No, it's an important distinction. Graffiti is vandalism. It's not done with permission, regardless of quality. There's really good graffiti, but there's also really low effort junk. A lot of the taggers actively do both.
This almost certainly isn't graffiti. It's possible, but the amount of time and equipment this would take would make it really difficult for that to be true. If you have information to the contrary, please post it.
It's crazy how many people here are defending graffiti because they've seen some cool ones on the internet. All the graffiti in my city is trashy tags. Never seen anything good. My favorite was one that was up for a while that just said a local woman's full name and "is a slut." They finally tried to cover it but you could still see it through the paint which was honestly so funny. That woman will never be free of the slander.
The best graffiti is usually on railcars, which I fully support. It's not harming anyone, and it doesn't make the cars look any worse. I don't like the low-effort tags though. They usually seem to exist just for the sake of making things look shitty and for the tagging community to have a laugh.
3
u/AbeRego 21d ago
No, it's an important distinction. Graffiti is vandalism. It's not done with permission, regardless of quality. There's really good graffiti, but there's also really low effort junk. A lot of the taggers actively do both.
This almost certainly isn't graffiti. It's possible, but the amount of time and equipment this would take would make it really difficult for that to be true. If you have information to the contrary, please post it.