How to Buy
How to Sell
Buy Credits or Subscription
Photoshop Contest '07 – Round 3 Winner Announcement
Posted Friday, 14 December 2007 in
It has been an absolutely fantastic third round of our contest, with a greater variety of entries than in any of the earlier rounds. Find out who won here!
How about checking out the
2008 Photoshop Contest
? It's on until November 17th!
1st Place, and winner of the MacBook Pro:
X i o l i t a by
[click to view larger image]
The source photos used in Round 3:
The Top 15:
2. Crestock Inn by
[click to view larger image]
3. Mother Nature by
[click to view larger image]
4. The Ark by
5. a second chance to be good by
6. Gravity by
7. Shinigami by
8. Palindromic by
9. Escapee by
10. Old McDonald's Burger Farm by
11. Apollo's home by
12. The Power of Dreams by
13. Spooky Scene by
14. Garden by
15. My Tiny Cottage by
Summer night at granny house
Words are sharper than blades...
Check out the winners of
Comment on this article
The Daily Free Stock Image
We are giving away a free, high quality photo every single day!
Get Your Image
Some clarification regarding the winning entry
on Friday, 14 December 2007 1:22 PM
We know what some of you will say that the winning entry does not include enough of our source images to qualify, so we will answer this in advance:
When we initially saw the winning image we were impressed by it, but we also freely admit that we had our doubts as to whether it qualified, given that our source images occupy so little of the actual image area. The judges, however, did not seem to share our concern, so consequently we have been thinking long and hard about this before today's winner announcement.
We said in the rules that we require one or more of the source images to be a 'central part of your design', and in our judgement 'central' is by no means synonymous with 'large'.
We are entirely satisfied that the concept of the winning entry was conceived based on the source images, created entirely by the contestant and that the knife and dress in the source images are absolutely central to the overall image. As such the image is entirely compliant with the rules, ethos and idea of this contest, and it received more votes from our judges than any of the other entries. We know that many of you, albeit not everybody, will agree with this judgement.
on Friday, 14 December 2007 1:57 PM
Well done all! Some great work!
on Friday, 14 December 2007 2:03 PM
This pretty much changes the whole nature of the contest. Congrats to the winner. It will be interesting to see what happens with Round 4.
on Friday, 14 December 2007 2:13 PM
i thought it would be between 1 and 2 . . . at least i got that much right (versus my own entry). congratulations to all who placed, as well as entered the contest. i hope the vote weighting will be adjusted in round 4, as there is clearly a "how many people you know" process in place. i am sure we all write to a some people to say "hey, i entered a contest and your votes and comments are appreciated" . . . but it is clear to most of us that we are at a great disadvantage despite submitting quality, original, and thoughtful work. when so many entries carry 75 votes and you look at one next to it, that is technically or artistically superior, with 7 or 8 votes, i believe the contest suffers.
i would simply propose this: in future contests, leave it to the judges. allow comments by the public, but let the judges' votes stand at 100%.
thanks again for the chance to flex our skills. it was a blast. now, to figure out how to jump my round 4 votes to 137!
on Friday, 14 December 2007 2:26 PM
Congrats X i o l i t a, but then again you knew you were going to win right? ;-)
I was still pretty shocked to see that "The Ark" didn't AT LEAST come in 2nd place. That would have been my prediction
on Friday, 14 December 2007 3:04 PM
I'm pretty much furious and outraged at the winner and half of the top 15. I'm glad I didn't submit anything for round 4. This whole contest was flawed from the start and yes, there's been some good art and a lot of competition but the whole thing has been tarnished by the lack of action and poor voting structure. Next year, I suggest you do a voting system similar to Worth1000.com so that it's actually fair. No, wait, how about you just don't have another contest. That would be the most fair to everyone.
Wow like we didn't see this...
on Friday, 14 December 2007 3:12 PM
Funny to see that in the end I was right that this one would win and vote pimping and Crestock cover up would prevail...The Judges are a Joke plain and simple and a fraud. Better not hold another contest as it is a waist of time and a Scam!
on Friday, 14 December 2007 3:25 PM
*deep breath* - OOOOOOOMGGGGGGGGGGGGADD ....It took a good solid hour to get my composure back to normal, ( good thing im still at home otherwise i woulda cause ruckuss at work ) ... so here i am ...*pant*
WOW .. THANK YOU SO MUCH TO EVERYONE AND THE JUDGES OF THIS ROUND !!!!
yknow, .... to wake up the next morning after your 31st birthday and read the announcement.. manm this has got to be one of those rare moments in my life ill never forget !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jyrus...thanks dude... well i was confident enough to know that it would somehow make it in the round and be eligible but never assumed i was going to !!!! Like seriously, I was kind of surprised Spizak's ESCAPEE ranked 9th place - that one was extremely beautiful imo and when i first saw it ... i thought .. ok no point in competing for this round , but i kept going anyway ..
The Gingerbread house was awesome as well ( just looking at it makes me wanna sink my teeth in it ) mmmmmmmmm ! Happy face dude ..Goodstuff
My hat goes off to all the participatants in this round ....and most importantly the professional nature of the judges of Crestock Judges
for their fairness of handling things properly and accordingly.
Happy Holidays guys !!!
on Friday, 14 December 2007 3:45 PM
I'm so sorry HappyFace.
I was more than sure you'll win.
on Friday, 14 December 2007 3:46 PM
sideshowsito, I know that feeling I pretty much freaked the hell out last week when I found out I won. I think I let a few choice expletives fly pretty loud at work.
on Friday, 14 December 2007 5:22 PM
is this a illustration contest or what?!!!
the name should be "crestock painterX contest"!!! the first one is really good congrats but no photos there only illustration!! the dress of the lady is not the same and this is just one example!! damn such wasted time with crestock crap! don't trust crestock...
on Friday, 14 December 2007 5:40 PM
Way to adhere to the contest's objective...judges
I completely disagree with Crestock's initial post that this designer's use of the dress (segment) and knife are 'central' to this design. They are as central to this picture as the apple on the woman's head or the target on the wall. As in...they could easily be replaced and it would make no significant difference. But if you took out what, let’s say HappyFace used from the source images (or just about anyone else for that matter)…..well you’d have nothing. Get what I’m saying?
The winner’s got serious skills and talent, but he didn’t adhere to the rules. But since the judges were soo amazed right from the start with his design, they had to bend them in his favor.
This contest is flawed, and hopefully you will correct it for the future.
Congrats to the winner, cause in the end...you still won a free Macbook Pro...and I did not. At least I placed no. 20!
on Friday, 14 December 2007 6:13 PM
wowwww amazing works all of them some of them i never saw them like the mcdonalds house , ja ja ja is beautiful , the one with electric scalatorrr is amazing , the scale model wow , the winner says everything in the poster he did ,
congrats to all the winners , well deserved ,
on Friday, 14 December 2007 8:47 PM
I don't see why using Photoshop as an illustration tool is a bad thing.
on Saturday, 15 December 2007 1:55 AM
No doubt, this is the best image!
THIS IS PHOTOSHOP!
Congrats To Slideshow Happyface and all people
on Saturday, 15 December 2007 7:45 AM
waste of time
on Saturday, 15 December 2007 5:45 PM
I don't know why people are claiming this contest was a waste of time for those that entered and didn't win. If you are a true artist, this experience is just another opportunity to flex your artistic muscles, create something you are personally proud of (inspite of it not winning), and gives you something to add to your portfolio. Stop whining.
on Saturday, 15 December 2007 9:58 PM
there are a lot of nice pictures..i like them!congratulations for the winner:)
on Saturday, 15 December 2007 11:50 PM
there is some really incredible work here. i just have to say nice job to everyone who participated.
get some free desktops. LeviAndJennissa.com
Awesome..but once again..rules bent
on Monday, 17 December 2007 3:43 PM
Obviously the winning piece is very good, but I agree with Strudelhouse; the design elements aren't really "central" to the design.
on Monday, 17 December 2007 5:56 PM
It is fantastic to see that the same style of art isn't always the winner. To me this is another example of how people use stock art. Personally I do think the voting system is flawed and should be judge based only. The judges know art and the voting system seems more like a popularity contest than an art contest.
It's great to see a real piece of art become the winner and not just the popular vote. Great Job Judges
And for all the people that are pissed....get over it! This artist did a hell of a lot of work to create this piece and the stock images were used. She/he manipulated them which is what this contest is about...stop whining already.
Knives were not stock
on Monday, 17 December 2007 9:06 PM
the Knives were rendered in a CD modeling program. And 90% of that dress was rendered too.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 1:39 AM
Amazing, simply amazing!!!
just stopping by.....
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 2:41 AM
from digg. and IMHO,the winning image,while very nicely done. didn't follow the rules at all. the knife and dress,as other ppl pointed out,could be completely different and would'nt change the image one bit. anyone that thinks they are "central" to the image should'nt be judging art,or anything else for that matter.
it must suck to enter a contest trying to follow a set of rules and then have the judges decide to pretty much completely ignore them :/
De Web Times
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 3:30 AM
It is fantastic work done.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 3:37 AM
Photoshop Contest ‘07 – Round 3 Winner Announcement [via Digg] ...
Liars and cheats
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 3:56 AM
The official rules of this contest specifically said that one or more of the images must be a central part of the design. The winner this week has none of the stock images, short of the knife handle. The woman looks vaguely like the stock photo, but it's not the same stock image. Crestock posted their "apology" as the first entry, but they don't mention the reason why they should've stuck by the rules and made at least one of the images a central (and "large") part of the work: so you couldn't use a previously created work and enter it in the contest. The runner up pieces this week are all better qualified to be the winner because they obviously used the stock images and must have been created for the most part during the previous week. I guess it's Crestock's prerogative to be able to change the rules midway through the race, but they should be ashamed of themselves and apologize to all of the great artists who followed the rules.
Photoshop Contest 07 – Round 3 Winner Announcement | Crestock.com Blog
roScripts - Webmaster resources and websites
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 7:14 AM
It has been an absolutely fantastic third round of our contest with a greater variety of entries than in any of the earlier rounds Find out who won here
Jagdip Singh Ajimal
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 9:00 AM
As a novice in photoshop, I am really struggling to see how the above was made. Can anyone provide a video tutorial on how to do this?
Knowledge is great. Sharing it is better.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 9:08 AM
I think the winner deserved to win. To me, he did creatively use the elements of all the pictures, they're just very subtle.
I'm not sure, but it seems like the fence is made from the house turned on it's side, the first picture of the girl is used as well as the style of the dress from the other girl, the knife is obviously used multiple times, he brought in "arches" from the second pic by using the target, and maybe he takes the blue hue from the last picture.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 9:27 AM
These photoshop guys are real artists, their art is astonishing!
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 12:00 PM
Winning image was horrible. Sorry, no offesne. I also would have to say that a lot of these entrants used illustrator or other programs and not just Photoshop. Apollo's home and My Tiny Cottage are AMAZING
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 12:12 PM
OneUnhappyContestant, you sound like a sore loser. Get over it! You obviously suck at this!
*mommy, mommy, they're not playing fair!*
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 1:01 PM
Am I Wrong?
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 2:35 PM
This isn't NAM...there are RULES!
I didn't even enter this contest and I think I could have convinced the judges to give me the win for just being a cool guy. I mean if you're going to let people do pretty much whatever they want, don't tell them that there are limitations. Tell them to show off their illustrative skills and leave it at that. But I guess that the others (like me) who have written comments in protest of the way this one turned out are just whining about the judge's lack of charactor. Remember Rosie Ruiz and how she skipped the first 25 miles of the Boston marathon in 1980 and ended up winnnig? I guess if it weren't for us whiners she'd still have that title.
Having said that, though, I'm not saying that first place should be taken away from sideshow... I mean, clearly, their very talented. But a consolation prize to the runner up should be awarded for actually running the 26.2 miles the fastest.
Good luck keeping people in the relm of the "rules" on the next round.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 3:23 PM
The rule about the usage of the stock images is so vaguely defined, that it can be bent in any way Crestock wishes (and so they did). Even in the post clarifying their decision, there's still no definite interpretation given other than that "central not necessarily equals large". Crestock backed their decision up by saying that the judges didn't mind. But of course the judges don't care much about these rules. It's not their competition! Their task is to pick the best image and they did. But why have rules then? The rules are to be maintained by Crestock.
I agree that in a contest that calls itself a PHOTOSHOP contest, and there are images provided to be used, extra points should be awarded to those who do. Entries that use stock in a lesser amount, should be awarded lesser points. But as far I can see in this crediting system the amount of stock used clearly has no influence at all.
on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 4:14 PM
There is not the same knife.
on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 12:30 AM
Congratulation to all winners. Especially for the 1st winner, it is a very good picture. But, to be honest, I'm quite dissapointed with Crestock, why choosing this picture as 1st winner. Why? Because it's only use a very...very...very small component of the source picture. Only the knife it had been used! The winner was not adhere to the rule!!!
Other 19 pictures are a lot better. Crestock should choose one of them as 1st winner.
Shame you have ruined this contest
on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 12:32 AM
In allowing an open door to submit images from past that loosely resemble your contest images. Photoshoping at its core is about taking an image an creating another. What you now have here is a drawing contest with a theme, not a Photoshop contest
on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 6:01 AM
Photoshop Contest '07 - Round 3 Winner Announcement...
on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 9:28 AM
as the tittle says! :D
on Thursday, 20 December 2007 3:34 AM
Is photography included. I have some pictures of 2mp taken, which are good. Can i use them here.
on Thursday, 20 December 2007 11:17 PM
I agree with SOS . It took me a while to figure out what they actually used a set of photos. Although yes great work but its kinda crappy and unfair to the others who submitted. I didn't apply so I don't care but still, why have a contest with rules if the winner doesn't really follow them? Weird contest people...
on Sunday, 23 December 2007 7:04 AM
Very nice. If I didn't have my own I'd probably vote for this simply out of sheer art work. This contest has given me a bit of fantasy that I needed.
on Wednesday, 26 December 2007 10:17 PM
Fabulous ! Amazing ! Beautiful !
My god ! What's a level !
It's very impressive !
I imagine the time that it took to do that !
Congratulations to all the winners ! You really desearve it !
Great work, but if I was a judge,
on Wednesday, 2 January 2008 5:21 PM
Id disqualify the entry for not using the images supplied more clearly indentifiable, its a bit of a cheat if you ask me.
on Saturday, 12 January 2008 2:43 PM
I Stumbled upon this website earlier today and personally i would've hated to be the guy to choose the winning entry - there is so much talent in this round alone! the question I'm asking is would anybody be willing to do a photo shop piece for me? if you're interested, drop a line to firstname.lastname@example.org. Thanks
on Saturday, 12 January 2008 7:50 PM
Very good. Congratulations.
Saúde e paz!
on Thursday, 17 January 2008 7:59 AM
“Beloved, do not believe every spirit,
but test the spirits to see whether
they are from God, because many false
prophets have gone out into the world.”
-1 John 4:1
Amazing photoshop'd images...
on Thursday, 24 January 2008 12:28 PM
Wow - some people are amazingly talented. The winning entry for the crestock.com photoshop competition
Add your comment:
Further comments have been disabled on this post.
Model & property releases
Crestock is a visual content provider licensing quality royalty-free stock photos and vector illustrations. Get our
Daily Free Stock Images
Read our blog
for design and photography news, tips & tricks.
© 2010-2013 Crestock Corporation. A
company. All rights reserved.