ISO50 Workshop – 11/03/07

Posted by Scott

As stated in the previous post, I’ll be hosting a workshop entitled “ISO50: Blending Analogue and Digital” at this year’s OFFF festival in New York. The festival runs Nov. 2-4. The workshop will be held Saturday, November 3rd, 2007 at the BMCC Tribeca Performing Arts Center in “Theater 2”. Things will get started at 11:30am and it goes through to 1:30pm. I’ll be focusing mainly on process and theory, with specific examples and PSD deconstructions.
Space is limited to 230 people and entry will be first come, first served at the door. The workshop is included in with an OFFF pass, available here.

44 Comments Leave A Comment


Scott says:

October 14, 2007 at 11:12 pm

this is put on by the OFFF festival and I don’t know that they are planning on releasing a video of the workshops. I know they do an overall video for the festival, but it doesn’t include all the content from lectures or anything like that. you might try asking them as they’ll know more.
in any event, I will try to put together some lectures on the west coast for next year.


Kelvin says:

October 15, 2007 at 7:33 am

Do hope there could be video or even better lecture notes releases~
People like me from the other end of the world has like 1% chance of ever attending anything.. Haha.
Cheers, love the work, love the blog!


Scott says:

October 15, 2007 at 11:48 am

I would love to to a tour of workshops, and will definitely try to make something like that happen over the next couple years.
As for integrating workshop content into the site, that’s a great idea, I will look into it and hopefully have something up in some form or another.


Futuretron says:

October 15, 2007 at 11:55 am

I am from Australia and I am going!!!! Suckers.
A very nice surprise to hear you are doing the workshop, am big fan and super excite.
I have just a standard ticket, there is not much info on the site about what gets access to what. Can I come to the workshop with my standard ticket? I will get there earlier of course.


Scott says:

October 15, 2007 at 12:34 pm

yep, you can go to the workshop with the normal pass. There was some confusion since the OFFF site had some false info about this. In Barcelona you had to purchase a separate ticket for the workshops, so parts of their site still reflected that. But in New York, it will be included in the $80 pass.


Weezi says:

October 15, 2007 at 1:21 pm

What if I just wanted to hit the workshop (without OFFF tix)?
Is it open to public? If so, how much?
Thanks brother..


Scott says:

October 15, 2007 at 1:27 pm

as far as I know this is not possible. The workshops take place inside the festival so you would need to have a pass.


Torched says:

October 15, 2007 at 1:50 pm

Seems like quite an interesting event but I find it quite discouraging due to OFFF NY site, they have no scheduling/programming information. The lack of information just leads to confusion of what is actually at this event, resulting of a vague assumption. I’m only two hours away if I decide to attend this event, but I am unsure of what it really has to offer over the span of three days. Honestly, I think my only worry is the driving and parking compared to the country life too many people I know make a big deal of this so I am unsure what to expect. Is it as crazy as some say it is?

The offf catalogue; I enjoyed the influence of design techniques from some other works you posted on your blog.


Porteño says:

October 15, 2007 at 2:39 pm

sweet, thanks for the info and keep up the great work. I’m going to look into making the workshop in NYC, all pending how work here in SF pans out. Hopefully i can make it.


Scott says:

October 16, 2007 at 1:17 am

the reason for the vague info is that this is the first year OFFF has been held here and they were actually a bit behind on pulling it together since it was so soon after Barcelona. As a result, the website hasn’t been updated as thoroughly as possible. I think they may actually do this to deter people, since the events sell out so quickly, they want to sort of keep it underground maybe? Anyways, rest assured, it’s an amazing time. The core of it are the presentations, many artists / studios presenting their work, giving case studies, speaking about their methods. Then there is a full exhibition space with various installations and artwork. Along with all that is the mercado and the public area which is always a good time, beer and food and all that. The key is that this is all about art, not contacts or big clients or anything like that (although that is certainly present), the driving concept is innovation across many mediums and the people behind it.


Justin Meyers says:

October 16, 2007 at 10:05 am

I thought you would all enjoy seeing someone that took a little ‘too much’ inspiration from Scott H.’s work… This guy is selling prints that are almost exactly like the ISO50 prints. I love Scott, but I would rather have many things that influence my design as opposed to one artist. I am not trying to bash on this guy, but it kinda pissed me off.


Maynard (ghostly) says:

October 16, 2007 at 7:18 pm

I came accross the tm82art website a few days ago myself and immediately saw the similarities. I like his stuff as well though so I can’t really fault him, he knows what he likes. As for the idea of putting tutorials/workshops up on the site I am all for it. I’m sorry I’m going to miss the NY workshop.


Torched says:

October 16, 2007 at 8:53 pm

Justin Meyers, I think its a bit off topic from the subject matter of this blog entry. But I will comment to your comment, since I’m currenty in doubt if my eye’s have failed me, because I can’t honestly see the similarities. Is it the fact that they sell prints on paper? Scott style differs dramaticly in many areas, first off color pallete scott choose’s more of a richer color spectrum, where as the tm82art does the opposite. Even the style of vector is diffrent atlest from my perspective. Even the subject matter of the peices show no similaritys to my knowledge.


Justin Meyers says:

October 22, 2007 at 8:31 am


There’s a Hall Monitor whever you go on the web these days, gotta love the blogosphere…

My AIGA peers used the similarities as a discussion of what is ‘plagerism’ and what is ‘borrowing too much’. It was more of a laughing session of how embarassing the similarities were.

If being almost identical to another artist is working out for your design career, great, more power to you.

At the end of the day, it’s a good topic to bring up that challenges designers to think beyond their own ethics.

Maybe you can entice Scott to create an ‘open’ discussion forum for anything ‘off topic’.


Justin Meyers says:

October 22, 2007 at 11:27 am

Anyway… I guess we can all move on now. I was just sharing. I am not trying to tear this Tanner guy down, but to contribute some accountability in the industry. I would expect someone to do the same for me. Who all is going to see Scott in NY this Nov.? My co. won’t send me, they already sent me to Chicago this year. I hate budgets.


Uffe Raupach says:

October 29, 2007 at 2:31 am

Hi Scott
Big fan of your works and music.
Flying to OFFF from Denmark and hope to get a seat at the workshop.
Are you making any live tycho music shows at OFFF or in NY ??
Would love to hear it live….


Ian says:

November 5, 2007 at 5:22 am

I’ve seen a really nice rip off of Scott’s stuff on istockphoto in the Design Spotlight here is an upload of it.

It would be interesting to hear Scott’s opinion on influence vs ripping off other artists. I saw this pic which Scott obviously used as the basis of this piece of work There’s not a whole lot of difference between the original and Scott’s version.


justin says:

November 6, 2007 at 8:26 am


That’s actually the original piece from the Russian propaganda revolution. Scott ‘remixed’ it, for lack of better words, I would guess to pay homage to the movement and artist.

I would definitely love to hear scotts opinion on what actually defines ‘stealing’ and what crosses the line from ‘inspiration’ to down right thievery.

It’s hard to discuss this stuff with guys like Torched because they have no ability to accomodate other perspectives.

After some strategic harrasment, Tanner Morrow took his artwork down. Why would one of clean conscience do such a thing? haha


Ian says:

November 7, 2007 at 5:10 am


I can appreciate that. I would however be a bit more comfortable about it if Scott credited the original work when displaying the various products he has based on that image for sale in his shop. Or is it such a well known image that it doesn’t need to be credited? I don’t know, I stumbled across it accidently during a google image search. To be honest I was just happy to discover that Scott was “mortal” :)


Scott says:

November 7, 2007 at 1:05 pm

I guess I have always assumed that was a famous enough image that I didn’t need to mention the source every time I printed it. I have talked many times about the source of the art of that image and it’s the only time I have ever sampled artwork so directly like that. It was for a show many years ago (2001) and fit the subject matter and the location well. It was actually informed quite heavily by the work of Shepard Fairy, who if you look back at his work, it contains many examples of sampled artwork like this.


Ian says:

November 8, 2007 at 4:15 am

Well ok then I’ll let you off :). So to summarize, it’s a fine line between creating a piece of work that is a “homage” or even taking an iconic image and subverting it for your own devices, and creating something that is a direct rip-off. If you are open and honest about your reference points and your reasons for using the original piece then that’s ok. If you conceal your references and try and pass it off as a fully original piece under your own name, then that’s not ok. And there’s a hell of a lot of grey area between those two extremes.


justin says:

November 13, 2007 at 1:33 pm

I wouldn’t consider either of those to be ‘rip offs’ of his work. If the first one is, it’s a very ‘literal’ translation of it.

It’s just the style. When you can’t tell the difference between two pieces of art, or they’re very small differences that could only be seen by someone that ‘knows better’ for lack of better words, then it’s ripping off in my opinion.

I am really starting to not care anymore. I got really pumped up about this subject when I came accross tanners work, but… why get worked up about it? they know what they’re doing. It’s for $$$ and psuedo recognition.


josh says:

November 13, 2007 at 2:48 pm

i agree. i think in tanner’s case he probably just really loved being creative, and this style struck a chord with him. cant fault him for that. it does for me too. i feel bad since he is obviously good at what he does, and probably enjoyed it.

something i realized the other day when i was noticing all the tiny ways one person had copied someone else, was that it probably means i pay too much attention. and that i should get a life and go do something else besides stare at a screen all day. then i can be creative instead of regurgitating what has already been done. i am not meaning that as a sarcastic comment about anyone else either, just myself.

and in my other comment above, i meant that second image was a source of inspiration for scott, not from his work. that is a poster of bob dylan. it is much older that scott’s stuff. but here i go caring again, i should stop memorizing scott’s website and go outside or something :)


justin says:

November 14, 2007 at 2:22 pm

Yeah… I’ve been a lot less consumed with work and have found a love for mountain biking and cooking.

You know… if someone wants to just copy someone, they might sell a few posters but never actually do anything to advance design.

Not to be pretentious, but that’s the difference between mediocre and great. No one wants to see the same stuff, over and over unless it’s the same artist.


a.nonymous says:

November 26, 2007 at 1:41 am

Justin Meyers, other justin … i’m pretty annoyed with you. i enjoyed tm82’s work. just because something is stylistically similar or perhaps even inspired by someone else’s work, it’s not necessarily theft.

“Not to be pretentious”

… too late.

and quit picking on torched.


Justin says:

November 27, 2007 at 8:05 am


I am glad your response provided so much substance and insight. I was beginning to worry there for a moment.

Since You (a.nonymous) have enjoyed his work, I, as well as the others will take back everything we have said.

May his thievery, I mean ‘inspirations’ rain for a thousand years.


Scott says:

November 27, 2007 at 9:33 pm

I just had to delete a couple comments…. this has gotten out of hand. If you have an opinion, we’d all like to hear it, as long as it’s expressed in the proper manner. If you truly believe in what you are saying and understand what exactly it is you are trying to say, you shouldn’t need to resort to defamatory comments and course language.
The bottom line is that each artist decides for themselves where the line between influence and mimicry lies. The rest is up to the people who appreciate their chosen art form to decide. If the artist has taken the work of another and built on it and evolved the form, then a good thing has become of this influence. If not, they still don’t deserve to be torn down, and it’s no one person’s right to decide for everyone else what defines a rip-off. A lot of artists start out using what others before them have done as a foundation, I myself am completely guilty of this so it’s not my place to say if Tanner’s work is “too similar”. Just enjoy it for what it is, if someone knows design, they will know the origins and there is no problem. They can just see some things as an extension of others. Sorry, I know this is all rambling, but it’s a tough issue, one I’ve really never got my head around to tell the truth.
I do these workshops and talk about my process not so people can take what I do and apply it directly, but so that it might inspire them to create something new that may have built on the things I am doing. Of course, I have seen things that seem to incorporate a few too many common elements come from other designers… But this is a common thing with young designers. Sometimes you emulate the style of someone else to learn and along the way you find your own path and in the end you have your own personal style.


Eden says:

November 27, 2007 at 10:02 pm

I’ve been talking with Tanner online in random tidbits for a while.
He wasn’t introduced to Scott Hansen’s work until later on in his career, much after he developed his career in art, and his vintage style.
Tanner’s is actually quite a bit different, when you look at the actual emotion of the art and what it is directed to.


Justin says:

November 28, 2007 at 10:50 am

It’s nice to see quite a few opinions on this. I think Scotts point was a bit eye-opening. I think building upon work is expected and even needed.

The whole subject is so ambigous…

I don’t regret bringing the subject up by any means. I think some of my points could have been made without sarcasm, and for that, I am sorry.


Justin Meyers says:

November 28, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Hey Scott and Justin-

My problem is not that someone emulates their favorite designer for practice, or personal advancement, but rather when someone makes a living off of someone elses ‘identifiable work’.

I was just not seeing where he actually made advancements off of your work.

It’s not about Tanner personally, it’s about making money off of work that can only loosely be discerned from another artists work.

I know a lot believe that design and art in general are not able to be held to any level of integrity. With no apologies, I am not one of those persons. It’s not personal, it’s not with the intention of tearing another person down and it’s not to assume that I hold a superior viewpoint. But, as you said Scott, people are allowed to voice their opinions.

If it’s worth bringing up, it’s worth finishing and people will more than likely get their feelings hurt and take offense to the opposite view point.

Being that I have my own personal convictions, I guess I couldn’t bring myself to sell art that people have difficulty distinguishing from another artist/designers work.

At the end of the day, the others that hold the opposite viewpoint are just as opinionated. We’re all trying to ‘wrap are heads around it’.


Tony says:

December 16, 2007 at 6:20 pm

hello all.
I just discovered scott’s work a few weeks ago. I myself have been trying to develop a style for vintage/retro (wut ever you want to call it) for a couple years now and am about to graduate with a degree in graphic design. But after reading up on this situation with tannermorrow one thing is kind of bothering me.

It’s one thing for someone to “copy” someone elses work. but its another to take inspiration from it and develop your own style based on your own personal tastes.

How many of you would like to bet that this tannermorrow guy just happens to have a personal taste for vintage style artwork? It might even be possible that he grew up his entire life around it, so of course hes going to take that as an influence on his personal art style. But to say that someone has plagarised or copied scott’s work just because it looks like a vintage style is completley bogus.

This goes for all forms of art, whether is music, graphic design, wut have you.

How many music majors do you think take time to study great musicians like bethoven, chopin, or bach. Probably every single one of them.

how many art majors do you think study great artists like davince, michelangelo, or picasso. Every single one of them!

Think of it this way:
You see a cubism art piece hanging in an art gallery as you walk down the street. after noticing the artist you see that its a local artist that is selling the piece. You wouldn’t say “OMFG Haxors! this guy is copying picasso and hes making money off it. Picasso is the second coming when it comes to cubism and no one else in the world is ever allowed to paint that way because those are the rules!” would you?

you would appreciate the piece for what it is.

And you should appreciate Tanners artwork for what it is. A vintage style art that quite frankly, looks pretty darn good. Who are we to say that he isnt allowed to develop his own style just because someone else did it first? That would make us hypocrits.


Justin Meyers says:

December 24, 2007 at 10:29 am

Tony –

I think Tanner is very talented.

I had a designer friends of mine send me links to his work, thinking it was actually Scott Hansen. They asked me if I had seen Scotts Latest work, because I put his prints up in my office. I saw work that I could hold up to a specific ISO50 piece and just a few things were moved around, that was the only difference. But… that’s just what I saw, other people love him.

This was about the subject and not the person. He’s probably a really awesome guy, he’s definitely very talented, but people just looked at this subject as if I was going after Tanner, I was going after the subject. Sorry if I made it otherwise.

I found out that Lester Beal, an avante guarde artist was accused of copying too much from other artists, so… in short, I don’t think I’ve been the first to bring the subject up.

I think it can be pretty easy to fall into the blogosphere trap. I feel like a jerk for some of the ways I reacted to others comments, but at the end of the day, I totally understand others opinions on the matters and has actually helped me get a better understanding of the subject.