If I understand correctly, this article is just saying that there is a shift in graffiti from quantity to quality as people focus on creating better pieces that can be seen by many people online rather than being seen in person?
That seems like a great shift. Higher quality with the same (if not greater) level of exposure. What's the downside? Streets stay cleaner too, and less people get in trouble for a "harmless" crime.
The article also compares Banksy to Selena, I'm familiar with Banksy, but who is Selena?
I wonder if the next transition is to move away from physical graffiti entirely to digital graffiti (imagine a Wii remote style paint can directed at a tablet) -- as hardware prices fall this could be increasingly affordable, even for those with lower income, and definitely more affordable than getting in trouble with the law.
That seems like a great shift. Higher quality with the same (if not greater) level of exposure. What's the downside? Streets stay cleaner too, and less people get in trouble for a "harmless" crime.
The article also compares Banksy to Selena, I'm familiar with Banksy, but who is Selena?
I wonder if the next transition is to move away from physical graffiti entirely to digital graffiti (imagine a Wii remote style paint can directed at a tablet) -- as hardware prices fall this could be increasingly affordable, even for those with lower income, and definitely more affordable than getting in trouble with the law.