Outrageous republican propaganda "art"


sorabji.com: Are you stupid?: Outrageous republican propaganda "art"
By semillama on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - 12:05 pm:

    http://www.prwatch.org/forum/showthread.php?p=12485#post12485

    Check that shit out. apparently the "artist" claims it's original art, but it's obviously photoshopped, and the title of the piece, "She's glad he's there - Are You?" is particularly disgusting considering that the subject in question is tending to the child because his unit just shot up her family (actually, his family-it's a boy). I highly doubt that lad is glad he's there. I'm sure he would be happier if his mother was there.


By TBone on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - 01:22 pm:

    Apalling.


By wisper on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - 07:30 pm:

    There is such a thing as original photoshop art.
    Photoshop is her medium, that's just a shitty example.
    Her other work is actully very well done, so I can't imagine why that one looks so very very bad.

    And it's creepy and sad and etc, yeah that too.


By semillama on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - 08:54 pm:

    you can't claim its original photoshop art if you blatantly use a copyrighted photograph. And I couldn't find any thing on her own page stating that photoshop is her medium. She claimed it wasn't photoshopped but original art to some one who called her on her BS. I think a copywright infringement cease-and-desist order is somewhere in her future.

    I did find some derivative caricatures which might have been made with photoshop, but her other stuff seems to be paintings.


By wisper on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 01:33 am:

    Naw dude, it's ALL photoshop painting.
    this, and all of these, each thing is at least 80% Photoshop. (She's really good).

    She says the soldier is original art, she never claimed it was a physical painting.
    And it would count as original art, if she hadn't gone into the magical world of copyright infringement.
    But I wouldn't expect a political cartoonist to know shit about copyright laws :)

    goddamn i hate political cartoonists.

    However, at the same time, she could always claim it's "parody", and then it's all cool.


By semillama on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 10:26 am:

    THat's what's weird. Why is that such a slop job of photoshop if she's otherwise really good?

    And BOY is she headed for copyright infringment!


By patrick on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 01:15 pm:

    that image was on the front page of the LA Times the day Eva was born. I have it saved somewhere.


By wisper on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 06:54 pm:

    I can only guess it's because she's only good at painting crazy cartoons with Photoshop and not good at realistic photo manipulation, they're quite different.
    The delicate art of the selection brush eludes her.


By Antigone on Friday, February 4, 2005 - 03:40 am: