Ya think so?
Yes, I do.
The whole point is that it's a goof. A joke, a pun, and not intended to in any way be a serious image or a slick execution.
The point, in my insignificant opinion, is that some people are unable to understand that photographical pictures can be gorgeous even when they are no photographs any longer. You are so afraid of post-processing that your attempt becomes a jaundiced and mocking contortion of what could have been a piece of art that intelligently plays with both visual expectations and funny citations of fairy tales and horror stories. A slick execution would have been funny; the deliberate lack of craftmanship is just priggish and hypocritical.
The humour has been lost.
The humour wasn't there from the beginning. It could have been but wasn't permitted.
On the other hand—when thinking about it, it
is a piece of art with kinda message about art ... but on an entirely different level which is not funny but disgusting. It says, 'when you're starting your art with a camera but don't stick with what the camera and only the camera will give you then you'll end up with goof.' And that's a sour, foolish, and short-sighted message if you ask me.
It may be your way of thinking but isn't mine. Art is greater than photography.
