Tattoos out of fashion

suicide_circus

They can look great but more often than not, they don't.
I just can't contemplate choosing an image/pattern/witticism that's gonna be on my body forever anymore than I could contemplate choosing one tshirt or hairstyle for myself for all eternity. I just can't come up with anything that I would want tattooed on me, not opposed to the concept at all.

El_Dangeroso

I like the 'idea' of tattoos, ie marking something meaningful to you in a permanent way. However, can someone show me an example of a nice tattoo? I have never seen one in real life that didn't detract from someone's looks. The very fact that people say they look best on the young, athletic and attractive means that you have to have enough attractiveness in place for the tattoo to not tip you over the edge into unattractive territory.

I'm open to be corrected with some examples though!

Diabhal Beag

No real problem with them. Some tattoos can look amazing and have great meaning or significance. Some people get tattoos of butterflies and post pics on FB looking to impress. To each their own but I'll likely never get one myself.

Duck's hoop

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I like the 'idea' of tattoos, ie marking something meaningful to you in a permanent way. However, can someone show me an example of a nice tattoo? I have never seen one in real life that didn't detract from someone's looks. The very fact that people say they look best on the young, athletic and attractive means that you have to have enough attractiveness in place for the tattoo to not tip you over the edge into unattractive territory.

I'm open to be corrected with some examples though!

There are some really fantastic tattoos. They're amazingly intricate pieces of art. But they're tattoos and no matter how great one is I just can't see myself not being bored/fed up/dissatisfied with it after a short enough time.

Maybe that's why people collect them? Chasing the buzz (pun pun).

I've been thinking about it for 20 years. But I doubt it will ever happen. Maybe I'm just too mainstream conservative.

newmug

You know the way during the Celtic Tiger days, everybody was getting decking, and nowadays the trend is getting the cavity walls pumped with foam? Well 30 years from now, anyone with enough grey matter will clean up cleaning up tattoos.

El_Dangeroso

Duck's hoop wrote: »

There are some really fantastic tattoos. They're amazingly intricate pieces of art.

Ya see I've seen the one's that have just been done, really intricate and vibrant in colour. But a year later it looks like crap, I'd love for someone to show me a five year old one that doesn't look all tired and shabby.

Also, as much as one would like to feel like their design is timeless, it is inevitably influenced by the fashion and design trends of the time. Kind of like how Happy Days looks incredibly 70's even though it's set in the 50's. So add 15-20 years to the age of a tattoo, it not only looks tired, but really dated too.

Tar.Aldarion

Hootanany wrote: »

That's not proof it's Wiki it's all here say anyway.Why is everybody so upatity about a tattoo anyway.

I personally don't like them, but that's just me.

Citation needed.

Tar.Aldarion

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ya see I've seen the one's that have just been done, really intricate and vibrant in colour. But a year later it looks like crap, I'd love for someone to show me a five year old one that doesn't look all tired and shabby.

Also, as much as one would like to feel like their design is timeless, it is inevitably influenced by the fashion and design trends of the time. Kind of like how Happy Days looks incredibly 70's even though it's set in the 50's. So add 15-20 years to the age of a tattoo, it not only looks tired, but really dated too.

Actually really don't like big detailed vibrant tattoos at all, love smaller minimalist tattoos. 99% of tattoos are really horrible which skews my view of them I think, some can look really nice.

Love2u

I don't like tattoos at all. David Beckham looks gross. Turn off!

Duck's hoop

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ya see I've seen the one's that have just been done, really intricate and vibrant in colour. But a year later it looks like crap, I'd love for someone to show me a five year old one that doesn't look all tired and shabby.

Also, as much as one would like to feel like their design is timeless, it is inevitably influenced by the fashion and design trends of the time. Kind of like how Happy Days looks incredibly 70's even though it's set in the 50's. So add 15-20 years to the age of a tattoo, it not only looks tired, but really dated too.

Maybe the monochrome tattoos preserve better? I thought the coloured ones looked good for a bit but I definitely think just shading is the best.

Also feel there are a lot of timeless tats out there. But again, don't think it's for me. Search 'great tattoos'. There are some pretty massive pieces out there.

willmunny1990

I like tattoos but I hate when people get tattoos of their kids names, parents names, kids date of birth and portraits. I actually no a guy who has a portrait of his mother on his arm and its ridiculous looking IMO.

Hootanany

Deleted User wrote: »

When you say that people with tattoos are stupid and then give misinformation, people will defend that

Hang on I'm not ignorant I just commented about children's names in Chinese letters" I meen Why" we live in Ireland why not Gailic.
And being called ignorant twice is very racist.

Howard Juneau

Hootanany wrote: »

Hang on I'm not ignorant I just commented about children's names in Chinese letters" I meen Why" we live in Ireland why not Gailic.
And being called ignorant twice is very racist.

Wtf is Gailic?

P_1

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Wtf is Gailic?

Badly misspelled traditional French?

kildara

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ya see I've seen the one's that have just been done, really intricate and vibrant in colour. But a year later it looks like crap, I'd love for someone to show me a five year old one that doesn't look all tired and shabby.

Also, as much as one would like to feel like their design is timeless, it is inevitably influenced by the fashion and design trends of the time. Kind of like how Happy Days looks incredibly 70's even though it's set in the 50's. So add 15-20 years to the age of a tattoo, it not only looks tired, but really dated too.

The attached photo is 35 years old. Yes, it's not as vibrant and clear as the day it was done but it certainly does not look tired or shabby (imo).
Classic Japanese, as is the attached, is not influenced by fashion and is still a very sought after and popular choice.
There are many tattoo artists in the world specialising in realism, nu-skool, bio-mech etc but there are equally numerous world class tattooists who specialise in Japanese and old school styles. Some artists have 2-3, even 4 year waiting times.
With regard to the vibrancy of tattoos, as they say, bold will hold.

Penny Dreadful

Personally I think tattoos are vile. Two of my sisters have them (one has one and the other has 3 or 4) and I think they are horrible - granted in varying degress.
For me they are an absolute turn off.
Other people like/love them and thats ok for them.

El_Dangeroso

kildara wrote: »

The attached photo is 35 years old. Yes, it's not as vibrant and clear as the day it was done but it certainly does not look tired or shabby (imo).
Classic Japanese, as is the attached, is not influenced by fashion and is still a very sought after and popular choice.
There are many tattoo artists in the world specialising in realism, nu-skool, bio-mech etc but there are equally numerous world class tattooists who specialise in Japanese and old school styles. Some artists have 2-3, even 4 year waiting times.
With regard to the vibrancy of tattoos, as they say, bold will hold.

Indeed it looks very good for 35 years old (definitely never touched up no?), wouldn't say it's the most beautiful thing in the world but that's just subjective opinion isn't it. 99.9% of tattoos look shite after a few years though.

bodice ripper

Everyone gets the tattoo they deserve. No one who ever did a lot of research, spent a lot of money, thought hard about the content and listened to their tattoo artist, ever got a bad tattoo.

sydthebeat

I have three tattoos, I designed them myself and they all hold personal meaning for me.

AS far as I'm concerned, they will never date, never loose meaning and will never be regretted.

Leftist

For tattoos see ear-rings in the 80s/90s

look how popular they are for blokes these days.

ElKavo

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Serious question. Why get your back done if just for yourself? I rarely see my back tbh. It's not like your sleeves or whatever.

By this logic should I only get the hairs on the front of my head or sides cut?:rolleyes: Oh wait, I can't even see them without a mirror. What about shaving? Hmmm;)

tashiusclay

Its the people that have "getting new tattoo soon, any ideas peeps?!" up on facebook that really amuse me, really says a lot about your creativity followed closely by your attention-seekingness when you've to turn to fb to decide what to get permanently inked on your body

Arawn

Leftist wrote: »

For tattoos see ear-rings in the 80s/90s

look how popular they are for blokes these days.

Every third bloke has ear rings these days

rubadub

Arawn wrote: »

Every third bloke has ear rings these days

well then in the 80's/90's it must have been close to 100% so.

There is no way 33% of adult males here have earrings.

I imagine there are lots of people with tattoos who got them ages ago who may not have got them now, simply as they are so popular nowadays. Of course they would be less likely to admit it as they have already done it.

Arawn

rubadub wrote: »

well then in the 80's/90's it must have been close to 100% so.

There is no way 33% of adult males here have earrings.

I imagine there are lots of people with tattoos who got them ages ago who may not have got them now, simply as they are so popular nowadays. Of course they would be less likely to admit it as they have already done it.

Do you consider the 18-25 bracket?? Quite a large number have piercings

Dub Ste

I've only got one tattoo,it's on me mickey..

When it's "resting" the tattoo spells,HEN.

When it's "awake",it spells,HELLO MY NAME IS DUBSTE,I REALLY HOPE YOU ENJOYED YOUR STAY IN DUBLIN...!!:D

kildara

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Indeed it looks very good for 35 years old (definitely never touched up no?), wouldn't say it's the most beautiful thing in the world but that's just subjective opinion isn't it. 99.9% of tattoos look shite after a few years though.

I don't know if its been touched up. As you say though, tattoos are subjective. The point I was trying to make is that not all tattoos look crap after a number of years. Of course if you have an intricate one on your forearm and never put suncream on it, expose it to the weather and sun, then UV will shag it very quickly.

If you look after a pair of leather boots, protect them by polishing them and dry them properly etc, they will last for years. If you wear them in all weather and chuck them in a cupboard when wet, they will last a few months. Same with tattoos. Most of the tattoos you see are on people who don't care for them properly.

Black Leather

I just love women with tattooed bodies - very sexy! Tattoos will never go out of fashion - well I hope not!

Pauleeeeeeee

Most tattoos look like garbage because they were applied by someone who doesn't know what they are doing and/or has no consideration for the limitations of what can be done on skin with regards to how the tattoo will age.

Someone who knows the how to properly apply a tattoo and who cares about how it will look down the line will do a tattoo for you that will look good for a long time.

The problem is that most people don't know what makes a good tattoo and/or have very little taste and just want any old shíte put on their skin as long as the price is right.

Most tattoos I've seen in this country are average or below par. Most will age like shíte. Unfortunately, this is what most people see. I've been stopped by people who "never liked tattoos before" who have admired the work on me because it was done right.

Sure tattoos are "in" right now and their popularity may very well decrease over the next couple of years but don't tar everyone with the same brush. It's a deeply interesting artform/craft with hundreds of years of history and incredibly difficult to master. That might be hard for a lot of people to appreciate and I understand that because the majority of work people are used to seeing is quite poor.

At the end of the day though you're either going to like tattoos or you're not going to like them.

But please, If you don't like them, then shut the fúck up and mind your own business.

o1s1n

bodice ripper wrote: »

Everyone gets the tattoo they deserve. No one who ever did a lot of research, spent a lot of money, thought hard about the content and listened to their tattoo artist, ever got a bad tattoo.

Like all other art, the end result is subjective. There are lots of people who are happy with really bad tattoos. If they're happy with them then that's their own personal choice.

However as someone very interested in high level drawing/rendering and art in general - I've seen so many tattoos which, to the untrained eye folks might think are good, but they're really really not.

Be it awful perspective, bad use of line, badly chosen colours or just overall awful draftsmanship - just because someone is a tattoo artist doesn't necessarily mean they really know what they're doing when it comes to creating a piece of art. Sure, they know how to ink skin, but there's more to it than that.

As long as the person with the tattoo is happy that's all that matters, but really, I do look at tattoos a lot and I frequent places where there are lots of folk with them - most aren't very good at all. For years I wanted to get some, but simply by looking at the standard of most it has forever put me off the idea.