Glad they got nabbed. Graffiti art can be pretty to look at, but so often it just defaces and ugliness the neighborhood. I hope their probation is strict and that if either violates it they go to jail. I know there must be others, and hopefully they are soon caught too.

These guys are artists. Besides being illiterate (ugliness?), the commenter above obviously doesn't appreciate art. Move to the burbs. Run a homeowners association. Go br lame and obstructive somewhere else.

They aren't "artists," they're vandals. Defacing private or public property with juvenile, half-assed paint schemes is not art. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, have them play on your property. And btw, ugliness is a recognized word; get some literary- and art appreciation- skills yourself.

I second Murphy. If you like the "art" so much why aren't you offering up YOUR property for their work. It's not art, it's vandalism pure and simple. It lowers the quality of life for it's victims, blights the urban landscape, and in more than one instance is damaging historical sites along with significant modern architecture.

There's a world of difference between street art and tagging. Neither of these guys are the next Banksy. From what I've seen, they are merely taggers.

Hey Rusty- There's a whole world of street art that is successful and qualifies as legitimate artistic expression. I've got books on it, have studied it, and have done lots of murals in public public spaces. The stuff these guys did doesn't fit the definition of "art". I don't give a rat's a** what you claim is "real art"- if it is executed without the property owners' permission, it is disrespectful, harmful, and illegal. The tags that were done on my property by one of these characters were obscene and artless. And, by the way, be careful who you accuse of illiteracy- your mis-spellings might be taken as examples of the same. Go move to a ghetto and be destructive and nasty there.

"Go move to a ghetto and be destructive and nasty there." is a truly offensive and distasteful statement, Mister Stevie. The implications you give of poorer people being unable to be morally upstanding and have a pretty place to live and raise their families is really terrible. You ought to think about the way you frame your arguments.

Vomit has done murals, I think they're kind of cool. Most graf heads know not to hit up people's homes, schools or churches, but Vomit has been known to be kind of a jerk. He's been in bigger trouble before and that didn't keep him from doing the mark making that he is compelled to do. I think adding color to a wall is beautiful, I just wish there were safe spaces to foster this kind of creativity instead of turn it into a black and white, completely punishable offense.

Kudos to the Atlanta Graffiti Task Force. Let's now get to work on SEPES and BLAZOE, wherever and whoever they are.

Briana -
They're not artists, they're vandals. I like the way you compliment them on not vandalizing "people's homes, schools or churches" and ignore the fact they've vandalized historical structures, award winning architecture, traffic signs to the point of illegibility, community non profit's structures and vehicles, businesses, parks, recreation facilities ... the list goes on.
"Kind of cool" is a poor rationalization for vandalism.

I really enjoyed looking at the Living Walls around town. But am absolutely not down with painting private property, especially when the people who live in the immediate vicinity are opposed to it. Just because you live in the city, doesn't mean you give up your property rights, and its in everyone's interest to have steady property values.

If the statement above is indeed true:

"vandalized historical structures, award winning architecture, traffic signs to the point of illegibility, community non profit's structures and vehicles, businesses, parks, recreation facilities"

then that's absolutely despicable.

These guys are artists and the more they are suppressed the more vandal level artists will arise