Quote: "i'm not pointing fingers because mine was terrible but, GG, you might wanna dust your glasses off a bit "
You're right - and fully justified in pointing fingers.
I think I must have used one of my bugged seamless utilities to create that image. I'll try again using an up-to-date version.
[Note to self: tidy up your files and make sure that all machines have the current bug-free working versions.

]
Edit Er, actually, VanB's original image contains some very obvious seams so it's not surprising seams are present in the "seamless" version. Here's an enlarged section of his image - this seam is along the line (x,y) = (19, 234) to (200, 234):