Fleet Foxes Minneapolis 08 Florafauna

[automator]

This topic is dedicated to: Fleet Foxes Minneapolis 08 Florafauna

[DavidaLoca]

Oh man... hands down one of the most controversial posters ever on Gigposters.com... tch screw that, probably ever printed.

http://www.gigposters.com/comments/1000 ... onies.html

[mistersmith]

[db23]

i still do not get the big deal about this. originally i thought the artist used one of the images in Smith's post above. after seeing his poster and the one in Smith's i was like "big f'ing deal." i skimmed the gigposters comments and agree that the artist could've drawn the shapes differently but i lost total interest halfway through and went to sleep.

[StatusDesign]

The fact that he just basically traced the shapes and flipped it upside down shows tons of laziness, lack of respect for the other artist, and downright lameness. Thats why a bunch of peeps were pissed

[ricv64]

" I made this " plus his history on GP was what caused that

[samverrill]

Yea, I actually think Paul is a pretty talented designer (I'm using designer instead of artist to deal with the whole "I Made This" business). But his GP and internet persona does him zero favors. Why he feels the need to pick fights, and then make ridiculous excuses I'll never understand.

[db23]

The fact that he just basically traced the shapes and flipped it upside down shows tons of laziness, lack of respect for the other artist, and downright lameness. Thats why a bunch of peeps were pissed

i think the fact that the artist was passing it off as his own and then fighting with others was the big deal. i'm not gonna make a big deal about it because i don't know the artists involved nor do i have any personal interest in either pieces but Fairey and Kozik are two of my favorites and were never the most original. just sayin'.

[hillsj2001]

i can't believe i read through almost all of that over on GP...my head hurts

[tajmccall]

I made this post.

[DavidaLoca]

The fact that he just basically traced the shapes and flipped it upside down shows tons of laziness, lack of respect for the other artist, and downright lameness. Thats why a bunch of peeps were pissed

i think the fact that the artist was passing it off as his own and then fighting with others was the big deal. i'm not gonna make a big deal about it because i don't know the artists involved nor do i have any personal interest in either pieces but Fairey and Kozik are two of my favorites and were never the most original. just sayin'.

But the difference between Kozik and Fairey is that they never claimed to have created something on their own. Paul on the other hand argued that "I made it" and created all of the artwork himself. So yeah, you can borrow clip art, or take someone elses ideas but at least credit them when it's due.

Oh and when the original artist Andrew Holder found out about it, Paul didn't really do squat when apologizing to him about taking his art other than saying something like "I'm sorry if you feel like I stole your art." What kind of crap is that honestly?

[mistersmith]

I only put up the pic to save 5 responses going "what's so controversial?"

I think the first part of the GP argument was, "if something is old, tired, worn-out, nobody will miss it, go ahead and use it." Like '50s advertising and stuff. What happened here was a very recent print from a respected artist got completely aped.

I think the second part was, "if you're gonna use work like it was clip-art, then be an artist about it. Bring something new to the table." This poster took a bigass rock in the sky and created...a bigass rock in the sky.

Third was an argument about making art vs. plagiarizing. The designer of this poster said "I made it" like a dozen times, implying the work was all his, at one point he was saying only that in his repsonses, but eventually clarified with "if I didn't exist neither would this poster." Which doesn't mean a whole lot.

Apparently he has a bad rep on GP, I have no idea about that. Guess I don't read GP enough, which is probably good.

If anyone is unclear about what I'm talking about above, maybe you should first go talk to your Friendly Local Gigposter Artist. Failing that, here's an example of what can be done when a talented designer chooses to work with source material:











EB for that poster:

[db23]

I made this post.

you better give credit where credit is due. someone wrote that same post on 2/17/08. THIEF!

Smith and Davidaloca, very good explanations. I get it and I read that, I just didn't care. I know what the artist did was wrong and the fact that he was passing it off as his own was the major crime in my book. Re-using the image didn't faze me at all and i'm sure i'm in the minority but i also feel like i'm one of the few who think most gigposters should be used to just promote the concert they're made for. Shit, a piece of paper that lists band, date, time, venue is what i see for most of these. sure there are some images/artists that we collect and pay for but people seem to forget that these posters should be used to promote instead of profit.

[marcabrunswick]

Just now starting to read about this controversy and don't 100% follow. Just know its a shame because this is one helluva a band- I hope nobody judges them by this. Worth a listen.

[mcnail]

The band had 0 to do with the poster, that I can guarantee.

As far as the controversy, it's just kind weird that he aped something off a current artist. That is what makes it kind of awkward.