| Yahoo! Answers |
|
|
|
|
| Open Question: How bad does my tattoo look? |
|
It's a home tattoo, (big mistake)
I just wanted to know if i over criticize it or it's really shit.
I have others professionally done, this one's getting fixed soon. I just want honest opinions fro |
| 2013-08-03T06:22:44+0000 |
|
| Open Question: How bad does my tattoo look? |
|
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=izua37&s=5
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2w562vr&s=5
And in my Avi are the only ones where I can find a decent looking shot of it.
It says with hope comes faith, |
| 2013-08-03T06:18:04+0000 |
|
|
![]() |
Comments made by Quil
<-back next->
31 to 45 of 48 comments
 |
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| Faded, but it must have been good color once. Nice work. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| This screams for color. The shading is, at times, not as good as it could be. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| The flames look unreal, the kanji is cliched. We don't need to see 5490532409 pictures of it. Nice work, but tasteless. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| Did you get this in Las Vegas, drunk on cheap beer and slot machines? Either that, or you have candle-wax for brains. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| WHAAAAT?! |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| This reeks of stupidity. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| Good work, very nice ink quality. Not very original. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| Nice color, but the photo is out of focus, a lot. |
|
Quil |
2004-06-27 |
 |
| Very faded, the lines are wobbly, and tribals are usually pointless, especially these pointy black Neotribal things. |
|
Quil |
2004-05-03 |
 |
| Granny, what a fat ass you have! |
|
Quil |
2004-04-29 |
 |
| AWESOME. |
|
Quil |
2004-04-29 |
 |
Lower back = overdone. Tribal = overdone. Butterfly = way overdone.
The work is not terrible, though. |
|
Quil |
2004-04-26 |
 |
| that's excellent. |
|
Quil |
2004-04-25 |
 |
| Bold, vibrant color. What's up with the "before" design? It looks like it was done in ballpoint pen. |
|
Quil |
2004-04-25 |
 |
| Er, the Jewish religion is opposed to astrology (divination in general). It doesn't look like excellent work either. |
<-back next->
|
![]() |
|
