Sorry, I print an actual photo when I make a chop, and I review the image as if it appears in a magazine or on a postcard handout. (I did magazine ads for over 15 years for the art gallery I managed) and I always reviewed prints in their physical form.

When reviewed on a high resolution screen (any thing over 2 feet viewing area) of COURSE imperfections will show up. On a 5 inch ad placed next to a vogue ad, I was never concerned with ghosting... force of habit. My bad. The "real bad white fringing" really looks great in the final print, but I always forget that the digital view creates back lighting when viewed on a computer monitor is TOTALLY different then the ink print and since I usually always work in the physical world (book prints, postcard hand outs, sports posters and banners, presentation handouts)I always used my final print out of the printer as my guide.

As to the size of the image, I always send my clients the image to their iPhones/iPads and any image over 4mb disrupt their systems, or I would get "I can't see the whole image" so I got into the habit of shrinking the final image down to a size their smaller viewing area could accommodate.

I have to disagree with your "TON of jpg atficats" (I'm sure it's spelled artifacts but you must have discovered a new word) but then again I could be wrong. The blurring and crunchy edging looks awesome in the print version. Then again that's what happens when you work with the public.

When you work with physical prints the outcome is completely different then what you see on an HDR screen. A fact I do know of, but it never really helped me with clients. All they want to see is what the finished product looks like, and they never want to see the work involved.

Sorry, I don't know how to talk to you, you kind of remind me of my ex boyfriend, he always had something negative to say in such a passive aggressive manner that I would sometimes feel like I'd just been hit in the head with a sledgehammer followed by tons of hugs.. hehehe

Take your "yucky" statue jpg and embrace that fact that you went in with your talent to demean someone in such a pleasant manner and rejoice. Your a smarty and I'm a dummy.. rejoice... Now trust me, I am not getting critical here at all. I'm just pointing out things that are very obvious. hehehe

Nothing will ever be up to your "standard" unless it looks like something you made, and I get that. I've lived it my whole life. Your technical brilliance is amazing but your communication skills are that of an alligator coming on a hooked fish. I'm caught on the hook and you have all the power.

Though it is quite a giggle that you took time out of your busy day to get out your red pen and slaughter my creation... hehehe

Thank you for your attention in this creation, but I can see there is NO WAY I could ever equal your excellence, so why even try. You're asking me to thread a needle when I'm trying to hoist the mast and I really don't care.

hehehe... if voting mattered to me that would be important I guess LOL.. .though my expectations weren't very high to begin with when I'm told it's real bad (twice), blown out highlights, and yucky, so I'm happy with what I got I guess I'm just not that creative hehehe

hehehe... if voting mattered to me that would be important I guess LOL.. .though my expectations weren't very high to begin with when I'm told it's real bad (twice), blown out highlights, and yucky, so I'm happy with what I got I guess I'm just not that creative hehehe

I have noticed several times that high votes are not always related to talent. Art appreciation is such a subjective matter, it varies with periods and places Your talent is unique, you are one of my underground heroes, and this is a compliment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwVqOs3Aess

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgcc5V9Hu3g

Contest Goal:
Use different sources to create a statue or sculpture.
You can NOT use sources of statues and sculptures though!

The last time I checked, and I may be wrong on this one, but I don't recall a plastic toy being a "sculpture or statue". I'm a little slow so you could be right. Though I never thought of my "Tobor" I had as a kid as a "statue" but I guess the clean lines and neatly shape head might qualify as a "sculpture". Whatever.. no big whoop.

I guess I can only suggest you to "red flag" it and ask them to remove it.

I am not going to red flag it. The mods will eventually decide if a toy qualifies as a statue/sculpture or not. In my opinion all toys qualify as statues though. Dolls are just mini 3D statues or models of people, animals or cartoons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doll
I just thought the contest idea was more along this line.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCwcKEUcqcU&t=245s

I actually got the vision when I was coping with my dosage of meds that are suppose to keep my heart beating and the only way I can do that is to lay down and wait for the side effects to disperse (usually takes about a couple of hours) so I day dream. In this case, the statue contest. I had a vision of a Hershey bar in the middle of Times Square.

While I felt that a Hershey Bar would be too much on "the nose", not to mention the nightmare of copyright, I searched through about a thousand photos to find a chocolate tower, (a picture that didn't reflect any form of commercialism) then I searched through a thousand other photos for a city square with the perspective that matched up with how the chocolate was sitting.

Placing the two pictures into photoshop, I selected out the chocolate tower, and used several functions to cut it out. (The original photo is dark on dark) I think that's one of the things you do in photoshop. As I am disabled and can't afford the "modern photoshop online" I use the White Rabbit Photoshop which serves my needs. I then thought of the great brass/bronze sculptures in city squares I was granted the joy of reviewing in my meager travels around the US.

I do enjoy the occasional abstract.. the Miami fried eggs the size of Studebakers and the giant glove in a public park in San Diego. This is my creative process. Childish I know, but that's how my brain works.

I then matched the texture of the Prague photo up with the chocolate using a variety of filters to give it a more convincing look. De-saturating the nuts and nuggets in the chocolate to make it more into a sculpture was my goal. I erased the base of tower with a super soft brush to give it a ghost edge then repeated it (layers) about 7 times and merged it into the brick pattern in the Prague photo, then lightly burned the ground and the blurred edge I created to make it sit properly to the best of my ability and eyesight.

I'm sorry that you feel my work is "nothing" but a cut an paste job and I just humbly disagree. I love your work, and I think you are probably one of the most talented people I've ever seen on this sight. You opinion is very greatly appreciated. I just happen to disagree with you on this one.

That was done on purpose, the framing was actually a stroke bar frame that I faded into the image. It exists around the whole image. I know that framing is a no no in photography, but photoshop does give you a little freedom in this area... I used to use plastic wrap and lens flare all the time and now I don't (due the the frightening negative reaction from everybody.) I still use it in my private work and it's a lot of fun... I just don't like being governed by the norm, never have and never will... that's just me