May 26, 2004

Photoshop makes art safe for children Taking a hint from John Ashcroft, Worth 1000 makes the classics of Western Art SFW. [via boingboing]
  • Drat. That second John Ashcroft link was supposed to lead here.
  • So worth1000 added clothing to the artworks because it didn't like compromising pictures shot of its webpage?
  • This is a hoot! It will make my wife, formerly an art historian, giggle all day! Thanks, Ambrosia!
  • There's something about covering up nudes that makes them so, um, well, dirty. Do the paintings feel shame? Another take on this idea was Porno-Graphics by Dan Greenburg, a little pop-up book with clothed nudes where you could lift a flap and undress the art. Very funny. (SFW)
  • This made me laugh. And renewed my dislike of John Ashcroft and his "let's make children safer by illustrating how bodies are dirty and wrong" message.
  • I love the DaVinci in a business suit.
  • Some of these guys have such mad skillz I almost piss my pants.
  • While my hat is off to the photoshop skills of some of thes guys, the thought that some of these classic works might be considered NSFW really disturbs me. Cool link though. Damn cool.
  • I look at fark photocontests to remind myself that I am OK with photoshop. I go to worth1000 to see that I could be a helluva lot better.
  • Did you guys catch the catfight that was going in MeFi about it? Stavros really has a wedgie. Or something.
  • Wow. Didn't catch this post. Superb Photoshop skills.