FearFactor47 said:Sick? What's sick about it?
You have to watch American Chopper...
FearFactor47 said:Sick? What's sick about it?
dops7107 said:I wonder if the guy had to take hundreds of photos to get all the details so accurate. Doing a pan and zoom on that thing would be awesome.
I think it was meant to be a demonstration of CS2's capabilities.Marky_Mark said:Just take a picture of the place and move on with your life. This guy has way too much time on his hands.
Marky_Mark said:Just take a picture of the place and move on with your life. This guy has way too much time on his hands.
Hoef said:Yeah not my kind of art .... Best artists I know move "beyond" realism
If you go to the actual location in Chicago and look at the red brick building it really is that clean. The real estate company that bought it freshly sandblasted and tuck-pointed the facade. He even got the white paint/dirt on the left raw brick side down exactly. The only part of the building that looks very fakey to me are the top windows. The lack of haze in the distance and the amazing depth of field also give it away but I think that's part of the point of the artist's photorealistic style - it makes the viewer really study it for inconsistencies. I used to get on the "L" at that stop every day for years. When I saw this artwork I swear I thought it was a photo - it's that accurate.dietcokevanilla said:the red brick building on the right hand side looks a little 'flat' or perhaps too clean.
Les Kern said:You have to watch American Chopper...![]()
saunders45 said:... He's like the freakin Bob Ross of Photoshop.
baby duck monge said:Man. I tell you that first one is basically photo-realistic. The second one looks 'off,' but it's hard to say why. Still damn near close, but not quite.