Jesus would own them all !

You can't be serious? This guy had the balls to steal something off the internet and put it up in a gallery somewhere? Who's sponsoring the event, ebaum's world?

hahahahaha, nice reference for eBaums world! you get a brownie

Who's sponsoring the event, ebaum's world?

LMAO! Never truer words written.

Stylistically this might be better than the "original", however, it isn't very well done (basically it's copied from the film's poster) and probably took about two hours to finish.

Well, I don't mind "fast art", but if not even the idea is an original one, I doubt the value of such an "art object". If it was supposed to be a comment on "internet vs. religion vs. art work" it failed in the execution.

This is just dumb.

Hilarious. Try this with the Muslims.

yeah many would be offended, no doubt. I'm a Muslim and I think people need to lighten the F up!

He may be able to turn water into wine, but when it comes to battling three fellas with proton packs, Jesus has nothing on the Gho..Religionbusters!

@ Daft Punk: I imagine if the artist swapped the image of Jesus for that of Mohammed it would definitely ruffle some feathers!

Saying Jesus is made of Ectoplasm is like saying Metachlorians are what drive the force. I find this artists lack of faith disturbing.

I would rather pray to the Ghostbusters everynight and see them in Heaven then Jesus. Just sayin'...we'd all have a much better time!

well, thats because you're an idiot.

Seems interestingly provocative!

While Jesus' expression is priceless in this artwork, the original b&w internet piece i so better. This one seems to have lost the comedy aspect somewhere along the way.

wasn't there four Ghosbusters? What happened to the token black guy?

He's the one they're shooting their laser guns at

lol!

not so cool

Hey there. Artist here.

Thanks for the in-depth post from the original author. Good to see someone actually do a little research.

And! Thanks for the constructive criticism from the comments section.

Yes, I freely admit that this work is appropriated, but I see a lot of value in the concept that is expressed by the image. If you actually read my artist's statement, you'd know that I do not value execution at all, it's about the concept. What many of your are missing is the context which this work was in. The piece was part of a larger exhibit entitled "Divine Comedy" which was about religion, communication and the value of concept. The Ghostbusters vs. Jesus work acted mostly to shock and awe, as well as make people laugh. The exhibit had clearly atheist overtones as well and took place in a sleep college down with many Christians. This work served to stir things up and make them think. I'm paying respect to the internet with the work I do, not stealing from it. I'm bringing it into the gallery in my own way, for my own purposes.

And no, I'm not a great graphic designer, nor even a great artist. Nor am I a plagiarist, criminal or asshole. I'm just a college kid who had something to say about God.


Thanks again!

-Jon
www.jonandrewdavis.com

What you had to say, was that you are unoriginal. If you simply loved the original from the internet, like I did, and you wanted to make yourself a personal interpretation of it, great; but selling prints of it and slapping your name on it is a bad idea. Personally, I'd feel obligated to provide a print of the original picture, along with yours, explaining your inspiration, just for a showing of the piece.

I do love the internet, but being business savvy and loving the internet aren't mutually exclusive. I put my name on it mostly to make sure I received traffic. I am internet savvy, otherwise this wouldn't have spread as much as it did and you would have never seen it. I worship memes (excellent examples of evolution! So much more fast paced and visible!) and the content creation device that is the internet. I don't worship Jesus. That's what I was saying with the piece. As far as I know, I'm the first to bring this kind of meme into a gallery, the art world, in a professional context. That's what I was doing.

PS are you the same Jon Andrew Davis who wrote "A Heart Unforfilled?"

Hmmm, awesome but I wouldn't want to wear that in America. Also, where the hell is Ernie Hudson?

where's ernie@??@

I applaud you for defending your artwork, but I have to agree that it is a shameless ripoff of the original photoshop artist. Ideas are free, yes, but this is wholly not the same thing as XKCD using the idea of Jesus as a ghost. You've replicated composition, poses and tone of the piece almost identically. I'm hesitant to say if this would be okay for display in a gallery if it was for a charitable cause or something, but you are selling prints of this, and that isn't okay. Just because the internet exists and people get ripped off from time to time because of it does not make us living in an "age of appropriation." Ripping people off is cheap and not a respectable thing to do, especially for a college student. My advice to you is to discontinue selling prints and to never put this piece into a portfolio or show to a prospective employer, because "appropriation" might be okay when you're safely detached in the realms of the internets, but in the real world it's called plagiarism and that's not something you want to be recognized for as a young artist.

You are NOT someone with something to say about God. You're not anyone with anything to say at all. You've heard someone else say something and are repeating it and selling it on your website.

You're a mina bird.

(with a website)

Yeah! What are they racist!? =/

I would totally buy this print if it weren't completely offensive...Go Ghostbusters though!

I'd have to say that the original photoshop artist is ripping off of XKCD -> http://xkcd.com/459/

And Roy Lichtenstein stole his work from comic strips and Andy Warhol is a whole 'nother case.

The idea of the Ghostbusters sucking up Jesus isn't unique. It's not mine, It's not the guy who created the photoshop image. It's a pretty universal concept that's part of our shared vocabulary spawned by the internet. One of the ideas I investigate through my work is that of originality, content creation and ownership, (especially in concern with the often anonymous content creation machine that is the internet). It's actually impossible not to be influenced by some source or another... No art occurs in a vacuum (except this piece I'm currently working on that involves vacuum cleaners and text, heh)... It's just where you draw the line between inspiration and plagiarism. contend I'm clearly on the good side, with my honest intentions, obviously radically different work that is compositionally and technically stronger and without any resemblance to the other artist's work. You contend that I'm not. This is where we differ. It's a simple matter of opinion, not of ownership or anything.

'm not being recognized for plagiarism, I'm being recognized for my own work. It's just that people on the internet picked out that piece to post on their blogs. That makes sense, it was the most accessible one.

I'm not ripping anyone off, stealing from anyone. It's absurd to say I'm taking advantage of the original photos


I WILL put this in my portfolio. I'm still young. I'm proud of it and it's ability to ignite discussion. I just wish people talked about fundamentalism and religion half as much as they do about ownership, (although I really enjoy both topics!) I'm not being recognized for ripping people off (and who exactly am I stealing from again? I can't recall.)

I WILL NOT take down the ETSY shop. I need that money so I can take a trip to Europe (travel is the best education you can buy), support my art and actually make something worthwhile. Additionally, there's a demand and people want them. I'm really happy people want a copy. That means there's less religiousness going on! There is absolutely nothing wrong or immoral about selling something I created to people who want it. If i did a portrait of Obama and it was as popular as Shepard Fairey's... I'd sell it. Psh. Well, I'd sell it if I wasn't as rich as Fairey, who's profiteering off of teeshirts and prints that are way more derivative than mine. (and they suffer from a lack of thought or purpose and a repetitive, one-note style.)

I invite discussion, but excuse me if I dig in my heels and try to defend myself. I learn from doing so and the discourse is healthy.


-jon.

I don't find it funny. It's more like a lame joke. And not exactly offensive - rather inappropriate.

Ernie never gets the respect he deserves. "Who are you gonna call" HE-MAN!!

Have fun being carlos mencia, you talentless fuck.

OOOH BURN.What an insult!!!!

..
...
..
TO CARLOS MENCIA...=



OOOOH dOULBE BURN

speaking of which. Another work in my show was this :

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3463/3307524975_79...

flickr link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30949808@N02/3307524...

This piece is not that good. first its a ripoff, and second of all its just some crappy penn tool from Illustrator. The background is really flat, actually all the colors are flat, and im having a hard time looking at this piece.

I wonder what Jesus, Slimer, and Vigo are going to talk about in the ecto-containment unit?

looks terrible and this self described "just some college kid who loves the internet" is a dipshit theif plain and simple.

Funny stuff.

i agree, as a fellow artist this piece is just boring looking and offers nothing new from the original. As for the artist describing it as an evolved meme, that is bogus. if anything it is devolved seeing as it lacks the foresight of the original. wonder what the /b/tards think of this?

You need to make this into a T-shirt, I will buy it immediately. You been busted ghost-jesus.

Lame...

"Yes, I am aware of that image and I was inspired by it. I could never find an original author, so I like to assume it was created by the internets. As a result, I had no objection to taking the idea and working it into my own show. (Also, this is an art climate of appropriation, just look at the queen of copycatting, Shepard Fairey :P)"

I do admire them bringing up that other lame ass Fairey. But to use him as an excuse to do the same? That's just as dumb. The original still looks better too.

I dont understand why its funny ? Makin Jesus look stupied ? That is sooo uncool guys...

I'm all for religious humor, but stealing someone's idea (as several of you suggest the artist did) is 100% evil and cannot be tolerated on any level. Oh and, using LiveTrace is globby cheese-whiz.

Or because God doesn't exist. Yet, I've met Dan Aykroyd, so there ya go.

Which part is inappropriate? The fact that if Jesus did exist, and he died, the Ghostbusters were called on Easter? He's not being crucified or anything. He looks like he's in the same position, but there's a difference.

Overall, a hillarious picture that I would surley buy as a shirt, despite what all these right-wing christians on /film have to say :-)

I just checked out on Jon Andrew Davis' website to look at his gallery and all his other work is garbage IMO. This Ghostbusters picture is clearly his best work, on a technical level, and it's a shame that it will forever be tainted by the fact that he ripped off the idea..

Now Davis has that audacity to point fingers at Shepard Fairey, suggesting that more condemnation should be focused on Fairey, and that he (Davis) has done little copycatting in comparison...as if that's any excuse. That's like saying that someone is more of a killer than you, because you've murdered less people. Whatever. Lastly, Davis proclaims that he is deeply interested in internet memes and incorporates them into his art. DAVIS: "I have a deep interest in internet culture, especially in memes and their evolution, and it can be seen in several works." I bet he made up the whole, "I'm interested in internet memes" excuse after it was discovered that he basically Photochopped another person's work. No matter how crudely executed the original was, no matter how little the original artist cared about it to not sign or copyright it, and no matter how much Davis improved on the idea, IT'S STILL A RIP OFF.

As an artist myself, I sure as hell would be pissed off if some did this to something I designed, and I sure as hell would never do likewise. My housemate's girlfriend is a graphic designer and she had reservations after she basically Live Traced a photograph into Illustrator and then radically altered it for use in an a larger composition. It's called respect for the original source material. She has such integrity as an artist she declined an invitation to have it displayed in a gallery for that reason.

Yeah man, this is so not cool that it's.... UnCool.

attention art is always bad art, damn didn't artist have any original ideas instead he makes some rehash, no talent whatsoever.

oh and if you think this is funny, you better check you morals/values because there's another place where they are laughing at this and that's a place called hell and that's where you are going if dont repent.

dude, that was way too serious, but why?

basically, nothing we haven't seen before.

one thing i've always wondered concerning copyrights is what happens when T-shirt companies print shirts with copyrighted characters on them.

do they secure rights first? Do they pony up the cash to the creator or whichever studio?

Don't try to pass it off as artistic expression. Just because others steal ideas and concepts doesn't mean you should too. You should have a little more respect a just a tiny bit of artistic integrity. Stop pointing fingers at other people who do the same thing. It shows how childish you are about your "art." I agree everyone and all art is influenced by others and their work, but being influenced by the theft of other artists against other artists is not the same thing. You are basically saying you are inspired to steal by others who have stolen. Not only is that wrong, but you are being unoriginal.

We get it: Shepard Fairey is a prick who steals from others. Does that mean it's ok for you to act like he does and also act like a prick? If you think it is, then you really are a prick. Even Fairey knows in his heart what he is doing is wrong because he won't let people use his work like he does to others. I don't know how you feel about others using your work, but don't pass off your "art" as an examination of meme and copyrighting. It's theft, plain and simple.

By the way, as an artist, you should at least try to reach for originality in your work. An artist who doesn't try to be original is a bad artist at best. You are in college so you may think you are smarter than you actually are (it's a curse of all college kids), but I promise you what you are doing has absolutely no artistic merit. You are doing this to make money and go on a trip to Europe. If you do make money of it and make it to Europe, I hope the culture and art in Europe inspires you to do something original. I really do. If not, there are a lot of great artists in Europe for you to steal from if you can't think of anything yourself. I know you are up to that task, but are you up at least attempting something original and unique?

The Shepard Fairey comment was a joke. Sarcasm. I'm not saying I'm doing this because he did it and therefore it's ok. That's ridiculous. I hate Fairey and myself equally for what he and I did.

I am capable of original thought and art. This isn't an example of that. It's an idea I took. That's pretty clear.

Should I repent now? How many Hail FSMs?

I'm a college kid, yes I have that attitude, but no I'm not naive. I'm smarter than some, dumber than most... I've learned my lesson and I have a lot more to learn.
I'm going to Europe because I'm eager to learn, explore and create. The negative criticism from these comments had forced me to do a lot of thinking. I'm grown up enough to realise I did wrong. (I should have hidden or disguised my plagiarism better! hahah! Just kidding! No but really, someone famous once said originality is only determined by how obscure your sources are")

anyway. this has been fun and enlightening, and thanks to all of you intellectuals who have judged me. (correctly on this issue, but not quite so accurate on whole of me, but that's not your fault as the only information i have provided is through this stupid jesus artwork and my own words playing devils advocate even after the cognitive dissonance triumphed over my self-imposed ignorance).


Peace. Flying Spaghetti Monster be with you.