rarely consensus here, nor should there be

Thanks for input Poster Bob.
Sad to say it, but that kind of sums up my opinion as well lately...

art cave:
I know and agree, but input from other countries is always good.

I guarantee both will have a looong and successful career, they've broken away from the maximum 3k budgets where most of us operate and are into a world of interiors and art, not critically acclaimed by self appointed "experts" perhaps. But beautiful and colourful things will always win out. The idea that you need, or artists want, more than one solid idea they can develop over many years is a myth. Painting isn't a "trick", they've both become a lot more technically accomplished over the years and I've never met two artists more dedicated to their "careers", you can bet they'll be around and devloping a loooong time after most others have moved on. Have a long look at their careers, early work compared to later work, who represents and buys them...they're pretty much established now, and barring any disasterous decisions, their fan base will grow and grow. As will their prices. In my opinion.

How long will Chevrier continue to grow when there's coffee mug editions etc, and an abundance of prints. At at certain point it's going to have a negative effect, the question is if it'll have a negative effect on her as an artist or if it'll increase the value on the older stuff

As opposed to that guy Invader. So many tricks. (No shade toward Invader. I love his style and work. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.)


And when Dolk tried not to be a one-trick pony, that worked out well. (I much prefer his stencil/street stuff but give him props for going with his artistic heart.)


To each their own, but I kind of like the female empowerment vibe I get from Chevrier and I love Whatson's irreverence and the beauty the graffiti can bring out in pieces such as Dancer.

Abundance of prints sure has hurt that Fairey guy. He sure disappeared and has become irrelevant.

I'm throwing stones in a glass house here, since I own many SC and MW prints, but I reckon it's like that with art that you evolve from one type/artist to another within a few years/decades.
Thanks for all comments/thoughts you guys have come with!

I totally agree with thisismyusername regarding coffee mugs etc. Why not push the brakes a bit? Like Dolk did as mentioned by @pr.yu.

Funny Invader was mentioned, but that is another discussion. #hype.

I've been around on this forum some time, but not as a user that long. Who is "FR", and why is his opinion relevant regards to Sandra?

I like both artists, depending on the work. I have two Whatsons in my living room and enjoy seeing them everyday and a little Sandra sketch in the office.

I don't care for most of Chevrier's work, but her drawing skills seem to have improved over time. Whatson's print releases and murals have just reflected older work and hopefully he'll move on to other concepts. But I really wouldnt mind if he stuck to tagging Dancing women his whole career - they're usually lovely images. I think he might be working on a new dancer based in his IG feed.

I passed on his last few print releases, but the Pez x Whatson collab is one I would pine for. Of course that's due entirely to Pez's creativity.

The Whatson Chev collab prints I thought were hideous. Baboom being the better if the two. They were two expensive giclees without hand finishing, large and ugly, but that's just my opinion. If you like the images, then you'll be happy. If you think they're investments for the future, then u better start scooping the water, because the ship is sinking.

I don't think either are particularly good at what they do, so when you stick them both in a blender, what comes out ain't pretty.

Whatson is mediocre with his stencil work and has no roots in tagging, so his faux tagging shtick is a joke. Beyond his lack of technical skills, I find the work devoid of any real meaning or message. The creative process seems to be "what can I ejaculate these faux tags on next?"

Chevrier paints at a community college level, at best. Thankfully, the portraits are covered in comic books, which I will admit, in the early days she excelled at tearing and pasting. The one redeeming quality in her work is that there is an actual meaning that she strives for.

Regardless of my opinions, both have found a fan base that appreciates their work and good on them for making it in a tough business. It's hard to fault them for doing what pays the bills.

The demand for this one seems to be coming from Scandinavia. They love it. Over there it's all the rage for living rooms to have light grey paint, 'kinfolk' books on a side table and this print on the wall.

They paste it all over insta - more than the Brits love posting pics of avocados.

It's not the abundance of prints it's the abundance of s**t. There is zero quality control in his releases. If he cut it down to say four relevant pieces per year he'd be an absolute superstar.

Whatson is pathetic with no stencil skills. Just look at how shi*ty he is at cutting stencils for women's faces. Chevier is a joke because she makes up her philosophy as she goes to fit her cut and paste art and I agree, her technical skills are nonexistent. Is she cutting checks to Marvel yet?

I gather you have some disdain for both.

They love Whatson as much as the Brits love their Harlands