fantomas 1's Comments
nobody is showing the back of the card -- how does it hold the seeds? can we see the root system?
is there any chance that the sprouts were added just for a photo and not really a functioning component of the final card?
is there any chance that the sprouts were added just for a photo and not really a functioning component of the final card?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
the making of images show airbrush art in progress -- he might simply have a weird technique. since he's working from photos, he can take the elements to a high degree of finish without working on the piece as a whole.
but, this would be unheard of in terms of the extraordinary level of realism and detail achieved.
it may be total BS as so many suggest. there's even a 2005 thread on snopes.com message board about the veracity of the claim.
a couple thoughts:
- artists who paint planes and nature or both typically are not as adept at painting people. artists who paint figures and nudes typically are not as good at perspective and draftsmanship as some other artists who do not typically paint/draw from the figure are.
it is very rare for someone to achieve MORE realism with the human form than they normally achieve in their typical oeuvre -- in this fellow's case he's known for paintings of planes and nature scenes; not photo-real humans and his typical work is very realistic, but not so overtly photo-real as the "Tica" portrait.
- the artist mentions some techniques he uses to create the realism: split fristket, the "etcetera" technique and his shield-reveal technique. none of these terms are mentioned anywhere else on the web -- not by attendees of his seminars; not by other airbrush or photorealist painters -- nowhere but on this one "Tica" page on the artist's site. it seems improbable that these techniques would not be cross-referred to anywhere else IF they allowed an artist to obtain such mind-bending realism and detail.
- the photo of the artist and two other gentlemen posed in front of the "Tica" painting -- note that the image runs right to the edge of the substrate. this is very atypical of air brush art. most air brush art is created on illustration board and the work is created with substantial untouched (white) borders that are typically either cropped later or omitted in photo-reproductions. this is very odd that the image runs right to the edge as though it were cropped. most artists who keep (or sell) the original would not crop this image down like this; they would either frame or matte it and the cropping would produce a piece larger than the image area (which is VISUALLY cropped by a frame or matte). it's pretty weird to put all this time into it and then chop it down right to the edge like that.
Ultimately, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. this image and the controversy around it (and the artist) has been floating around on the web for 2 years and there's no extraordinary proof at all.
but, this would be unheard of in terms of the extraordinary level of realism and detail achieved.
it may be total BS as so many suggest. there's even a 2005 thread on snopes.com message board about the veracity of the claim.
a couple thoughts:
- artists who paint planes and nature or both typically are not as adept at painting people. artists who paint figures and nudes typically are not as good at perspective and draftsmanship as some other artists who do not typically paint/draw from the figure are.
it is very rare for someone to achieve MORE realism with the human form than they normally achieve in their typical oeuvre -- in this fellow's case he's known for paintings of planes and nature scenes; not photo-real humans and his typical work is very realistic, but not so overtly photo-real as the "Tica" portrait.
- the artist mentions some techniques he uses to create the realism: split fristket, the "etcetera" technique and his shield-reveal technique. none of these terms are mentioned anywhere else on the web -- not by attendees of his seminars; not by other airbrush or photorealist painters -- nowhere but on this one "Tica" page on the artist's site. it seems improbable that these techniques would not be cross-referred to anywhere else IF they allowed an artist to obtain such mind-bending realism and detail.
- the photo of the artist and two other gentlemen posed in front of the "Tica" painting -- note that the image runs right to the edge of the substrate. this is very atypical of air brush art. most air brush art is created on illustration board and the work is created with substantial untouched (white) borders that are typically either cropped later or omitted in photo-reproductions. this is very odd that the image runs right to the edge as though it were cropped. most artists who keep (or sell) the original would not crop this image down like this; they would either frame or matte it and the cropping would produce a piece larger than the image area (which is VISUALLY cropped by a frame or matte). it's pretty weird to put all this time into it and then chop it down right to the edge like that.
Ultimately, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. this image and the controversy around it (and the artist) has been floating around on the web for 2 years and there's no extraordinary proof at all.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
human marvels has a similar page of pix of known human cases...
http://www.thehumanmarvels.com/labels/horns.html
...there was a recent news item about a man from India with a very large/long horn...he had one longer years ago, but it snapped off one day...and a new one started to grow.
http://www.thehumanmarvels.com/labels/horns.html
...there was a recent news item about a man from India with a very large/long horn...he had one longer years ago, but it snapped off one day...and a new one started to grow.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
in WWII there were some (aborted? executed but botched?) plans to use bats (and birds?) with BOMBS attached (little bombs).
the bats pictured are (possibly) fruit bats -- they do not have very developed hearing as they have keen eyesight and amazing noses (for smelling/seeing...FRUIT).
bats that use echolocation for visualization of their environment have really amazing ears and noses.
the bats pictured are (possibly) fruit bats -- they do not have very developed hearing as they have keen eyesight and amazing noses (for smelling/seeing...FRUIT).
bats that use echolocation for visualization of their environment have really amazing ears and noses.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
uh...this is a hoax or just sensationalist (BS) journalism...
the pic of the croc w/ said hand is photoshopped.
the pic of the croc w/ said hand is photoshopped.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Darwin's contribution wasn't the theory of evolution, but the THEORY OF NATURAL SELECTION -- evolution clearly and scientifically takes place. Natural selection is the theoretical mechanism by which species evolve.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
amelie -- it was recorded and given to the old "mr. glass" painter with other brilliant/bizarre bits.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
they're not (all) "dubbed" in japanese -- the transformers toys were originally made in japan by takara and later licensed by kenner/hasbro.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
the California name legend is not clear -- one idea is that Balboa wrote "calida fornax" (Latin for "hot furnace") -- this would have been as Balboa was traveling North on his trip up the Pacific coast and through the area of Baja California (Spanish for "Lower California"), which is indeed very hot (like as in "hot as a furnace").
The story goes on to say that in Spanish, the "calida" was bastardized to "callida" (kai-yee-duh) and "fornax" is pronounced "for-nash" -- together "kai-yee-duh-for-nash"...which sounded like "California", the mythical island inhabited solely by dark-skinned women which had been talked about in Europe at least since the late 15th century.
Of course, this was a natural link since what we now know as Baja California, Mexico was drawn as an island on early 16th century maps. Later Cortez was sent to explore/claim "California" and that is apparently documented -- whether it was beleived to be the fabled island...is not clear. Cortez made several documented missions but apparently left the settling of the land to later conquerers...who continued to call it California Alta (Upper California) and California Baja (Lower California).