Sometimes the shot is not possible without photoshop

[Forgiss - Sean Nel]

840 layers to get the shot the way he envisioned it! Granted, it's not a "photograph" and should most probably rather be labeled under some kind of 'electronic art' tag, but it's still a very good image that displays the skill and patience of converting what he saw in his mind's eye into an actual image.





This image is from Luis Louro's (CreativeStudio) Facebook profile, here is the link to it

[JandeBeer]

A very creative photographer if you look at his other work on FB as well.

[Forgiss - Sean Nel]

yes, he definitely is

[cagenuts]

Wow! 840 layers. Reminds me of my wife in winter. Unlike Photoshop, there's no Action button to press

[Forgiss - Sean Nel]

Wow! 840 layers. Reminds me of my wife in winter. Unlike Photoshop, there's no Action button to press

HAHAHahahahaha!!!! Too funny!

[bomtek]

looks like my office

[elsahoffmann]

He is what is called a photographic artist. They do have vision and patience - big time.

[Trommel]

To me this guy is what I heard them refer to as a graphic artist. Never forget there was a chap with me at school who wanted to become one. A photo is a realistic moment in time captured for eternity with a mood created by the photographer, his camera and light. We should start to be more critical about what gets classed as a shot or art using photo components.

[JandeBeer]

To me this guy is what I heard them refer to as a graphic artist. Never forget there was a chap with me at school who wanted to become one. A photo is a realistic moment in time captured for eternity with a mood created by the photographer, his camera and light. We should start to be more critical about what gets classed as a shot or art using photo components.

If you have looked at all his other work you will notice that he is also a photographer or as Elsa stated a photographic artist.

[Forgiss - Sean Nel]

... A photo is a realistic moment in time captured for eternity with a mood created by the photographer, his camera and light. We should start to be more critical about what gets classed as a shot or art using photo components.

That is a very random set of statements... and I do not quite understand the response.

I posted the image because it's a great example of a photographer using his photographic skill plus his understanding of light and shadow, depth and perception, to create an image that conveys a certain message. No, it's not a photo. I don't think anybody ever thought it was...

I think the Blog post over on SPL (funemployment) had a pertinent note:

10. Pursue that personal project you’ve always wanted to do. If you take one Hipstamatic photo of yourself in a gas station bathroom, it’s vanity, but if you take one in every state, it’s art, right?

[Sean Hearder]

Wow! 840 layers. Reminds me of my wife in winter. Unlike Photoshop, there's no Action button to press

hmmmmmmmm no comment Hilton! hahaha

[SimonDP]

Granted, his Photoshop skills are second to none. He's also a brilliant creative photographer. Combining the two makes him a brilliant creative graphic artist.

[Surly Ghillie]

A photo is a realistic moment in time captured for eternity with a mood created by the photographer, his camera and light.

...mmmmmm

maybe for you, and that's just fine, but do you have any idea how completely arbitrary your chosen definition is? there are gazillions of creative PHOTOGRAPHIC energies out there who do not choose to impose your set of limitations upon their own vision.

ALL POWER TO THAT VISION AND ITS CREATIVITY.

We should start to be more critical about what gets classed as a shot or art using photo components.

Why? What purpose will be served? Certainly not creativity for its own sake or the evolution of photography.

why does everything always have to have some narrow-minded, limiting label?

call it what you like; it's a great illustration produced via photographic process. conceptual photography at its best. http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/forums...al-photography


the dude produces concise visual concepts; the kind of stuff you see most clearly with your eyes closed. one of the tools he uses is a set of phenomenal photographic skills. it should inspire rather than threaten. eat your heart out if you can't compete. sorry for that.

people who need to pigeon-hole every goddarn thing, or feel their own style of working shouldn't be classified in the same way as something so breathtakingly different, display a subliminal insecurity about their own ability. it's like there's this paradigm out here "if only we can get this sucker out of the mix, then my own stuff don't get to be measured against it" . what I do is photography... what he does is cheating.

shame.

the guy shows vision, ability, technical excellence and oh, he happens to use photographic processes in his creative mix.

so let's crucify the bastard! how dare he! it's not even real photography!!

Sean thanks for posting the link to a photographer with great creative energy.

the truth is but for the sky there are no fences facing and this kind of work underlines it. use it..... don't use it. no sweat.

[Grahame Lane]

Well said Wolf

[Trommel]

Sjoe, what a reprimand for sharing my mere thoughts agreeing with the original poster that yes it is electronic art rather than a photograph. I had no negative feelings towards the artist or his skill, by the way I believe that it is well done!

It appears that some of our friends here feel either threatened by my simple definition or do not feel that they are limited to photography but would rather be part of a creative and mentally superior group of photographic artists.

All well, I still enjoy taking simple photos without any vision, any technical excellence or any ability.

[Poolstok]

Hi All

Terry - you will be glad to see my post again!

N E Way - this is a great Photoshop job - nobody will disagree, but look carefully - the ocean of papers was *probably* created with a set of about 7 - 8 brushes - you can see the repetition. Very creative, but as with many PS jobs: not impossible, and most often easier than one may think.

I have not read the full thead - I am moving into a new house, so I do not have the energy or time to read it all, but my 2c's worth to the ensuing 'feud': My 3rd year thesis on History of Art was based on where different art forms fit in - from classic, rennaisance, impressionism, expressionism, dada, cubism, minimalists and nihilists. In short, the one needs the other to give definition. Without shading, light have no meaning - and that is why B&W is timeless.

You can argue this way or that. It may not be a photograph, but ask yourself this: is it interesting to look at? If your answer is 'yes', then the artist succeeded.

Later

Pools

[elsahoffmann]

My 3rd year thesis on History of Art was based on where different art forms fit in - from classic, rennaisance, impressionism, expressionism, dada, cubism, minimalists and nihilists. In short, the one needs the other to give definition. Without shading, light have no meaning - and that is why B&W is timeless.
Later

Pools

hey long time no see Poolie

the statement you made is spot on - thank you for those wise words.

[Chris F]

You can argue this way or that. It may not be a photograph, but ask yourself this: is it interesting to look at? If your answer is 'yes', then the artist succeeded.

most interesting statement !!