Turning your LVs into art - Yes or No?

[BULL]

Thank you for your considered opinion. I do like the artist and I like LV but am unsure if I would merge the two. I was interested in other people's opinions - whether pro or con but it seems to have descended into an attack on the artist and her integrity - even going so far as to accuse her of using fakes. Some of the posters are strangely triggered by this particular topic, so I'll just let them hate amongst themselves.

I feel I must come back to defend the girls. I re-read the entire thread again, to make sure, because it still feels that we were looking at different threads.
Nobody was hostile, or attacking neither you or the painter. You on the other hand did belittle them in a very condescending way, but let's just forget that. I believe you didn't mean it, you were just getting a little too passionate about the topic.
So what happened again? Strong opinions and criticism? Yes. Very much. Attack? No. Not a single one. An attack doesn't look like this. And if we call any critical opinion an attack, where does it lead? What's next, people who don't like these bags are a f*scist? Come on.
You threw in a (very) controversion topic. Which is wonderful, since it makes the forum more alive. But then let people say if they find the bags disgusting or amazing. It's OK. Both are OK. Tons of people found the latest Kusama release cheap and bad, or when the Jeff Koons came out, people were so polarized over it. But that is OK, and also kinda great. It is entertaining and healthier for the community. But the key for that is to please let people have their opinions. No need to school everyone who doesn't like the bags that they should know the painter better, and invalidate their opinion just by labelling them hostile for being critical. Really no need.
Not to mention that at the end of the day, this lively discussion keeps the thread going and keeps it on top, so more people will get to know this lovely self-proclaimed artist. So all the people contributing were kinda doing her a favour. A big one.

 

[Pop Art Suzy]

In a nutshell, art is very subjective. You either like it, or you don't. There's no middle ground. As an artist myself, you have to accept constructive criticism. It's called a critique. It's something I had to endure throughout my college years as an art major. Not everyone is going to like your work, it's not personal. Just accept it as a criticism. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[daisy913]

Not to mention that at the end of the day, this lively discussion keeps the thread going and keeps it on top, so more people will get to know this lovely self-proclaimed artist. So all the people contributing were kinda doing her a favour. A big one.

This bit made me go on the artist’s website. There’s a lot of fluff in the writing… I have my own strong opinions now, but this isn’t the place for me to state them lol

Anyway, I will say that I find it odd that the artist is openly associating her name with the modified LV bags.

Because it isn’t an official LV collab, it could actually damage how potential collectors and gallerists view the rest of her work and career (they already look down on artists with day jobs).

If she ever sold the pieces, LV will immediately know who to sue (hope she created those pieces as works under an LLC).

If she has it up, in hopes that someone will commission her, either set up a different business that isn’t under your professional artist name, or do it through word of mouth, without posting any photos to the professional artist socials.

If she just did it for her own personal collection and enjoyment, leave it out of the professional website. Save it for the personal instagram.

 

[zipporah]

I think this is a very different thread to what the OP was aiming for, mostly because the initial responders didn't know the artist. BULL, you're still (condescendingly!) referring to Jane Waterous as a "lovely self-proclaimed artist." Huh? Just because you don't know her doesn't mean she's some random lady painting on bags. I have seen her work several times at art shows in Hong Kong. It sells for thousands of dollars.

The impression I got was the OP wanted a discussion on adding art to bags (by people who are professional artists outside the bag world, not people who have made LV customisation their job) - people could share whether they liked Jane Waterous' work specifically, or whether they would more generally enjoy having a bag turned into an art piece. So things like, "I'm not a fan of this artist but if [different artist I like] offered this I'd go for it" or "Nope, not for me, if I want to buy art I'll get a painting, I wouldn't want it on my bag."

What she got was a bunch of replies from people who didn't recognise Jane Waterous and responded like she's some amateur trying to make a quick buck from flogging painted LZs of dubious origin. Honestly, the responses were weird. The OP wasn't mad that people didn't like Waterous' work, she was frustrated that people missed the point of the thread entirely and were rude about it.

 

[zipporah]

This bit made me go on the artist’s website. There’s a lot of fluff in the writing… I have my own strong opinions now, but this isn’t the place for me to state them lol

Anyway, I will say that I find it odd that the artist is openly associating her name with the modified LV bags.

Because it isn’t an official LV collab, it could actually damage how potential collectors and gallerists view the rest of her work and career (they already look down on artists with day jobs).

If she ever sold the pieces, LV will immediately know who to sue (hope she created those pieces as works under an LLC).

If she has it up, in hopes that someone will commission her, either set up a different business that isn’t under your professional artist name, or do it through word of mouth, without posting any photos to the professional artist socials.

If she just did it for her own personal collection and enjoyment, leave it out of the professional website. Save it for the personal instagram.

Genuinely, you're not allowed to customise an LV and sell it? So if I bought an LV and painted something on the canvas, I wouldn't be allowed to resell it? Or is the issue whether I, say, just put it on VC with a note saying I'd modified it vs if I was a professional artist actively promoting my work? This is an honest question, as I have no idea what the rules are. I follow a second hand reseller in Hong Kong who has sold designer bags she's dyed because that was the only way to deal with staining. Is that wrong too? I feel like if I've paid money for the bag I can do what I want with it, but I also understand LV wants control over what it puts out and would not be happy if it felt customers might be confused into thinking something was an official collaboration.

Anyway, like I said before, the page on her website is called 'Bespoke' and I don't see a flashing, "Email me to get your bag customised!" sign. So I imagine it's people who are fans of Waterous' work *and* fans of LV who asked her to do it. Which would fall under the category of "people doing what they want with bags they purchased" rather than "artist trying to promote their LV customisations."

 

[BULL]

I think this is a very different thread to what the OP was aiming for, mostly because the initial responders didn't know the artist. BULL, you're still (condescendingly!) referring to Jane Waterous as a "lovely self-proclaimed artist." Huh? Just because you don't know her doesn't mean she's some random lady painting on bags. I have seen her work several times at art shows in Hong Kong. It sells for thousands of dollars.

The impression I got was the OP wanted a discussion on adding art to bags (by people who are professional artists outside the bag world, not people who have made LV customisation their job) - people could share whether they liked Jane Waterous' work specifically, or whether they would more generally enjoy having a bag turned into an art piece. So things like, "I'm not a fan of this artist but if [different artist I like] offered this I'd go for it" or "Nope, not for me, if I want to buy art I'll get a painting, I wouldn't want it on my bag."

What she got was a bunch of replies from people who didn't recognise Jane Waterous and responded like she's some amateur trying to make a quick buck from flogging painted LZs of dubious origin. Honestly, the responses were weird. The OP wasn't mad that people didn't like Waterous' work, she was frustrated that people missed the point of the thread entirely and were rude about it.

That is the point. I can. This is kitchen art. I can dislike it as much as I please.
But that doesn't mean that I consider Jane to be a bad person or I would ban her from selling these bags or from making them. But I won't like them, and I will still feel that choosing Vuitton as a canvas was just a misfired way of getting a little more attention. I might be wrong, maybe she truly was just naively pairing these 2 loves of hers, without any marketing intentions, I really don't know.

Also, just because people get into art shows and galleries, that doesn't mean a thing. That is not a metric of art. Just as much as the price of the paintings. And also neither is the point. Art is supposed to evoke feelings. Even strong ones. Hers did the job. Many of us were moved in a way. It moved me so much that I would never call this art, but I am not the Pope noone has to agree with me. I don't want to convince anyone who loves her work to hate it. Why would I? But at the end of the day, we are still talking about her work. It did its job. And that should be celebrated.

We also discussed the original intent for the discussion. Painting and personalization has a long history, but selling them after putting art on them is a different thing, also rendering them unusable (or at least recommending not using them at all) ruins the bags kinda. That is what I felt from the answers.

 

[jess236]

I think this is a very different thread to what the OP was aiming for, mostly because the initial responders didn't know the artist. BULL, you're still (condescendingly!) referring to Jane Waterous as a "lovely self-proclaimed artist." Huh? Just because you don't know her doesn't mean she's some random lady painting on bags. I have seen her work several times at art shows in Hong Kong. It sells for thousands of dollars.

The impression I got was the OP wanted a discussion on adding art to bags (by people who are professional artists outside the bag world, not people who have made LV customisation their job) - people could share whether they liked Jane Waterous' work specifically, or whether they would more generally enjoy having a bag turned into an art piece. So things like, "I'm not a fan of this artist but if [different artist I like] offered this I'd go for it" or "Nope, not for me, if I want to buy art I'll get a painting, I wouldn't want it on my bag."

What she got was a bunch of replies from people who didn't recognise Jane Waterous and responded like she's some amateur trying to make a quick buck from flogging painted LZs of dubious origin. Honestly, the responses were weird. The OP wasn't mad that people didn't like Waterous' work, she was frustrated that people missed the point of the thread entirely and were rude about it.

You summarized this perfectly! It was meant to be a discussion of whether you would use your LVs as an art piece by having an established artist use it as a medium. You can like the idea or hate the idea but devolving into personal attacks and attacks on the artists integrity is rude and unsophisticated. Accusing someone of using fake bags or of promoting someone who uses fake bags is clearly an insult - especially on this forum.

 

[daisy913]

Genuinely, you're not allowed to customise an LV and sell it? So if I bought an LV and painted something on the canvas, I wouldn't be allowed to resell it? Or is the issue whether I, say, just put it on VC with a note saying I'd modified it vs if I was a professional artist actively promoting my work? This is an honest question, as I have no idea what the rules are. I follow a second hand reseller in Hong Kong who has sold designer bags she's dyed because that was the only way to deal with staining. Is that wrong too? I feel like if I've paid money for the bag I can do what I want with it, but I also understand LV wants control over what it puts out and would not be happy if it felt customers might be confused into thinking something was an official collaboration.

Anyway, like I said before, the page on her website is called 'Bespoke' and I don't see a flashing, "Email me to get your bag customised!" sign. So I imagine it's people who are fans of Waterous' work *and* fans of LV who asked her to do it. Which would fall under the category of "people doing what they want with bags they purchased" rather than "artist trying to promote their LV customisations."

Full disclaimer, first: I don’t practice art/copyright/trademark law. I don’t practice law in general, but I am a professional artist based in the US. Since I don’t want people stealing my work, or suing me, I keep up with the law guides and cases in my field. What I know as “procedure” is based on my understanding of how the US handles copyright and trademark laws. I can’t speak for other countries, because copyright and trademark laws vary country to country.

If it were me and I had my luxury item customized outside of “official” routes, I would put them up with the disclaimer of “This model/item has been modified by 3rd party individuals with no affiliation to [brand]. In purchasing this item, it will not be serviced or recognized by [brand].”

See how I never use the word “authentic” or “genuine?” The base may be authentic, but the item, as a whole, isn’t.

And it doesn’t matter if Waterous put up “contact me for customizations” or not. I can just hit the “Contact” button on her website and send an inquiry.

If you bought an LV bag and want someone to customize it, you are allowed to have that done. There is nothing wrong with Waterous customizing bags for people -it’s more of her image as an artist that can be damaged. Customizing people’s ready-made items is not considered fine or high art. The art world is very superficial and image is everything.

The best thing to do is to set up a different company specializing in customizations. That way, if you get sued, the customization company can declare bankruptcy and not your professional artist company (usually llc) or individual (personal assets).

If people want to have work done in the style you are known for, then do it by word of mouth. Don’t showcase photos in your professional socials, because you are inadvertently causing a market for it. The gray area could be if you do it for free, because **usually** companies seek “lost profits” as damages for infringement.

Lastly, if Waterous thinks she has a market for it, she could always try to contact LV and make a pitch for a collab. If I felt my art career was in a good position and trajectory, I would do that, instead of doing it myself under my own name. One action is much more prestigious and guaranteed to work in your favor for professional endeavors, than the other.

 

[BULL]

I follow a second hand reseller in Hong Kong who has sold designer bags she's dyed because that was the only way to deal with staining.

That does sound repair, that is very different story.

Genuinely, you're not allowed to customise an LV and sell it?

This is an interesting question. It would be interesting to hear from a lawyer, or from someone who tried doing it and was contacted by LV and what was their legal reason.
Most of the people I saw doing this were doing in on Instagram. Even the very famous ones. Sheron Barber did crazier and crazier custom pieces and sold them, but now that he grew big, all his old (mostly LV based) stuff is gone from the website and from his Instagram. It felt that it was in such a gray area legally. I guess this collection is very limited for Vuitton to deal with it, but would be fun to know what they think.
If people just have their bags painted, they can do it, but selling modified Vuitton as Vuitton is a different story. It reminds me of the watch industry. You can have your Patek encrusted with diamonds by an indie artisan, but it ceases to be a Patek anymore, the company will refuse to take it back for service. This could be a similar case if the artwork wouldn't just personalise, but also modify the bag. Vuitton might refuse servicing it. But since these are not bags anymore, but sculptures... I don't know. interesting.

 

[BULL]

If it were me and I had my luxury item customized outside of “official” routes, I would put them up with the disclaimer of “This model/item has been modified by 3rd party individuals with no affiliation to [brand]. In purchasing this item, it will not be serviced or recognized by [brand].”

THIS!

Customizing people’s ready-made items is not considered fine or high art.

and also THIS!

 

[BULL]

or of promoting someone who uses fake bags is clearly an insult

so it was meant to be a promotion after all. Well, people don't respond very well to ads these day. Sorry for that.

 

[jess236]

In case anyone wants a break from the drama and to refocus on the topic of this thread, I'll just post a little bit about the artist and some of her works for more context. And yes, it's ok, you don't have to like it. I'm just sharing.

Biography — Jane Waterous

Biography of internationally-acclaimed artist Jane Waterous.

www.janewaterous.com

"Jane's art is internationally renowned and collected. Apart from winning the coveted Art Expo NYC Solo Artist Award, her work is shown in numerous international solo art exhibitions, prominently displayed in luxury hotels around the world, can be found in the collections of Fortune 500 Corporations, Royal families and celebrity alike. Jane's capacity to create new and exciting works that emotionally and soulfully touch the audience is unmatched. Throughout her 35-year career, she has not forgotten the themes that brought it all together: Love, Life, Laughter and Family."

Jane is best known for her series: The Gatherings Series. A reflection of human connection, The Gatherings paintings represent an embodiment of three decades of work. The sculpture-like, three dimensional figures appear to dance in a synergistic halo of light, depth, color and action, literally, and figuratively jumping off the canvas. While each work conveys a unique emotional experience, they all share a feeling of joy and wonderment. For Jane, "Everything that matters happens when people come together. Life is a series of Gatherings, that all add up to a life well lived."

 

[daisy913]

I think this is a very different thread to what the OP was aiming for, mostly because the initial responders didn't know the artist. BULL, you're still (condescendingly!) referring to Jane Waterous as a "lovely self-proclaimed artist." Huh? Just because you don't know her doesn't mean she's some random lady painting on bags. I have seen her work several times at art shows in Hong Kong. It sells for thousands of dollars.

Art is subjective. Not to mention, gallerists and investment collectors only care about who is selling and “value.” I’ve been to many art fairs and shows, and have seen many artists make questionable art that sell for loads of money, much more than Waterous’ work.

Galleries, collectors, art fairs, and the prices of pieces have nothing to do with the legitimacy of someone’s art career, if you ask me. I think we can all think of artists whose works we consider as “not really art,” but still pay for it. In the same way, there is good talent out there that isn’t getting their due recognition and pay, because they haven’t hit their lucky break yet.

Not saying any of that to bash Waterous, but more so that everyone else can ask themselves what they take into consideration when calling someone an “artist” and what makes art that they want to buy and own.

Also, Western vs Eastern aesthetics vary greatly. An artist that sells well in one part of the world can flop in the other. Learning art and art history in America, Western aesthetics are considered higher. It’s a conditioning I’m trying to be more aware of and lessen when I look at art and make it. I can see why Waterous would be in Hong Kong art fairs, but be left out in Western art fairs.

 

[jess236]

so it was meant to be a promotion after all. Well, people don't respond very well to ads these day. Sorry for that.

Maybe that's the problem you have...you think it's an ad. I'm not the artist, just someone who likes her work and likes LV and wanted to discuss the idea of using LV as art.

If there are specific rules on this forum to separate the two (the difference between and ad and sharing an idea), it would be great to know. Maybe someone can explain this better.

Yes, I am enthusiastic about this artist after I saw her work, but I'm just sharing my interest. Whatever you might think, you have to find a more respectful and polite way of expressing yourself.

 

[BULL]

Maybe that's the problem you have...you think it's an ad. I'm not the artist, just someone who likes her work and likes LV and wanted to discuss the idea of using LV as art.

If there are specific rules on this forum to separate the two (the difference between and ad and sharing an idea), it would be great to know. Maybe someone can explain this better.

Yes, I am enthusiastic about this artist after I saw her work, but I'm just sharing my interest. Whatever you might think, you have to find a more respectful and polite way of expressing yourself.

You were the only one insulting people here and calling them nemes. We expressed our feelings about her art only. You are expressing yours about people here not sharing your enthusiasm. That's not OK.
And I wasn't even thinking that you posted it as an ad, but after this tantrum calling people attackers and insulters for no valid reason, this was the least I can say. So please, let us enjoy her work.