Dear Karen,
I enjoyed your article and was impressed that the two things you stressed above all were cleanliness and dedication to the art. I agree that you should be willing to tattoo for free before being paid for it. However, I would like to offer some food for thought about gauging your talent against others.
I live in Portland, ME, an area overrun with tattoo shops and boasting some serious tattoo talent. If I thought I needed to match their artistic ability to pick up an iron I would never do another tattoo. Fortunately I don't hold myself to the lofty standard you set. I wonder if you actually hold yourself to it. Do you mean that if I do quality sterile work that people are happy with and possibly continue the tradition by training other artists to do the same I have have nothing to offer? Your perspective on the talent issue almost seems designed to discourage artists away from the tattoo industry. Possessing great talent is wonderful for those that have it, but for us less than amazing artists I have another gauge. It is called KNOWING YOUR LIMITATIONS. I can execute most flash art reasonably well, and about half the pieces I have done have been either the customer's drawing or my drawing of their concept. I've never seen a happier client than one who left with their artwork now in their skin. I believe that the only way to get better at your art is to push your limitations. I am usually willing to push mine to a certain degree, but on the other hand if I have someone who wants a portrait I refer them to another artist. I apprenticed under one of the great underground artists in this area, and he stressed two things above all - cleanliness and customer satisfaction. I'd rather see someone else make a buck and a happy customer than make that buck for work they are dissatisfied with. I didn't get into this for fame and fortune, and I sure didn't do it to match my talent against the best there is out there. I started tattooing because I wanted to make a living at something I enjoy doing, and to make people happy. If you still think I'm wasting my time let me know. - Butch
I took my time thinking about Butch’s comments, wondering if I had been too harsh. If an artist is doing what they love and their clients are happy, is it unfair for me to suggest that they don’t belong in the business if they can’t produce a high quality product? I’m all for the whole “art for art’s sake” mantra; anyone who feels artistically inspired should feel free to express themselves, whether they’re “good” at it or not. Beauty is, after all, in the eye of the beholder—what is considered dreadful to one person could be positively inspiring to another.
In the case of tattoos, though, there is a pretty clear line of definition between “good” and “bad.” A bad tattoo is one that has shaky or uneven lines, blank areas where the ink isn’t solid, blowouts, color inconsistencies and/or blended lines. If a tattoo just looks like an indistinguishable blob, it’s pretty safe to call it “bad.” The concept of “good,” on the other hand, is a little more subjective and there are many tiers or levels of good tattoo work. If a tattooer is only capable of tracing over the lines of a pre-fab flash design and then filling in the spaces with color, the results aren’t going to be stellar but they’ll probably be acceptable. I’ll be the first to admit that there are plenty of people in this world who are satisfied with mediocrity, especially if it saves them money. This is the client base for Butch and artists like him. And it is a pronounced step up from the clowns who tattoo themselves and/or their friends under dirty conditions. At least Butch is making an effort to keep his clients safe, and anyone who knows me knows that safety is my numero uno soapbox rant.
And Butch readily admits that he isn’t as good as much of the competition in his area, and yet he continues to stay in business. That proves that artists like himself have a place in this industry, does it not?
Well, for right now, maybe. I believe that Butch and many other artists just like him will continue to have work for a while - maybe even years. But I also believe that the numbers will begin to dwindle over time and that artists like Butch will eventually be phased out. Think about the evolution of the audio/visual world over the past 30 years or so. In 1977, the VHS video cassette was introduced to the U.S. and was hotter than a desert wildfire. By the time the DVD was introduced in 1995, almost every household had a VCR and stacks of VHS tapes. People were initially resistant to the DVD because it was more expensive and made their current movie collections obsolete. Over time, however, the higher audio and visual quality of the DVD won us over, and now the DVD player is just as prolific as the VHS once was. Yes, there is still a limited client base for this antiquated technology, but the companies that developed them aren’t making any money on those sales. It has all but been phased out along with 8-tracks, records, black-and-white TV, and cassette tapes, all of which experienced great success in their day but no longer have a place in modern society except as a novelty. And now we are being introduced to Blu-Ray technology, which is bound to eventually phase out the now-popular DVD. Change is bound to happen and if you can’t keep up, you get lost.
The tattoo industry is evolving twice as fast as audio/visual technology. Change is taking place so rapidly that its beginnings and most significant history take place just within the last 30 years or so, and in that time we have progressed from primitive imagery to full-blown high definition. And while there is a limited client base still seeking old school style art for the sake of nostalgia, they still expect the art to be executed much more cleanly than it was back then. Even some of the most highly respected pioneers of the industry, such as Lyle Tuttle, readily admit that they would not be able to survive if they were still tattooing today and had to compete with the current talent.
