digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at akenini.com —

Amazing Animation [PIC]

akenini.com — just wow... woman is animated in a series of images

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Namco, on 11/15/2007, -123/+10First ***** Post!


    ...*****!!!!!, Faaaaaaaaaaaaakkkeeeeee!
    • blahtastic, on 11/15/2007, -2/+45Yeah, I bet it was photoshopped. *rollseyes*
    • jb0nd38372, on 11/15/2007, -9/+2I would comment, but the feeling of being under the first ***** post leaves me nauseated. Goodnight!
    • Micktion, on 11/15/2007, -8/+1He might be right.... take a photo... draw over the top of it and take snapshots... then display the sequence in reverse.

    • bstew22, on 11/15/2007, -12/+1FAAAAAaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

      fa fa fa fa f afa
  • vivalagoat, on 11/15/2007, -32/+13meh, thats not all that impressive. heaps better ones on youtube.
    • Saiing, on 11/15/2007, -8/+13>meh, thats not all that impressive

      Great - let's see some of yours then.
      • Amablue, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7Just because he can't do it doesn't mean it's impressive. Just because my friend can't program doesn't mean he should be impressed by my Hello World.exe
  • ChromaVita, on 11/15/2007, -6/+635It was great until the part where they increased the brightness and washed everything out.
    • tsunami643, on 11/15/2007, -15/+7You mean the end...?
    • imikedaman, on 11/15/2007, -1/+17"Great until the very end!"
      - ChromaVita
    • Romanito, on 11/15/2007, -1/+5I guess you're disappointed because you weren't expecting this in the first place. If the artist's intent was to make an overexposed image, then it makes sense. I think that starting with a normal lighting is a good idea to achieve a better final result.
    • wiifm69, on 11/15/2007, -4/+27Photoshopped! the reflections are all wrong
    • Dustmuffins, on 11/15/2007, -1/+6Man, that's just the HDR!
    • apophenic, on 03/26/2008, -1/+2Yeah, that was my thought exactly.
  • dillyhoo, on 11/15/2007, -14/+61Well, is it a pic or an animation? Make up your mind.
    • Mitthrawnuruodo, on 11/15/2007, -1/+20Both.
      Yay for Animated GIFs!
    • cjh24, on 11/15/2007, -3/+225/7/3 Hikuu to Web 1.0

      I remember GIFs
      Also contrasting colours
      And MIDI.

      • cjh24, on 11/15/2007, -1/+10Dugg down eh? That'll teach me not to be stoned, sentimental and creative in one sitting, won't it?
    • LJRod82, on 11/15/2007, -6/+3Technically, it's neither. She doesn't move, so it's not animation. It's just elapsed photography by means of an animated GIF.
      • dinostabOMG, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4Thanks for definitively nailing down what animation can or cannot be.
    • arjie, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Here's something less ambiguous, it's just an animation:
      http://www.pelourinho.com/movies/c003702/
    • ahoyhoy, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Pick a side America; we're at war. This, is the Colbert Report!
      God damn that show needs to come back on the air soon.
    • Goldspink, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1An animation is nothing but a series of pictures.
  • guydudeman, on 11/15/2007, -11/+2It's a sort of animated illustration.
  • CrazyArcher, on 11/15/2007, -25/+6That isn't very impressive. All he did was create an image and save it at various points throughout and then string the different images together.
    • KurtHectic, on 11/15/2007, -0/+20Wow, really? Is that what he did?
    • DMCer, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4OK, let's see you do it.

      ....waiting...
    • shavenlunatic, on 11/15/2007, -4/+3you sir... are a ***** genius

      /sarcasm
    • terracottapai, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3I guess I'm the only one who got the joke.. sigh..
      • shavenlunatic, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1you give him too much credit methinks
    • dinostabOMG, on 11/15/2007, -3/+4I see what he did there...
  • fenix61, on 11/15/2007, -27/+205was anyone else waiting for boobies
    • richardsimpson, on 11/15/2007, -4/+2mmm... animated boobies...
    • Sidzilla, on 11/15/2007, -3/+2Marge Simpson does it for me. Blue hair... mmmmmm.....
      • EzarKun, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1you like blue, why dont you ***** one of the smurfs.
    • wfbnadador, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1honestly? how old are we
      • forgetfulca, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1About 6 to 9 million years, according to where you'd like to mark the branching. Doesn't seem to be any signs of growing up any time soon, nuther.
  • OutThisLife, on 11/15/2007, -7/+3Interesting last few frames there..
  • DeviantDragon, on 11/15/2007, -8/+13Uh, what did you think pictures did? Magically appeared complete?
    • DeviantDragon, on 11/15/2007, -3/+2And I don't mean photos.
    • LucidDr34m3r, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Well, to be fair, when you look at most pictures, you don't see the whole process behind making it. I'm pretty sure that's the point he was implying...
  • JenadaeXX, on 11/15/2007, -11/+1Believe it or not 4chans Oekaki forum sees better artists then this on a daily basis. If you liked this check it out.
    • linzichan, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Most oekaki boards do. Go back to /b/.
  • Weather, on 11/15/2007, -9/+96Amazing is the fact that anyone dug it or that it made the front page.
  • mostdiggever, on 11/15/2007, -9/+4i'd hit it
  • DeadTorrent, on 11/15/2007, -12/+27Are you ***** kidding me, there are hundreds of gifs showing of each step of a painting as its made, if you think that was amazing you need to get out more.
    • schroeder, on 11/15/2007, -1/+26I think the people who get out more don't realize there are hundreds of gifs showing of each step of a painting as its made.
    • Trax91, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4Link me up! I'm ready to spend my the rest of my week seeing step by step illustrations!
    • happytedium, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Or stay in more.
  • KanchoBukkakeku, on 11/15/2007, -15/+2sex is ***** sexy
  • andrewcsayer, on 11/15/2007, -4/+158She looks sketchy, man
  • felidaeus, on 11/15/2007, -5/+30Awesome. At least until the bloom. someone had waaaaay to much fun with the bloom effect in Photoshop.

    People, there is such a thing as TOO MUCH LIGHTING.
    • DeadTorrent, on 11/15/2007, -0/+6yaI know, hey lets take a perfectly good picture, and add so much brightness that you can't make anything out
      • looselips, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2Maybe to hide the fact that the original reverse destroyed image was a photograph and the person wanted to hide it better.
        Plus this animated image is so old that a few other artists copied this idea when they created their own artworks, on actual film. Not displayed like a lame flip-book.
        • dinostabOMG, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2Em, this is actually the oldest type of animation - those artists weren't copying whomever this guy is.
          • looselips, on 11/17/2007, -0/+1Oops!, I was trying to say this animated-gif painting progression idea, inspired other artists.
            They created a provable progression using timelapse and a video camera. Many of the others I have seen before have been done quite well.
            I apologise for insulting flip-books, I meant to tear it to the 1990's, low quality animated gif instead.
  • looselips, on 11/15/2007, -9/+62Take a picture you want to draw:
    1. Take screen capture
    2. Destroy it a bit with a clone brush and erase parts
    3. Repeat 1 and 2 repeatedly
    4. reverse the video

    Ta-*****-Daa!
    • SquigglyP, on 11/15/2007, -1/+6or, you know, draw and paint something and save an image in various stages then show them sequentially in .gif form.

      It's not really that great of an image, but it's interesting to see how people approach a painting.
      • championchap, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Yuhuh, though i'm not that good with pictures of people myself. I dont like how they went about a lot of it.
        Particularly the hair.. why does "blending" seem to mean "blurring" in photoshop?
        • SquigglyP, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1yeah, whomever this was was using too small a brush too early. I rarely even get to that size of brush.
      • looselips, on 11/15/2007, -4/+4No offense, friend. But take it from someone who has had an art background his whole life; I would not disgrace my work with an animated gif.
        I would proudly be displaying it in a better format such as png or something that can be scaled to check out my detail.
        I understand that the concept would be helpful for people who want to "see how people approach a painting", but this small, and lame animated gif does not even accomplish this. I know if I did a painting like this today, I would have dozens of high quality pictures or scans and I would create a presentation.
        Since this is digital art (computer), why would the person not have multiple high res copies as the work progressed?
        If this person did truly do this picture from a blank page, I take my hat off to them because as an artist who prefers a physical medium (paper & pencil, paint & canvas), I understand that painting on a computer is unbelievably hard. Plus No mention of a stylus, monitor dot pitch, and absolutely no mention of which programs were used, makes me state that I believe it is bogus.
        They would also probably be interested in other "Graphic Arts" and they would have heard about flash and they would have decided a presentation would be the way to go, to teach.
        If you need free programs for screen capture and and cheap flash, try Wink2 http://www.swftools.com/tools-details.php?tool=644 ...
        and CamStudio2 http://www.swftools.com/tools-details.php?tool=816 ...
        both from http://www.swftools.com/
        (currently freelance web designer and php developer)
        • SquigglyP, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1It's not bogus. The guy's just not that skilled an artist. It's not really much different with today's PC's and tablets to paint with nearly the exact same process in Photoshop that you would with oil.

          I've had an art background my whole life as well, tho I've never been to any schools for it. My dad's an artist so it was only natural that i end up learning a bit. As i said, you can approach a work with a PC in pretty much the same way as traditional mediums. But digital art IS very different from traditional mediums. There are all sorts of interesting ways to approach the painting in photoshop. You can go with the classic "Sketch to painting" method or you can just take a brush and start putting in shapes, removing shapes, refining shapes until you get the overall shape you like, then further detail and refine it. I've seen some really interesting techniques where people will doodle with gray markers some random abstract geometric groups with a few different shades of gray, then scan in several of those, layer them, add a layer of color and then start playing around until they end up finding an interesting composition in the abstract tie-die of a landscape. He most likely used a tablet, and I'm sure it was done at a higher resolution, just scaled down so that his animated gif wasn't at some absurdly un-web-friendly resolution. Dot pitch has little effect on the painting process. It was either Photoshop or the Gimp (probably the former) tho if the signature says 2002 as it would seem, then I'd say it would probably also be possible in Painter. Back then painter had a more 'digital' looking set of tools, and this could be the pastel tool. Smart money's on Photoshop. There's really a LOT of examples of this sort of .gif animation on the web. You should check out some sites like conceptart.org or sijun.com (the forums there). Mostly digital stuff, almost all excellent and both geared towards learning.
    • GimbalLocker, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5I also found it interesting that the "Artist" chose to almost fully render the Left eye before even roughing in more of the rest of the form. Looked fishy to me. Also went a little out of their way laying down alot of broad tones that weren't reallly used
    • hplasm, on 11/15/2007, -2/+71 See talent.
      2. Post 'I have no talent but you can do this in Photoshop'.
      3. Repeat every time talent appears.

      Yawn.
      • looselips, on 11/17/2007, -0/+2#1 was the only one you got right. I know how to spot talent and how to spot fakes by questioning them with simplistic rationality.
        Congrats to you though for having a trolling talent. Not much of one, hence the easy spotting.

  • anteyekon4myst, on 11/15/2007, -5/+120Take on me. (take on me)
    Take me on (take me on)
    I'll be gone

    In a day or twooooooo
    • drknownothing, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2That's what I was thinking when I watched this lol.
    • thailand1972, on 11/15/2007, -0/+37I never knew the lyric was "in a day or twoooo" - I just thought he was just yodelling - cheers for the info!
      • spinningobo, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5Ditto. Thank you for completing the lyrics to the chorus of a song that I have been too lazy to look up myself.
        • techweenie1, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2That music video always made me teary eyed at the end...
        • cjh24, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3The miracle of the internet
    • anteyekon4myst, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Come on people this is just like that AHA video :http://youtube.com/watch?v=PJasflip-5Y
    • bloominoctober, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Best. Comment. Eve.....well, Today.
    • chicagodj, on 11/15/2007, -0/+5Chris where have you been?
      I DONT KNOW
  • jklikesnews, on 11/15/2007, -8/+16Obviously a lesbian.
  • thailand1972, on 11/15/2007, -0/+14Half way through the 7th loop, there's a screamer.
  • Dimalinch, on 11/15/2007, -4/+2What a great work of art
  • tversetti, on 11/15/2007, -7/+3this thing is older than the internet
    • agisten, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1THANKS GOD, SOMEONE HERE IS OLDER THAN 15 !!! I saw it back in 1999 on Netscape 3.0 Browser
  • stellarceltic, on 11/15/2007, -2/+5'shopped
  • ballswithballs, on 11/15/2007, -3/+3I think someone doesn't know what animate means.
  • tchynerd, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4now do it in paint!
  • archivist, on 11/15/2007, -2/+6it's not an animation. it's a time-lapse of an illustration... semantics!
    • arcticblue, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4which would be an animation wouldn't it?
    • TPHigginbotham, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1I don't have a problem with the title but the description is misleading: "woman is animated in a series of images". "The woman is *illustrated* in a series of images" would have been the correct terminology.
  • osofast, on 11/15/2007, -8/+2photoshopped
  • Dwebtron, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1no 'a scanner darkly' references? come on!
    • cjh24, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1it was always the same face...
      (ps have you read the book?)
  • bsolidgold, on 11/15/2007, -2/+3Hate to break it to you... but that's more like time-lapse than animation.

    Still, impressive artwork.
  • Jerky1312, on 11/15/2007, -1/+7A video in time lapse form would be much more enjoyable to watch. There are quite a few guys who post their work on youtube who have videos of their work and its much more impressive. For example..
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoxypapNwoU
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwybNJV0J20
  • sb76117, on 11/15/2007, -3/+3it was just a little less ***** on reddit... why the hell is this post worthy?!
  • daxsymbiont, on 11/15/2007, -4/+2she's like that little girl-looking woman (because of a condition) that played in latest x-men.
  • WoollyMittens, on 11/15/2007, -4/+3Good god, not this one AGAIN.
  • isaactwito, on 11/15/2007, -1/+10Wow, completely ruined at the end when it is lightened.
  • Kwipper, on 11/15/2007, -6/+1Whoopdie ***** doo.


    no digg and buried as lame
  • 2oonhed, on 11/15/2007, -3/+1very old.....interesting, but old
  • Sombersky, on 11/15/2007, -3/+0dammnnnnnnnn
  • bonk2k, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8Interesting? Yes. Amazing? No.
  • sandeepjain, on 11/15/2007, -2/+4i received this image long back via email...i wonder how come this become the front page story....any ways nice image
  • Jarasmen, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1Meh. Every artist could make you one of those...
    • JudgeMonkey, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2Yes, they could. And I wish they would. It'd be nice to see their process.
      • Jarasmen, on 11/17/2007, -0/+1Why not visit some art class then? Though an 'audience' would feel a bit awkward after some time I think... at least for me.
      • forgetfulca, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1Can't imagine why you are being dugg down. I personally find this sort of thing more expressive than just looking at the end result. Especially since these days anything just might be photoshopped (in the 'cheater' sense of the the word). Plus while I don't have any talent, I like to draw and watching a pro do it gives me some tips on where I'm going wrong. Jarasmen's op is studiously blase, like everyone on the net is these days, but I challenge him/her to duplicate it. And even if you can, it doesn't diminish the fact that this is interesting for non-artists to see.
  • calculatepaypal, on 11/15/2007, -5/+1This is old news.. But cool anyway!

    http://digg.com/business_finance/Great_free_tool_f ...
  • ursonate, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1This was not amazing to me. Maybe it's just because I've seen better.
  • nutzngum, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2i'd like the 43 seconds of my life that it took to watch this back please.
    i don't question the artist's talent but a pretty girl with perfect features? Perfection is easy to capture - however anyone who's done life drawing knows that the imperfect models are more fun and rewarding to capture AND harder to draw.
    just sayin' ...
  • DarkReign16, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Hey look, it's my ytmnd from 06/10/06. lol. http://drawgirl.ytmnd.com/
  • astrotrain, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Unisys called... they want to sue the person for using .gif
  • cavar, on 11/15/2007, -3/+0Pity the result is kitschy.
  • Bwackv, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Great series of pictures, overdone/typical completed product.
  • geoman2k, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2this is so stupid. there is so much great art being made today, it's a pity crap like this is the only thing diggers are impressed by.
  • AIRYHTAK5103, on 11/15/2007, -1/+0WHY IS IT SO BRIGHT!!!!!!!!!! BETTER STUFF OUT THERE
  • DiscoJohn, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2It's called the process of drawing. Let's digg more stupid crap!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.