dobi said:

Craig Robson said:http://mintees.com/people/200479-portmanteaux

GUEST MODE ACTIVATED!

when you deactivating it for me,Sir? :)

fopifopi said:

dobi said:

Craig Robson said:http://mintees.com/people/200479-portmanteaux

GUEST MODE ACTIVATED!

when you deactivating it for me,Sir? :)

The day you go back in time and un-steal the designs you stole.

MonkeyMouth said:

Luke Tarrant said:

MonkeyMouth said:What the fuck are you guys talking about? Gnar did what? Cant find it in this thread

http://mintees.com/tees/345914-11-11-apparel-destiny info in the comments

Oh ok thanks. This is kinda bullshit in my opinion. Hardly anything original in that thread. Original or "rip"

I don't see a problem either...

In your opinion, Ripped or not?

Original :
Contino :

Original :
Contino :

Original Spalding logo :
Contino :

doran said:In your opinion, Ripped or not?

Original :
Copy (?) :

Original :
Copy (?) :

Original :
Copy (?) :

the only one that could even be considered a rip is the spalding logo, but in that case i would consider it an obvious homage. although i'd never seen the spalding logo, i assume the majority of contino's stuff is derived from some sort of vintage typography that he's seen before. but that one is much more direct and intentional than most of his other stuff.

It's kinda obvious that Jon is inspired by old sings and vintage typography and tries to recreate graphics like that. I don't think that has anything to do with ripping somebody off. Plus the original creators are probably already dead. You just found some of his sources, that's all.

right I'm gonna say it.... this is fucked up. Can I have all of your addresses please to come and slap you? I LOVE contino... I think the guy is the top of his game and I'd cut my balls off to be as good as him... but how it it that those are not rips yet Tims (thone media) work was rips? Like am I missing the big fucking picture here? Did I miss the memo on rips when I studied graphic design at university?

I don't doubt that contino was doing homage to those designs and we all know he is perfectly capable of smashing it out of the park on anything he sets his mind to but why is it that being as notorious as Jon Contino makes it OK for him to do this yet is Invocation clothing had done this EVERYONE on here would be going fucking nuts?

It's literally a case of one rule for the big dogs and another for the smaller guy.

I'm majorly on my Man period today so maybe I'm hitting the fan but fuck me I just don't even understand you guys right now.

Feel free to explain what I'm obviously missing here and deflate me from this hissy fit comment...

I can see both sides of this. He's doing the whole "Americana" thing and by doing that, you're going to copy/re-use old stuff and old ideas.

But that muscle man is clearly traced. (The old trace & flip!) Pretty lazy.

I guess, for me, a lot of it comes down to the artist's intention. Is he trying to pass off this stuff as 100% his original ideas? Or is it more of a tongue-in-cheek homage to old stuff? (I honestly have no idea, the only contact I've had with Contino's work is when someone posts it here, haha)

8-bit ZOMBIE said:I can see both sides of this. He's doing the whole "Americana" thing and by doing that, you're going to copy/re-use old stuff and old ideas.

But that muscle man is clearly traced. (The old trace & flip!) Pretty lazy.

I guess, for me, a lot of it comes down to the artist's intention. Is he trying to pass off this stuff as 100% his original ideas? Or is it more of a tongue-in-cheek homage to old stuff? (I honestly have no idea, the only contact I've had with Contino's work is when someone posts it here, haha)

Just a curiosity question because I want someones opinion on this... So let's say Tim (Throne Media) came on here tonight and sees Kyles thread. What would everyones opinion be on it if Tim stated that his work was not a rip off of Kyle but a "Homage"... do we think suddenly Kyle would be like "oh shit no way thanks man that's rad"... I don't.

According to the design gods, if you use any sort of traditional media if your work, you are a Contino style biter, so i would say all those pictures are of people ripping Contino and jocking his style. That muscle man clearly posed like Contino's drawing.

Contino's stuff is very obvious. He's clearly not trying to hide the fact that he's drawing inspiration from old Americana stuff. That + talent = don't care. Tim is not technically ripping, just style-biting hard and not doing a good job at it. Some people don't care. Kyle cares a lot. especially since he's going after the same market as Kyle. I don't think the original designers of all that old stuff care (if they're even alive) cuz he's going after a completely new market. He's taking old ideas and putting them in new context.

So if he was less talented... so what if it was Tim who had done those images? Would it be the same for him or is it different because he's not Jon Contino. I get your points and agree it's fine... but it FEELS very much like it's a different set of rules for the big dogs and that's not fair.

fuggart said:

8-bit ZOMBIE said:I can see both sides of this. He's doing the whole "Americana" thing and by doing that, you're going to copy/re-use old stuff and old ideas.

But that muscle man is clearly traced. (The old trace & flip!) Pretty lazy.

I guess, for me, a lot of it comes down to the artist's intention. Is he trying to pass off this stuff as 100% his original ideas? Or is it more of a tongue-in-cheek homage to old stuff? (I honestly have no idea, the only contact I've had with Contino's work is when someone posts it here, haha)

Just a curiosity question because I want someones opinion on this... So let's say Tim (Throne Media) came on here tonight and sees Kyles thread. What would everyones opinion be on it if Tim stated that his work was not a rip off of Kyle but a "Homage"... do we think suddenly Kyle would be like "oh shit no way thanks man that's rad"... I don't.

It's definitely a slippery slope and there's lots of grey area in this kind of discussion. But to see a vintage sign and take that idea and turn it into a new design versus simply biting the style of a current and popular artist, to me, those are two very different things.

personally i think there is a difference between taking stuff from design history (iconic or otherwise) which is part of your aesthetic, for example kyle (sometimes) borrows from cult movie posters, mainly because its part of his aesthetic, electric zombie and his freelance work have the feel of old horror movies, the heyday of horro with freddy and jason and mike myers and when shit like bad brains was on tv. etc etc etc. in the same way that i might use a piece of classic tattoo flash as a jumping off point to create something twisted up and new. or in the same way that Contino uses classic americana or Dobi might use soe vintage advertising or warning sign.

and stealing from someone current who works in the same field as you. Invocation stole images from another current freelance designer in order to make a quick dishonest sale for his clothing line.
whilst i think its not entirely clear enough in general i think its pretty clear cut in this case.

Craig Robson said:personally i think there is a difference between taking stuff from design history (iconic or otherwise) which is part of your aesthetic, for example kyle (sometimes) borrows from cult movie posters, mainly because its part of his aesthetic, electric zombie and his freelance work have the feel of old horror movies, the heyday of horro with freddy and jason and mike myers and when shit like bad brains was on tv. etc etc etc. in the same way that i might use a piece of classic tattoo flash as a jumping off point to create something twisted up and new. or in the same way that Contino uses classic americana or Dobi might use soe vintage advertising or warning sign.

and stealing from someone current who works in the same field as you. Invocation stole images from another current freelance designer in order to make a quick dishonest sale for his clothing line.
whilst i think its not entirely clear enough in general i think its pretty clear cut in this case.

I do get what you are saying but it still doesn't make much sense to me personally... stealing artwork is stealing artwork... whether that's stylistically or elementally. That's my opinion though. Still think Contino and Kyle are top of their individual games though.

yeah i get the principle.

just out of curiosity did you take the photo or did you buy the rights to use it for designs like this?: http://mintees.com/tees/357762-mallory-knox-wake-up/

sorry to single you out, im just hoping i can prove a point.

Craig Robson said:yeah i get the principle.

just out of curiosity did you take the photo or did you buy the rights to use it for designs like this?: http://mintees.com/tees/357762-mallory-knox-wake-up/

sorry to single you out, im just hoping i can prove a point.

copying my argument YOU RIPPER!

I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

fuggart said:I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

so you did buy the rights to the radio?

I just think there's a huge difference between what Contino does and waht Tim did. People hire Contino because he mastered this style. Kyle mastered his style and Tim has a lot of design in his portfolio that represent the same style of design. And I guess he only gets hired because he's offering his work at a much cheaper price. Just like Craig said, he's stealing from someone current who works in the same field.

It's basically like all those kids trying to draw like Michael Shantz but that way of style-biting just looks more obvious.

Craig Robson said:

fuggart said:I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

so you did buy the rights to the radio?

No but it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to talk about... I'm asking what the line is...? Like what is OK and what's not in your opinion? I'm 100% pro what Kyle does with his work but lets use that for example (sorry kyle!) the authors of the artwork he uses are most likely still alive. But in Jons case it's OK because the authors are probably dead... there is so much irregularity in the argument that I'm confused.

I'm not arguing against you, just trying to grasp at what point it stops being OK

fuggart said:

Craig Robson said:

fuggart said:I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

so you did buy the rights to the radio?

No but it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to talk about... I'm asking what the line is...? Like what is OK and what's not in your opinion? I'm 100% pro what Kyle does with his work but lets use that for example (sorry kyle!) the authors of the artwork he uses are most likely still alive. But in Jons case it's OK because the authors are probably dead... there is so much irregularity in the argument that I'm confused.

I'm not arguing against you, just trying to grasp at what point it stops being OK

well there you go. im not saying its wrong that you used a vintage radio picture, all i am saying is that you seem to have a moral argument one way but not the other.

consider the reasons why you used the photograph without permission and without purchasing the rights to do it and you might start to understand why other people do to. and furthermore why if i then took your radio design and printed it on shirts you might be mad.

hmm fair enough dude. I don't think I fully understand but fuck it... life goes on. Thanks for trying to clarify the issue though

fuggart said:

Craig Robson said:

fuggart said:I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

so you did buy the rights to the radio?

No but it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to talk about... I'm asking what the line is...? Like what is OK and what's not in your opinion? I'm 100% pro what Kyle does with his work but lets use that for example (sorry kyle!) the authors of the artwork he uses are most likely still alive. But in Jons case it's OK because the authors are probably dead... there is so much irregularity in the argument that I'm confused.

I'm not arguing against you, just trying to grasp at what point it stops being OK

there is definitely gray area, and the line has nothing to do with them being dead or alive. it's not like the day they die it's ok to steal their work. it also has nothing to do with big dogs vs little dogs. for the record, i thought kyle was harsh, but that's how he is. he cares a lot about that kind of thing. i don't blame him, but i don't see it the same way.

it's the difference between guys biting contino using the exact same elements as him and contino biting vintage signage and typography. gray areas for sure, but the guy biting contino is going to get a lot more heat than contino biting vintage spalding logos.

All you have to do is look at their body of work, Contino is known for having a traditional americana style of work, he doesnt hide the fact that he takes heavy inspiration from stuff like that. It looks like Tim basically took what someone made popular copied it and undervalued it for the sake of picking up clients.

cmeyers said:

fuggart said:

Craig Robson said:

fuggart said:I don't think it's the same when you're talking about stock imagery, especially if it's as heavily edited as that radio was.

With the Contino thing I'm not saying I disagree with what he did. I really respect him and think his designs are great even those. Where my issue is on the matter is that why is it different to someone like Tim. From what you said before I gather it's a style issue... fair enough. I won't dispute it but for me I think there is just some kind of vague line that I can't begin to comprehend and for that reason I'm sat here frustrated... you know what I mean?

so you did buy the rights to the radio?

No but it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to talk about... I'm asking what the line is...? Like what is OK and what's not in your opinion? I'm 100% pro what Kyle does with his work but lets use that for example (sorry kyle!) the authors of the artwork he uses are most likely still alive. But in Jons case it's OK because the authors are probably dead... there is so much irregularity in the argument that I'm confused.

I'm not arguing against you, just trying to grasp at what point it stops being OK

there is definitely gray area, and the line has nothing to do with them being dead or alive. it's not like the day they die it's ok to steal their work. it also has nothing to do with big dogs vs little dogs. for the record, i thought kyle was harsh, but that's how he is. he cares a lot about that kind of thing. i don't blame him, but i don't see it the same way.

it's the difference between guys biting contino using the exact same elements as him and contino biting vintage signage and typography. gray areas for sure, but the guy biting contino is going to get a lot more heat than contino biting vintage spalding logos.

It's bizarre right? Such a mine field of opinions and perspectives that it's easy to understand why so many designers starting out get in trouble for ripping etc.

We've all been there on the being ripped off thing on some scale though... one guy outright stole elements from two posters I made for a band called mewithoutYou and mashed them together into one poster and I hit the fan... I can definitely see why other designers do it regardless of what extent they go to to vocalise it.

I don't think you're ever going to be able to make this a clear black and white issue. Everybody is going to have a different opinion on who doing what is ok and whats not ok.

This thread being bumped is proof that this resurfaces and doesn't get resolved every year. There's no straight line and never will be, everybody is influenced by something, its a matter of how you go about it.

i think there are gray areas

A recognized artist can copy. We will say that a tribute copying.
For others, they are going to say that plagiarism (?).

Original :
Contino :

Original :
Contino for CXXVI :

Original :
Contino for CXXVI :

^^^
Last two are rearranged copy & pasted designs from the originals. Thought I'd point that out.

Declaration Clothing did the same thing for the Unite or Die piece:
http://cl.ly/image/3i2N1V43332K

Serji Gold said:^^^
Last two are rearranged copy & pasted designs from the originals. Thought I'd point that out.

I noticed that too.

I guess the line between rip/homage/style-bite/etc. is very thin and you'll hear a different viewpoint on the issue from any designer you ask. While I'm a fan of Contino's work and understand the difference between his "rips" and Tim's style bites, the projects posted just seem really lazy now.

unite or die is super obvious and i knew he didn't come up with it or draw it himself. not surprised. steeplechase is just a reference, congratulations, you found his source, but not a rip. united workers is a bummer, but not a rip. it's clip art. not stolen art. i think people just have this weird love for contino and think all his stuff is hand drawn, but in reality a lot of it isn't and is simply referencing a vintage piece.

Serji Gold said:^^^
Last two are rearranged copy & pasted designs from the originals. Thought I'd point that out.

Yeah that is such bullshit... the texture is hardly even changed (if at all). I wont lie... this has damaged my view of Contino dramatically. He's still very good but a lot of these pieces blew my mind when I first saw them

fuggart said:

Serji Gold said:^^^
Last two are rearranged copy & pasted designs from the originals. Thought I'd point that out.

Yeah that is such bullshit... the texture is hardly even changed (if at all). I wont lie... this has damaged my view of Contino dramatically. He's still very good but a lot of these pieces blew my mind when I first saw them

He didn't even fix the "S" and the "A" where they hit the circle in the middle of that "United Workers of America" design. (They just cut off all weird on his version.) Again, lazy

fuggart said:

Serji Gold said:^^^
Last two are rearranged copy & pasted designs from the originals. Thought I'd point that out.

Yeah that is such bullshit... the texture is hardly even changed (if at all). I wont lie... this has damaged my view of Contino dramatically. He's still very good but a lot of these pieces blew my mind when I first saw them

exactly my point. everyone's made him out to be incredible. i always figured half the stuff was clip art or referenced clip art. it's only bullshit because of your perception of him. people put him on a pedestal. nothing in my mind has changed about his work. put anyone under a microscope and you'll find the same.

Its really no different than people using all the stock art or royalty free clipart in Dover or craphound books, all that shit was done by someone at one point in time, and pretty much every artist on here has used that stuff at some point. I've never been a huge Contino fan just because im not a huge fan of the crappy hand lettering look, but alot of his shit is original, and a lot of people are into that style right now so that's why he is so popular i guess.

Hey guys, just wanted to chime in here. My pal Ray Masaki gave me a heads up, and as someone who's seen me speak about this in person, I thought it was worth mentioning. I'll just run through these real quick to clarify:

1. Tattoo man/Uncle Sam —This is a pretty well known piece in tattoo culture. The whole point of my Uncle Sam piece is to reference it and pay homage. It's a satire piece (hence the flip, it's kind of a joke.) Anyone familiar with tattoo culture would recognize that and since this piece wasn't commissioned and was personal work, I don't feel the need to worry about it. In my lectures, I actually talk about vintage pieces that inspire me that I like to put a new twist on and this piece in particular is my first example.

2. Hand — There are hundreds of versions of this. It was a common practice for signage in the late 1800s/early 1900s. Again, this is my take on the idea and my way of bringing classic work into a new age.

3. Spalding logo — This is another piece I speak about in my lectures. Yes, the original Spalding logo is awesome, but this is another common practice from the early 1900s. Lots of baseball-related subject matter were laid out in a similar fashion and that's where my inspiration came from. One of the "original" pieces that was posted (that match my color scheme and appears to be vector) is actually not original at all , but a replication of an old Spalding logo version with my color palette applied to it. You can clearly tell the difference when you look at the rest of the Spalding pieces in that image. Also, if you do a little research on the history of actual Spalding logos AND baseball design history in general, it should be pretty clear what my intention was.

4. Steeplechase man — Another one that is a classic image that is SUPPOSED to reference a particular illustration. The Steeplechase man is an iconic symbol of Coney Island, and in creating this cover for the Brooklyn Original Makers Club cover, we wanted to reference an iconic Brooklyn image. This is something that has been duplicated thousands of times, and also started making its way in various forms to other boardwalk towns as well. Again, this is a reference which is supposed to look like this.

5. CXXVI designs — I'm not the only one that designs for CXXVI, I didn't draw those.

Just to wrap things up, I haven't actually copied ANY of these. I pick my reference (whether its obvious or not) and do my interpretation of them. Depending on the audience, these interpretations will be either extremely obvious and appreciated or appear to be new. My intent is to either delight or educate. That's also the reason I speak about these very things to students and other professionals. I think it's a topic that needs clarifying and I try my best to use my own work as examples. There's a clear difference between stealing and referencing classic imagery. Some people are obvious thieves, but there are those who are not and trying to make genuine statement...these people just need to vocalize it a bit more.

I've been the victim of plenty of straight up rips, but I've also seen others take inspiration from my original work. I'll never get upset about that, but the laziness and unoriginality that goes into plain old stealing cannot be forgiven.

I don't want to get wrapped up in a long discussion, but if anyone wants to discuss this in more detail, I'd be more than happy to talk to you personally via email — joncontino@gmail

I'll try to check back a little later today though in case anyone has something directly to ask or comment on.

well at least the joncontino username is now taken so whoever has been making fake typographer accounts on here can't pose as him.