Metropolis 13 Dye
Forum rules
• Posts in this forum should directly relate to the artist, art, or artwork.
• Do not post ISOs or FS/Ts in this forum section. Please use the Open Market section of the EB forums for all secondary (resale) market activity.
• Do not post details of your order process, shipping status, or condition upon arrival in this forum section. Please use the item's Release Discussion thread for this activity.
• Posts in this forum should directly relate to the artist, art, or artwork.
• Do not post ISOs or FS/Ts in this forum section. Please use the Open Market section of the EB forums for all secondary (resale) market activity.
• Do not post details of your order process, shipping status, or condition upon arrival in this forum section. Please use the item's Release Discussion thread for this activity.
-
- Art Enthusiast
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:45 am
Wait could someone please explain this...... Is this exactly the same as the original "Metropolis" poster but with a slightly different color and the artist's name on it? Is there something that I'm missing or is this just an opportunity to own the original without paying a million for it?
- seeker1115
- Art Expert
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:04 pm
Yeah, I don't understand. It's not even that different from the original color wise. Here's the original poster for comparison:
Woodyland is a kitten
- rubberneck
- Art God
- Posts: 26101
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:19 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
Interested to see what this looks like as a screen print...
-
- LORD KINGSHIT
- Posts: 1727
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 1:00 am
someone should probably change the status of this edition to "bootleg" instead of "official". booting a famous and historic designers work, without permission/knowledge from his estate, is arguably a questionable action for an art gallery. just kinda seems out of the spirit and a further and unfortunate blurring of the line between "Interpreted or Referential Artwork" and "Bootleg Merchandise" at these sort of events. public domain or not, im a little disappointed by this, gotta be honest.
but also, yeah, we all dont have a million dollars kicking around for a real one. i get that.
but also, yeah, we all dont have a million dollars kicking around for a real one. i get that.
- wonkabars7
- Art Expert
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 2:13 pm
Well put, DD.danieldanger wrote:someone should probably change the status of this edition to "bootleg" instead of "official". booting a famous and historic designers work, without permission/knowledge from his estate, is arguably a questionable action for an art gallery. just kinda seems out of the spirit and a further and unfortunate blurring of the line between "Interpreted or Referential Artwork" and "Bootleg Merchandise" at these sort of events. public domain or not, im a little disappointed by this, gotta be honest.
but also, yeah, we all dont have a million dollars kicking around for a real one. i get that.
What makes this situation even more questionable is how there is a licensed print of this poster which goes for a bit less. I can look up details later.
The Han Solo card is maybe more ridiculous as there is no way Lucas/Disney (or even Topps) approved it.
Wonka, do you mean the S2 recreation? It's quite a bit more $$! But is the correct size and not a shrunken version:
http://www.jackgallery.com/page.php?pag ... 1&subtype=
Cheap reprints of the poster seem to be everywhere, but I suppose this one is more expensive because it's screened and on fancy paper with nice inks. It's not exactly original art, but I reckon it'll look good on a wall.
http://www.jackgallery.com/page.php?pag ... 1&subtype=
Cheap reprints of the poster seem to be everywhere, but I suppose this one is more expensive because it's screened and on fancy paper with nice inks. It's not exactly original art, but I reckon it'll look good on a wall.
This. Between Metropolis, the Hulk print, the Han Solo print...this artist seems to just enjoy taking established works from other artists, screening them and then calling it his work. I've said it before, it's disappointing because he does other original works like Snow Princess that I actually like and have purchased. But this kind of stuff really turns me off.danieldanger wrote:someone should probably change the status of this edition to "bootleg" instead of "official". booting a famous and historic designers work, without permission/knowledge from his estate, is arguably a questionable action for an art gallery. just kinda seems out of the spirit and a further and unfortunate blurring of the line between "Interpreted or Referential Artwork" and "Bootleg Merchandise" at these sort of events. public domain or not, im a little disappointed by this, gotta be honest.
but also, yeah, we all dont have a million dollars kicking around for a real one. i get that.