A submission for the SXSW competition after the style of Mucha.

For a larger version of the design go to:

http://www.stanford.edu/~jbergen/Aethernet_Natural.jpg

Feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

NICE!

Art Nouveau will never go out of style. I love this on natural so much! 5$

Beautiful design, well executed but the idea is lacking a little. It loks amazing but it doesnt really mean much, atleastto me. The cord should be more prominent and maybe show somewhere where she plans to plug in the cord. Amazing work though. 4

I was just at the Mucha Museum in Prague last April. It was really nice, to say the least. Love your work-- the arrow is subtle, but nice! The only thing I wonder: what is her left hand resting on? It looks like a fifth color....

The black-tee is hot!

If you're going to replicate a graphic style, you can't choose much better than Mucha. It doesn't look like an exact copy of any particular image which makes this even more outstanding. Gotta agree with Mangold, though...it's beautiful, but there's not much beyond that. Nice details, nice colors, but I wish there was more too it than that.

nice job.....defeinately 5 and buy!!

Looks like an Absinthe label. very nice detail
$5$5$5 on black

HA HA - MYHA!!!

Mucha is a personal favorite, and I would definately wear this! Great job!

Really nice, good luck for you

Adoring this tee. Best of luck. Fiven + $.

Though Mucha's work is public domain, I still think he did it better

I thought this was influenced and not copied/traced?

http://bf.shantidas.free.fr/web_mag/mucha/affich/samaritaine_vis.JPG

http://art.pro.tok2.com/M/Mucha/mucha41.jpg

I agree with grayehound; but even so I think Threadless could use a tshirt like this after all the poopy ones lately.

Beautiful. Black for me, please.

I really like this one

its beautiful!

looks best on natural, 5!

Lovely but the arrow in the corner annoys me somehow. :/

This is a rip. Not to mention a bad use of traced art from a master artist, that in no way gives homage to his name.

I vote for this entry to be disqualified on grounds of theft.

Proof:
http://www.eyegazechicago.com/mike/mucharip.gif

lots of people use source photos, what's the problem? the point is that other elements of the design are unique, such as the mosaic idea and the stars. So whether or not this photo was "used" to create this design, goodncripsy has enough obvious talent that it's plain they don't need to "rip" something.

then... why is the face traced from a piece of mucha's art? The body is traced from a photo mucha took of one of his models.

http://bf.shantidas.free.fr/web_mag/mucha/affich/samaritaine_vis.JPG
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v219/Uinku/ripoff.jpg

I don't think the rest of it shows any skill at all. And in no way should make someone exempt from being labeled an art thief.

o no, my Mucha! :[ he's one of my favorites...

i cant endorse a design that won't even properly spoof an excellent artist. sorry :[

The second photo you gave there is ok, but the first? That's pretty obviously copied. However I'm not sure what to think. I'd like a long winded explanation from the designer, personally. On one hand I can see where the evidence points to rip, but on the other hand, why would he have posted a blog with his design before submitting it if someone was bound to figure out the source? So after all that I guess I'd have to agree with nealteak in saying that "i'd rather see something original, not a tweak of an established artist."

I'm going to sound contradictoary in this next paragraph, but I'm not trying to prove a point one way or the other here. I just wanted to leave you with some open ended questions. In "How to steal a million" with Audrey Hepburn, her cinematic father was an artist who copied other famous works down to the last details and resold them for large amounts of money. Was what he did "art"? Was it not art because of the fact that he copied other famous artists' paintings? But does the originality of the concept justify what is art and what is not? To copy a painting like that detail for detail obviously takes incredible paitience, a suberb eye, and artistic ability, but it can't be considered "art" even though he "stole" it?

Art theiving would be if I were trying to pass off the style and elements as my own. But I have acknowledged my source as Mucha. How far do I have to go? Would you like a bibliography?

I really love Art Nouveau and personally I'd like to have a t-shirt in the style.

Thank you for the concerns.

" A submission for the SXSW competition after the style of Mucha."

and

"But I have acknowledged my source as Mucha."

are completely different

if I wanted a Mucha shirt, I would go get one of his original pieces put on a shirt. Not some cheap knockoff that was a traced version of Muchas original photos and work. You tried to say this was inspired by Mucha, as if this was an original idea and you took his style and applied it to your original drawing, but what you did, was trace Muchas work, and applied his style to it. On an ethical standpoint this is total bs, and if you had any respect for Mucha (which you say you do) you would have never tried to pass this as your own take on Muchas style

Absolutely GORGEOUS design! I like it best on the colored shirts. 5$

"Art theiving would be if I were trying to pass off the style and elements as my own. But I have acknowledged my source as Mucha. How far do I have to go? Would you like a bibliography?"

you said its inspired by him, but all you did was trace it.

fail

this all brings into my mind Andy Warhol and his theiving of other images.
---
If people like the design they will over look this fact.
---
I have no feeling either way about this peice.
---
I think it is nice but it could use something more maybe the Art Nouveau lettering in the design.
---
There are little picky things like her back foot floating up into the air. But thats all picky.
---
Nice, but I think it needs something.

I feel that were this image to be showcased as a commentary, or even a parody based on a specific, iconic Mucha illustration, then that would be an acceptable case of submitting this as a mucha homage, but this image:

<img src="http://www.eyegazechicago.com/mike/mucharip.gif">

Is prety solid evidence that this is not a case of an homage, but moreso if an outright tracing of work that is undeniably that of Mucha.

Granted, there appear to be elements that are your own, but the most important part of the image (the woman) is unmistakably cobbled together from various Mucha images.

infuckingcredible. i love it on natural.

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO - this is a ripoff

ZERO

ZERO

ZERO

the reason this is so "fucking incredible" is because it is someones elses work you, please stop supporting this sub.

you obviously have skills, it would be nice to see some original work from you.

Please refer to my blog.

thanks

Even if this were, say, one of the top 10 highest scorers ever, it would never get printed (fortunately, imo) because Threadless doesn't want another Predicament/Killing Tree situation on their hands. However with my full sincerity, I want to wish you good luck on your future submissions.

nice vector work : )

I like this on natural =)

Mucha is public domain- the copyright expired in 1989. It is perfectly legal and legitimate to copy his work, regardless of how tasteless individuals may find it.

I have mixed feelings about this.

It's a lovely and skillfully done (though the upper foot could be improved) blending of the 2 Mucha pieces with original elements added that fit the Nouveau style very well, and it would look wonderful on a t-shirt.
Assuming Mucha's work is public domain as stated above, I can't say I see any ethical difference between the tracing and "remixing" done in this piece and the tracing of other non-original open-source material that appears so often in Threadless submissions to little or no objection from the voters. Vector tracing is an accepted practice here, for better or worse, and calling something a "rip" or "stolen" purely because recognizable source material was incorporated seems unfair.

The ethical problem I do see here is in the statement that this submission was done "after the style of Mucha", which is emphatically misleading since it implies a wholly original composition that mimics Mucha's style - not one made using actual components of pieces of his work. This semantic misrepresentation, imo, *does* amount to claiming someone else's work as your own.

That said, I hope negative reaction to this piece doesn't deter you from submitting future similarly styled entries (with any source references properly acknowledged, of course, and perhaps less overtly recognizable). This really is beautifully done, and I just love Art Nouveau. :)

The ripoff comment is so funny I laughed really loud when I saw it!

for anyone who is very familiar with Mucha's work, this is definitely not a 'ripoff' ....ummm.... eathernet wasn't around at the time!
look Closely at the drawing!

It is a Very clever twist on an old masters work, and I really like how the stars are incorperated,... although, they look like they are 5 point starts, Mucha always used six point stars, but...... either way,... the way it is tied into the concept is phenominal!

I love it. Definitely a 5+$ (if it will ever be in-stock. ?) :)

wait.. .. everyone...

O.K. ...
one very important copyright rule comes into play here:

it is not copywright infringement to Parody something.
there have been endless parodys of Michael Angelo's work, Van Gogh's work... ect.....

this falls under a 'Parody' classification, and thus is safe against copywright infringement. (SNL would be broke if it wasn't for the Parody part of the copywright law!)

There is a quote (I am not sure by who) that says "Steal from one person it's plagerism... steal from many it's research."
I am NOT in ANY way saying that this is stolen... my point is this:
The artists took a PIECE of original artwork & an old photograph of a model used by that artist for SOMETHING ELSE- I say 'something else' since NONE of those folks complaining have provided any ARTWORK that uses that photo of Mucha's model (Did Mucha take the photo? Maybe not!) If you have one, send me a link!
My point is that many folks take elements from many different sources to create art & like any good design this one invokes a good feeling!
So they used a little tracing... BIG F@#%ING DEAL. Take a good look at all the winning designs from the past year... now look how many used a "trace" of some sort! See the point?
*******
Lastly- my critique:
I LIKE- but I think it needs some bianary code or something digital worked in someplace.
Keep up the good work and don't let negative people get to you...

I am not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV. As artists, we have to be aware of the rights that we are given under copyright law.
When considering this piece, we shouldn't consider it a parody as much as a derivative work while it it based upon, even traced from 2 existing works, it is a new work of authorwhip. It is my belief that even if the Mucha works were still under copyright, this would be legal and copyrightable as a new work. There would obviously be an issue about the attempt to copy Mucha's style and a question could be raised about forgery, IF this were to be passed off as an original work by Mucha, however no such representation is being made. I firmly believe that the designer has, as the law requires, made substantial changes to the original works, and thereby has created, legally and ethically, a new work of authorship.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html

That being said, I give this a 4.5 (round to 5) and would buy it as is. I think that a couple small issues have been raised about her feet, whatever her left hand rests on, and the ethernet cable which keep this from being perfect.

If I coulda come up with this, I would have. I'm sorry it's causing you so much grief. Amazing work - $5

I love love love it. I don't care if it is or isn't a ripoff.... the fact is it's beautiful and I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Well in the large part I find that what makes this piece beautiful was Mucha's work, not good n crispy. Certainly there's nothing legally wrong with this, in the same way that it's not legally wrong that the Rolling Stones don't own their music. It's just ethically perverse.

Goodncrispy didn't "copy" what Mucha did as some sort of conceptual statement, like pop art, but rather as a crutch for lack of skill. A surrogate. This is not indellibly goodncrispy's work. Be honest with yourself too man. You know "inspired by" isn't good enough. Your not in an art class, this is the professional world. You state where every damn thing came from unless it's brilliantly obvious what the source is. Had you done that from the get go, I'd have no issue. But you didn't. You lied by omitting the full facts. That's wrong.

Of course no one but us artists care about that. So I'm sure that you will win and become momentarily wealthy by riding on the coattails of a master. Congrats.

After seeing the ORIGINAL Mucha.... and tracing back Goodncripsy's lack of proper attribution I am rather angry. If this was a rip-off contest then, yeah, by all means win. HOWEVER-- there are other people who entered the contest with original images (and therefore non-controversial). As it stands, my entry has more points-- but that will soon no longer be the case. Whine, whine, whine. I think I'll copy this piece and enter it into the contest myself! In fact, let's ALL copy this and enter! We can all win! Hooray us!

See my point?

hmm seems more parody more then anything...since when do people back then hold plug ins

Really nice vector work.

uh..uh..uh..mazing... WOW O_O *impressed*

I like how Empire_of_the_Mad_Monk said his design is non-controversial.. most shirt that get printed ARE controversial, just look at perdicament o_O

I dont care where he got the image from, its beautiful and I want a tshirt of this.

$5

man there really are some stupid comments in this thread

you can obviously sort the artists, from the kids who dont even know what they are talking about.

If you like this shirt so much, then why dont you go get a Mucha drawing and iron it on one.

This is not an original idea, this is hardly a parody, and though it doesnt break any copyright laws (much died in 1939) its still an issue of ethics.

like previously stated, there are people who entered this contest with original ideas, who didnt have to rely on tracing images of masters work, then toss in an ehternet cable and call it inspired (im one of those people).

Of course this a beautiful shirt, ITS NOT HIS

shame on anyone who gave this more then a 0

When I saw controversial-- I really am implying that the Mucha Family Trust, which oversees the intellectual property rights of Alphonse Mucha's work, is not infringed upon by hack-artists who do not understand the concept of intellectual property.

What would the Mucha Museum and the Mucha Foundation have to say about this? Their mission is to preserve the work of Mucha.

Let me ask some of you here: IF this became a judicial, or litigious case, what would the judge decide? Want a hint?

If YOU were SxSW, interested in promoting and branding your event, would it be SMART to reproduce a marketing item, publishing it on fliers, trade journals, promotional materials (such as bags), and all over the internet. They might flat out refuse to print the 'winner' of this online threadless contest because of the potential legal fallout. Plus, they might think that their event is worthy of brand-new images. On the other hand, they might not give a flip.


From guideline submissions:

Inappropriate Material - The design must not be overly offensive or contain copyrighted material.

From copyright law:
Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright.

(this is why I mention the Mucha family and the organisations working for them).

*sigh* artist vs. consumer age old tale again

*sigh* Kids these days....

Dawgone young whippersnapeprs with them WiFis and them P2Pees and them FM radios. No respect, I tell ya.

yes us kids just don't know where to point out artist integrity on the line or thinking the black-tee is hot! *insert more sarcasm* right of the bat. i don't like this shirt and i won't wear it, but i do think it is a parody unless i want to getindepth with research and be all high and mighty about copyright and be a hypocrite at the same time then yeah.

I LOVE art nouveau!!!!!!!

Basically the best design on the site. Ever. $5 x one billion. Keep up the good work kid.

Black-Tee is the best for aesthetic purposes; however, my points are all valid and remain true no matter what unprofessional and uneducated comments you might put forth, Stuntgrowth.

Also, your lack of punctuation and grammar is annoying. I seriously doubt you can understand what people are trying to communicate here as you seem to be proficient in English only to the sixth-grade level.

Thanks for your comments, however. You are the worst friend a designer can have because you'd let someone roll them rather than put food on their table. Good job! Keep it up!

I'm done with this. Don't reply.

why are peopl being so gay about this image

its clearly awesome

end of story

love it. $5

damn you for winning... there's no denying it.

i like it alot...and thats it.

wow you completely mis interpert what I said funny really, and to attack my typing is a sad way to prove a point im just a lazy typer and its just a blog not like im typing for my microbiology lab report :P . BASICALLY what i was trying to say is its like a god damn salem witch trial here, everyone just throw whatever opinon they have of what this shirt is and accusing art thief and whatever, if youre going to accuse us kids forthinking a shirt is a parody without being well indepth in knowing what copyright (hence actual educaitonal background of such like threadless) who to say its a parody or not, and its up to threadless to accuse this is a rip off not some designer with a busted ego. so im soooo sorry if this upsets you because im not upset at ll for the matter.

This idea is not original. Period.

MUCHA IS BEAUTIFUL AND I'M PRETTY SURE EVERYONE SHOULD RELAX.

i like this. and the fact that you acknowledged the artist that inspired you is enough for me. it's clear you aren't trying to claim this is your personal style, and this design is clearly beautiful. i hope this does well. natural and black work for me best. you get my love score: $5, good luck darling

i think something a lot of people neglect to take into consideration when juding the "_ hearts threadless" submissions is this: how well does this design support the theme? the theme being the very heart of the competition...

And while this is a very well-executed design, and very pretty (regardless of how it was derived from someone else's imagery) I don't think it supports the theme "interactivated" terribly well.

I will also say this: though you may have traced over an exisiting photo, you did an excellent job cobbling the elements together....you converted the photo into an excellent looking "painting," which is something of a skill in and of itself, and it speaks well of the talent that you do have. I look forward to seeing some completely original works on Threadless in the future.

In the end, I like the image, but I would not buy this shirt for reasons of my own taste and opinion.

The black shirt is DOPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!

I loove Mucha and I looove this :)