02-12-13, 10:29 PM
(02-12-13, 09:28 PM)nick crisp link Wrote: It seems more akin to producing an image from pixels as with a digital camera to me, but building it up in stages rather than in one snap of the shutter.
It looks quite clever, but it is not art.
Hit the nail on the head there Nick. I'd call it photo realism using coloured pixels instead of paint. And it could be done on an iPad I suspect, or at least you could do it using something like Photoshop. And it probably would take 200 hrs. That's and eight hour working day for 25 days.
In the old days before computer you'd pay someone called a finished artist do that sort of work.
The Artist that did that paid a lot of attention to shadow and detail to get to that photo realistic level.
For instance this airbrush painting below took 40 hours to complete. If a further 160 hours was spent on the fine detail it would look more like a photo. That's a lot of time and effort if you can just take a photo. But would there be the same sense of achievement?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/adrianbarna...732335871/
Some say that he eats habanero chilli peppers dipped in oil of capsaicin for extra bite and that his pyjamas are made from Nomex. All we know is, he's called Ad the Bad