AbsolutePunk.net (http://www.absolutepunk.net/forum.php)
-  News (http://www.absolutepunk.net/forumdisplay.php?f=165)
  -  Pierce The Veil Faces Trouble Over Album Art? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=2797722)

Thomas Nassiff 06/23/12 09:33 AM

Pierce The Veil Faces Trouble Over Album Art?
According to this post, Pierce The Veil allegedly hired an artist to recreate another artist's work for the album art for their new album, Collide With The Sky. The post says that the band wanted to license a particular artist's work for use on the album, but he wasn't available, so they had someone else recreate a very similar image. The comparisons of the two images are in the replies, and we're reaching out to Fearless Records for comment.
From The PostConceptually, thereís no mistaking these two images are identical. The first image, Escape, was created by Daniel Danger in 2011. Daniel is a self-employed freelance Illustrator known for his architectural and landscape-oriented motif.

Pierce the Veil had approached Daniel Danger this spring, as they were coordinating the release of their newest album Collide With the Sky. With two weeks before a print deadline, the album was still in need of a full design and layout. The initial request was to license Escape for use on the album cover, and work with the band/label on a layout. Daniel was not available at the time or within the timeframe Pierce the Veil required, so no contract was ever made between the artist and the band, and no permissions were signed.

Needless to say, when Daniel caught wind of the cover for Collide with the Sky, it was apparent that the band commissioned a different artist to essentially recreate a pre-existing image, refusing to entertain the possibility of another concept.

Itís not the first time something like this has happened to Daniel, and itís not the first time a situation like this has occurred with intellectual property. We all know faceless corporations steal from artists, but something about a group of musicians stealing from a potential peer comes off as a more focused blight.

Thomas Nassiff 06/23/12 09:33 AM

billyboatkid 06/23/12 09:36 AM

I think it's different enough but what do I know.

Calvin Lauber 06/23/12 09:36 AM

Pretty shitty of them, the original picture is way cooler.

SomedayTheFire 06/23/12 09:38 AM

It's not different at all. What a fucking douche move by the band.

Zack Zarrillo 06/23/12 09:39 AM

You could chop it up to not being a big deal, until you see that both images have a human flying away above the house. That's what makes it the same to me

Handraa 06/23/12 09:42 AM

Wow, how shitty of them.

algae 06/23/12 09:45 AM

Wow, how shitty of them.

Rob McWilliams 06/23/12 09:46 AM

Yeahhh, they could be passed off as two different images until you see that they both have humans flying away. That's just shitty.

Thomas Nassiff 06/23/12 09:49 AM


Originally Posted by zack-182 (Post 109751152)
You could chop it up to not being a big deal, until you see that both images have a human flying away above the house. That's what makes it the same to me

Exactly what I thought.

wtfjaked 06/23/12 09:56 AM

Both concepts are the same. The first picture is much better in my opinion. Still shitty to take the concept from the original artist nonetheless.

parkerjamison 06/23/12 09:56 AM

damn, first image is so much better.

Your Milkshake 06/23/12 09:57 AM

exactly what they do with their music too

cholly 06/23/12 09:58 AM

this is the problem with the whole "art belongs to everyone" idea

galkain 06/23/12 09:58 AM

I would have enjoyed that first image so much more. May have even provoked me to pre-order the LP release. It's a shame they just couldn't think of another idea.