Should tattoos be considered art? Are tattooers artists?

by Dan Henk Dan Henk

Working title: “Why people might think your work sucks”.

I have been hearing complaints almost since I began fifteen years ago about how tattooing is not being taken seriously as an art form. Maybe it was as a genre specific sort of folk art, but that wasn’t enough for most people in the business. But you know what? I see where the illustrators are coming from.

Now, before people get start to react, let me go over some of this. I think the best approach is to compare tattooing to another medium. When punk rock came out, there were a few auteurs, but most of it was crap. And I like punk. But it’s true.

In high school I had a blue mohawk, combat boots, and a spiky leather jacket. Over time, some real talent started to emerge. That’s when it was recognized as an art form. It took a while, but bands like Black Flag and the Dead Kennedys are respected now. The Ramones and the Sex Pistols have even been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Same with metal. Or science fiction. Or comic books. In fact, I almost went into comics, and I’m still the first to admit that most early comics had mediocre artwork and stories. At best. Now you get the likes of Alan Moore and John Totleben. Metal used to have Venom. Now they have musicians that can play circles around many in other genres. Even  if you don’t like metal, you would be an idiot to not admit it has talent. I think tattooing has gone through the same birth pangs.

Super sick steam-punk tattoo by Dan Henk


The way for anything to prove it’s worth, is by producing a better product. Early tattooing had a limited palette, limited machines and limited needle groupings. Such a social stigma was attached to tattoos for generations that truly talented artists often looked elsewhere for careers. And not to pick on just tattooing, the other genres I discussed had the same problems early on. In fact, going back to the beginning of comics, serious artists tended to do something that involved more money and more respect. Limited time lines, low wages, and stories that were often quick and aimed at the lowest common denominator didn’t help matters. Then, in the eighties, comics developed specialty stores; they weren’t just for passersby at the corner store any more. A different kind of people started reading them, and started making them. Adults remembered them fondly from their childhood. Celebrities admitted they were fans. Comic conventions began sprouting up all over the place. Comic books started to make the news. And then there came the movies. In time, comic books, artists and writers began to to be taken much more seriously by the mainstream. I would say tattooing has gone through a similar evolution.

Painting by Dan Henk


These days there are some some amazing tattoo artists out there that blow away some artists in other fields, or at least compete with it. But just as all comics aren’t well drawn, neither are all tattoos done well. In fact, with such a huge demand for tattoos, there is no way the best artists could even keep up. Unlike most comic or commercial illustrators, tattoo artists aren’t peer reviewed, (unless you count Instagram). And they are in far greater demand. So even technically well-executed tattoos that are artistically mediocre flow out of shops every day. But it’s still true that many, (perhaps even the majority), of tattoos are not well executed at all. They may not flow well with the body, and they make otherwise blank skin actually look worse. To add salt to the wound, unlike bad artwork on paper, they can’t just be shelved and forgotten about. That’s the nature of the beast. At it’s best, Tattoos can impress more than any painting could. At it’s worst, it can become a life-long regret and the subject of jokes at parties. But I don’t think the answer is to cry over spelt milk. Great looking tattoos will always triumph.

What  I hear all the time is, “Wow, that’s a tattoo?” This isn’t because I think my tattoos are the bees knees, I’m talking about tattoos done by a huge range of talented artists. Most people are used to the old-school pieces their parents have, or the small tattoos their friends got from a local flash shop. Put out your best work and forget the haters. Like many punk bands that were written off at the time but are now considered classic, many art forms are like this. The movies Blade Runner and The Shining were panned by critics when they first came out. Now they make all the top ten lists. If it’s quality, it will be recognized, even if it takes time. If not, it may not even noticed while it’s passing,

painting and tattoo by Nick Baxter


Before everyone starts making all sorts of excuses about how they are really just a misunderstood specialist, let’s consider a few things. Good movies make it not because they were “underground” or “misunderstood”, but because they were well done. Too many tattoo artists write off artistic techniques that are the life blood of any other illustrative medium. Anatomy. Perspective. Design and flow. Light source. The list goes on.  Most of the general public is not going to look at a tattoo by the likes of Robert Hernandez, or Tommy Lee Wendtner, and say “oh that’s just scribbled crap”. But by the same token, the public at large is not going to look at the work of Joe Shmo who can’t even pull a straight line and say “that’s art”.

I would like to make another point. Art for Art’s sake…or art for wages? I attended art school. And I remember, in art school, there was this art world snobbery towards anything that was produced for an ‘assignment’. H.R Giger was a well-respected fine artist, until his designs were used for the movie Alien, then the fine art world denigrated him to being just an “illustrator”.  So, if you want to be technical, since a tattoo artist works with a client and produces art for money, he is also just an illustrator. Like Frank Frazetta. Hey, if that’s the company you want to throw me in, I’m fine with that. Keep in mind, however, that this hypocritical frame of reference would apply to all those revered early artists, like Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Da Vinci, etc, etc, etc. The true masters we admire and study now… mostly did religious material and portraits. Why? Because that is what paid the bills. Sounds like illustration to me.

Amazing painting by Carlos Torres

Alright, one more issue that I feel needs to be addressed.

I remember, when I first started, that I had this portfolio with just a few tattoos in it. But I had a whole load of paintings filling the rest. And boy did I hear it. “You’re just a frustrated painter”. “That doesn’t apply to tattoos”. “So you can paint, this is tattooing, who the hell cares”.

Now it seems like everyone paints. Some are really good at it. Like Nick Baxter, or Carlos Torres. But just like anything, most tattooers doing it suck. Even if you are a good tattoo artist, that does not make you a good painter. I have seen great painters try to do another medium, including tattooing, and fall on their ass. They didn’t lose respect as a painter, but that’s no free pass in the tattoo world if your work is crap. You need to do good paintings to be respected as a painter, and good tattoos to be respected as a tattooer.  It’s not like being good in one field gives you some free pass in all the rest. Unless you’re Prince, I don’t expect a good musician to automatically be a good basketball player, and I don’t expect a good tattoo artist to be a good painter.

Carlos Torres tattoo
Carlos Torres tattoo

So, in my opinion, a tattoo is and isn’t art. Just like a painting. Many paintings suck. Many tattoos suck. A great painting will be considered art. A great tattoo should also be considered art. Unless someone has a prejudice against tattoos. And if that’s the case, who cares. Their loss.

Similar Articles

7 thoughts on “Should tattoos be considered art? Are tattooers artists?

  1. You are frist an artisti,then a tattoo artisti.what i meen whith this?you don’t need to be an artist.fortattooing.

  2. An Artist, is not an Artist unless they create original art work, on the medium, of which they want to be called and artist of. Therefore, any original art work, that is “created” and tattooed into the skin, is art; created by a tattoo artist.

    If the original art work is tattooed into the skin, it becomes an original tattooed art work.

    If the art work evokes a memorable response from a viewer, it is better than the shit that doesn’t.

    But even the ugly stuff, that doesn’t cause a memory, if it is original, should be concidered art.
    Thanks for asking.

    Still drawing, one breath at a time, and hated worldwide for doing it.
    kelly Miller

    1. “Original” is an opinion, not a fact. Everything that has happened will happen again and is happening right now. We are just reflections and recreations of each other. There is one conscious mind that everything is connected to. So when you pull an idea from your mind it’s really your ego that makes it your’s. The collective shared environment that created you created the artwork that you produce. Every influence you’ve ever had in your life created the so called “original” artwork. There is no such thing as an original idea. These thoughts are borrowed and organized in rare ways sometimes. But rare isn’t original either. Like the term “Original Gangster”. There is no such thing. There have been gangsters since the first man made a club. But was making a club an original idea if his inspiration came from something else? I could go on and on. I’m still waiting to see something truly original tho. It’s all illustration to me.

      1. i never said original, although you are probably responding to the other poster. I said good. If it is good in the eye of the beholder it is art. If it is good in a lot of eyes, it will be widely accepted. There is a theory that we aren’t even really self aware, we just act like we are because of a complex “butterfly effect” in the brain. So everything has it’s influences, it is just how the designer puts those together that makes art. The whole “we are all part of the same conscientious” is a little too hippy and new age for me

  3. I am A tattoo artist sometimes and a tattoo illustrator at others.. When my client ask what is the difference I tell them it’s a illustration till it moves you, then it’s art

  4. I’m a certain form of artist not regarding being a tattoo artist. But I am a tattoo enthusiast. The time it takes to do a tattoo what all is involved with doing them. This artistry is unique, yea you can be a dope artist on paper but to do it on skin is a whole new ball game. My artist during some of my sixteen hour sessions she was so enthusiastic the while time. So the pride the artist has is a form of art. Tattoos represent the foundation of one’s personality and shows character so yes it is considered and will always be considered art

Comments are closed.