 |
herrhepcat |
2005-09-27 |
 |
| kellene is completely wrong. The tattoo matches exactly the proportions of the original. Half the point of it is the math behind the picture using golden rectangles. As for the lack of a cock, once again, the point is the math. Go get your flash tatt. |
|
herrhepcat |
2005-01-11 |
 |
| Go get an art book or something. If thats your idea of 'a beautiful drawing', you need to expand your culture past the neighboring prison. You have porn on your back, and it's not even good porn. |
|
herrhepcat |
2005-01-11 |
|
| His legs only look funny 'cause they are wrapping around my waist. And yes, I had the 'equipment' edited out. Being a straight guy, I thought it was enough having a naked man tattooed on me. I can always add it, but a little tougher to take it away. |
|
herrhepcat |
2004-03-27 |
 |
| I got a laugh out of it. I think it's great. |
|
herrhepcat |
2004-03-23 |
 |
| not a great tatt, but ok. I've never had a scab from a tatt. I use Tattoo Goo every day on a new tatt for 2 weeks. |
|
herrhepcat |
2004-03-18 |
|
| "Nice Fresh Idea" is a great compliment, thank you. Strange to be "fresh" with such a recognizable, classical piece though. |
|
herrhepcat |
2004-03-18 |
|
| Seems in looking at all the little lines, detail and shading, that 12 hours is right. Maybe I did have too many smoke breaks. |
|
herrhepcat |
2004-03-15 |
|
| Took 12 hours. Got it WAY before The Davinci Code was released. Now everyone thinks I'm enlightened. LOL!! |
