And so I commented about it here, of course; the guy didn't actually create the image at all, but merely photoshopped someone else's work.
So today--a mere four and a half years later--this comment shows up at the post:
Hi, zagtul here. Why did you make this post when you know nothing about it at all?...in other words, he's screencapping the image and photoshopping it exactly as I had said in my original post.
The reason it looks so similar to the screencap is because that's the only part you're right about. I'm pretty sure I explained my work process somewhere in one of my uploads but I'll do it again.
I take a screencap of a scene/character I like, then I import it in Illustrator (not Photoshop) and use it as a background.
Then you start by tracing all the lines with the pen tool. Add color, shades and all that shit.
The result is that you have a vector image that can scale up or down how much you like without losing the quality.
Keep talking out of your ass on your shitty blog though, I'm sure it amuses a lot of people.
I could, for example, trace Mona Lisa and "add color, shades, and all that"; if I claimed I'd "created" the image other people would (justifiably) tell me I was full of shit. Mona Lisa is an iconic image in our culture and everyone knows it, and any claim I might make to "creating" an image based on it would be obviously risible; to any reasonable observer that would be a derivative work.
It's no less true when it comes to anything else. Screencapping something--anything--from an original work that was not created by you and manipulating the image does not change the fact that you have produced a derivative work, not an original.
The post stands. The opinion stands with it.
* * *
EPA says sunlight is bad for plants.
That about sums it up.