Read-only historical archive Reconstructed community archive · captured 17 November 2010

Forum index / Photoshop, Editing & Design / Show off your Work

Show off your Work

5,289 posts · page 73 of 177

MyK
post #2,161
08 February 2006, 18:27 UTC#2,161
hahahaha

google bot, you crazy jew
r0b
post #2,162
08 February 2006, 19:26 UTC#2,162
QUOTE(MyK @ Feb 8 2006, 01:27 PM) [snapback]279707[/snapback]

google bot, you crazy jew

womp
post #2,163
09 February 2006, 13:58 UTC#2,163
Meh..
Attachments
fablesig2_copy.jpg · 110 KB
Attachment metadata survives, but the file is absent from the recovered server backup.
Joe.
post #2,164
09 February 2006, 18:32 UTC#2,164
Good old fable, but pretty basic man, try to use more challenging ideas.
womp
post #2,166
10 February 2006, 08:45 UTC#2,166
My new sig and Av
EDIT: 28layers and 4groups, took me fucking forever so dont flame it unless its necessary cos im almost quite proud of it
xpose
post #2,167
10 February 2006, 09:48 UTC#2,167
28 layers on that? Looks like it only needs easily less than half that!
Adrian Rize
post #2,168
10 February 2006, 09:50 UTC#2,168
sig an av
womp
post #2,169
10 February 2006, 09:51 UTC#2,169
QUOTE(xpose @ Feb 10 2006, 09:48 AM) [snapback]280767[/snapback]

28 layers on that? Looks like it only needs easily less than half that!

Trust me ive still got the PSD if you dont believe me, it took fucking ages and so wasnt worth the effort in the end, but it genuinly does have 28layers
made
post #2,170
10 February 2006, 11:34 UTC#2,170
QUOTE(xpose @ Feb 10 2006, 09:48 AM) [snapback]280767[/snapback]

28 layers on that? Looks like it only needs easily less than half that!

I could have probably done it in around 6. Lol.
Word
post #2,171
10 February 2006, 11:41 UTC#2,171
I could have done it in one :happy:
scrotomm
post #2,173
10 February 2006, 15:23 UTC#2,173
QUOTE(Word @ Feb 10 2006, 11:41 AM) [snapback]280840[/snapback]

I could have done it in one :happy:


yeah same, ctrl + e
xpose
post #2,174
10 February 2006, 16:30 UTC#2,174
Being real picky, ctrl + e would just merge the selected layer with the one beneath it :p

You'd have to go to layer>merge visible to flatten the image!
scrotomm
post #2,175
10 February 2006, 16:33 UTC#2,175
QUOTE(xpose @ Feb 10 2006, 04:30 PM) [snapback]280926[/snapback]

Being real picky, ctrl + e would just merge the selected layer with the one beneath it :p

You'd have to go to layer>merge visible to flatten the image!


yeah well, it would take longer, but it does the same job
chris_fragile
post #2,176
10 February 2006, 17:42 UTC#2,176
or Ctrl Shift and e is so much quicker
adEm
post #2,177
10 February 2006, 17:44 UTC#2,177
QUOTE(chris_fragile @ Feb 10 2006, 12:42 PM) [snapback]280976[/snapback]

or Ctrl Shift and e is so much quicker

Karl
post #2,178
11 February 2006, 16:10 UTC#2,178
new sig xD
made
post #2,179
11 February 2006, 16:16 UTC#2,179
Love the left half, but the right is a Frito creation.
ZekE.XH
post #2,180
11 February 2006, 16:17 UTC#2,180
The VIP part ruins it
Karl
post #2,181
11 February 2006, 16:23 UTC#2,181
:( now im sad

:slits wrist:

jk lolz
Karl
post #2,182
11 February 2006, 16:54 UTC#2,182
ok I changed it abit, any beter
Dom
post #2,183
11 February 2006, 16:56 UTC#2,183
QUOTE(ZekE.XH @ Feb 11 2006, 04:17 PM) [snapback]281731[/snapback]

The VIP part ruins it

ZekE.XH
post #2,184
11 February 2006, 16:57 UTC#2,184
It's a bit better but I'd still remove the right part
THC
post #2,185
11 February 2006, 16:58 UTC#2,185
get rid of the right part karl..
r0b
post #2,186
11 February 2006, 18:05 UTC#2,186
QUOTE(ZekE.XH @ Feb 11 2006, 11:57 AM) [snapback]281781[/snapback]

It's a bit better but I'd still remove the right part



QUOTE(THC @ Feb 11 2006, 11:58 AM) [snapback]281782[/snapback]

get rid of the right part karl..

Karl
post #2,187
11 February 2006, 18:11 UTC#2,187
better now?
ZekE.XH
post #2,188
11 February 2006, 18:14 UTC#2,188
Yes, would probably be even better if the dude would be like the text below it
Karl
post #2,190
12 February 2006, 05:26 UTC#2,190
is there a difference,






burn.