# What five copies in a row do to one letter > Copy a letterform five times, each pass from the last rather than the source, and the fifth is descended from the first without being the same letter. August 20, 2026 · https://justog.club/stories/the-letter-that-changed-when-it-was-copied-wrong The same letter appears five times in a row, soft black on cream, each one small and evenly spaced from the next. At a glance it looks like practice — the same shape, drawn again and again. Look closer and it isn't the same shape. Each version was copied from the one directly before it, not from the first, and by the fifth the letter has drifted into something only related to where it started. That's the whole argument this shirt is making, and it needs no history to make it: copying a shape from a copy is a different process from copying a shape from a source, and it produces a different result every time. ## Why does copying a copy change a letter, when copying an original doesn't? Because a copy always carries small errors, and the next copy has no way to tell the errors from the design. Copy an original and there's a source to check against — a mistake stays visible as a mistake. Copy a copy and that check disappears: whatever drifted in the first pass is now simply what the letter looks like, and it gets reproduced faithfully, drift included, along with everything that was actually intended. Repeat that four more times and each pass locks in whatever drifted in the one before it. ## Why does the drift usually add features rather than remove them? Because a slightly more finished-looking version is the one that tends to get copied forward. A shape seen once — in a photograph, on a page passed around — doesn't get remembered with every detail intact; a curve that was nearly straight gets recalled as straight, a terminal that had the beginning of a hook gets recalled as a hook. [A terminal picking up a hook this way](/stories/the-serif-that-grew-a-hook) is the same mechanism shown at the scale of one stroke end rather than a whole letter — each redraw slightly regularises whatever looked like it was reaching toward a cleaner form, and drops whatever looked accidental. ## Does the fifth letter still count as the same letter as the first? Related, not identical — descended from it the way a fifth-generation copy of anything is descended from the first. Put them side by side and the family resemblance is obvious: the same basic skeleton, the same general proportions. But the curve that started the sequence is straight by the fifth, the terminal that started plain now carries a hook, and the proportions have widened. Nobody would mistake the fifth for a redraw of the first done from scratch. ## Is this actually how the letterforms in this practice took shape? Yes, in the ordinary sense that most of them were learned from a copy rather than from a teacher. A shape gets seen once and gets redrawn from memory and from that single reference, not from any instruction. [A blackbook page](/stories/the-blackbook) is where most of that redrawing happens: a shape tried, adjusted, tried again, each attempt built on the last attempt rather than on whatever it started from. Multiply that by however many hands a shape passes through and the result is a convention nobody sat down and designed — it accumulated. ### Is this the same thing that happens to tattoo flash? No — the mechanism runs in the opposite direction. [Reproduction wears flash down](/stories/how-a-line-ages): a design copied and recopied loses its finer lines until only the heaviest strokes survive. A graffiti letter copied and recopied gains features instead — hooks, extensions, shadows accumulate rather than drop away, because what survives here is whatever reads as more resolved, not whatever is thick enough to physically survive the copy. ## Does the drift ever correct back toward the earlier version? Rarely on its own — there's no reason for a hand to prefer an earlier draft it's never seen. Nobody redrawing letter four is holding letter one up for comparison; the version in front of them is the only version that exists as far as that hand is concerned. Correction only happens if somebody deliberately goes looking for an older reference and chooses to follow it instead, which is a decision, not something the copying process does on its own. ## Who owns a letterform that drifted through five hands this way? Nobody owns the drift itself; the convention it settled into is free for anyone to draw. A specific letter, in a specific hand, belongs to that hand. The hook, the widened proportion, the straightened curve — none of that is anybody's property, any more than a serif belongs to whoever first drew one. What's owned is the particular version on this shirt: this exact fifth-generation shape, drawn by one hand at one size. Working in the same general convention isn't the same as reproducing this letter. ## Does it print well? Yes — five closed shapes in one flat colour, with no detail finer than the weave can hold. Soft black on cream keeps every stage legible against the others, which is the point of printing all five together rather than just the last one. Nothing here depends on a gradient or a fine internal line that would close up at fabric scale. ## How do I get one made? Describe the letter at [JustOG](/) — how many generations of drift, how far apart, whose hand. Pick a direction, drag the crop frame, see it composited on the real garment, and it's made to order and shipped. Designs other people have published are in the [shop](/shop). Nobody who drew the fifth letter ever saw the first one it came from.