At first I thought most of these images were photos.
They are all inspiring paintings from some amazing artists and I recommend you check out the rest of their work by clicking on the links.
1. Shower Scene
Artist: http://alyssamonks.com/
2. Milk Girl
Artist: http://www.diegogravinese.com/
3. Station Scene
Artist: http://www.bertmonroy.com/
This Photoshop image by Bert Monroy uses a total image count of over 15,000.
4. Lunch In Tiburon
Artist: http://www.bertmonroy.com/
5. Self Portrait
Artist: http://davidkassan.com/
6. People Swimming
Artist: http://alyssamonks.com/
7. Graffiti and Wood Peeling
Artist: http://davidkassan.com/
8. Under Water Scene
Artist: http://alyssamonks.com/
9. Female Portrait
Artist: http://www.drublair.com/
10. Splash
Artist: http://www.ericzener.com
Can’t believe they are not photographs.They look so real #incredible
Alyssa Monks uses oil on linen, if you click through you can see the brush strokes detail. Splash is oil on canvas.
Artists don’t automatically have photo-realistic abilities. It takes time and practice, you have to prove that you can do it. So to those saying “what is the point when you could take a photograph” and that they could do something more interesting with their time, their art isn’t just one painting, it is a journey always trying new things, trying to get better, and always learning.
Queensboro Bridge by Andreas Orosz: http://www.andreas-orosz.de/contents/index_ger.html
Wow, these paintings are amazing! Now that’s talent!
Those are pretty good, but these are astounding:
http://www.anthonybrunelli.com/main.html
http://www.hyperrealism.net/Anthony%20Brunelli.htm
http://www.anthonybrunelli.com/index-anthony_work.html
the last one with the earrings is a photograph, the “artists” made this whole spiel about it being a painting as a joke…. casts some doubt on the rest of the “paintings” here.
me sorprece is something that I am learning also to do how is everything?
Those are amazing!! I want one! ha
Lmafo, number nine is a joke chumps. Peace
The number 9. must be a photograph.
all I have 2 say is……………………. WOOOOOOOOOOOW!
i am pretty sure most of those are fakes, seriously, and the one even says “this photoshop contains over 15000 images” well that would be a lot of work, certainly, but that doesn’t make it a painting, it still makes it just a picture. and number 9 is obviously a photograph, from the individual strands of hair to the texture of her skin and teeth, no painter could possibly achieve that level of detail with a brush. i call shenanigans on pretty much all of these.
wow nice collection
Number 9 is not a fake.
You can see the making of it online.
Several of these (including #9 and #3) are not traditional paintings, but created in photoshop.
Still, an amazing achievement.
should i have my image?
Sometimes these photo-like paintings offer us something interesting, but when you look at the late rembrandt self-portraits, you see a man who uses the paint expressively as well as a means of intense visual description
Имели мы Ð²Ð°Ñ Ð²Ñех имеем и будем иметь.
Совершенно Ñекретно, гриф ÑекретноÑти 10. Теперь мы беÑÑмертны, мы Ñвета и тени ÑмеÑи, и дом наш будет поднебеÑье храм указующем перÑтом.
ЗарÑд блаÑтера на макÑимум в другой руке куÑок плаÑтика, Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð·Ð»Ð° ползла ползла Ñлыша поÑтупь вибрации по коммуникациÑм крейÑера, по трубав винтелÑции. Ð’Ñ‹Ñтрел один, другой, третий доÑтали вы Ð¼ÐµÐ½Ñ Ð±Ñ€Ð°Ñ‚Ñ†Ñ‹, за пазухой капÑула вырезать лазером лаз в низ, разум в проÑтрации а в теле проÑнулаÑÑŒ машина убицйÑтва, Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð¼Ð½ÑŽ точно точно вашу Ñверх Ñекретную формулу …
Мы вÑеравно Ñильней
number 9 is an airbrushed painting. (zach) the artist who did it even founded an airbrush school, and i’m studying under him in another week! i’m stoked
These are amazing I hope I have the ability to aspire such art in my lifetime.
This is almost impossible, but I know now day any thing is possible. I do a little and have a sister that does oils.But this gosh it is so clean . Thank you …..J.
Godspeed – ti o chem? k psihiatry davno ne hodil, chtoli??
These are truly amazing. The milk in Milk Girl looks a little too viscous though, like paint almost, it should be thin like water.
Number 9 looks fake. Nobody can get that detailed. But in light of all that why not just take a photo? If these ARE real, then I can appreciate them for extreme technical proficiency only. I find hyper-photorealistic work incredibly boring.
many, if not most of these are just photographs with filters applied in photoshop to make them look like paintings.
Retard.. most are paintings. Please think for second before posting next time.
Truly gifted artists.
alyssa monks, diego gravinese and eric zener are now my new favorites! thanx 4 sharing this awesomeness!
gooooooooooood
I think that for any art movement we have good and bad artists.
We can say that also a photo is warm or cold.
Photorealist must be great painters, they can also interpret the original image, like Chuck Close.
Some years ago, I was lucky to see some work about an italian photorealist, starting from the begin.
She started from a color photo, for realizing a b/w paint. It was amazing, she trasformed the color image in her mind, giving to the paint deep of field and blur.
here a link to her work – http://www.chiaraalbertoni.com
what amazing work, an inspiration. The female portrait is out of this world with painstaking detail!!!
Pete
impossible!
don believe it!
them ugly picture
#9 is NOT a fake. I thought so too until I remembered that picture being covered by AIRbrush magazine a couple yaers ago. It is real.
cool! I wish I could paint like that..
though hyper realism isn’t my style ^^
Wow, these are really incredible. I love all of them but my favorite is probably the first one, Shower Scene
Please don’t link back to your site with keyword rich anchor text.
If you want really want links for your site, please contact us and we can arrange to write you some content that will drive great editorial links.
nice bt can`t belive ……………..
Greate painting……….
they need to make paintings of celebrities doing the slam dance(having sex).
VERY GOOD PAINTIGNS OMG
wowwwww those dont lok like paintings
woww are those real
Those are definitely real, but if your trying to make photo-realistic pictures, why not just take a photo? This skill is unnecessary. These look like they’re paintings of photos anyway.
For those who are saying those are fake, no they’re NOT…but personally I don’t like photo realism they’re too technical. Most, if not all, of these painters use projectors meaning they’re merely tracing from a photo. It’s cheating for the purist of painters. Also, as the comment above me said, why PAINT a photo realistic photo that is based on a photo? That’s just carbon copying the photo, no imagination and not very artistic in my opinion. Might as well just frame the photo used.
Rafter242…I wanna watch it.
Back in the 70′ I went to a “Photo Realist” exhibition at L.A.C.M.A. yet the works stayed in the realm of fine art,
with visible brush strokes and splattered paint, thus making the works more aestheitically pleasing on the eye.
These artist, some who used projectors, due mostly to the sheer size of the canvases, some spanned whole
walls, but these were all established fine art artists, and used aids to speed up the production of the works. I
have no problem with that, only for the novice and aspiring young artists who must realize that even a 2D photo
is complete in its visual integrity, nothing has to be created from the beginning, everything is already complete!
Photo Realism like for example Impressionism is strictly a matter of taste. If you get close to an Impressionists
work, it’s pastel blots of pigment, and a Photo Realist work always has a hint of cartoon in it, if you know what I
mean? The 1st time I saw Leonardo’s thumbnail sketches in the 60′s I was awed! Dali also has very exquisit work
in this medium. My personal favorite work is by the Dutch, strange as it seems it combines the best of all visual
presentation; Light/ Dark, Drama and a Fine Art Realism,…it’s most sublime in its visual wetness of surface, yes!!