Penguinisto opened this issue on Jan 25, 2005 ยท 23 posts
Penguinisto posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:02 PM
Attached Link: http://www.artincontext.org/LISTINGS/IMAGES/FULL/Q/9TQ9SMQL.htm
No cheating - do not scroll or look down below the image until you have made up your mind.ghelmer posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:19 PM
Spoiler alert... HOLY COW!!!!! WOW! I'm thinking Softimage or something when I first saw it! Yikes! Old school real world art will never die.
Again, WOW!
G
Message edited on: 01/25/2005 13:20
The GR00VY GH0ULIE!
You are pure, you are snow
We are the useless sluts that they mould
Rock n roll is our epiphany
Culture, alienation, boredom and despair
mateo_sancarlos posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:28 PM
The first thing I noticed is that there is no distance haze or air pollution - it is far cleaner and shinier than what you'd see in a real city. But it's an excellent, complex render - no doubt.
XENOPHONZ posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:43 PM
This is one of the best "oil on canvas" renders that I've ever seen !
Uh....what does "oil on canvas" mean? Is that some sort of a new type of software....or something?
SamTherapy posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:49 PM
Nice use of the Dystopia blocks in the background. ;)
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
dlk30341 posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:57 PM
WOW doesn't even begin to describe it o.O
Sarte posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 1:59 PM
Isn't this painting by the guy who paints New York free of pollution-and people?
Do the impossible, see the invisible
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWER
Touch the untouchable, break the unbreakable
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWER
dlk30341 posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 2:14 PM
I saw a person in one of his other pics :)
voodoo posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 2:28 PM
No doubt, the guy's talent for painting is amazing. On the other hand, though, it just makes me think, "why not just take a photograph?" In other words, it just makes me wonder at his talent, not about the scene.
ranachronos posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 3:18 PM
Attached Link: http://www.artcyclopedia.com/history/photorealism.html
If you need more Photorealism paintings to look at, try this link.gg77 posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 5:12 PM
Why bother? Just take a photograph.
zippyozzy posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 5:30 PM
Fake but pretty awesome if you ask me and I didnt cheat. ;)
SamTherapy posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 6:20 PM
"Why bother? Just take a photograph." Well, I'm a decent painter but I'd sell my soul to be able to paint like that.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
odeathoflife posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 7:31 PM
The White building off to the left with the dome roof looks totally fake, but the rest is amazing.
♠Ω Poser eZine
Ω♠
♠Ω Poser Free Stuff
Ω♠
♠Ω My Homepage Ω♠
www.3rddimensiongraphics.net
Fazzel posted Tue, 25 January 2005 at 8:44 PM
The reason for not just taking a photograph is because you can create places that have never been or don't exit anymore.
R_Hatch posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 2:19 AM
Stuff like this is why I got into 3d. Dammit, good 3d software didn't become available until after I wasted all that time learning to draw and sculpt ;-P
xantor posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 3:25 AM
Some of these photorealistic paintings are made by tracing a photograph so it might not be as amazing as it seems.
ghelmer posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 4:22 AM
I learned to draw by tracing Star Wars and Superman comics as a kid. That never taught me the deftness to paint on canvas like that!! Traced or not it looks bloody amazing!! I still keep thinking Sofimage and Renderman when I see it! Again, my two cents are spent! G
The GR00VY GH0ULIE!
You are pure, you are snow
We are the useless sluts that they mould
Rock n roll is our epiphany
Culture, alienation, boredom and despair
EnglishBob posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 6:45 AM
My last reply was blather, so I've deleted it until I come up with a more considered response. :) - Can't even type straight now...
Message edited on: 01/26/2005 06:46
Jackson posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 1:46 PM
Very nice work but I knew it couldn't be a photo of a real scene. The reflection in the window would be impossible in RL. Plus I doubt that long a depth of field is possible with such a wide-angle shot.
AntoniaTiger posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 2:54 PM
Depth of field is an optical illusion. The blur is smaller than the human eye can resolve when looking at the final image. It's not so incredibly wide-angle, and apart from the window frame there's nothing particularly close to the "camera". Stopped right down, and on a tripod, it doesn't look impossible. And it's hard to tell, but the distant objects don't look quite sharp. Which is something I've done with my camera when there's a little haze.
Jackson posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 3:28 PM
"It's not so incredibly wide-angle..." Did you note how wide the street and sidewalk are? Yet he gets pretty close to the opposite side. Looks like a very wide-angle to me. My widest lens is 18mm and I'm pretty sure I couldn't fit all that in a shot. "...apart from the window frame there's nothing particularly close to the "camera". " The window frame was my point of reference; it's the key. "Stopped right down, and on a tripod, it doesn't look impossible. And it's hard to tell, but the distant objects don't look quite sharp. Which is something I've done with my camera when there's a little haze." Interesting. I doubt I could get anything like this with any of my lenses. But I'll try next time I visit a city with six-lane streets and 15-foot wide sidewalks. Do you have any tips? What lens/settings did you use?
AntoniaTiger posted Wed, 26 January 2005 at 3:44 PM
My brother let me use his 12mm on my Fed-2 at Christmas, one of those Voigtlander optics from Japan. I don't think the pic needs something that extreme.