Forums >
General Industry >
2,000 hours on one photoshop image.....
it's VERY nice... & INSANE!!! Aug 18 06 09:02 pm Link you have to admire the dedication to his art! He is a purist and a pefectionist. He does not follow the sheep he leads his own way with his own style. I wish I was as good in photoshop as this guy maybe I would put down the camera.....well maybe not. My hats off to his craft! Aug 18 06 09:02 pm Link I could watch anime porno , but I dont. Aug 18 06 09:07 pm Link gavin oneill wrote: Probably BECAUSE he has no MM account. Aug 18 06 09:20 pm Link DarioImpiniPhotography wrote: Because he is a painter not a photographer or a model. Aug 19 06 02:10 am Link ~Krista~ wrote: Wow... You get hot geeking out about photography. I think I'm in love! Aug 19 06 02:20 am Link Why use Photoshop when Painter is so much more powerful as a painting app??? Compared to Painter, for this sort of thing, Photoshop is just so primitive. Aug 19 06 02:49 am Link Julie Saad wrote: I know exactly what you mean... it just looks like a really clean, crisp picture if you don't know the story. Then when you hear the story behind it...your blown away... but just browsing or at a glace you see it and say "that's a clean shot." Aug 19 06 02:51 am Link Jean-Philippe Martin wrote: He could easily create a photographer account and most people would not be able to tell the difference Aug 19 06 02:54 am Link I'd hate to be him when the hardrive crashes. Aug 19 06 06:36 am Link http://www.moma.org/exhibitions/2001/gursky/ Gursky uses digital manipulation to creat the image, but not 100% from scratch. http://www.designboom.com/history/becher.html The Becher's were his teachers, 100% reality. Gotta love obsessive Germans! And speaking of Bauhaus, here is an American contemporary out of Chicago (no manipulation). http://www.eastman.org/ne/str085/htmlsr … 00001.html And speaking of no manipulation, check out Joel-Peter Witikin...all darkroom! http://www.art-forum.org/z_Witkin/gallery.htm Aug 19 06 07:03 am Link It reminds me of artist Liza Lou, who spent 5 years gluing 30 million beads to everything in her kitchen. Amazing, yes, but who has that kind of patience! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/ … 9895.shtml Aug 19 06 07:12 am Link Mark Heaps wrote: Thank you, Mark, because this is really what it's about: computer-generated art, including art derived from photography and made to resemble photographic product. Aug 19 06 07:24 am Link That is impressive....but the technique looks close to digital animation used in games ect. I could turn on my X-box, PS2 and see about the same quality. He probably works for a game company, the software sounds pretty indepth with 15,000 layers. So who here on MM that does editing can show him up, or make something comparible? Aug 19 06 07:53 am Link Why, Peter--is there any difference left between personal and industrial art? Beyond "Because it's there" (and the origin of that comes from the day when men actually ventured outdoors to make their mark), what, really, is the point? For observation, others work too on high resolution photography . . . so what? I have to take another good look at the OP picture--I'm starting to wonder if there were any humans in it. Aug 19 06 08:45 am Link And for the record, nope, not one person, not even a reflection of one in car window, in Bert's scene. Aug 19 06 08:47 am Link |