People are split over whether a man's intricately detailed and eye-wateringly expensive full back tattoo was worth the cost.
There are many reasons to be looking dope as f**k and it turns out that paying $56,000 (£46,000) for a full back tattoo is one of them, but not everyone thinks the guy who got the tattoo made a good ink-vestment.
The tattoo artist understood the assignment perfectly and did just that, giving one man a back covered in designs he'd always wanted right in the spot where his eyes can never directly see it.
While the customer might never directly lay eyes on the artwork pretty much anyone else with an interest in staring at the man's bare back will get a very good look.
The artwork in question is a canvas of science fiction, leaving the man bearing the images of a robot and an astronaut on his back with the ink reaching up to his neck as well.
It's an incredible sight to behold but not everyone thinks the man getting the tattoo made the right decision money-wise.
One person said the tattoo cost 'way too much' and the man 'got fleeced', while another declared 'that's a down payment on a house f**k that', though others suggested that if the man was in the market to be spending £46k on a tattoo then he probably had little trouble affording a house.
"No tattoo is worth that much. I don't give a s**t if Jesus doing it," someone else said, though famously Jesus' skills lay more in carpentry and miracles than tattoo artistry.
A fourth broke down the spending and gave the verdict that the man had paid 'a lot' for his artwork, working out that since the tattoo took 80 hours to do he must have been spending $700 per hour on the artists.
The massive debate over whether the man had spent too much or too little rolled on as plenty of others said they thought it was money well spent.
One said the full back tattoo had been 'absolutely worth it' and declared that the tattoo artist had 'painted a mural'.
Someone else said the price 'sounds about right to me' because if a tattoo artist is charging that much money for a tattoo then they likely 'have a history of that type of price range' and it's 'permanent art' anyway.
Another commenter who'd been crunching the numbers said: "Girl math says if he lives for 40 more years he only paid $3.80 for that tattoo."
Ultimately it seems as though the assembled voices of the internet can't find an answer to satisfy this debate.
Plenty think the dude got an 'incredible piece' etched into his back while others reckoned they couldn't consider the price worth it unless 'that s**t better dance, jump off my skin, walk, talk'.