posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:01 AM
Originally posted by Dulcimer
the "photo" doesnt have that great of lighting. you dont need a subject to draw an image such as this. one could use any "alien" concept for the
I don't believe that in this example, knowing what i know about fine art and drawing, you can't get realism without example and there is a level of
detail within that image which couldn't come from thin air or a person's imagination. It goes way past how light or dark the image is. I don't want
to sound like a know it all but studying art and the methods of artists does help in seeing aspects of an image which would be very very hard to
reproduce without reference that contained equal or more detail. I don't see why a drawing made with so much skill would exist in this context.
the background is nothing but a blur of rag or something, nothing that gives enough detail to prove its a photo.
Well there is a very good representation of cloth with what the being is lying on and also in the suit it's wearing. Studing the art of drawing
material and fabric, you see that 'blur or rag or something' in a very different light. You only need to study the renaissance to see the level of
training and focus they put into reproducing realistic materials and fabrics which contained the traits of those fabrics as we see them, that was a
major part of artists training during the renaissance - the ability to reproduce fabrics and they would study that discipline their entire career.
In this image, the cloth he's wearing has a level of detail in it which is pretty amazing (if it were a drawing). To me it's clear there are two
different representations of fabric in this image. A heavy wool type blanket under it and a metalic/shiny looking silk type fabric that it's suit is
made from. To draw both of these so realistic to be able to convay the feel and look of the material along with realistic folds while also being able
to draw a realistic Alien all without refrence is a pretty amazing talent - almost as amazing as what the image is.
like i said, have you ever seen a photo of this quality? even old black and white photographs are far better, aged even.
But we aren't looking at the photo, we are looking at a reproduction. One is a low count (8-bit 256 colour) .gif file, the other is a photo of a TV
screen of a camera filming the photo. Add to that image compression and there's your quality issue. The TV images show much more detail and even the
possability that the original is in colour. I would think if we had a better detailed photo that we'd see even more detail in what's already
represented and it would be obvious that it's not a drawing.
one thing i have noticed is that the alien appears to have tear ducts.
look at the eye corner.
I don't know if they should or shouldnt have tear ducts but what animals that have eyes and live above land don't have a function to keep their eyes
moist? I don't see why Ailens with larger eyes wouldn't have a tear duct? Doesn't mean they cry tears of emotion but it would mean they have the
ability to keep their eyes from drying up i guess.
Anyway, not trying to squash your thoughts but from my perspective and from what i know about fine art, i think there's no way that's a drawing - a
bad web image, yes.
We really need to contact the guy and ask for a scan. If he was given the photo by a mexican police officer then he should be able to provide a better
It could still be a fake of course but it's not a drawing, if it's fake then it's a photo of a dummy (and a good one at that).