[Gentle Mental]

coming at ya at $909

ed of 76 quite lovely - each unique - and NOT a giclee.... who's in?





should've been bigger...

[Gentle Mental]

oh yes... the stampede's at burlesquedesign.com/

2pm central time...

[f5ers]

The print was based on the time he wandered into that dodgy estate in Liverpool while faced on acid

[gozgoz]

AND each handfinished.

[pezlow]

Amazing screenprint. Burlesque Design really are top of the game for this. I'm too skint though at the moment.

[Existencil]

I want to love it, but it's a mess...

[biggayal]

Wow, I really like that - reminds me of some of the rave flyers from the 90's...... Screen print as well - now that's work of art...
Not sure I can justify the outlay at the moment after a bit of good fortune the other day though.........

[horizonmike]

Like it a lot, but too pricey for me at the moment.

[goffy]

Dec 17, 2008 11:04:23 GMT 1 f5ers said:

The print was based on the time he wandered into that dodgy estate in Liverpool while faced on acid

Doesn't look like any estate in Liverpool that I know! I like it, and if it has a Liverpool connection even better. How do you know this? Oh I was it was still $2 to the pound.

[neale]

Not my thing, but fair play if its a screen print!!!

[jerometurner]

pass. i got a Bethlehem on Monday and can't afford another print. i own a few prints printed by the fine folks over at Burlesque i'm sure those who will buy one will get their money's worth.

[Heavyconsumer]

This image does nothing at all for me. Big fan of the man's work usually and have often changed my mind (from dislike to like) when seeing pieces in person, but there's no chance of that with this image. Not digging any aspect of this piece, there's just too much going on and the colours don't work well together (imo). Not to mention, the price is a piss-take.

I'm sure the printing process will involve a great deal of skill, but I'd def' take a giclee I like over a screen-print I don't. I'm out.

[Gentle Mental]

i'm sure it'll be blistering with details.... i am just soooo poor right now...

[Grubster]

it is a screenprint with loads of handfinishing, watercolor, paint splatter, and hand coloring on some individual faces. The process video at Burlesque design. These guys do work wonders with their methods of screenprinting

[gozgoz]

And a david choe wooden toy to go with it!

www.ningyoushi.com/Choegal_by_David_Choe_p/nyup016.htm

[spencerlee]

I'm torn on this, I like it, then don't...then like it.....weird.

[Existencil]

Wow, those toys are pretty expensive. I remember getting one of his get small series for about £5 last year.

The print is all over the place. There is no focus.

[bmjt]

What an utterly lurid mess.

[rosstierney]

Dec 17, 2008 17:21:17 GMT 1 gozgoz said:

And a david choe wooden toy to go with it!

www.ningyoushi.com/Choegal_by_David_Choe_p/nyup016.htm

that's fantastic, thanks!

[arcam]

Anyone get the story behind the image?

[rcab11]

I'm blind!! but to each his own. No para mi.

[crazyarsemother]

Dec 17, 2008 17:45:55 GMT 1 bmjt said:

What an utterly lurid mess.

What an utterly depressing statement. Each to their own I guess BMJT, but I see a well composed and excucted painting. Even Clive Bell would pleased with its 'significant form' despite its step into realism. I think its fantastic and exciting. Only critism would be the position of the dogs in foreground.

Wish I had the cash for this one.

[themightyreds]

quality video clip at the linked site!

[365takes]

Dec 17, 2008 17:55:54 GMT 1 @rosstierney said:

Dec 17, 2008 17:21:17 GMT 1 gozgoz said:

And a david choe wooden toy to go with it!

www.ningyoushi.com/Choegal_by_David_Choe_p/nyup016.htm

that's fantastic, thanks!

Yes, thanks. I would have missed this.

The print isn't for me. Sometimes his stuff really works for me and is brilliant other times I just don't feel it. No bad thing.

[Deleted]

I want to love it..but I keep thinking lord of the rings

[rosstierney]

Dec 17, 2008 19:07:45 GMT 1 @365takes said:

Dec 17, 2008 17:55:54 GMT 1 @rosstierney said:

that's fantastic, thanks!

Yes, thanks. I would have missed this.

The print isn't for me. Sometimes his stuff really works for me and is brilliant other times I just don't feel it. No bad thing.

the figure's limited to 1,000, not 200 like it says on the ningyoushi site

they produced it too!

[bmjt]

I'm sorry you feel that way James, but to my eyes, its awful, i'm not i can eloquently put into words how and why I dislike it so much, but it just makes me feel slightly sick...possibly because it's lots of seemingly unrelated little bits built up to make a larger image, shards of lurid colour interspliced, a real mish-mash of narrative and imagery, an array of incoherant depth cues with no real focus or compostion, varying levels of detail, and a style/technique of painting that I just don't enjoy, it's just horrendous (Im my opinion of course) I'm glad you like it though.

[crazyarsemother]

hey bmjt, thats cool. Like I say each to their own. Thanks a lot for your further explanation which is perfectly valid and good to hear. I have an odd hang up for composition and I feel this works. I am not too sure why and it may need to be disected. I see a lot of small triangles spread across a classic landscape background. My compositions feel very formal to myself but I guess as you paint more you push limits and boundaries of construction.

Its just freshing to see something ambitiious after a lot of the sterile post-modern two tone 'clever' pun based stuff. But thats what this site is about isn't it to discuss images - love it.

[crazyarsemother]

Oh and I am also a shameless colour slag.

[bmjt]

No worries James, maybe my first post was a tad sterile, as you say this forum should be for discussion, as opposed to one-line ultimatums. I totally understand appreciating work that pushes the boundaries, and I imagine if this had techincally, and semantically been to my taste, I might partake in that viewpoint in regard to it.