| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/26/2011 10:39:40 PM · #1 |
. . . than most of my pictures do.
Steve Mills
more prints |
|
|
|
05/26/2011 10:44:23 PM · #2 |
| wow. he really understands light. |
|
|
|
05/26/2011 10:45:07 PM · #3 |
| WOW!!! I can't believe those are paintings!!! Amazing! |
|
|
|
05/26/2011 10:53:38 PM · #4 |
It's an understatement, but that's both amazing and outrageous!!!
The guy can take up to 500 hours to make a single piece... I can make one just in 1/500s LOL. |
|
|
|
05/26/2011 10:55:32 PM · #5 |
That man has such a wonderful grasp on lights, shadows, reflections, and refractions. It's amazing!
Thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
05/26/2011 11:04:03 PM · #6 |
Lol
Originally posted by gg3rd:
It's an understatement, but that's both amazing and outrageous!!!
The guy can take up to 500 hours to make a single piece... I can make one just in 1/500s LOL. |
|
|
|
|
05/27/2011 02:42:51 AM · #7 |
| Yes, a technique called photorealism - it has been around for along time. ;-) Pretty cool stuff there. |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 03:57:32 AM · #8 |
| To me it begs the question "Why??" I mean, if I could paint photorealistic scenes, I would paint stuff that could not exist - if you paint everyday scenes that look so much like photos, you have to tell people "that's a painting" for them to even be impressed. Not saying it's not an amazing skill though - it most definitely is. |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 07:32:30 AM · #9 |
The way he does it is by taking a photograph, printing it out, then reproducing it with oils. To me, the only creative part is taking the original photograph, the rest is pure technical skill, matching the colour of each square millimetre. A human photocopier. So if you asked him to "paint stuff that could not exist", I would imagine he would struggle to include the same level of detail.
Still....pretty amazing.
Bill.
|
|
|
|
05/27/2011 10:39:14 AM · #10 |
| There's also the hyper-realist sculpture of Ron Mueck. Prepare to be disturbed! |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 02:04:29 PM · #11 |
Think on the bright side. Our images look more like paintings than his... and he's an artist. :)
|
|
|
|
05/27/2011 04:28:14 PM · #12 |
I don't get photorealism, either. I guess it's conceptual art, but why keep doing it over and over?
Think about this:
invention of the camera: mid-1800's
painting gets "impressionistic" and more abstract: mid-1800's
a coincidence? I think not. |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 04:53:22 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Louis:
There's also the hyper-realist sculpture of Ron Mueck. Prepare to be disturbed! |
Some of them are really disturbing, but what amazing art. But when it comes to the paintings, I agree with  Art Roflmao. Why?
|
|
|
|
05/27/2011 05:22:15 PM · #14 |
'Eventually Mueck concluded that photography pretty much destroys the physical âpresenceâ of the original object, and so he turned to fine art and sculpture.'
That's what I love about photography. :) |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 05:28:17 PM · #15 |
| Still, that is crazy ass talent right there.. wow |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 06:09:28 PM · #16 |
| I think some of those paintings had dust spots... |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 06:17:58 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't get photorealism, either. I guess it's conceptual art, but why keep doing it over and over?
Think about this:
invention of the camera: mid-1800's
painting gets "impressionistic" and more abstract: mid-1800's
a coincidence? I think not. |
Interesting point. Photography must have been very liberating for painters. |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 08:23:35 PM · #18 |
| Pretty impressive skill. I suspect that Steve Mills does his paintings by referencing a photograph, though... :-) |
|
|
|
05/27/2011 11:18:57 PM · #19 |
He should use the Copper Hill method.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think some of those paintings had dust spots... |
|
|
|
|
05/27/2011 11:27:58 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
He should use the Copper Hill method.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think some of those paintings had dust spots... |
|
No no the arctic butterfly works better for me. |
|
|
|
05/28/2011 12:39:51 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Pretty impressive skill. I suspect that Steve Mills does his paintings by referencing a photograph, though... :-) |
He did 400 photos of his Coke Classic can, and spent 400 hours painting it...
R. |
|
|
|
05/28/2011 01:23:06 AM · #22 |
Fascinating links in this thread. Reminded me of Ben Johnson, an artist in the UK. He uses thousands of photos as the starting point. He recently had an exhibition a the National Gallery in London. This short video is well worth watching as it goes into detail about how he works. A lot of computers and assistants and time involved.
Ben Johnson - The Modern Perspective
Ben Johnson Website
|
|
|
|
05/28/2011 06:36:47 AM · #23 |
:) You should see the guys in Shenzhen China. There's a whole street of people all lined up doing this.
You take them a picture (photo or painting) and they'll re-paint it for you and send it back in the post.
And it looks amazing. |
|
|
|
05/28/2011 06:51:44 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
To me it begs the question "Why??" I mean, if I could paint photorealistic scenes, I would paint stuff that could not exist - if you paint everyday scenes that look so much like photos, you have to tell people "that's a painting" for them to even be impressed. Not saying it's not an amazing skill though - it most definitely is. |
I was thinking exactly the same thing, I guess the skill is copying rather than creating, which is a shame really. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/24/2025 06:32:37 PM EDT.
