Pinched ink: is it wrong to steal a tattoo? | Hacker News Reader

Pinched ink: is it wrong to steal a tattoo?

theguardian.com

17 pointsedward15 comments

"In 2014 my partner and I decided, after carefully weighing the pros and cons, to be spontaneous and get tattoos."

This is gold.

"We're individuals" - said the army of clones unisonely

It reminds me of something I heard as a teenager from an educator...I didn't realize at the time he was mocking us all. The phrase went something like this...

"You all want to be unique right? Just like everybody else."

I came up with a nice phrase myself once: "Generalizations suck."

I'm not sure if the author does the article a favor by showing the most common representation of a diamond in line form as tattoos. Who did steal from who here when all of them are carbon copies of a symbol? Probably none.

I compared the three images and they all have minor differences ie. they're not line for line copies. Its merely a use of geometry + diamond shape, where the geometry makes sense because of how it applies to a RL diamond, and like the old SGI logo it tries to create a 3D effect. There's just not much special about this tattoo (e.g. basic shape, small one instead of large one). It is therefore a terrible example. I'd say the same with the mountains. People think they're super original, and then it turns out they weren't. Cause, surprise surprise, there's a lot of people on the planet, wearing a lot of tattoo's, and the digital era makes it easier for these to be copied and found (searching/finding a copy of the tattoo).

Furthermore, it isn't like its copy/pasted. There's real labor involved in making the tattoo, often an example is used. Why can't an existing tattoo be used for such? Well, why not indeed. A tattoo artist wants a satisfied customer, to keep their name, good for business, customer wants therefore best result, etc etc.

When GW2 was released, a developer revealed their gigantic tattoo on their back with the logo, a large two in the form of a dragon, covering their whole back. I thought it was really cool, and wondered about copy cats but because it was so huge I didn't expect that to happen (don't think it did).

Recently I learned tattoo's don't allow you to sweat well, and whenever I see football (soccer) players with a lot of tattoo's I can't help but chuckle (I suppose you can apply this to all physical sports though I'd love to see a chess player full with tattoo's). Which I find also funny given the context of carefully considering the pro's and con's vs spontaneous.

I could be wrong but didn’t tat shops before the internet just have a binders or catalogs with ideas and tattoo samples for people to pick from? So of course there’d be many people with similar tattoos?

They did, but it was fairly uncommon for you to pick something and get exactly that. It was more of an inspiration, a starting off point. You find some stuff you like and then you talk to the artist and get them to sketch out something based off that but tailored to you.

It also provided evidence that the artist had some idea of what they were doing. Really good shops would have pictures from the day of, and then from 10 years later right next to each other so you could ensure the work wouldn't fade or bleed excessively.

Now, did some people flip through the book and ask for that exact tattoo? Sure. Some people put amazingly little effort into something that they'll carry forever.

80% of the tattoos I see in Tokyo are done for members of what are euphemistically called "anti-social groups" - Yakuza. The rest are a few foreigners and an increasing, but still small number of fashion tattoos on Japanese men.

Despite local bathhouses proclaiming no-tattoo rules, many tattooed people are allowed in. More than 5%, less than 10% of bathers on average. But I live quite near Kabukicho. I believe the practical concern is rival gangs, so the bathhouse owner probably has an arrangement.

What I see there is interesting. Major parts of whole bodies are sometimes laid out with the complete pattern in sketch form. Like a city's subdivisions. Some younger men are already fully inked. The highest quality I have seen is surprisingly on older men. Some I find so beautiful. The best looking art-body comes always in with three helpers / bodyguards. The style and detail here is as you might see in Buddhist art at Tokyo National museum.

Major themes are oft repeated: Carp, Dragon etc. But the detailed content is always unique and creative. No matter the rank.

Reminds me of this case that went into straight identity theft territory: https://www.vice.com/en/article/5dp4gx/professor-catfished-b...

These tattoos are basically “flash” — small, cheap tattoos that are relatively simple. I don’t see a lot of trouble copying these; a lot of artists will use templates. Most artists don’t give a shit about flash.

If it’s an actual large, intricate tattoo with some work in it, that’s another story. I would be extremely suspect of any artist even willing to take such a request — good artists work within a style they’re comfortable with and most would not feel comfortable enough to do a good copy of an intricate piece by another artist.

That said it’s totally fine to get inspiration from other tattoos or even borrow the whole concept into an original piece. Most artists want you to come in with some examples of what you’re looking for.

But tattoo artists are actually artists — most got into it because they’ve been drawing most of their lives and tattooing is one of the ways to make a living as an artist. It’s best to think of a tattoo as commissioning a piece from an artist — it’s actually what you’re doing, and they just take the extra step of putting it on your body.

Do they all need to be original artists? Historically art has also given a huge role to reproductions. It was not uncommon to have many copies of a painting be made by different persons (which has made tracking originals a time consuming process). Some painters were even specialized in copying a certain master style and paintings. Every musician does not like composing its own music either.

Tattooing isn't exactly a forgiving medium. Every work is inherently novel in it's application. Trying to get somebody to copy a "high effort tattoo" vs one of their own design is a short road to a shitty tattoo.

Silence of the lambs way, yes.

Artistic copy, no. This is fast fashion.

I have a bunch of tattoos. My right arm is sleeved for instance. Not saying that to try to get coolness points here (tbh I don't think tats are even considered "cool" anymore...) but to just make the point that I've got some bad ones I'd rather not have. It's gonna happen if you get enough of them. For instance, I found a painting of a girl in Day of the Dead face paint that I _loved_. Got something inspired by it tattooed on me. A big one at that. The artist who painted said painting ended up being Sylvia Ji[0]. Her stuff is now adorning the bottoms of snowboards and displayed on t-shirts. Would I have gotten that knowing what I know now? Absolutely not. Do I regret it? Eh... not really. At the time that I got it, it was a really different thing to get.

I think the point of a tattoo, the thing that makes them so exciting, is the fact that you can in fact get one that was a mistake and that mistake is permanent. Its inherently a dumb thing to do to yourself and depending on how you look at it, that can either be exciting and life affirming or a reason to never ever set foot in a tattoo studio. Knowing that, you can definitely over think your first one and do something like the author is describing. IMO you just own it. Ok so you got something that someone else has. Whatever! Get more. Get a cover up or get it removed! To me it's kind of an analogy for life: messy, complicated, hard to get out of sometimes. Even getting a bad tat is a ballsy move IMO.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Day-Dead-Other-Works-Sylvia/dp/099333...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com