I was thinking of getting a tattoo in the future, I have a few ideas in mind at the moment, but I still haven't settled on a style for the tattoo. I saw on one the pages mentioned earlier in this thread about Rob Richardson so I decided to take a look at his work and decided I liked it. But when I began to look into photo-realistic tattoos more I came across this
article.
I was wondering if anybody on these forums could give some insight as to why this tattoo faded so fast or knows someone who has had a photo-realistic tattoo fade that badly in a short amount of time? or is this just a risk of with these types of tattoos that they are doomed to lose a lot of detail?
There is always a chance that it could just be a bad tattoo, the guy has gone too deep, too shallow, the ink was poor / degraded, it didnt heal well and the guy picked it at... who knows.
Plus like the article says, there are tattoo artists and there are tattoo artirsts, photo-realistic is a very new genre and the ability of artists is going to vary drastically.
I imagine if you follow the rules started in the article you'll be fine
1) Don't get it done at a convention, you want somebody with their own shop you can go back to.
2) Make sure they can provide you examples of healed work - does it look remotely as good?!
Given how much people rave about Rob Richardson (and rightly so) I'd be shocked if you ended up with something that would fade as fast as the above - but at the same time I imagine that in ten years it wont be half as photo realistic anymore - even my straight line tribal looks like ass after 15 years.