	obsesif @ 11/7/2006 16:40 commented on Fil ptoing; why not show us how well you can do such a 'copy' and we all can see how 'retarded' you can be? i can not claim that i watched turbo doing this one, but i saw him many times on some demoparties, how he managed to stay 48 hrs at a c64, or an amiga and pixelled nearly pixel-by-pixel the whole picture. this talk should be made on how well he did his work and not about talking nonsense. if you think, this is traced/copied with matrices, just ask turbo to show off some images of his tens of disks all fill of cool pixelarts, be it sometimes copies of a painting or truly invented images like: http://www.7dx-party.org/7d5/files/gfx/Kid%202005%20-%20Turbo.zip or http://www.7dx-party.org/7d3/files/gfx.zip
	obsesif @ 11/6/2006 05:04 commented on Fil Hi, its surely cool, but to reply to the fact that is copied, surely it is. At the time this has been made, it was popular to re-create personal favoured paintings with pixels and there are lots of such images on the Amiga demos, slideshows... This does not mean that these are 'shamelessly' transferred. No, they are pixeled by hand and of course the reference to the rightfull owner of the image has been mentioned in the scrolltexts/infotexts in the demo itself. I do not mention the respectless copies of art, made by big artists, painters and sculpters in the whole art history, but creating a derivative art is also a subject of art-ethics. Please do comment on the quality of the pixelization and gradients, or if it is a good replica or not. Turbo himself should stated that it is a copy, that's his failure. But he also didn't stated, that it's a product of his imagination. A mis-interpretation should not lcloud the fact that this is a good pixelled-replica of a painting.