To be honest, I'm not 100% convinced it's an actual tattoo. I thought it might be when I first saw it, but then when I looked at it, it didn't seem right. When I saw him in LA, it looked like a giant paint smear he put on himself over his old tattoos. If he actually GOT a paint smear tattoo over all of that, that must be pretty damn painful and I'm not really sure how they would have been able to do the color fade so that his old tattoos would still be visible through it.
Well, it was like a color fade with a gradient kind of like what happens when you paint with a brush and it starts to run out of color, which is what makes me think it probably isn't. It's not just that it's faded, it's that it's got a bit of a gradient effect from a brush stroke.
It just seems like it'd be harder and more tedious to try to get a tattoo that covers your old tattoo to do *THAT* whether it's possible or not. Sounds like hours of work in the chair darkening/lightening the pigmentation and to go over that much of his body on top of it? Chances of it being for real just go out the window for me.
but wasnt miyavi saying about the uncomfortable pain of it recently on twitter? Thats why i thought it was real. Goes over the old ones you say?? oh no! but it doesnt cover them up completely right if its the 'fade' effect your talking about. I saw the one on the inside of his arm..cant say i like it very much but.. have you been able to see the chest tatoos really clearly in his U.S performances then? your lucky. I wish i could see them. Does it look stylish and unique like his old tatoo's, would you say?
He had a shirt on the whole time during the LA one, so the only thing I could see were parts of blurs on the top of his chest and on his left arm. And in my picture I took with him, he had what looked like paint on his leg too, so if there is another real tattoo, he was covering it with a shirt.
This is the picture I took with him though. You can kind of see part of the fade above his collar. That and what looks like paint on his leg along with "brush marks" is the only thing I saw on him that seemed new.
The only pic I have is the one I took with him, which is posted above. It doesn't show everything I saw at the concert because he didn't have a jacket on during the live and he kept his shirt on the whole show, but with the wide collar and no jacket you could see the fade covering a good chunk of his chest. I don't really see how it'd be practical or smart to tattoo yourself like that on that much of your body, but with the original post's question, those brush marks were the only things I saw on him that were "new" in those places. It kind of sounds more like Lovelie and Jewelie had paint on Daddy time backstage.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
It just seems like it'd be harder and more tedious to try to get a tattoo that covers your old tattoo to do *THAT* whether it's possible or not. Sounds like hours of work in the chair darkening/lightening the pigmentation and to go over that much of his body on top of it? Chances of it being for real just go out the window for me.
Reply
have you been able to see the chest tatoos really clearly in his U.S performances then? your lucky. I wish i could see them.
Does it look stylish and unique like his old tatoo's, would you say?
Reply
He had a shirt on the whole time during the LA one, so the only thing I could see were parts of blurs on the top of his chest and on his left arm. And in my picture I took with him, he had what looked like paint on his leg too, so if there is another real tattoo, he was covering it with a shirt.
This is the picture I took with him though. You can kind of see part of the fade above his collar. That and what looks like paint on his leg along with "brush marks" is the only thing I saw on him that seemed new.
http://theeki.org/Stuff/DSC05933.JPG
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Leave a comment