actually, i think if you look back at amy jo's work, you can see that these elements that might look AA-ish are actually the sorts that she has been using all along. this is like a new formation of those elements, but still very amy jo.
not trying to start any arguements. just didn't get your comment. it sounded like a "gotcha" thing. lord knows there's enough around gp that you can play "gotcha" forever.
if you took images that had a (roughly. very roughly) center points in them and overprinted them in different colors into a single image, it would look like what you say this aa's or amy's or anybody's work. it's printing and layout. not copying, ot even inspiration. that's all.
a lot of folks on this sight think if something looks remotely like somebody else's, it's a rip off. that's sorta ignorant of process sometimes.
In no way am I referring, accusing or otherwise alluding to Amy Jo copying the style of AA. Both her and their work travel separate conceptual roads altogether, but the general aesthetic of the source images, degradation of those images snippets, color palette, plus (as you mentioned) the explorative and organic overprinting ends up with a similar look.
To avoid sounding like a complete wanker, I took another glance at AA's Explosions in the Sky poster, the one that came to mind when I first took a look at this. I am going to stick by my statement.
It's a beautiful poster. Just one of those "could have sworn it was AA from the thumbnail" things.
gorgeous stuff, amy.
12volt - i fail to see any similarity between amy's piece and aa's work. the only point of convergence is that they are both exploring the wonders of overlapping images/ink. that's called printing, not theft.