|
|
Post by solar77 on Jan 26, 2009 4:58:42 GMT -8
That story was discussed ad nauseum on almost all the street art boards. It's utter B.S. - do a search on thegiant.org's main board and you will find plenty of info to back that up.
|
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Jan 26, 2009 9:05:48 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by StephenW on Jan 26, 2009 9:49:24 GMT -8
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appropriation_(art) ^ Link above needs to be copied/pasted. Pretty common technique employed by a lot of big names. I don't see anything wrong with it as long as the artist is not trying to hide the fact the fact that there was source material used. Being the "first to create something" is pretty hard to come by as artists draw influence and inspiration from other artists they admire.
|
|
|
|
Post by untilshewokeme on Jan 28, 2009 3:16:57 GMT -8
taken from OMG Posters: "Shepard Fairey returned to his old stomping grounds of Providence, RI to work on a massive installation at Nice Slice, a local pizzeria. The 8′ x 10′ mural is centered around his iconic Angela Davis image. If you’re ever in the area, stop by and check that beast out. Big thanks Mitch from Providence for the pictures. Enjoy!"
 Nice Slice has the best pizza on earth! I recommend the vegan bbq chicken. I was just there a few weeks before this and the owner never mentioned it to me... wonder if it was a surprise. If I end up going again anytime soon I will me sure to post some pictures. |
|
|
|
Post by juggernut3 on Jan 28, 2009 7:26:31 GMT -8
Many of us have read the article and I have to say props to those guys for researching where Shepard's image inspirations come from... but that's about it... it takes no effort to label and criticize an artist's work as a "hack". Shepard does use some of his favorite images/ads/propaganda of the past as sources for some of his most famous campaigns. But he doesn't copy the original spirit and merely replicates the artwork. Shepard researches the influence it had on its respective time period and moves to flip it on its head and put a whole new spin on things. When Shepard was at the Smithsonian for his "Hope" induction, he was given a private tour of the museum. There was an exhibition of called "Ballyhoo" - histories of poster aesthetics, celebrity promotion and advertising. The museum curator started off giving off a bunch of facts around many of the propaganda posters of the 20-60's... but by the middle of the tour. Shepard was actually having a very active discussion with her regarding its origins and effects on the populous. What I'm saying is that Shepard doesn't "bite" these historic campaign and passes them off as his own. He really thinks outside the box to put his artistic signature and transforms these lost ad campaigns of the past into something relevant to our generation. Final point... many people have dissed Banksy when they found out the source of his stencils were derived from some photos we can all find on Flickr or somewhere online. Example being "Love is in the air" (AKA: flower chucker) This is arguably one of Banksy's most famous images, yet he sourced the inspiration from this photo.   Does this make him a biter? No, because none of us had the artistic creativity to take the rock out of that protester's hand and put flowers in its place to make it sing to our generation. This illustrates the point that while the writers of that article ripping on Shepard did the research to find the source images for his inspirations, they did not bother to pick up a phone or email Shepard to ask him why. (I know for a fact Shepard would be open to discuss his work to anyone who cares to ask.) So it’s easy to be subjective and lean into someone for what you "perceive" as plagiarism and play antagonist. As a real journalist there should be impartial research of both points of views... which that article clearly didn't by not reaching out to Obey for comment. |
|
|
|
Post by StephenW on Jan 28, 2009 15:20:42 GMT -8
I'm supposed to stay away from prints but this is hot... SUBLIMINAL PROJECTS RELEASE - LEAP OF FAITH We will be releasing the Leap of Faith collaboration print by Martha Cooper and Shepard Fairey this Saturday 1/31, inside Subliminal Projects Gallery. The print is 18"x24" and an edition of 450. It will be $50 +tax and can be purchased by CREDIT CARD only. Prints will be sold in person only, one per person, and no phone orders or reservations. We will be open from 12pm - 5pm on Saturday. This is your chance to check out all of Martha's beautiful photographs and have a great print to remember it by. Beware Ebayers! We have policies regarding the prints so anyone who intends on ebaying their print, thanks but no thanks, you are not welcome!  |
|
|
|
Post by steveinca on Jan 28, 2009 17:32:53 GMT -8
I'm supposed to stay away from prints but this is hot... SUBLIMINAL PROJECTS RELEASE - LEAP OF FAITH We will be releasing the Leap of Faith collaboration print by Martha Cooper and Shepard Fairey this Saturday 1/31, inside Subliminal Projects Gallery. The print is 18"x24" and an edition of 450. It will be $50 +tax and can be purchased by CREDIT CARD only. Prints will be sold in person only, one per person, and no phone orders or reservations. We will be open from 12pm - 5pm on Saturday. This is your chance to check out all of Martha's beautiful photographs and have a great print to remember it by. Beware Ebayers! We have policies regarding the prints so anyone who intends on ebaying their print, thanks but no thanks, you are not welcome! I may have to go by and grab on of these. Looks like it's not signed though, right? |
|
|
|
Post by reactor88 on Jan 30, 2009 0:03:20 GMT -8
Not sure if this was posted yet but I was watching the USA Network tonight and they had one of their "character approved" commercial spots on Shepard Fairey. You can see it here:
|
|
gman
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by gman on Jan 30, 2009 1:23:42 GMT -8
I was searching this Shepard Fairey controversies and see on this blog that most are saying its ok because he was not hiding the fact he copies everything he does. My question is does he say this some where or are we assuming. I like his work but worry that if we don't draw a line somewhere the word original art will have no meaning.Am I wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by droow2 on Jan 30, 2009 11:31:14 GMT -8
I'm supposed to stay away from prints but this is hot... SUBLIMINAL PROJECTS RELEASE - LEAP OF FAITH We will be releasing the Leap of Faith collaboration print by Martha Cooper and Shepard Fairey this Saturday 1/31, inside Subliminal Projects Gallery. The print is 18"x24" and an edition of 450. It will be $50 +tax and can be purchased by CREDIT CARD only. Prints will be sold in person only, one per person, and no phone orders or reservations. We will be open from 12pm - 5pm on Saturday. This is your chance to check out all of Martha's beautiful photographs and have a great print to remember it by. Beware Ebayers! We have policies regarding the prints so anyone who intends on ebaying their print, thanks but no thanks, you are not welcome! I may have to go by and grab on of these. Looks like it's not signed though, right? Signed by both Shep & Martha Cooper  ))))) |
|
|
|
Post by juggernut3 on Jan 30, 2009 14:39:28 GMT -8
I was searching this Shepard Fairey controversies and see on this blog that most are saying its ok because he was not hiding the fact he copies everything he does. My question is does he say this some where or are we assuming. I like his work but worry that if we don't draw a line somewhere the word original art will have no meaning.Am I wrong? Gman you ask a very valid question. "he copies everything he does" <- could you tell me what blog said that? That's a very irresponsible statement. He does not copy everything. War by Numbers, Evolve Devolve, Obama - Progress/Hope/Change/Vote. were not previous ad campaigns. Shepard doesn't copy, he samples and remixes...  Does this image of yellowstone park have anything to do with Iraq and spouting oil wells? That ad served its purpose in the 1930's and is mostly useless to our generation, but Shepard took that great piece of retro artwork and made it relevant to today's generation. Does anyone know what will happen to Campbell Soup brand if it got taken over by Progressive or if Marilyn Monroe was only the face of the 1960's? Warhol took those images too and did his own "artistic" spin on it... taking "pop" icons/world renowned brand names of yester-year and made them into art/symbolism relevant to generations to come. So do many question Warhol as an artist that did not make ORIGINAL ART? To your question if "its ok (copying) cause he doesn't hide it". Absolutely not, just because you're not hiding that you're copying/stealing something it does not make it right. This does not apply to Shepard. In Shepard's case, he is not admitting to "copying" he doesn't hide where he's "sourcing/sampling" the inspiration, but he does defend himself by stating that he puts his own artistic soul/interpretation into each of his said pieces. In my case, there is no assumption... I know Shepard and we've discussed this a few times. He works hard as an artist and creates original work and he does not copy. The line of copying and sampling is very gray and there's no scale or Webster's standard for it. As fans of art we subjectively judge what we like and dislike. The above rant was just my subjective opinion on art and sampling. 
|
|
|
|
Post by bigstrunso on Jan 30, 2009 15:05:02 GMT -8
Well said juggernautnut...........
|
|
gman
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by gman on Jan 31, 2009 16:53:38 GMT -8
I see the artistry in Shepard's work and as I said before I like his work. I think that my observation of this may come more from shows of other artist I have been to.I like what he says in his work and in a way its neat how he takes posters of historical value and puts his own spin on it. I still think we need to be careful about how much of this sampling we accept. I see Limon and other artist on here get slammed for copying work and some of the points are valid and some I don't agree with.My wife loves his work and says his artistic impression on the work far always any sort of sampling.As you said its very gray I just hope that visual arts continue to be the forum of which people can openly express themselves. I don't know if that does a better job of explaining it or not but hopefully so.
|
|
|
|
Post by comiconart on Feb 3, 2009 22:14:23 GMT -8
Here is a new article that serves as a rebuttal to the plagiarism accusations... Interesting read. |
|
|
|
Post by richardtharbaugh on Feb 3, 2009 22:24:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by comiconart on Feb 3, 2009 22:32:17 GMT -8
OK...that's all well and good, and I don't know if that article has been posted anywhere else or not prior to being posted on supertouch...but I found it because OMG linked to it on supertouch.
Regardless of how it got there, it is an interesting read and worth the time.
And thanks for smiting me for posting it. ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by richardtharbaugh on Feb 3, 2009 23:29:25 GMT -8
Yeah, my post wasn't directed as a slight to you, nor did I smite you for posting it. The rebuttal article centered around the 'attribution issues' did originate at Supertouch. I remembered the earlier posts here that discussed Supertouch's usage without appropriation / permission issues, and in the context of this here little web forum, it made me chuckle. The message is size medium, I think. OK...that's all well and good, and I don't know if that article has been posted anywhere else or not prior to being posted on supertouch...but I found it because OMG linked to it on supertouch. Regardless of how it got there, it is an interesting read and worth the time. And thanks for smiting me for posting it. ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by evilchoy on Feb 4, 2009 17:38:13 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by rizza79 on Feb 4, 2009 18:24:33 GMT -8
This article and situation is exactly why I made the post about the previous article about Shepard's work. Something like this was inevitable to happen with the amount of popularity and money that has been made from this image alone. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.
I enjoyed reading everyone's insights, views, and arguments on the issue. It is definitely an interesting subject. As someone said, it is virtually impossible for an artist to create an image or idea that was not derived from somewhere, something, or someone else, but it does get a bit tricky when the foundation of the work is taken from another source, and everything gets put in a spotlight like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by evilchoy on Feb 4, 2009 19:00:04 GMT -8
As someone said, it is virtually impossible for an artist to create an image or idea that was not derived from somewhere, something, or someone else, but it does get a bit tricky when the foundation of the work is taken from another source, and everything gets put in a spotlight like this. As a producer or creator of some form of media that is consumed by an audience I hope that my sh1t is not derivative, I think the problem with shepard is not that the guy is not creative but the fact that his inspiration is very visible in his work. Take a look at his background he came of age during the time when the word remix, and sampling were introduced into our lexicon and he adapted it into his medium, and made it his. His work is inspiring and iconic blah, blah, blah. I remember seeing shepards work when I was in High School in one of my many forays in manhattan. I was off to see the 120 minutes tour with EMF, PIL, and LIVE...I know I am dating myself and I tried to pull the sticker off the back of a no-parking sign near the ritz. After that I always equated shepard's work with music and new york and it reminds me about the time in my life when all that mattered were concerts, be it neds atomic dustbin or the Luscious Jackson and DJ Hurricane at the Palladium, a new sticker or bill was posted on the walls around the clubs and I could never get more than a sliver, I always left empty,, but rightfully so. I apologize for ruining many of shepard's piece early in my life. But back to the story at hand, now that he is at the point of his career where he is doing retrospectives, publishing books upon books, and appearing on comedy/new shows he somehow becomes legit. And becoming legit means Mo money Mo problems. That also means he starts paying for rights of other artist, photographers need to eat and the AP is one hungry baby. |
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Feb 5, 2009 0:27:26 GMT -8
My whole thing is look at that photo, what's so special about it? Shepard could have chosen any photo he wanted. It was his modification that made it take off so.... Maybe in the future just ask for permission since he probably could have gotten it on the cheap? But then it would open him to lawsuits from all the other ones...
|
|
|
|
Post by thecreep on Feb 5, 2009 1:33:24 GMT -8
I think its cool when the original photographer is credited, it is often done with music. But I do find it ridiculous that the photographer that took the Obama image waited until this time to collect to make a noise. It's like waiting to make sure there is money to be had, and it's pretty shiesty. Years of working in a law firm that dealt mainly with copyright, I saw it all the time. As far as Shepard using images, I have no problem with it and don't know why there is such a stink about it. Some of the most famous paintings by Gauguin, Van Gogh and Degas were from photographs that they did not take. fogonazos.blogspot.com/2006/11/famous-painters-copied-photopraphs_06.htmlIt doesn't degrade the work, I mean part of being an artists is to talk about the world around you and what you see. Should photos be exempt from this? Especially in a time were imagery like this is so commonplace and a part of our everyday lives. Now I could understand being upset if Shepard was using actual photos or prints as collage pieces, similar to the technique of David Hochbaum, but he is not. He is using the imagery much like all the artists that paint scenes from movies, tv shows and so on. |
|
|
|
Post by evilchoy on Feb 5, 2009 6:16:35 GMT -8
But he picked manny's photo, a freelancer. what if an Annie Leibovitz picture was picked or one by the creepy lady that stuffs babies into lettuce leafs. Out of the hundred of thousands of picture that Fairey picked he picked the one of a man that gets paid per image, he contracts those payments to the AP who gets a share for marketing and managing the rights of the image. The AP would not go after him if that image did not for the 1/1000th of a second show the future of our country. But all this would be a mute point if the fairey piece wasn't so amazing and revolutionary that the movement embraced it as the image that would reflect a new change.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhorn1 on Feb 5, 2009 6:19:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by evilchoy on Feb 5, 2009 7:10:34 GMT -8
A.) who said it was okay....
B.) other than the website provider who is making money out this.
C.) Really....
D.) I would love to see if shepard as a account on that site that would kick a$$
E.) Really...
F.) I we get an Arts Cabinet member I hope they crack down on bad taste and down youthful creativity... Hell all of us that are using avatars from artist should start paying a price also...
G.) I like the Alphabet
H.) I think if money or something that can be calculated is achieved with the help of another some comeuppance needs be addressed.
J.) Please try to use the word Comeuppance in a sentence today.
|
|
)))))
