Prague’s street art collective EPOS 257 recently converted some blank billboards into abstract art with the help of a few paintball guns. They write:
Shooting into the white surface of vacant billboards with a paintball gun – blank canvasses in an urban environment, a gesture expressing an opinion and at the same time abstract painting in a urban environmemt.
This looks a whole lot like vandalism… I was hoping for a more artistic outcome.
Doesn’t look very appealing… i agree with elizabeth, it was more like vandalism.
I think it’s hard to be accurate with a paintball gun at that range 🙂
It seems that the only difference between vandalism and “abstract painting” is a video camera.
I’m usually all for people expressing their ideas and emotions in an urban environment, but this doesn’t express anything other than “Hey, look, we have paintball guns!”
You know, if you didn’t post the video, these vandals would be less likely to do crap like this.
typical mediocre garbage published by urban prankster… why give these guys the time of day? it’s not real resistance against outdoor advertising.
I am disappointed with this post because Urban Prankster originally posted primarily Improv Everywhere style stuff but has turned into a combination of the comedic and the obnoxious. I realize that people believe in expression of self but I agree with the previous posters that this is vandalism…if it isn’t something you can do in broad daylight or in front of people without being seen as a criminal, then it shouldn’t be on this site! This, in my opinion, is on the same level as tee-peeing houses or defacing something, because that essentially is what it is.
I feel this site should be for people who use their artistic talents and creativity to mock everyday life and brighten peoples days with a laugh and a smile.
As an agent and a fan of Improv Everywhere and public expressions of self, I feel this is insulting to our art and our message.
You guys realize the billboards were blank, right?
I’m pretty sure this project falls within our mission statement:
“Urban Prankster covers pranks, hacks, participatory art, flash mobs, and other creative endeavors that take place in public places in cities across the world.”
True, but I just wish they could have done something a bit more creative with all that space. It doesn’t take much to fire off hundreds of paintballs at a blank canvas and videotape it. I mean, the least they could have done was attempt to paint some sort of comprehensible image; even a simple smiley face would have been a hundred times better than the lazy abstractions that look like, as others have already pointed out, mere vandalism.
I definitely wouldn’t mind driving down a highway only to look up at a massive illuminated smiley face. At least that has the potential to maybe put a smile on others’ faces; if anything, generate more smiles than would random paint splatters.
These boards are owned by a company which charges for the occupancy of their space. Blank white space is the best advertising tool out there, eyes are drawn to it. This is theft of the of the advertising company’s space. Vandalism of private property. Two thumbs down.
Yeah thumbs down to people doing something new and different that adds color to an unsold billboard owned by a big corporate conglomerate whose business is to add advertisements to our city skylines!
The term “vandalism” applies to when something beautiful or useful or attractive is ruined, made ugly or harmed. A plain white canvas has a certian asthetic appeal, but come on.
They used attractive colors, the exectution was super clever and the result was interesting.
Charlie,
This is wanton destruction of someone elses property. Did they pay to put content on the billboards? No? then they should not put anything there.
So you feel it is ok to do damage to something — as long as it is a big, faceless company? Or is it just ok in general? Can I come to your house, and add color to it? I’ll do both inside and out, just tell me where.
Rob,
I must have missed the attractive and clever part… All I saw was junior high style vandalism, and minor criminal acts.
Ok. I can understand your point.
How would you feel if they had snuck up ladders and recreated a gaint Camille Pissarro painting? He’s got one called “Children at Play” or something. How about that one?
Would that be worthy of your praise?
Rob,
Sure, assuming they paid for the rights to decorate the board. I will admit that that plan at least takes skill and talent (and if executed well, would be more attractive than this), but it is still a criminal act of vandalism, if they do not have the right to decorate the board.
Ok. I think I get where you are coming from.
Do you think it is possible to improve something without the owner’s permission?
Rob,
Occasionally, yes, but it is rare. Any time you cost the owner, destroy property, or cause damage, you are a criminal. It’s not like they tore up a guys yard to build a flood dike here and saved his house — they did out right tasteless, criminal, vandalism.
‘Improving’ something is typically something the owner is pleased to see, and does not cost him without his permission.
Yes, I agree, tearing up your yard would be vandalism.
If someone leaned over your fence, and placed an arrangement of flowers onto your patio table, would you consider that vandalism?
No — the intention *appears* to be a friendly, gift giving one. That would be no more an act of vandalism than a may-basket. On the other hand, were they to *toss* it over the fence, leaving a smashed vase, crushed flowers and garbage, that is vandalism. Were they to paint an arrangement onto my fence, that is also vandalism.