is it art because you've made porn pointless
or is it art because you've used layers in photoshop?
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:41,
archived)
do you just finish up enough on the magazine til it becomes semi transparent
layer it up and then scan it?
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:43,
archived)
it's art
because from a distance it doesn't look like porn, so may be the first SFW porn
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:42,
archived)
It's as bad as filtering, surely. Layering images with low opacity is something anyone could do.
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:47,
archived)
oh sorry...
too busy being alive to make pretence of talent -seemed to work throughout the 20th century...
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:52,
archived)
Anyone not lacking fingers, toes, or a head dobber can pick up a paint brush
but that doesn't mean they could paint like michaelangelo
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:52,
archived)
but that doesn't mean they could paint like michaelangelo
anyone else
think this should be the new tenner?
piss hard to fraud
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:47,
archived)
piss hard to fraud
bah! to the layer dissers
I think it looks rather nice and the colours remind me of some Mucha paintings I have:
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:47,
archived)
i'll knock him out you grab the paintings
we'll split the proceeds 60/40
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:52,
archived)
ooh Gawd I wish
actually should have made myself more clear. I have some prints that were made back in the 70's and placed on boards and varnished by my dad so err... no sorry my mistake. But I did go and see some of his originals in a Mucha expo a few weeks ago. Rather bloomin nice!
( ,
Thu 4 Sep 2008, 20:53,
archived)