Photos of cars with counterfeit designer interiors

Photographer Luis Gispert's new NYC gallery show, titled "Decepcion," features shots of fancy cars blinged out in aftermarket, knock-off Louis Vuitton, Burberry, and Gucci interiors. Above, "Gucci Gloom" (2011). Below, ""LV Escalade" (2011). From Mary Boone Gallery:

Embedded within the world of car enthusiasts customizing vehicle interiors with designer themes: a satellite world of designer imitations in service to those in need of color coordinated designer brand fabric and logos. A micro-economy consisting of dresses, shoes, and bedrooms designed and customized to personal taste and aesthetics. Women running underground counterfeit designer dress shops out of their garages. Men outfitting anything from Timberland boots and backpacks with designer accents to custom leather apparel. In a dizzying conflation of class, aspiration, and travesty, these anonymous creators appeared to relish the bastardization of cultural symbols of wealth.

Luis Gispert's Decepcion (Mary Boone Gallery)

"WORD UP! - Logo Lovers" (Paper)

• [drukqs]

  Something worrisome happens to the taste level of many people once their disposable income passes a certain threshold.

  • [mat catastrophe]

     No, their taste was always suspect. They simply become capable of expressing it better. Um, louder.

• [Dennis Smith]

  The second photo shows an upholstery coloured the same as Friday night vomit.

  • [EH]

    That vomit was originally designed by Takeshi Murakami.

• [grs]

  In a dizzying conflation of class, aspiration, and travesty, these anonymous creators appeared to relish the bastardization of cultural symbols of wealth.

  That’s a beautiful sentence.

• [Brent Kirkham]

  Quick, pass the bag.  I feel very queasy. 

• [ill lich]

  I first saw Timberland “Gucci” work boots about 5 years ago, and it was really confusing, all I could say was “they’re Timberland work boots, they have a Timberland logo on the side, adding fake Gucci cloth doesn’t make them Gucci shoes, are you an idiot, or just have weird self-esteem issues? “   Oddly, it kind of reminds me of cargo cults.

  • [Antinous / Moderator]

    I first saw Timberland “Gucci” work boots about 5 years ago, and it was really confusing

    I feel that way when I see a jacked-up monster truck crawling over a speed bump at 2 mph or yuppies cleaning their shoes before they step up into their off-road vehicle.

• [zootsinfo]

  The way they decor is so fantastic design that i ever know, they customize on every detail side make car looks luxurious performance. Really impress me

• [Daemonworks]

  The only problem is that a few too many of these brands tend to be ugly as sin.
  For example, I really can’t understand why anyone would buy Louis Vuitton with their crap-brown fabric and logo on endless repeat. You want to buy a bag just to show off how much money you’ve got? Fine. At least buy one that looks good.

• [redstarr]

  Seems to me that the actual high-end companies are missing out on an opportunity.  Looks like there’s clearly a customer group looking for car interiors from companies like Louis Vuitton and Gucci.  In the absence of the actual company offering the product they want, potential customers are turning to counterfeiters instead.  If I ran one of the companies who’s logo was in demand in the counterfeit after-market auto decor circle, I’d be in a big rush to start putting out our own authentic versions. 

• [cservant]

  So if it was Hello Kitty interiors, would you still call it counterfeit designer interiors?

• [redstarr]

  Yes, they would still be counterfeit designer interiors no matter what logo was used as long as the designer who owns the logo or produces/designs the authentic brand isn’t the one producing it/selling it.  It wouldn’t matter if it were Hello Kitty or Star Wars or Super Man or Chanel or Ralph Lauren or KISS.  If the real owner of the famous brand isn’t making or selling it or licensing it or otherwise knowingly willfully involved, it’s counterfeit designer merchandise. 

  • [cservant]

    It’s strange.  I don’t associate it as counterfeit designer merchandise.  I tend to think of it fan work or something to that extent.

    I guess I would consider it as counterfeit designer merchandise if you actually made quantities of it and sold it for profit.

    • [redstarr]

      Interesting take on it.  Since there’s not a real source for the
      authentic logo stuff, I can see that it might be a bit different than
      buying a knock-off Fendi handbag because the real Fendi makes and sells
      real Fendi handbags that you can actually buy but if you are a huge
      Gucci fan and want Gucci logo car seats, the real Gucci doesn’t make any
      car seats, so you’re not so much counterfeiting the car seats in that
      you’re not copying an authentic available product.  You may be right
      that there needs to be a better word for that than “counterfeit”. 
      “Counterfeit” does imply copying an existing product rather than using a
      logo without permission to decorate an unrelated unauthorized product.

      And
      I got the impression from the article that these interiors and products
      are being produced and sold for profit.  In that respect, it fits in
      more with the usual knock-off handbag type counterfeiting than fan art
      labor of love type pieces.  There are people making them and selling
      them motivated by money.  It’s not all people in their garages with a
      deep and abiding love of Louis Vuitton stitching the little LVs onto
      their seat covers and people that love high heeled shoes and hate that
      Metallica doesn’t have a line of strappy pumps so they’re handpainting
      the band’s logo on them and people that love Star Wars crafting bunk
      beds that look like a replica Millennium Falcon and that kind of thing. 
      Yeah, I could totally see for those folks it is fan art.  Kind of
      infringementish, but a display of genuine affection for the real owner
      of the logo on a product that the real owner doesn’t offer a way to get
      legally.  I think the element of hand-production by fans for themselves
      makes the fan art kind of thing different than the article’s car
      interiors that are made by folks that have seen the fans as a market
      that they can capitalize on.

• [redstarr]

  There’s an old Suburban SUV in my town that’s painted metallic green with a wide stripe around the center of the vehicle that’s painted a sort of goldish color with the Gucci logo all over it. 

• [eyebeam]

  Dumb people with more money than taste.

• [redstarr]

  Interesting take on it.  Since there’s not a real source for the authentic logo stuff, I can see that it might be a bit different than buying a knock-off Fendi handbag because the real Fendi makes and sells real Fendi handbags that you can actually buy but if you are a huge Gucci fan and want Gucci logo car seats, the real Gucci doesn’t make any car seats, so you’re not so much counterfeiting the car seats in that you’re not copying an authentic available product.  You may be right that there needs to be a better word for that than “counterfeit”.  “Counterfeit” does imply copying an existing product rather than using a logo without permission to decorate an unrelated unauthorized product.

  And I got the impression from the article that these interiors and products are being produced and sold for profit.  In that respect, it fits in more with the usual knock-off handbag type counterfeiting than fan art labor of love type pieces.  There are people making them and selling them motivated by money.  It’s not all people in their garages with a deep and abiding love of Louis Vuitton stitching the little LVs onto their seat covers and people that love high heeled shoes and hate that Metallica doesn’t have a line of strappy pumps so they’re handpainting the band’s logo on them and people that love Star Wars crafting bunk beds that look like a replica Millennium Falcon and that kind of thing.  Yeah, I could totally see for those folks it is fan art.  Kind of infringementish, but a display of genuine affection for the real owner of the logo on a product that the real owner doesn’t offer a way to get legally.  I think the element of hand-production by fans for themselves makes the fan art kind of thing different than the article’s car interiors that are made by folks that have seen the fans as a market that they can capitalize on.