You wanted to match what? The head of the Gandhi statue isn't distorted. If you want to resize an image, hold down the shift key when scaling.

Now you're okay. Good luck!

Author, please find a usable source for an Earth image. The one you've used is an illustration and not usable.

5.7. 3D Renders or Illustrations as Source: Using other people's 3D renders or illustrations (even with permission and no matter in which form they are offered) creates a false impression of your artwork. So 3D renders or illustrations (this includes brushes, tubes, clipart, pdf files) can not be used as sources, unless they are entirely created by yourself.

i like your entry !

i like your entry !

Thanks for using my source for this entry. Good luck. Agree with blending.

I agree with CMYK46 - clean up the edges, maybe a little DOF to sway attention away from the pixelated photo, and you've got yourself a good chop!

Good blend, but some edges of the added figure are blurry, and the head is distorted.

LOL

Congrats - good work!!

Good idea, only it would have been better when the edges of the couple were blurred a bit.

looking better

Yeh what James D said... i was trying to say that but got stuck on she is too in focus... 6 yr old was naggin my ear off at the same time and i lost my train of thought lol

Result is pretty ok, imo. Perhaps some suggestions: add more shading to the girl, mostly on her body around the mouth of the shark. This way it will look less flat. Same for the back of her hair, experiment with light and shade. You might want to blur here and there her hair too, gives the idea it has more underwater movement and it's a bit further away (to create some depth of field). Lastly you could try to add a color adjustment layer to make her a bit more blue, that's up to you. Good luck!

haha thats pretty cool author... make me think of pineapple fish hehehe. Goodluck

she just looks like she is chopped and pasted. Try blending her in with the background so she too looks like she is under the water.

I disagree, it's not that she is too in focus, the car has been shot using a high shutter speed, and what looks to be tracked judging by the slight motion blur to the BG. So she would be just as in focus as the car. There is also an obvious difference in the lighting and the amount of noise between the source image and the stock.

So

1) Colour correct her to match the stock (use curves)
2) Add a reflection to the car of 'her' left arm and drop to opacity right down
3) I think you forgot to apply my previous advice to the part of the window under her arm :P and darken those areas even more! also, there is a pale line just where the window meets the 'car' - paint that out.
4) Apply some movement to her hair (either find another stock image, which might be easier / or paint and manipulate the source image)
5) It might be easier to get rid of her necklace than to make it match the scene.
6) It might not work but add a layer of noise and bring the opacity down - just an idea.

Yup,I agree with Keiley22, adding some blur into a woman would make it perfect and more realistic. Good luck author.

everything else in the photo has atleast some level of blur, maybe play with her a little bit, she is too in focus.

initial thoughts: - The window is still closed, and there is no physics to her hair...

yes you are correct lighting little odd

It's a fine work, great effect author.

Congrats

You CAN use smoke brushes!! it was my misunderstanding! - but I still prefer images over brushes but that's just me!! anyway GL with your entry!!

Good find, but the lighting is a little odd. Warm sunlight from the left and moonlight from the back.

congrats on 3rd

ok thanks for clearing that up!?!....

@ JamesD and author, brushes made from photos are fine to use, which includes most smoke, cloud brushes etc. Brushes that are not allowed are those made from illustrations and 3D renders.

That's looking much better overall now; GL Author!

EDIT: I was just re-familiarising myself with the rules and came across this in the PS section

"5.7. 3D Renders or Illustrations as Source: Using other people's 3D renders or illustrations (even with permission and no matter in which form they are offered) creates a false impression of your artwork. So 3D renders or illustrations (this includes brushes, tubes, clipart, pdf files) can not be used as sources, unless they are entirely created by yourself."

So basically, it appears from a glance that the use of the smoke brush is now questionable; which is a shame!!
Maybe you could find a suitable replacement in the form of a picture? there's some good smoke and ink stock on cgtextures.com that would be a good alternative, I haven't found as big a selection elsewhere........... Anyway, hope that helps??

Fair enough; what about re working the way those shapes that you like be incorporated into the image?..... like turning the shape into flames?? I'm sure there's a way to make the leaves more dynamic and more suited to your concept of a flaming violin.

It's just a thought.....

I second James, not to mention there's no source for the leaves.

I agree about the placement of the little guy's feet.

ARGH I was well impressed with this until I read you used a smoke brush!, if you're gonna keep it then may I suggest you remove the smoke on the bottom of the violin, it's distracting and ruins the image IMHO. I also think that the leaves are also not doing the concept justice.

The masking of the large animals right foot needs some work. I also would place the small one more to the front. They are now in the same horizontal plane with the feet, but the trunk and tusks overlap.

The background buildings look very much like where the source pic was taken (in the Isle of Man) - well done - I like it !

The source pic is mine and I keep looking and wondering what was done in the pic, because the real background is almost exactly this.

Funny! Would be better to skew the background so the buildings don't look like they're leaning.

The two correct links for the sources are:
http://www.pxleyes.com/picture/50777/Her-Love-for-Horses.html
http://www.pxleyes.com/picture/50593/red-mushrooms.html
Author, please keep in mind to always link to the image information page and not the download page.

Use skew for the image perspective and add some shadows on the wall texture to create more realistic look...beside that not bad at all...

Almost there But if you pay attention, the texture you applied to the wall is out of perspective too. It may affect the general look, causing the illusion that the perspective of the paiting is wrong...

It still looks out of perspective. Try free transform/skew.

Personally, I think you could have made this out of anything but it is a very stunning image.

Listen to Divair.

You should have shown how you made the teeth in the SBS, but nice work! (Could use a bit more shading under lips, though...).

A very realistic outcome. Good luck!

Use the Transform Tool to change the bottom of the paiting. Its sides should be parallel to the doors frame

Agrees with painting perspective comments

Very nice

i dont think the paint is lined up right. i would work if you lined the door lines with the painting

Good change, just tweak the perspective on the painting a bit...