15000 layer photoshop picture

[-MM!!-Lazarus]

Whats cooler though is the gigapixle cameras, take a shot with one of those and you can see someones eyes from like a mile away

Except that they work on scanning technology, so it takes a minute or so to take the picture, line by line by line, meaning the person would have to be REALLY really still.

 

[Donut]

oh my jesus is that insane

Oh my insane is that Jesus?

 

[Nestor Makhno]

Great work! But I would just use a camera....

QFT mate - you have to ask, "Why?"

 

[User Name]

QFT mate - you have to ask, "Why?"

Because he wanted to. Why does someone spend 2000 hours restoring a car they never drive? Because they want to.

 

[Xendance]

Why I'm writing this line of text on this God forsaken forum?

Because... umm... I'm... bored?

 

[Dheepan]

Um well... honestly that's great but that's really just totally pointless IMO. That's ridiculous that he made that, but honestly there's almost nothing artistic about that picture. Lot of skill but not much artistic merit. Well, I'm an abstract artistic so I guess you shouldn't take my word on it . But really with all the possibilities of photoshop I'd rather see something that's not possible with paint. Secondly, although he calls it painting I really don't, mainly because you really can't feel the emotion and feeling of a work on a computer screen. Seeing a painting in real life and comparing it to a print out or computer image is completley different. A painting that was done of that same picture would exhibit some feeling and emotion, even as a landscape, the mistakes of the painter adds character. His rendering gives off a feeling of vapid lifelessness. Just an opinion.

 

[Boogerhead]

Very impressive!

My ex-wife had a print of a photo-realistic painting of a woman on a screened-in porch, the neighborhood behind her. You could see the effect of the screen everywhere; you could see the fuzz on her socks. He painted the fuzz on her socks.


(I think the woman was supposed to be Kurt Vonnegut's wife, meaning the artist is his son-in-law, but I had a hard time tracking that down.)

 

[Capt.Marion]

laird. plain and simple, ye word-wastin' pansies! (okay, back to normal)

that is one heck of a photoshop job. Now you really really mean something when you say " thats one hell of a photoshop ye got yourself there, son..."

 

[Boogerhead]

Except that they work on scanning technology, so it takes a minute or so to take the picture, line by line by line, meaning the person would have to be REALLY really still.

The cool one is an old aerial camera that uses film. No need to stand still:
http://www.gigapxl.org/gallery-Petco.htm

 

[Shadehunter]

I've seen other, photo quality pics done using Photoshop/Illustrator... and its not about creating a photorealistic scene from scratch because someone hired you to do it, but because you want to challange yourself.

It is an Art, because one has a passion for it, and they strive to better themselves artisticly (even if to some, it may seem a waste of time).

By the sound of it, the image was composed piece by piece, then put all together in one file, so I imagine, it was not as computer intensive as one imagines (though, you probably still need a hell of a rig.... and a damm good backup.. can you imagine working on some fine details for 5 hour's, then bam... your computer crashes... yikes...)

Very impressive though...

Shadehunter

 

[Conscript]

QFT mate - you have to ask, "Why?"

He has probably got more detail into that picture than even a camera could manage. Unless you have a 20 mega pixel camera or something.

 

[DieFledermaus]

Brings new meaning to the quip "Take a picture, it will last longer."

It is almost as good looking and realistic as what someone could have done in approximately 3 seconds with a decent camera.

 

[Slashbot_427]

well i need some textures for my RO map.... not sure I could afford it tho.