a dead artists work should only be done using paintings that are well known, or if not, then it should be indicated that it is an homage in the title or in some other way when the work is presented. I mean, if nobody knows the image and nobody knows it's a tribute, then how is it a tribute? i'm totally with you chet. there is no difference between a dead and till alive artist when you copy a painting like that! even if you call it later "hommage"
|
|
|
Post by untilshewokeme on Jul 30, 2009 10:30:29 GMT -8
Sam based several of his "Japanese" styles on Jakuchu Ito, a Japanese artist from the 1700's, as well as several other Edo period painters i believe. I don't have the time to get you images, but i am sure someone else will go look. He basically did the same thing that he did with Foster's work. Trace out and slap his character on top. Homage or plagiarism? well it only took ten minutes of looking at the paintings Sam has on his site and a google image search of "Jakuchu Ito" and the only other Edo painter I am familiar with, Katsushika Hokusai, and I got this to share: Jakuchu Ito Katsushika Hokusai not as exact of copies as the Foster piece but a little too close if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by svenman on Jul 30, 2009 13:27:18 GMT -8
good finds uswm. this is not looking good.
i don't think this can be seen as 'homage'. fromage, maybe.
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Jul 30, 2009 13:39:56 GMT -8
|
|
cgriffin
New Member
too new to be clever
Posts: 32
|
Post by cgriffin on Jul 31, 2009 8:14:05 GMT -8
I'm glad Sam has come forward to face the music; that takes some courage. His explanation, though, falls way short of believable. Rackham would never have used a figure in a t-shirt and tattoos. Dur. What it boils down to is Flores appropriates images from many different paintings, old and new. He always has, now his entire collection is suspect. I think a similar thing is happening to Mijn Schatje as well, but she's been much less apologetic about her borrowing. Sam also nabbed from Walter Crane's 'Neptune's Horses' www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/detail/Detail_crane_walter.html, for this painting: www.subliminalprojects.com/main/exhibitions/egoaddictionotherbedtimes/flores_0.jpgThe best he can do, at this point, is 'fess up, put out a broad-sweeping apology, ask for understanding, and proceed with his career in full transparency. Works for politicians and televangelists, right?
|
|
|
Post by rhinomilk on Jul 31, 2009 8:27:52 GMT -8
the examples that untilshewokeme, it's like... no shit they were modeled after those pieces. they're obviously homages & he stuck in his images to remix them and made it his own (and they're not obscure like the jon foster piece). I personally like that they're close enough to the original, so if you're familiar with the era you can easily identify what he's using. there is a fine line though... like vanilla ice saying his beat wasn't a rip off of queen vs. the fugees sampling roberta flack (i'm not a hip hop expert)
|
|
cgriffin
New Member
too new to be clever
Posts: 32
|
Post by cgriffin on Jul 31, 2009 8:38:57 GMT -8
I also think the popularity of the source piece matters, too. No one would call borrowing from the Mona Lisa "plagiarism", would they? But nipping from Jon Foster, a currently working artist, is in very bad form.
There's a big difference between being inspired by a painting or style, and lifting entire portions and plopping it onto your own painting. To do it effectively, you must be making an obvious homage or parody, and most importantly, be sure you aren't infringing on copyright! Back in the day, Andy Warhol and Jeff Koons have had to confront these issues, to varying degrees of success.
It IS a fine line, one that is often kinda blurry. I'm not up on music sampling either, but must the sampler get permission from the original artist to take portions of a song and use it?
|
|
|
Post by untilshewokeme on Jul 31, 2009 9:19:43 GMT -8
the examples that untilshewokeme, it's like... no shit they were modeled after those pieces. they're obviously homages & he stuck in his images to remix them and made it his own (and they're not obscure like the jon foster piece). I personally like that they're close enough to the original, so if you're familiar with the era you can easily identify what he's using. there is a fine line though... like vanilla ice saying his beat wasn't a rip off of queen vs. the fugees sampling roberta flack (i'm not a hip hop expert) I have to admit that I am not an expert when it comes to the career of Sam Flores, but to me personally, I believe for it to have been an homage that the paintings would have to be fairly well known to the average viewer (and i know that some people's knowledge of art on this board is well above average) or the artist to at least come out and say "this series of paintings is an homage of Edo art" or something of that nature. I mean I have take some art history classes during my design degree and we touched based on Edo briefly. But if I was just to look at Flores' paintings then I would just assume he was paying a generalized tribute with his use of imagery. This whole situation just seems to be way too fishy to me. I mean even in his statement/apology it basically breaks down to "Sorry I stole your art, I meant to steal someone else's". Because let say it was a Rackham painting instead of Foster's, does it make it OK that he traced the thing line for line and slapped in his own character?
|
|
|
Post by thecreep on Jul 31, 2009 9:31:14 GMT -8
I have to admit that I am not an expert when it comes to the career of Sam Flores, but to me personally, I believe for it to have been an homage that the paintings would have to be fairly well known to the average viewer (and i know that some people's knowledge of art on this board is well above average) Exactly, thats a great point. There are many people on this board that are very knowledgeable about art, and willing to do some research and find out what is really going on. The sad part is, not everyone does that. So they see new works by an artist such as Flores, have no clue who Jakuchu Ito, Hokusai or Jon Foster is and just believe the works to be his concept to execution. Maybe they'll stumble onto this thread, or OMG Posters or wherever else this conversation is taking place, but not likely. So then it should be up to the artist to be quite clear about the work they are making an homage to. If the work was good enough and inspired the artist enough to make an homage, why not state who it is. Some people might even learn about an artist they have never heard of before.
|
|
|
Post by meatbag on Jul 31, 2009 10:19:52 GMT -8
holy sh*t. I didn't see that comparison yet, what a shame to see all this. Sam really made his way around the net grabbing from artist to artist. That's just wrong no matter how you cut it.
|
|
|
Post by origo on Jul 31, 2009 10:45:10 GMT -8
He just buried himself, this is so dissapointing.
|
|
|
Post by rhinomilk on Jul 31, 2009 10:49:56 GMT -8
look familiar?
|
|
|
Post by joshualinergallery on Jul 31, 2009 11:04:15 GMT -8
look familiar? Those sneaker head paintings were done on actual Nike boxes Sam cut up and painted on, personally I don't think there are any issues with that. He clearly jacked Foster, no iffs ands or buts. As for some of the other work he has done which was based on Edo period pieces I think he put his own spin on them and to me they are original enough, the Foster move is totally inexcusable. Also do we know that he wrote that the "apology/explanation" on OMG or was it someone else.....
|
|
|
Post by jediak on Jul 31, 2009 11:59:16 GMT -8
Josh, I've been wanting to hear your two cents on this matter since you have shown his work at your gallery, thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
Post by joshualinergallery on Jul 31, 2009 12:40:48 GMT -8
Josh, I've been wanting to hear your two cents on this matter since you have shown his work at your gallery, thanks for sharing. No problem. I have shown Sam in the past, two very successful solo shows at Lineage in Philly. He is definitely referencing other work, sometimes more so than others but aside from pretty much tracing the Foster image I do feel the other work was original enough and in Sam's own style that they were not ripoffs, including some other paintings that were posted in this thread after the Foster was brought to light. I also don't feel they were homages either, more of inspiration. I have to say though that I feel there is work posted here that I find to be derivative but others are ok with, I think that has to do with people's agendas and promoting certain things while calling others out. When one looks at a current artist and comments that it reminds them a lot of another current artist working in the same "scene" I think there is something wrong, I feel this is happening a lot here but for some reason doesn't get called out. My opinion on this might belong more in a different thread though.
|
|