Not that this isn’t technically impressive in terms of detail and technique, but it’s not exactly… uh… saying much. And unfortunately because it’s such a perfect reproduction of a photo, it has little aesthetic value over a photo. Since this is such a painstaking process, it begs the question…. wouldn’t taking a photo be an easier way to achieve the same aesthetic effect? Comparing him to, say, an accomplished artist (Picsso, whatever) is just a joke. Picasso did unique and innovative things and created great Art - with a capital A. This fellow from Spain clearly has impeccable technique, which is great. But it does not equate to great art or thought-provoking art or viscerally moving art or emotional art or… etc. I might respond more favourably if the image shown weren’t in the Maxim Magazine photographic style of pseudo-softporn closeups of beautiful female faces. This piece of “art” isn’t saying much more than “SEE THIS CHICK IS REALLY HOT AND I CAN DRAW HER WITH PERFECT REALISM AND SEE I ADDED WATER SO I CAN SHOW YOU HOW GOOD I AM AT PHOTOREALISTIC TEXTURES SEE SEE”. More or less.