i found this. it too reminded me of your work.

http://vimeo.com/6803905

I did a project at university about a year ago, where we were asked to make a typeface from a given material. My material was ribbon, and I was asked to “capture it’s characteristics”.

After many many experiments, I found a stripey paper toy and photographed it. Anyway, here is what it looked like.

http://designbytommorris.co.uk/Work%20Images/New%20Faces/POSTER1.jpg
(please excuse crazy colours!)

A little while later I found your artwork for Magic Chairs, and loved it. And it made me really happy to see that we had been sharing similar ideas (albeit quite different outcomes).

It’s brilliant to share ideas! And I absolutely love your design for Efterklang! :D

TM

The people who copied your art is bad artist then. Sometimes we need that kind of people to boost up our creativity, just take the positive way. I believe , people know who’s the original one.

keep up the good work, cheers :)

your post is annoying
your arguments are weak

and where in the blog post above (or anywhere else) does Hvass&Hannibal claim to be groundbreaking or original artists on the same level as Picasso and Pollock?

If you think the examples in the blogpost are OK and fair and not copies, then I feel sad for you.

- no offense

2- on the second artwork, the way it was done, cut-out or whatever you call it might be your original, but the process or the method is already have been done and nothing new. And even then in terms of originality of style the shape of the silos are very regular, I’ve seen a lot of illustrators or illustrations using thesame visual imagery that you are using on your artwork.
I belive originality is when picasso and braque coined cubism. and when pollock did the drip, thats original. Is yours grounbreaking? No offense guys just expressing my opinion.