Ink Master Season 2

[Web Head]

It really pi$$ed me off when that guy was all over Jamie for not having any tatoos. Telling him he can't know what it is like. That's like saying you can't be a brain surgeon unless you have had brain surgery. Totally stupid. I really liked Jamie's response (although it was only back in the loft) talking about how tatooed people are always b!tching about how people judge them, and here is this jerkwad judging someone because he DOESN'T have tatoos. I just wanted to shoot that old fart.

THIS.



I was watching some episodes while I was gluing together my Iron Man helmet... These judges hate EVERYTHING. They're like low budget Simon Cowell's.

Plus Dave Navarro is a D bag... my opinion. I mean the Red Hot Chili Peppers fired him!

Anyway Jessie... He and that new school stuff is pretty cool. I'm mad Jamie got sent home, even if he doesn't have tattoos he was the best they had.

 

[Wes R]

The canvases get what they pay for. If they don't watch the show they'd be a lot better off. I wonder if production will cover the cost of touch-ups or cover-ups on bad tattoos?

Watching the show convinces me I don't want a tattoo. I would never be able to trust that a mistake wouldn't be made. Also, I hope that it's just due to the competition but so many of the artists are more concerned with themselves than what's going to be permanently on the canvas' body.

I was hoping they were using some kind of temporary ink that didn't really go into the skin as bad as some of these are. Navarro is a tool and he's always been one when i see him on tv. Only reason I know who he is was from being a regular on VH1 stuff :lol

 

[Web Head]

Navarro is a tool and he's always been one when i see him on tv. Only reason I know who he is was from being a regular on VH1 stuff :lol

He was a founding member of Jane's Addiction and the reason they kept breaking up (I'm not a JaneA fan either) he was with the Chili Peppers for 5 years and got fired...

He is not a tool he is a tool bag. He has tattoos. He doesn't tattoo. He has no value as a judge other than semi star power and that is IT.

Sorry... my hatred for Navarro is just... high :lol

 

[DuneMuadDib]

It really pi$$ed me off when that guy was all over Jamie for not having any tatoos. Telling him he can't know what it is like. That's like saying you can't be a brain surgeon unless you have had brain surgery. Totally stupid. I really liked Jamie's response (although it was only back in the loft) talking about how tatooed people are always b!tching about how people judge them, and here is this jerkwad judging someone because he DOESN'T have tatoos. I just wanted to shoot that old fart.

Watching this right now. Screw these guys and their attitudes. Having tattoos doesn't have anything to do with your ability to do the job.

 

[Feraud]

It really pi$$ed me off when that guy was all over Jamie for not having any tatoos. Telling him he can't know what it is like. That's like saying you can't be a brain surgeon unless you have had brain surgery. Totally stupid. I really liked Jamie's response (although it was only back in the loft) talking about how tatooed people are always b!tching about how people judge them, and here is this jerkwad judging someone because he DOESN'T have tatoos. I just wanted to shoot that old fart.

Yes, the hypocrisy in those comments were cringe inducing.

 

[Zombie_61]

It really pi$$ed me off when that guy was all over Jamie for not having any tatoos. Telling him he can't know what it is like. That's like saying you can't be a brain surgeon unless you have had brain surgery. Totally stupid. I really liked Jamie's response (although it was only back in the loft) talking about how tatooed people are always b!tching about how people judge them, and here is this jerkwad judging someone because he DOESN'T have tatoos. I just wanted to shoot that old fart.

I can understand both sides of this issue.

Forrest Cavacco's and Oliver Peck's opinions are shared by most of the tattoo artists I've spoken with over the years--that a tattoo artist should have at least one tattoo so that he/she will know what his/her client is experiencing. And since this issue hasn't been mentioned previously on the show (that I can remember) I'm guessing Peck wouldn't have said anything (not on camera, anyway) if Cavacco hadn't said something first. I know I wouldn't get a tattoo from an artist who wasn't tattooed, but that's a personal choice.

However, Jamie Davies' opinion is equally valid. It's his body, and if he hasn't yet found the right art or the right artist he shouldn't be tattooed. And he's right about the level of hypocrisy that was openly expressed; people who are often judged just because they have tattoos shouldn't judge someone just because they don't. There's an old saying that goes, "The only difference between tattooed people and not-tattooed people is that tattooed people don't care if you're not tattooed." I still believe this is true in most cases but, apparently, it doesn't hold true if you work in the tattoo business.

It's unfortunate that this issue was raised in an episode in which the artist with no tattoos was sent home. If it had happened during any other episode it would likely have been nothing more than a few passing comments, and back to business as usual afterward. As it is, it's obvious some people believe Jamie was penalized for not having tattoos.

Regardless of the actual reason for the judges' decision, I agree with it. Sarah's decision to add that black background element wasn't a particularly good one, but the rest of her tattoo was better executed than Jamie's. I think most people are against the decision because, between her comments and her breakdowns, Sarah doesn't come across as a particularly likeable person, and I can't disagree. But I also think she doesn't have the talent and/or skill to be a "tattoo master" and will likely be sent home soon, probably in the next episode.

 

[Scareb]

This show is just stupid. As much as I hate it though, I hate that tattoo nightmares show even worse. That mexican artist is the worst actor ever. Everytime he talks about a tattoo, I cringe at his dialogue.

 

[Ghadrack]

I am convinced the only reason they kept that loser Sarah and ditched the no-tattoo guy is because he was too boring and she makes for "Good TV' for idiot moron reality tv fans. They shoudl really condense that whole season into a single hour, name the challenge, show the work, show the judging, move to the next week as an extra on the DVD for those of us interested in Tattoos and artwork to watch but loath being dragged through an hour of nonsense to see ten minutes worth of entertainment.

I actually watch another half hour program for the first half of the show and then tune in for the end so I don't have to watch much of the stupidity and can just see the point of the show.

PS, if I didn't mention it, reality TV sucks. These skill challenge programs would be great if they would drop the soap opera nonsense.

 

[Laspector]

My DVR cut off about 5 minutes before the finale was over...So who won?

 

[Scareb]

The dude with the crappy shirts.

 

[NamTar]

LOL but that was what LA Ink and Miami Ink were all about too. It was drama drama drama between the artists at the shops. That's reality tv!

Clint (mohawked guy) is hilariously stupid. I also find some of the stage names ridiculously funny too. Like Tatu Baby. -___-

This. If it were all about tattoos, less people would watch it. If it's about ridiculous drama, people watch it more for the reality tv aspect. I suppose it's a marketing thing. For example, my mom has zero tattoos and zero interest in anything relating to tattoos (and thinks mine are disgusting, haha) but she still watched LA Ink for the stupid drama and Kat von D's relationship problems.

I haven't watched a lot of Ink Master but I caught a few episodes. I liked some of the challenges and things like that.

Watching this right now. Screw these guys and their attitudes. Having tattoos doesn't have anything to do with your ability to do the job.

I know it's expected but it's still crap to judge someone on what's on their body rather than what kind of work they do. I know some professional tattoo artists with some terrible tattoos on themselves (from when they were young and experimenting on themselves, or whatever). Though, to an extent, I agree with the people who say they should probably have one just to know what it's like to be on the receiving end, but it seems like many people who are tattoo artists do anyway just because they are interested in tattoos. I don't know...

 

[Dexter2999]

I can understand both sides of this issue.

Forrest Cavacco's and Oliver Peck's opinions are shared by most of the tattoo artists I've spoken with over the years--that a tattoo artist should have at least one tattoo so that he/she will know what his/her client is experiencing. And since this issue hasn't been mentioned previously on the show (that I can remember) I'm guessing Peck wouldn't have said anything (not on camera, anyway) if Cavacco hadn't said something first. I know I wouldn't get a tattoo from an artist who wasn't tattooed, but that's a personal choice.

However, Jamie Davies' opinion is equally valid. It's his body, and if he hasn't yet found the right art or the right artist he shouldn't be tattooed. And he's right about the level of hypocrisy that was openly expressed; people who are often judged just because they have tattoos shouldn't judge someone just because they don't. There's an old saying that goes, "The only difference between tattooed people and not-tattooed people is that tattooed people don't care if you're not tattooed." I still believe this is true in most cases but, apparently, it doesn't hold true if you work in the tattoo business.

It's unfortunate that this issue was raised in an episode in which the artist with no tattoos was sent home. If it had happened during any other episode it would likely have been nothing more than a few passing comments, and back to business as usual afterward. As it is, it's obvious some people believe Jamie was penalized for not having tattoos.

Regardless of the actual reason for the judges' decision, I agree with it. Sarah's decision to add that black background element wasn't a particularly good one, but the rest of her tattoo was better executed than Jamie's. I think most people are against the decision because, between her comments and her breakdowns, Sarah doesn't come across as a particularly likeable person, and I can't disagree. But I also think she doesn't have the talent and/or skill to be a "tattoo master" and will likely be sent home soon, probably in the next episode.

While I agree with everything you have written here, I think his argument of "I haven't found the right art/artist" would be valid if he had been looking for say up to five years. But this guy has been at this for 17 years? 17? If you haven't found the right artists in 17 years it's because you aren't looking. And after 17 years of not finding the right art...he could have drawn his own art and found someone to ink it on him.

After 17 years, his excuses are just excuses.

But I don't say that this is any reflection on his talent or ability. The only thing I see it has a bearing on is his ability to empathize with the clients pain. And if he has learned to read peoples expressions and body english and can see evidence of their pain and discomfort and take steps to lessen it then that is kind of a moot point as well.

And feel free to dismiss everything I say as I have never seen a piece of art that I wanted to have on my body for the rest of my life. I am tattoo free. (As I prefer my women as well.)

 

[Zombie_61]

My DVR cut off about 5 minutes before the finale was over...So who won?

The dude with the crappy shirts.

A.K.A. Steven Tefft. I'm not too surprised he won, but if Katherine "Tatu Baby" Flores hadn't gotten screwed out of going to the finals in the second-to-last episode (IMO she should have been a finalist instead of Sebastian "Boring, Middle of the Road" Murphy) I think the outcome might have been different.

 

[trenchcoatpanda]

Dave is a way more interesting host then say, the guy from Hot Set. It just feels natural enough that I forget he's a famous musician or personality.

Wait the finale already aired?

Also theres a casting call for season 3 on getting tattooed on the show, you if you want to risk that on live tv.

 

[Scareb]

There's a reason why I did my research when I got my tattoos, because I know the artist was good and I liked his art styles. Being a canvas on the show is no better then walking into a shop and just saying "go nuts"

Half the time the artists try to talk the person out of what they want on the show.

 

[trenchcoatpanda]

Shouldn't have read this forum before I watched the finale, totally ruined it for me :facepalm But, I had a feeling Steve was going to win it anyway.

I was hoping they weren't going to do what Faceoff did with the Q & A with all the past contestants...and they did that... awkward cringe lawl.

I liked last years finale, where it wasn't in front of a live audience and was more intense since they had to do... two tattoos and be judged? Oh wells.

 

[Zombie_61]

There's a reason why I did my research when I got my tattoos, because I know the artist was good and I liked his art styles. Being a canvas on the show is no better then walking into a shop and just saying "go nuts"

Half the time the artists try to talk the person out of what they want on the show.

I couldn't agree more. To the artist it's one tattoo, a shot at $100,000, and whatever reputation comes with being "Ink Master" (which seems to be a dubious honor at best). To me it's something that will be on my body, and something I'll have to look at, for the rest of my life. There are maybe a few already established artists whose work I like, and who I would possibly allow to put whatever they wanted to under my skin. But these amateurs who are trying to make a name for themselves by showing off work that is "hit and miss" at best? Not a chance.

 

[Laspector]

Reviving this thread. Is anyone watching the new season? I will have to say I have been watching this show since the beginning, but for the life of me I cannot figure out why. I do not have any tattoos and probably never will but I certainly do not judge people who do. I enjoy the art of the tattoos that they do, but God do I hate all the contestants on it!

So my question to the people here that have or do tattoos is--are just all tattoo artists just complete @sshats? I have yet to see a contestant on this show that I would want as a friend. All of them are rude, crass, and just downright mean to each other. Compare these contestants to a show like Face off where the contestants are nice(for the most part), help each other and are genuinely sad when someone is eliminated. I realize it is a competition but there is no excuse for some of these folks' behavior towards one another.

And the judges--say what you like about Dave and his musical talent (or lack of-whichever way you feel), at least he is nice to the contestants. Toothpick and the other guy, I wouldn't pee on either of them if they were on fire.

I'm not trying to put down people with tattoos, I have many friends who have them, however I have never personally known a tattoo artist. Are they all like the people on this show?

 

[Wes R]

I watched this a bit. I think it's like other reality shows where they pick out the worst people you could ever get as judges and contestants. I watch that one where they fix up bad tattoos on one of the channels and they're normal humans and never jerks at least on camera. Sadly this show just reaffirms the stereotype of people with tattoos being unpleasant.

 

[crabra comander]

If I'm not mistaken, any botched tattoos that are completely loathed get put on the cover up reality show, tattoo nightmares...

And what's the issue with people with tattoos? Are we talking about the artists or the canvas peeps? Hmmm...maybe the artists are dicks IRL. I'll talk to my guy next Friday and let you guys know.

I couldn't agree more. To the artist it's one tattoo, a shot at $100,000, and whatever reputation comes with being "Ink Master" (which seems to be a dubious honor at best). To me it's something that will be on my body, and something I'll have to look at, for the rest of my life. There are maybe a few already established artists whose work I like, and who I would possibly allow to put whatever they wanted to under my skin. But these amateurs who are trying to make a name for themselves by showing off work that is "hit and miss" at best? Not a chance.