Rolled Out On: 5/30/2007 3:39 PM

Yes, she i- oh, you mean the picture itself...

Rolled Out On: 5/31/2007 11:25 AM

Utter horseshit.

Rolled Out On: 5/31/2007 3:19 PM

You know, Stacy, many years ago I'd have said the same thing. However, when I was in college I took a bunch of art courses. There was one painting course that focused on Trump L'Oeil (pronounced "trump loy") which means something like "To fool the eyes".

Each student had to take an object like a shadow box or some 3d sculpture and paint it, placing it next to the original. Even from inches away, it was hard to tell which was the painting and which was the original.

Some people are seriously that anal.

This guy teaches a class on this stuff and I'm sure that his reputation would be sullied if he lied about this and was unable to back it up. I read an article somewhere and the author had claimed to see the painting in several different stages. He has another example in there and it's not quite as good but still practically perfect.

Of course, the idiot thinks that photography isn't "art" by his standards, so he can pound fucking sand for all I care.

Rolled Out On: 6/1/2007 12:07 PM

Photography isn't art...and yet photo-realism *is* art? Even if that portrait is not a retouched photograph (which I am NOT prepared to concede) how, precisely, is drawing exactly what you see anything resembling artistic? It just means you have better than average hand/eye coordination. I had professors in college who spouted the same sort of bs, and it still smells like shit, even now. (Yes, I'm fine art trained, so I have license to bitch.)