well, chipmunks are curious, they smell everything… so they must have put a nut, wait for the chipmunk to come, then he was so curious about the “strange thing” he smelled it
Alright so you obviously cant tell if it is shopped. someone who can tell that it has been would say exactly where the flaw is and why its a flaw. by saying “you can tell by the pixels” it means nothing. FYI, pictures are made out of nothing but pixels. I’ve seen chipmunks that are that tame.
Hey constansis, I’m impressed with your superhuman vision that you can see the difference in pixelization to claim this is shopped. How about you use your fucking brain and think about the light source and the resulting shadows. I doubt whoever put these pictures up took the time to fill that in. If you’re saying this just to piss off people like me… good job, you got me.
Hahahaha what the hell, people see pictures and instead of taking them for what they are (which is art) everyone argues about if its shopped, You dont go to an art gallery and argue about the work on the walls do you? no fucking way your ass would be kicked out, so what I am trying to say is, shut the hell up, chill the hell out, and just enjoy the fucking scenery at least for once in your lives
no, i’ve seen this before on the site belonging to the gent who made them. he has about 6 trained chipmunks. it is for real. and for those who must insist on sreaming “shopped” on ANYTHING they see, I am sure you have barely touched photoshop to even know. I bet you would be surprised to know how many things we take for granted are actually epically photoshoped.
A.) Seems as if they are using a collection of taxidermy-recreated squirrels with similar color patterns. Still, very entertaining.
B.) Ya’ll are getting trolled…. hard.
FFS, thse are so clearly shopped it’s unreal. Just look at the shadows and the size of the pixels and you can tell straight away they’ve been shopped. Although I may have a slight advantage as I’ve seen quite a few shops in my time.
MUMU, you need your eyes checked. Those are high resolution pictures from a camera. I work with photoshop and I can tell you that while you can make realistic pictures or tweak photos w/PS, pixels are going to be in every digital pictures.
These are awesome pictures. I have to say that I am certain that all but the last two are legit minus the riding one. Some people may be complaining about the focus and pixels and such, it’s not. I will make note that I’m not absolutely certain about the last two, but the ones before all use a photo technique called depth of field. This is where you take a camera and manually set the aperture and shutter speed. These photos use shallow depth of field, meaning that the subject is in focus, but anything not in the range of the focus is blurry. Can be used to make some very strong photos.
For those of you interested, shallow depth of field can be achieved by a large aperture and fast shutter speed. However, if you want deep depth of field, where everything is in focus, provided the camera is held still, you make a very small aperture, but set the shutter speed for a longer period of time.
The rider, I’m not sure how they’d get that on the chipmunk without it bolting.
The second to last one, I’m not sure if the floating objects were shopped in, or if they were dropped in the middle of the shot.
And the very last one, I’m not sure, but my gut tells me something is wrong with it. I think I may be getting thrown off by the color contrast of the orange chipmunk on the TIE fighter.
All in all though, these are amazing pictures and I wish I had been there to see these unfold.
If I were going to spend time photoshopping, I’d probably use unicorns, not chipmunks. Just saying. I don’t know if it’s real, but I think it’s great and can’t imagine in what way the authenticity of these photo could affect me after I hit “stumble” again.
Its legit. I’ve fed Squirrels and Chipy’s right out of my hand in a park in Toronto. I’ve also had wild flying squirrels perch on my shoulder. You’d be amazed with what you can do when animals trust you.
I cannot believe the ones argueing over these pictures. you are getting all mad over something that does not even matter. Its so pathetic it is like going up to a 4 year old and saying “Nope, this isnt real, no way, you traced it from the coloring book.” ..I mean seriously who cares. I believe they are real because I once was friends with someone who had 9 pet squirrels. So a pet chipmunk is not that unbelievable. There are so many things in this world that are more important than worrying whether or not a photo is “photoshopped”. So try to have a good day!
Very cool. Is that a pet chipmunk or a wild one?
Also, first.
That is hysterical, cute and rather disturbing in a South Parkian kind of way….I LOVE IT…
i dig it
that chipmunk looks like a real hard nut
awesome! the CGI seems so real!
It’s not a squirrel its a Chipmunk!
And Brian, its not CGI, I have done similar pictures with my friends chipmunk!
shopped
FIRST
no its not photoshopped they just put a nut nut somewhere and wait for a chipmunk that they feed often to come and get it then they take the pic
yep, kickass! stumbled….
you have to be retarded on a serious level to declare this “shopped”. get a life dude.
How about the one with the figure on top of the chipmunk? How’d they do that?
well, chipmunks are curious, they smell everything… so they must have put a nut, wait for the chipmunk to come, then he was so curious about the “strange thing” he smelled it
FAIL
Alright so you obviously cant tell if it is shopped. someone who can tell that it has been would say exactly where the flaw is and why its a flaw. by saying “you can tell by the pixels” it means nothing. FYI, pictures are made out of nothing but pixels. I’ve seen chipmunks that are that tame.
Shopped…you can tell by the pixels.
The force isnt real. Shopped.
The only one that’s not especially believable is the one where the figure’s riding it. That one I don’t really buy.
The rest of them are realistic enough that I could believe them.
Either way, they make for interesting pics. I couldn’t care less if they’re real or not, they managed to entertain me for a few.
Hey constansis, I’m impressed with your superhuman vision that you can see the difference in pixelization to claim this is shopped. How about you use your fucking brain and think about the light source and the resulting shadows. I doubt whoever put these pictures up took the time to fill that in. If you’re saying this just to piss off people like me… good job, you got me.
having a photoshop war… nerds…
pixels give it away
this is absolutly NOT photoshopped. the one with the force might be. but the rest are NOT.
These aren’t photoshopped. And it’s obviously a pet chipmunk, a very friendly one. Maybe he blu-tacked the figure to it’s back? Idk.
Hahahaha what the hell, people see pictures and instead of taking them for what they are (which is art) everyone argues about if its shopped, You dont go to an art gallery and argue about the work on the walls do you? no fucking way your ass would be kicked out, so what I am trying to say is, shut the hell up, chill the hell out, and just enjoy the fucking scenery at least for once in your lives
If you followed the link, you could have found the entire collection and the story of how the chipmunk(s) became friends. For the “SHOPPED!” crowd, I call your attention to http://www.flickr.com/photos/powerpig/2968532917/in/set-72157600129693607/ showing what happens when the chipmunk moves.
Very cute. Don’t care if it is shopped or not. It is entertaining.
This isn’t shopped, its just a squirrel who wins +5 internets
no, i’ve seen this before on the site belonging to the gent who made them. he has about 6 trained chipmunks. it is for real. and for those who must insist on sreaming “shopped” on ANYTHING they see, I am sure you have barely touched photoshop to even know. I bet you would be surprised to know how many things we take for granted are actually epically photoshoped.
Oh Stumble, this is why I love you.
shopped is a joke from /b/.
It is especially funny to claim, even on the most mundane photos: Shopped, I can tell because I ‘ve seen a lot of shopped things and the pixels.
The commentators on this site seem to be strangely unfamiliar with trolls…
Dude, there’s always people unacquainted with trolls… I can’t believe that people take this crap seriously.
wow you guys are getting trolled hard
A.) Seems as if they are using a collection of taxidermy-recreated squirrels with similar color patterns. Still, very entertaining.
B.) Ya’ll are getting trolled…. hard.
FFS, thse are so clearly shopped it’s unreal. Just look at the shadows and the size of the pixels and you can tell straight away they’ve been shopped. Although I may have a slight advantage as I’ve seen quite a few shops in my time.
MUMU, you need your eyes checked. Those are high resolution pictures from a camera. I work with photoshop and I can tell you that while you can make realistic pictures or tweak photos w/PS, pixels are going to be in every digital pictures.
These are awesome pictures. I have to say that I am certain that all but the last two are legit minus the riding one. Some people may be complaining about the focus and pixels and such, it’s not. I will make note that I’m not absolutely certain about the last two, but the ones before all use a photo technique called depth of field. This is where you take a camera and manually set the aperture and shutter speed. These photos use shallow depth of field, meaning that the subject is in focus, but anything not in the range of the focus is blurry. Can be used to make some very strong photos.
For those of you interested, shallow depth of field can be achieved by a large aperture and fast shutter speed. However, if you want deep depth of field, where everything is in focus, provided the camera is held still, you make a very small aperture, but set the shutter speed for a longer period of time.
The rider, I’m not sure how they’d get that on the chipmunk without it bolting.
The second to last one, I’m not sure if the floating objects were shopped in, or if they were dropped in the middle of the shot.
And the very last one, I’m not sure, but my gut tells me something is wrong with it. I think I may be getting thrown off by the color contrast of the orange chipmunk on the TIE fighter.
All in all though, these are amazing pictures and I wish I had been there to see these unfold.
really does it take anymore than this http://www.flickr.com/photos/powerpig/2968532917/in/set-72157600129693607/ to change ur mind about the riding one?
just because this guy is kickass doesnt mean every lame computer geek who stumbles this needs to put in their two cents
If I were going to spend time photoshopping, I’d probably use unicorns, not chipmunks. Just saying. I don’t know if it’s real, but I think it’s great and can’t imagine in what way the authenticity of these photo could affect me after I hit “stumble” again.
Its legit. I’ve fed Squirrels and Chipy’s right out of my hand in a park in Toronto. I’ve also had wild flying squirrels perch on my shoulder. You’d be amazed with what you can do when animals trust you.
totally shooped, chipmunks have way bushier tails and longer noses. Oh and the pixels are a dead giveaway.
lol stop feeding the photoshop trolls! They appear on pic thread I see.
bestest on internets
I cannot believe the ones argueing over these pictures. you are getting all mad over something that does not even matter. Its so pathetic it is like going up to a 4 year old and saying “Nope, this isnt real, no way, you traced it from the coloring book.” ..I mean seriously who cares. I believe they are real because I once was friends with someone who had 9 pet squirrels. So a pet chipmunk is not that unbelievable. There are so many things in this world that are more important than worrying whether or not a photo is “photoshopped”. So try to have a good day!
Too fun. Now we need to get Han Solo and Luke Skywalker to kick some gopher butt. Matti
You guys have been seriously trolled. I can tell by the bridges. I have seen many trolls in my time.
Cool!Its Cute
Hello Photoshop…