Derby #67: Video Games Through Art History

Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo

Copyrighted characters without a discernable commentary/parody.

Rejected because: Copyrighted characters without a discernable commentary/parody.

add a comment

Comments

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


So I always thought Matt Groening drew the simpsons, but he only had the idea. Klasky Csupo drew and animated the characters. Finally finished, whew. Well, now to finish my other design.

Thanks in advance for voting everyone.
*Edit* - Since it looks like my first one is going to be rejected, everyone please check out my other SHIRT.

BootsBoots


quality posts: 36 Private Messages BootsBoots
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


This turned out well. I like the green (glowing of the TV?) It works really well. I hope it doesn't get rejected.


icywolfy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages icywolfy
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Well, Klasky-Csupo is just the animation company. Matt Groening is the cartoonist that actually drew the original character designs, in his style. See his weekly comic strip : Life in Hell.

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
icywolfy wrote:Well, Klasky-Csupo is just the animation company. Matt Groening is the cartoonist that actually drew the original character designs, in his style. See his weekly comic strip : Life in Hell.


Ohhhh. Now I see. Wikipedia isn't always as helpful as you'd think. Hehe.

georgemil


quality posts: 0 Private Messages georgemil

[quote]Re: [url=http://shirt.woot.com/Derby/Entry.aspx?id=24199]Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo

What is it floating above their heads?

georgemil


quality posts: 0 Private Messages georgemil

What is it floating above their heads?

Barnhill5


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Barnhill5
georgemil wrote:What is it floating above their heads?


It is a plumber's wrench hanging on the wall.

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Someone convince me this is an art history style. It's definitely a style, but...

hmmxkrazee


quality posts: 0 Private Messages hmmxkrazee
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Looks great but I don't think is a historical art style. I think they specifically wanted art styles that came up throughout history.

dest581


quality posts: 0 Private Messages dest581
hmmxkrazee wrote:Looks great but I don't think is a historical art style. I think they specifically wanted art styles that came up throughout history.


Last I checked, "history" was the past. That includes the recent past. :D

an0mali


quality posts: 0 Private Messages an0mali

Since yesterday is technically history, I can't see why this would get rejected. I don't recall reading anywhere specifying it couldn't be 'recent' history.

bro3of4


quality posts: 2 Private Messages bro3of4
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Dodging two sets of lawyers!

Nothing to see here. Move along. Move along.

snarkygal


quality posts: 4 Private Messages snarkygal
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


I certainly don't think this fits this Derby...it is not in a "historical art style" and in my opinion, violates the Simpson's copyright on their characters.

hmmxkrazee


quality posts: 0 Private Messages hmmxkrazee
dest581 wrote:Last I checked, "history" was the past. That includes the recent past. :D


Yeah but I'm sure you get what I mean.

Like stuff in textbooks and in art museums....

SailorButterfly


quality posts: 14 Private Messages SailorButterfly
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Honestly, I don't consider this an art history style. If so, what's to stop people from entering South Park-style shirts or Spongebob-style shirts? The derby then becomes Video Games Through Animation Styles.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "Most Awesome Butterfly-Sailor Hybrid on Woot"

Kilagria


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Kilagria
dest581 wrote:Last I checked, "history" was the past. That includes the recent past. :D


Actually history doesnt mean the past, it means a past notable for its important, unusual, or interesting events, duh.

Andy47240


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Andy47240
SailorButterfly wrote:Honestly, I don't consider this an art history style. If so, what's to stop people from entering South Park-style shirts or Spongebob-style shirts? The derby then becomes Video Games Through Animation Styles.

Great Idea! Just kidding, but I do like this shirt.



female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
georgemil wrote:What is it floating above their heads?


It's the rejector's ax about to fall.

I actually really like the design, just couldn't resist since it's a good possibility.

pstan


quality posts: 0 Private Messages pstan
Kilagria wrote:Actually history doesnt mean the past, it means a past notable for its important, unusual, or interesting events, duh.


I would have to say that the simpsons and drawing style used has had a pretty huge importance on cartoons and what you see today.


Really sweet idea. And very cool shirt. Hope you don't get the axe.

blammoed


quality posts: 1 Private Messages blammoed
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


You did a really nice job on this one. Great color work.

iris420


quality posts: 1 Private Messages iris420
joelterrific wrote:Someone convince me this is an art history style. It's definitely a style, but...


Matt Groening has been a well know artist for over 20 years. That's history enough for me.

Also, David Shenoda is fast becoming one of my favorite designers.

Carpe shirtem!

aradicallynewnerd


quality posts: 0 Private Messages aradicallynewnerd

The term "history" is pretty subjective, though if recent history counts (and recent art movement, at least, seem to) then this should be in the clear.

Live or die, it's a job well done.

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
iris420 wrote:Matt Groening has been a well know artist for over 20 years. That's history enough for me.

Also, David Shenoda is fast becoming one of my favorite designers.


I love you.

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Here ya go...
The video game part is obvious. As to the Art History Style...

As per Webster's online:

ART - 2.art Listen to the pronunciation of 2art
Pronunciation:
\ˈärt\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin art-, ars — more at arm
Date:
13th century

1: skill acquired by experience, study, or observation <the art of making friends>

CHECK. Ok there.

History -
Main Entry:
his·to·ry Listen to the pronunciation of history
Pronunciation:
\ˈhis-t(ə-)rē\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural his·to·ries
Etymology:
Middle English histoire, historie, from Anglo-French estoire, histoire, from Latin historia, from Greek, inquiry, history, from histōr, istōr knowing, learned; akin to Greek eidenai to know — more at wit
Date:
14th century

1: tale , story
2 a: a chronological record of significant events (as affecting a nation or institution) often including an explanation of their causes b: a treatise presenting systematically related natural phenomena c: an account of a patient's medical background d: an established record <a prisoner with a history of violence>
3: a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events <medieval history>
4 a: events that form the subject matter of a history b: events of the past c: one that is finished or done for <the winning streak was history> <you're history> d: previous treatment, handling, or experience (as of a metal)

Check. Ok on all counts.

Style -
Main Entry:
1style Listen to the pronunciation of 1style
Pronunciation:
\ˈstī(-ə)l\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English stile, style, from Latin stilus spike, stem, stylus, style of writing; perhaps akin to Latin instigare to goad — more at stick
Date:
14th century

1: designation , title
2 a: a distinctive manner of expression (as in writing or speech) <writes with more attention to style than to content> <the flowery style of 18th century prose> b: a distinctive manner or custom of behaving or conducting oneself <the formal style of the court> <his style is abrasive> ; also : a particular mode of living <in high style> c: a particular manner or technique by which something is done, created, or performed <a unique style of horseback riding> <the classical style of dance>
3 a: stylus b: gnomon 1b c: the filiform usually elongated part of the pistil bearing a stigma at its apex — see flower illustration d: a slender elongated process (as a bristle) on an animal4: a distinctive quality, form, or type of something <a new dress style> <the Greek style of architecture>
5 a: the state of being popular : fashion <clothes that are always in style> b: fashionable elegance c: beauty, grace, or ease of manner or technique <an awkward moment she handled with style>
6: a convention with respect to spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and typographic arrangement and display followed in writing or printing

Check. I've definitely got that covered. Definitions 2 and 5 are my favorites.

And here's my definition...

Art - an expression of someone's mind. Check.
History - the past. Check.
Style - a distinct form of expression characterized by unique variations in the execution of a skill. That's me all day, Baby! Hehe.


(There was no timeframe specified that constitutes history. There are several Andy Warhol themed entries that have been accepted. Warhol made paintings until the year of his death 1987. Matt Greoning invented the simpson's before this, but the first Simpson's cartoon aired in 1987 - the same year Warhol was also painting in. So, Warhol and Groening were contemporary artists. Warhol, obviously was more popular, but the derby description never said anything about how popular the artist had to be. If popularity were a factor, then there would have had to be a list of acceptable artists, or perhaps a "only dead artists" clause would do.
BTW
Georgia O'Keefe died in 1986.
Salvador Dali died in 1989.

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
DavidShenoda wrote:A bunch of stuff


Whoa... Ok, Animation history and Art History are two different things. They are kept separate in Art surveys and texts (that's Art with a capital A). It might be done via an art, but it isn't Art. A corporation makes it, which should be your first hint. There might be some personal animations that could be included in Art History, but the Simpsons is in Pop Culture history. I don't know why you would choose the Simpsons when the topic is Art History, and this is from someone who likes this entry.

paulhep


quality posts: 0 Private Messages paulhep
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Why is this shirt getting votes? I'm a huge Nintendo, and Simpson's fan. But this is ... not cool. (apparently the word l.a.m.e gets macroed to male.) I would never wear this.

GO VOTE!! This shirt is the Awesomeest!!! supermegavirus

tabrazinski


quality posts: 2 Private Messages tabrazinski
iris420 wrote:Matt Groening has been a well know artist for over 20 years. That's history enough for me.

Also, David Shenoda is fast becoming one of my favorite designers.


yeah. i was thinking this too. the simpson's is in its 20th season or something. started running when i was 4. and definitely, you could fine this art in a museum somewhere, and certainly it's in art books even now.

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
tabrazinski wrote:yeah. i was thinking this too. the simpson's is in its 20th season or something. started running when i was 4. and definitely, you could fine this art in a museum somewhere, and certainly it's in art books even now.


llo. Because the Simpsons is in it's 20th season doesn't make it Art History. It makes it a popular TV show that is ingrained in pop culture. That has nothing to do with Art History. Do they teach the TV show MASH in History class? Show me a single Art History survey book that has the Simpsons in it (Art History, not Animation History). The idea is laughable. I'm not being a snob, it just ain't gonna happen. I hope you all don't implode when or if this gets rejected. It should have been obvious going in (and even more so when you had to include the name of a company in the title) that this is NOT part of Art History.

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Someone link to a credible source that cites Groening as part of the Art History zeitgeist and allow it stand. David's explanation is reasonably well thought out, but I'm not going to make any promises. This shirt in particular walks very close to the copyright infringement line since I see very little commentary, and I fear this could easily be mistaken for a Simpson's licensed shirt.

Consider the vignettes at the start of each episode? This seems like something you could see there easily. I'll give it another day or so, but as when you get close to copyright issues, you have to know there's a good chance for rejection.

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Lastly, David your definition of style underscores something for me: "a distinctive manner of expression (as in writing or speech) <writes with more attention to style than to content> <the flowery style of 18th century prose>"

More attention to style than content seems important. The content is the Simpsons and not the style. To say something is in the style of something does not imply it's the same. Futurama is in the style of the Simpsons, but it is NOT the Simpsons.

So there...I'm not convinced that this is an Historical side, despite the semantics of recent history, and I think this is perhaps to close to Groening's actual drawings to be called a style.

iris420


quality posts: 1 Private Messages iris420
joelterrific wrote:Lastly, David your definition of style underscores something for me: "a distinctive manner of expression (as in writing or speech) <writes with more attention to style than to content> <the flowery style of 18th century prose>"

More attention to style than content seems important. The content is the Simpsons and not the style. To say something is in the style of something does not imply it's the same. Futurama is in the style of the Simpsons, but it is NOT the Simpsons.

So there...I'm not convinced that this is an Historical side, despite the semantics of recent history, and I think this is perhaps to close to Groening's actual drawings to be called a style.


The thing is, if you go waaaay back to 1977 when Groening first became known as an illustrator, you will see that he has always had this distinctive style, beginning with his Life In Hell comic series (which made it's debut in an avant-garde magazine). Those rabbits in that comic series look a lot like Marge without the blue hair, but they were definitely created before the Simpsons. Yes, Frye from Futurama looks a lot like Bart Simpson, but again, that is because that is the style of Groening. Therefore, I don't think that the content is the Simpsons and not the style. I think David has drawn in the very distinct style of Matt Groening.

I'm trying to make this an eloquent argument in the vein of "art is in the eye of the beholder", but if it's too close to copywright infringement, I guess not all the arguing in the world is going to help this design. I just felt it was worth a try.

Carpe shirtem!

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
joelterrific wrote:Lastly, David your definition of style underscores something for me: "a distinctive manner of expression (as in writing or speech) <writes with more attention to style than to content> <the flowery style of 18th century prose>"

More attention to style than content seems important. The content is the Simpsons and not the style. To say something is in the style of something does not imply it's the same. Futurama is in the style of the Simpsons, but it is NOT the Simpsons.

So there...I'm not convinced that this is an Historical side, despite the semantics of recent history, and I think this is perhaps to close to Groening's actual drawings to be called a style.


As for Futurama, the only difference with simpson's is the lack of yellow skin, and more shapely bodies. Matt Groening has a very unique way of drawing cartoon people. My intent was to draw the mario characters in the same way that Matt Groening would.

Besides, isn't the point supposed to be that you could confuse the design for something done by the actual artist. Is this not the intent of the derby. I did not have to make them the same shape as the Simpson's but I thought I made it obvious enough that they were Mario characters that this wouldn't matter.

I believe that the real issue is not the characters themselves, but that I put them on the couch in the same order as the Simpson's characters. Despite this, I deliberately made sure not to display any distinguishing features of the actual characters to avoid any resemblance to them other than body shape, which cannot be copyrighted. The pacifier and pearls were the only elements that could be related to the Simpsons characters. None of them have the same clothes or hair.

popesmoker


quality posts: 0 Private Messages popesmoker

While this shirt does seem to be on thin ice copyright-wise, the design fits the derby theme. Animation is a historically notable and relevant art form. Just because it may not qualify in a strictly academic sense as a painted art style, does not negate the fact that it is a historical form of art. Sculpture is not a style of painting, but it is still considered an art form. If animation is not considered an art-form, then shouldn't all the the designs portraying video game characters as famous sculptures be rejected as well?
Animation is a historical art-form and The Simpsons is a quintessential example of animation. This design combines a historically famous example of an art form with the most recognizable game in the short history of video-games and thus fulfills the Derby's theme by "showing us a masterpiece from the video-game world". This shirt may need to be rejected for legal reasons, but it is on topic.

Love the design. GMV.

Discobiscuits


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Discobiscuits
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Copyrighted or not, this is awesome.

Keelmy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Keelmy
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


I'm a bit biased here for a few reason but I'm hoping this doesn't get rejected because it isn't consider art history. While it doesn't fall under traditional definition of art history, animation is an art form that carries it's own history. As much as I'm not a fan of the Simpsons, it would be foolish not to recognize it's contributions to the medium. Every year it's on the air, it makes history by being the longest running sitcom on air (according to FOX) so it's got at least that going for it.

I'm actually working on an animation shirt as well and I do hope it will get a fair shake (told ya I'm biased). Good Luck Dave!

[/url]

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
popesmoker wrote:While this shirt does seem to be on thin ice copyright-wise, the design fits the derby theme. Animation is a historically notable and relevant art form. Just because it may not qualify in a strictly academic sense as a painted art style, does not negate the fact that it is a historical form of art. Sculpture is not a style of painting, but it is still considered an art form. If animation is not considered an art-form, then shouldn't all the the designs portraying video game characters as famous sculptures be rejected as well?
Animation is a historical art-form and The Simpsons is a quintessential example of animation. This design combines a historically famous example of an art form with the most recognizable game in the short history of video-games and thus fulfills the Derby's theme by "showing us a masterpiece from the video-game world". This shirt may need to be rejected for legal reasons, but it is on topic.

Love the design. GMV.


Animation is an artform, another medium for Art just like painting and sculpting. This medium can be used to make Art. Art museums even show animations made as Art. That does not make the Simpsons Art just because it uses this medium. The Simpsons is artfully done commerce, produced by a company to make money, with a gazillion dollar merchandising tie-in. It would be like saying mass produced bobblehead dolls are Art because they utilize the medium of sculpture or posters of Michael Jordan are Art because they use the medium of photography. Of course some people out there will see the art in well made bobblehead dolls but they will never be a part of Art History.

snarkygal


quality posts: 4 Private Messages snarkygal
female wrote:Whoa... Ok, Animation history and Art History are two different things. They are kept separate in Art surveys and texts (that's Art with a capital A). It might be done via an art, but it isn't Art. A corporation makes it, which should be your first hint. There might be some personal animations that could be included in Art History, but the Simpsons is in Pop Culture history. I don't know why you would choose the Simpsons when the topic is Art History, and this is from someone who likes this entry.


.

aust1nz


quality posts: 0 Private Messages aust1nz
female wrote:Animation is an artform, another medium for Art just like painting and sculpting. This medium can be used to make Art. Art museums even show animations made as Art. That does not make the Simpsons Art just because it uses this medium. The Simpsons is artfully done commerce, produced by a company to make money, with a gazillion dollar merchandising tie-in. It would be like saying mass produced bobblehead dolls are Art because they utilize the medium of sculpture or posters of Michael Jordan are Art because they use the medium of photography. Of course some people out there will see the art in well made bobblehead dolls but they will never be a part of Art History.


I think you're taking a semantic feeling (commercial products can't be art) and trying to make it sound like a fact. I believe that movies, albums and television often qualify as art, regardless of the fact that they are produced by businesspeople.

To extend your theory (if something is made for profit and/or merchandise tie-ins it cannot be art), you're eliminating a whole lot of contemporary work. Movies like Pan's Labyrinth; numerous photography collections or books; comics like the Watchmen, etc.

Sure, they aren't in the same canon of art history as Da Vinci or Van Gogh. That doesn't mean they don't qualify as important art.

Keelmy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Keelmy
female wrote:Animation is an artform, another medium for Art just like painting and sculpting. This medium can be used to make Art. Art museums even show animations made as Art. That does not make the Simpsons Art just because it uses this medium. The Simpsons is artfully done commerce, produced by a company to make money, with a gazillion dollar merchandising tie-in. It would be like saying mass produced bobblehead dolls are Art because they utilize the medium of sculpture or posters of Michael Jordan are Art because they use the medium of photography. Of course some people out there will see the art in well made bobblehead dolls but they will never be a part of Art History.


While I agree with your bobblehead/Jordon point, I don't think the fact that Simpson makes money detracts from its contributions to the history of Animation. We're taking about a show that has a great deal of cultural influence and has won many awards. As I noted before it's also "the longest-running prime-time animated series in the United States" (I had to look that up).

I can't believe I'm defending The Simposons. Heh that show should have been pulled off the air years ago but that's my humble 2 cents to this discussion

[/url]

snarkygal


quality posts: 4 Private Messages snarkygal
DavidShenoda wrote:As for Futurama, the only difference with simpson's is the lack of yellow skin, and more shapely bodies. Matt Groening has a very unique way of drawing cartoon people. My intent was to draw the mario characters in the same way that Matt Groening would.

Besides, isn't the point supposed to be that you could confuse the design for something done by the actual artist. Is this not the intent of the derby. I did not have to make them the same shape as the Simpson's but I thought I made it obvious enough that they were Mario characters that this wouldn't matter.

I believe that the real issue is not the characters themselves, but that I put them on the couch in the same order as the Simpson's characters. Despite this, I deliberately made sure not to display any distinguishing features of the actual characters to avoid any resemblance to them other than body shape, which cannot be copyrighted. The pacifier and pearls were the only elements that could be related to the Simpsons characters. None of them have the same clothes or hair.


Dude, those are SOOOO obviously Simpson's characters. And I will say it again...I do not think this fits the theme as "in a historical art style". Every week, you push people's buttons and create controversy. Do you do it on purpose?

Keelmy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Keelmy
aust1nz wrote:
To extend your theory (if something is made for profit and/or merchandise tie-ins it cannot be art), you're eliminating a whole lot of contemporary work. Movies like Pan's Labyrinth; numerous photography collections or books; comics like the Watchmen, etc.


I think you can even add Warhol (and other painters) to that list as I'm pretty sure some of his works sold and he's pretty heavily emulated in this derby.

[/url]

popesmoker


quality posts: 0 Private Messages popesmoker
female wrote:Animation is an artform, another medium for Art just like painting and sculpting. This medium can be used to make Art. Art museums even show animations made as Art. That does not make the Simpsons Art just because it uses this medium. The Simpsons is artfully done commerce, produced by a company to make money, with a gazillion dollar merchandising tie-in. It would be like saying mass produced bobblehead dolls are Art because they utilize the medium of sculpture or posters of Michael Jordan are Art because they use the medium of photography. Of course some people out there will see the art in well made bobblehead dolls but they will never be a part of Art History.


When someone is paid to make a piece of art, the product is still art. Throughout history, artists have received payment in return for their work (i.e commissions). The artists behind the Simpsons receive money for their work just as Michelangelo received money to paint the roof of the Sistine Chapel. Being paid to create art doesn't transform art into commerce. What the entity paying the money does with the art does not remove the artistic value of the work. When a town commissions an artist to paint a mural in their town square to increase their income from tourism, the mural does not lose its status as art because it is being used for a commercial end.

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
popesmoker wrote:When someone is paid to make a piece of art, the product is still art. Throughout history, artists have received payment in return for their work (i.e commissions). The artists behind the Simpsons receive money for their work just as Michelangelo received money to paint the roof of the Sistine Chapel. Being paid to create art doesn't transform art into commerce. What the entity paying the money does with the art does not remove the artistic value of the work. When a town commissions an artist to paint a mural in their town square to increase their income from tourism, the mural does not lose its status as art because it is being used for a commercial end.


I think you're missing my point. A mural is made to be Art. The Sistine Chapel was made to be Art. That is it's purpose, to exist as Art. The Simpsons is not made to be Art. It is made to be commerce, a product used to draw viewership and ratings. This is why it is not in Art History books, regardless of how artfully it's done. Animation history, yes. Television history, yes. Pop culture history, yes. Not Art History. If you don't believe me just go pick up an up to date, 2000 page Art History book and see for yourself.

iris420


quality posts: 1 Private Messages iris420
snarkygal wrote:Dude, those are SOOOO obviously Simpson's characters. And I will say it again...I do not think this fits the theme as "in a historical art style". Every week, you push people's buttons and create controversy. Do you do it on purpose?


I think the recognizable style of Matt Groening is what is at issue here, not whether or not the Simpsons is a piece of corporate trash. I can look at a Matt Groening drawing and instantly recognize his style, whether it's Akbar, Comic-Book Guy, or that weird lobster guy from Futurama. The derby asks that the artist reference a video game in the style of a famous artist or artistic style. Groening's art is his own style. I look at the fog right now, and I can say that the Mario one is soooo obviously Rembrandt because of the style. The Wii fit one is soooo obviously Egyptian because of the style. I don't see how this one is any different other than the fact that Matt Groening is still alive and rolling in the dough and for some reason this makes people think that he is not an artist.

Carpe shirtem!

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
iris420 wrote:I think the recognizable style of Matt Groening is what is at issue here, not whether or not the Simpsons is a piece of corporate trash. I can look at a Matt Groening drawing and instantly recognize his style, whether it's Akbar, Comic-Book Guy, or that weird lobster guy from Futurama. The derby asks that the artist reference a video game in the style of a famous artist or artistic style. Groening's art is his own style. I look at the fog right now, and I can say that the Mario one is soooo obviously Rembrandt because of the style. The Wii fit one is soooo obviously Egyptian because of the style. I don't see how this one is any different other than the fact that Matt Groening is still alive and rolling in the dough and for some reason this makes people think that he is not an artist.


Actually this is not in the style of Matt Groening, who is a comic strip artist. It's in the style of the company that produces the show, which looks quite a bit different. And no one is saying the show is corporate "trash".

peppersagooddog


quality posts: 0 Private Messages peppersagooddog
iris420 wrote:I think the recognizable style of Matt Groening is what is at issue here, not whether or not the Simpsons is a piece of corporate trash. I can look at a Matt Groening drawing and instantly recognize his style, whether it's Akbar, Comic-Book Guy, or that weird lobster guy from Futurama. The derby asks that the artist reference a video game in the style of a famous artist or artistic style. Groening's art is his own style. I look at the fog right now, and I can say that the Mario one is soooo obviously Rembrandt because of the style. The Wii fit one is soooo obviously Egyptian because of the style. I don't see how this one is any different other than the fact that Matt Groening is still alive and rolling in the dough and for some reason this makes people think that he is not an artist.




as much as i am LOATHE to admit it, since i dont like the design Or the designer for that matter, if warhol can be considered an artist because we can recognize his use of someone elses photographs along with ugly colors to make "art" in a specific style... this is most assuredly an homage to a particular and wholly recognizable artist. i am positive if he sold original serigraphs of his work like disney has done they would bring HUGE prices at ART auctions.

haxrox


quality posts: 10 Private Messages haxrox
female wrote:I think you're missing my point. A mural is made to be Art. The Sistine Chapel was made to be Art. That is it's purpose, to exist as Art.

The Sistine Chapel was commissioned. To draw viewership and ratings to the church, like many great works of art.

iris420


quality posts: 1 Private Messages iris420
female wrote:Actually this is not in the style of Matt Groening, who is a comic strip artist. It's in the style of the company that produces the show, which looks quite a bit different. And no one is saying the show is corporate "trash".


llo, I was!

Carpe shirtem!

popesmoker


quality posts: 0 Private Messages popesmoker
haxrox wrote:The Sistine Chapel was commissioned. To draw viewership and ratings to the church, like many great works of art.


Exactly. Many famous works were commissioned to serve an ulterior motive, not just for "the sake of art". Also, that viewership and ratings brought to the church also generated money in the form of donations.

Female, I think where we differ is in our perspective of art. You are taking a very strict, academic view of art. This is not an incorrect view, but for the purposes of an internet t-shirt contest, I think it's fair to say that The Simpsons is a historically notable example of an art form even if you wouldn't see it in an art history text book.

ClayMeow


quality posts: 0 Private Messages ClayMeow
popesmoker wrote:Exactly. Many famous works were commissioned to serve an ulterior motive, not just for "the sake of art". Also, that viewership and ratings brought to the church also generated money in the form of donations.

Female, I think where we differ is in our perspective of art. You are taking a very strict, academic view of art. This is not an incorrect view, but for the purposes of an internet t-shirt contest, I think it's fair to say that The Simpsons is a historically notable example of an art form even if you wouldn't see it in an art history text book.

The designer can defend this as art history all they want, but you'll never see this "Groening form" taught in any art history classes or art classes. Aside from the borderline copyright violations in this work and not following the guidelines set forth, it's a very neat design, but I just can't see this being passed off as an art form, no matter how much I've enjoyed The Simpsons over the years.

ClayMeow


quality posts: 0 Private Messages ClayMeow
iris420 wrote:I think the recognizable style of Matt Groening is what is at issue here, not whether or not the Simpsons is a piece of corporate trash. I can look at a Matt Groening drawing and instantly recognize his style, whether it's Akbar, Comic-Book Guy, or that weird lobster guy from Futurama. The derby asks that the artist reference a video game in the style of a famous artist or artistic style. Groening's art is his own style. I look at the fog right now, and I can say that the Mario one is soooo obviously Rembrandt because of the style. The Wii fit one is soooo obviously Egyptian because of the style. I don't see how this one is any different other than the fact that Matt Groening is still alive and rolling in the dough and for some reason this makes people think that he is not an artist.

It's different because he is blatantly using the actual Simpson characters. If the designer would like to argue that Groening has a distinct style then he should have designed the Mario characters with Groening's style and not just slapped clothes on the existing Simpson characters. That's a huge and deal-breaking difference. It's great as a piece of fan art, but not right for this derby.

jrigle44


quality posts: 0 Private Messages jrigle44
female wrote:llo. Because the Simpsons is in it's 20th season doesn't make it Art History. It makes it a popular TV show that is ingrained in pop culture. That has nothing to do with Art History. Do they teach the TV show MASH in History class? Show me a single Art History survey book that has the Simpsons in it (Art History, not Animation History). The idea is laughable. I'm not being a snob, it just ain't gonna happen. I hope you all don't implode when or if this gets rejected. It should have been obvious going in (and even more so when you had to include the name of a company in the title) that this is NOT part of Art History.


Im pretty sure you never went to art school but let me help you cause I went for animation and graphic design also with a minor in History. But you needed help with finding Matt Groening in Art History Books but here are two right off the bat Chronicles of the Classics Illustrated and Animation History: From Pencil to Pixel, the History of Cartoon, Anime, and CGI. I know this site is all for fun but this artist shirt meets all derby requirements. How can you say this is not Art History what because its a popular Tv show? Please to think that Matt Groening is not a historical artist what makes Andy Warhol a historical artist? That man had a talent for altering colors from a photo period the end. And not sure if you ever watched MASH but im sure it was a tv show with real actors acting out life during vietnam. But hey not here to start an argument just here to shed some light that you have no clue what your talking about.

toe2254


quality posts: 0 Private Messages toe2254
jrigle44 wrote:Im pretty sure you never went to art school but let me help you cause I went for animation and graphic design also with a minor in History. But you needed help with finding Matt Groening in Art History Books but here are two right off the bat Chronicles of the Classics Illustrated and Animation History: From Pencil to Pixel, the History of Cartoon, Anime, and CGI. I know this site is all for fun but this artist shirt meets all derby requirements. How can you say this is not Art History what because its a popular Tv show? Please to think that Matt Groening is not a historical artist what makes Andy Warhol a historical artist? That man had a talent for altering colors from a photo period the end. And not sure if you ever watched MASH but im sure it was a tv show with real actors acting out life during vietnam. But hey not here to start an argument just here to shed some light that you have no clue what your talking about.


both of those books are about animation history, not Art History, which is what female was asking for.

also, MASH was set in Korea.

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


I've still seen no conclusive post citing Groening's 'style' as part of Art History. To be clear the derby was to produce something in the style of an artistic movement, not to imitate a specific artist's work. It's a fine line to be sure and I realize that line is pretty blurry now.

If a rejection is to come, it will be because of the copyright concern. I'll have to wait until Monday to get my legal advice. Again, I'm trying to let everyone down easy here.

female


quality posts: 0 Private Messages female
jrigle44 wrote:Im pretty sure you never went to art school but let me help you cause I went for animation and graphic design also with a minor in History. But you needed help with finding Matt Groening in Art History Books but here are two right off the bat Chronicles of the Classics Illustrated and Animation History: From Pencil to Pixel, the History of Cartoon, Anime, and CGI. I know this site is all for fun but this artist shirt meets all derby requirements. How can you say this is not Art History what because its a popular Tv show? Please to think that Matt Groening is not a historical artist what makes Andy Warhol a historical artist? That man had a talent for altering colors from a photo period the end. And not sure if you ever watched MASH but im sure it was a tv show with real actors acting out life during vietnam. But hey not here to start an argument just here to shed some light that you have no clue what your talking about.


You're totally right. Everything is Art. My mistake. Pokemon = Art. Thundercats = Art. Wallpaper = Art. Cereal Box covers = Art. MASH = taught as Vietnam(!) History. The Simpsons apparently isn't just found only in Animation history books, according to you it's found in Art History texts and is taught in Art Survey 101, 201, 301 and in 701 grad level survey. What was I thinking, assuming that because it's a part of your craft's history, it wouldn't by default be a part of Art History, Art with a capital A? That because something is made with an art, doesn't automatically mean it is Art. That the goal of the studio execs and artists at Fox were to make Art. That I could have an adult conversation on the Internet without being childishly insulted. Completely idiotic, I know. Thanks for shedding light on the subject.

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Well, my soapbox is still broken from the costume derby, so all I'm saying is that if you're going to have a derby with so many opportunities for copyright issues then you need to be EXTREMELY SPECIFIC in what your considerations for copyright/parody are. Geez.

Come on, Joel. You're killing me.

Also, something I was thinking about -

To those who...
Like to love my designs,
love to love my designs,
hate to love me designs,
like to hate
love to hate,
and hate to hate them,

Let me see if I can help you understand my frustration. This design design, as well as many of my previous ones, took at least a full 8 hours from start to finish to make. That's a full day's work - that I did over night without sleep. If you went to work and your employer said, "hey, you know how you just got done working the whole day today? Well, we decided that doesn't count. You're gonna have to come in another day to do it again."
Don't lie to yourself. You would be pissed too. With the exception of Joel, because we all know he is like a billionaire by now. In any event, this is why I get so worked up sometimes. Take it for what it's worth.

Thanks again to my constituents. Hehe, guess I've caught election fever too.

tnt138


quality posts: 0 Private Messages tnt138
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


Wow... All this bickering reminds me of all my college art classes when I told them I was going to make comic books. I once wrote a 30 page paper over how Frank Frazetta transcends illustration to achieve a status of Fine Art. I had some heated arguments with my Professor (who was also the Art History Prof) about how Frazetta can be considered Fine Art. But, I never convinced him. He even gave me a 'B' on the paper which was a really high score for that guy to give.
The thing is people are starting to consider R. Crumbs work Art with a Capitol A. His work is going in galleries and being gawked at by all the Art Snobs. Your piece here and Groenings work are art, Art, Fine Art. The snobs be damned. It will all come around someday. Everyone hated Van Gogh in his time and didn't consider his work to be art either. The man only ever sold one painting while he lived. F&%@ the art snobs.
Anyway, awesome work!

Comment! Vote!

UPdownLoAD


quality posts: 2 Private Messages UPdownLoAD

I guess "I'd Want One" doesn't mean anything when it comes to copyrights....

iris420


quality posts: 1 Private Messages iris420
tnt138 wrote:Wow... All this bickering reminds me of all my college art classes when I told them I was going to make comic books. I once wrote a 30 page paper over how Frank Frazetta transcends illustration to achieve a status of Fine Art. I had some heated arguments with my Professor (who was also the Art History Prof) about how Frazetta can be considered Fine Art. But, I never convinced him. He even gave me a 'B' on the paper which was a really high score for that guy to give.
The thing is people are starting to consider R. Crumbs work Art with a Capitol A. His work is going in galleries and being gawked at by all the Art Snobs. Your piece here and Groenings work are art, Art, Fine Art. The snobs be damned. It will all come around someday. Everyone hated Van Gogh in his time and didn't consider his work to be art either. The man only ever sold one painting while he lived. F&%@ the art snobs.
Anyway, awesome work!


You know, I used to be one of those art snobs, not thinking that a cartoon could be considered serious work. I even broke up with a boyfriend, many many many years ago, because he was a supremely talented artist and he chose to "waste" his talent writing and illustrating comic books instead of doing "real" art. I dumped him for not taking himself seriously enough, and now he is on his way to getting his second comic published, and I'm still toiling away in obscurity. Art really is in the eye of the beholder. Just because Matt Groening isn't talked about in art history classes now, doesn't mean that in 30 years he won't be. Oh, and keep an eye out for comics by Robert L. Smiley because he's gonna be a huge comic artist someday!

Carpe shirtem!

BootsBoots


quality posts: 36 Private Messages BootsBoots
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


When the old 90210 went off the air years ago, I was sad. Now the new one's back and it vacuums. This is also sad. Now, I have to find my drama by reading the comments on your woot submissions, David. Is that sad?


sokowa


quality posts: 3 Private Messages sokowa
DavidShenoda wrote: . . .8 hour drawing . . . .


I feel your frustration when an artist spends 8hrs on a design and it either gets rejected or doesn't get many votes. It's a risk you take though. Spending 8hrs on a design doesn't guarantee anything at shirt.woot, sorry.

kwilder


quality posts: 0 Private Messages kwilder
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


I like this shirt, I would definitely buy it if it wins, and I could even buy multiple sizes as most of my friends would also love to own this shirt.

As to whether or not this constitutes art history, who knows. The definitions of both "art" and "history" are completely subjective, so some may think it fits, and others don't. Woot's definitions of those two words are the ones that matter in this instance.

In the case of the art style being depicted here though the style is part of the past (yesterday and the past 20 years) , the art is also a style of the present, and also because the Simpson's isn't going anywhere soon it is also an art style of the future. The same could also be said of many of the styles depicted here. So, I won't be surprised if it gets rejected, but I would love to buy this shirt if it isn't. Good luck!

haxrox


quality posts: 10 Private Messages haxrox
female wrote:You're totally right. Everything is Art. My mistake.

It is a really tough topic worth patient debate. Try to come up with a definition for Art with a capital A. Then go through, say, Rembrandt's works and decide which are art and which are Art. Like most artists, he did some work for money, some for love of the work, and some in a combination of the two. If Matt Groenig drew the characters just because he loved to draw (which is how many animation ideas start) and put them on youtube to exists solely as Art, then would the Simpsons qualify? And I don't mean this in a demeaning tone. There are some good arguments in this thread and those are two things I thought through for a while when trying to formulate a stance.

Josephus


quality posts: 25 Private Messages Josephus
joelterrific wrote:Someone convince me this is an art history style. It's definitely a style, but...


My view of this is that Groening isn't a style, but Cartoon certainly is. He picked a particular cartoonist, much as several have picked particular artists such as Van Gogh, Picasso, etc. I can't see a rejection of this for his picking a contemporary cartoonist, and more than you would reject a Mapplethorpe design. OK, that's a bad example, but you get the drift, I think.

eyeslikesugar


quality posts: 2 Private Messages eyeslikesugar
joelterrific wrote:I've still seen no conclusive post citing Groening's 'style' as part of Art History. To be clear the derby was to produce something in the style of an artistic movement, not to imitate a specific artist's work. It's a fine line to be sure and I realize that line is pretty blurry now.

If a rejection is to come, it will be because of the copyright concern. I'll have to wait until Monday to get my legal advice. Again, I'm trying to let everyone down easy here.


You're absolutely right, Joel. If it was just Mario, Peach, a kid and maybe Yoshi, it wouldn't be NEARLY as Simpson-y as it is including the Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, Maggie, and Santa's Little Helper characters. But because the main characters are in there, it is not simply "in the style of", it IS The Simpsons.

Would be smooth sailing if David hadn't included all of the main characters. Comics and cartoons are most certainly art, people... this design is' most certainly a rip of The Simpsons, due to the main characters' presence.

-James Cho -EdgarRMcherly Shirt.Woot.Com - Ye Oldest Sucker - 2009

eyeslikesugar


quality posts: 2 Private Messages eyeslikesugar
DavidShenoda wrote:This design design, as well as many of my previous ones, took at least a full 8 hours from start to finish to make. That's a full day's work - that I did over night without sleep. If you went to work and your employer said, "hey, you know how you just got done working the whole day today? Well, we decided that doesn't count. You're gonna have to come in another day to do it again."


This happens to everyone, David. Hell, I've submitted a design here, with 30 votes total at the end, that took double the time. I've also had 8 hour designs rejected for silly reasons like: Off-topic. (hi Motherhood derby! - no, I'm not bitter ;) Do the derby because you like it, not because you like money. You're more than welcome to start your own shirt business if you design here for the latter.

P.S. An exact quote, from you, from a deleted comment you left on your Link shirt. I have it saved due to the corrected proof you asked of me. (still want it?)

DavidShenoda wrote:You can't separate the person from the critique. If this were a job, and I needed to be professional and PC, then yes I would. But news flash, it's not

-James Cho -EdgarRMcherly Shirt.Woot.Com - Ye Oldest Sucker - 2009

wugsby


quality posts: 4 Private Messages wugsby
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


This is a cool design but I've still got to say that it's not an art style.This may fit under the broader "animation style" genre or something similar but "Groening Style" is not a historic art style anymore than any other of the thousands of cartoons' styles are. I understand that you worked hard but that's not a good reason to overlook the fact that it doesn't fit within the topic as well as the fairly strong possibility of copyright infringement. It's well done design, it's just not right for the derby.

tnt138


quality posts: 0 Private Messages tnt138

How is any of this image copyright infringement? Mad magazine has been making money off of this stuff for years! Hell, I found a two-fer!

Comment! Vote!

Earthboundkid


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Earthboundkid

I'm pretty sure we've found our derby winner.

I'm just confused about the wrench.

Lamuril


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Lamuril

I think this shirt wouldn't have been so much of an issue if the drawing didn't look like the main characters of the show. You could have definitely made them more to their real size and put them in front of the tv instead. However, since the shirt is already made and looks fantastic, I hope it is legal and it makes it into the fog. It's tied with another favorite in this derby. You did a wonderful job. I hope it makes it!!

ClayMeow


quality posts: 0 Private Messages ClayMeow
eyeslikesugar wrote:You're absolutely right, Joel. If it was just Mario, Peach, a kid and maybe Yoshi, it wouldn't be NEARLY as Simpson-y as it is including the Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, Maggie, and Santa's Little Helper characters. But because the main characters are in there, it is not simply "in the style of", it IS The Simpsons.

Would be smooth sailing if David hadn't included all of the main characters. Comics and cartoons are most certainly art, people... this design is' most certainly a rip of The Simpsons, due to the main characters' presence.

Exactly. If the designer actually thought there was such a thing as "Groening Style" then it shouldn't have been too hard to create the Mario characters in Groening's style. However, he didn't do that. He took the actual Simpson characters and slapped Mario clothes on them. As Joel said, this isn't copy-an-artist derby, and if nobody sees the blatant use of the actual Simpson characters then they're blind and/or have never seen the Simpsons.

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
eyeslikesugar wrote:


Why can't I do both? Aren't you supposed to go into a field that you're passionate about. If you're passionate about what you do, you will be successful and make money - eventually, at least.

Xanzibar


quality posts: 2 Private Messages Xanzibar
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


This has got to win!! GMV!!

What is this?
http://www.rewards1.com/index.php?referrer_id=1590902

klawrence


quality posts: 1 Private Messages klawrence
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


I'm not a huge fan of the concept of this shirt, but I have to say...
How is this different from the whistler's mother entry? http://shirt.woot.com/Derby/Entry.aspx?id=24148
They both took a famous image & just altered it to incorporate video games. I'd actually say this one is more altered.

Animation is a modern style of art. Basquiat was just a kid on the street painting trash until Warhol decided he was an artist. Don't all of the graphic artists on this site consider their work art. The original animation style of Matt Groening was most definitely art even if the reproduced made in Korea end result animation is not. (Another example is clothing ~ couture pieces you see on the runway = art / ready to wear clothes in the store don't.) The debate over good vs. bad art is another discussion.

Of course if the lawyers nix it there's nothing anyone can do, but I had to throw in my 2 cents.

klawrence


quality posts: 1 Private Messages klawrence
klawrence wrote:Don't all of the graphic artists on this site consider their work art?


Don't answer that.

eyeslikesugar


quality posts: 2 Private Messages eyeslikesugar
DavidShenoda wrote:Why can't I do both? Aren't you supposed to go into a field that you're passionate about. If you're passionate about what you do, you will be successful and make money - eventually, at least.


You absolutely can do both. (I think you're talking about setting up your own shirt shop, outside of Woot?) But my point is this: Don't use the fact that you don't need to "be professional and PC" when criticizing someone (see: Adder) because this isn't a job. And then a couple of weeks later, whine how unfair Woot is, because "If you worked all night at a job...." Woot's a contest, not a job, and there are NO guarantees. If you want, I suggest you talk to Jimiyo. He's a professional artist who used to submit here a lot with wonderful designs, and then he felt the same things you are feeling and went on. If you really want to break your art out to venues other than Woot, he might be able to help you.You know you can submit a daily, right? Then, you might feel you have a better chance at a design you worked overnight on. Either way, the derby is a battleground.. not a job. l ol.

-James Cho -EdgarRMcherly Shirt.Woot.Com - Ye Oldest Sucker - 2009

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

tnt138 wrote:How is any of this image copyright infringement? Mad magazine has been making money off of this stuff for years! Hell, I found a two-fer!


Well, there's a very obvious commentary with this image not present in the Mario/Simpsons version. That's an important distinction.

joelterrific


quality posts: 21 Private Messages joelterrific

Staff

DavidShenoda wrote:Well, my soapbox is still broken from the costume derby, so all I'm saying is that if you're going to have a derby with so many opportunities for copyright issues then you need to be EXTREMELY SPECIFIC in what your considerations for copyright/parody are. Geez.

Come on, Joel. You're killing me.


David...you know it's nothing personal. We warned that this derby would flirt with the edges of copyright issues. You bet big you win big...or lose 8 hours of your time. As I said, there's some subjective issues here around whether or not this is an historically recognized period in art (I'll agree cartoons fit), but this comes down to a copyright issue more than the other issues.

Keelmy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Keelmy
joelterrific wrote:(I'll agree cartoons fit)


cough Animation cough cough

[/url]

theinfinityloop


quality posts: 6 Private Messages theinfinityloop
sokowa wrote:I feel your frustration when an artist spends 8hrs on a design and it either gets rejected or doesn't get many votes. It's a risk you take though. Spending 8hrs on a design doesn't guarantee anything at shirt.woot, sorry.

Agreed. This is an unfortunate reality for tee shirt artists. No one is immune to the risk and to the sacrifice of time. You also seriously lessen your odds of print when you flirt with rejection boundaries. A handful of artists warned you even when you were doing your beginning sketches that Groening may not be considered a historical style.


UPdownLoAD


quality posts: 2 Private Messages UPdownLoAD

I'm sorry to have to make this comment......

"DOH!!"

haxrox


quality posts: 10 Private Messages haxrox

This is like a social experiment. All that debate and there are 7 colors in the design.

bunt


quality posts: 0 Private Messages bunt
jrigle44 wrote:Im pretty sure you never went to art school but let me help you cause I went for animation and graphic design also with a minor in History. But you needed help with finding Matt Groening in Art History Books but here are two right off the bat Chronicles of the Classics Illustrated and Animation History: From Pencil to Pixel, the History of Cartoon, Anime, and CGI. I know this site is all for fun but this artist shirt meets all derby requirements. How can you say this is not Art History what because its a popular Tv show? Please to think that Matt Groening is not a historical artist what makes Andy Warhol a historical artist? That man had a talent for altering colors from a photo period the end. And not sure if you ever watched MASH but im sure it was a tv show with real actors acting out life during vietnam. But hey not here to start an argument just here to shed some light that you have no clue what your talking about.


You are so right on the art history. If Warhol is considered a style then Groening is definitely a style. Maybe I'm jaded, but if you have the ability to consistently render objects, people, ect. in a matching look, it's a style. Granted it's not what is generally considered "historical" to most the public. It will and is in the animation world. Unfortunately, the copyright issue is still a problem. I say nice job emulating the Groening style.

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon
haxrox wrote:This is like a social experiment. All that debate and there are 7 colors in the design.


Eh? I only count six:

White
Red
Yellow
Pink
Green
Pale Green
(Blue is shirt colour)

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

SailorButterfly


quality posts: 14 Private Messages SailorButterfly
eHalcyon wrote:Eh? I only count six:

White
Red
Yellow
Pink
Green
Pale Green
(Blue is shirt colour)


The outline is a dark gray/black color.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "Most Awesome Butterfly-Sailor Hybrid on Woot"

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon
SailorButterfly wrote:The outline is a dark gray/black color.


Ahh, good catch.

/shamed

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

DavidShenoda


quality posts: 0 Private Messages DavidShenoda
eHalcyon wrote:Ahh, good catch.

/shamed


Psyche! *giggles*! Gotcha - Almost! My hideously demented plot to overload your brains with color, making any who would wear the shirt my minions, giving me the army I need to take over the world, was foiled by...
WOOTMAN!
or we could just call him "the man"...
or Joel the Rejector and devourer of worlds.

sayah


quality posts: 5 Private Messages sayah
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


David is right. This is on topic and passes the guidelines...unfortunately being right does not always prevail.

Let's move on.

OneStepAhead


quality posts: 2 Private Messages OneStepAhead
Re: Mario in style of Matt Groening - Klasky Csupo


too bad about the rejection.. this design could sell a lot of shirts. maybe print it somewhere else?

More Derby Entries

By date:

By rank:

Thumbnail