Pokemon Sprites

[Def Sprite]

lol I hope no one was expecting recolors.


I joined here a long time ago but I had only posted like 1 sprite here, but I'm getting more serious into my pixel art and would like to get better, so I came back lol.



Back in 2007 I was working on pokemon sprites for a game idea I had for a sidescroller/platformer. I decided to redo the sprites along with making some new.
I'm trying to perfect these so I could have a complete style for this, so crits are welcome. And if anyone knows any tips for spriting platformers that would be lovely too.

edit: Added some new stuff, fixed up some previous stuff as well.

[blumunkee]

I see a definite improvement here. Good job.

I have a hard time reading the face of the top one. I see an eye, then a jumble of black curves.

Also, you don't have to go to pure black. A very dark blue such as (0,0,32) could work for slightly softer outlining.

Finally, go slightly darker with the shading in places. It will make the forms pop a bit more.

[Def Sprite]

I've actually spent most of the day working on these since I didn't get any crits yet lol.
I know I don't have to use pure black, I'll probably edit that next time. I just updated the first post with some new stuff. The first top one I can't really go any further, it's face is 'v' and it was difficult turning it, that's the best it could look imo. Thanks for comment.

[EvilEye]

Looking good, and captures the style of the originals well.

Maybe add some shadows under them.

I can name most of them, sad huh?

[Quake]

I really like these :]

Very clear that you've improved..

I can also name a lot of them, well.. all the ones from Pokemon ruby

[Accident]

Budew, Roselia, Porygon-Z, Cherubi, Digglet, Mudkip, Natu, Azurill, Chingling.

c: Did I get them all right? -very much so a nerd-

They look very good, much better than the PKMN D/P/P style, which I've seen first-hand. I personally think, however, Budew's face looks a little odd.

[Atnas]

In the case of Budew's face, it would be a good instance of when symbolism can truimph over objective form to help readability. You don't need to have Budew's left eye follow the curve of it's face, varied x offset in relation to the mouth would work wonders. Also take a look at the top of Natu's head, see the one pixel band of green shadow? Actually all around his outline there is an unnecessary buffer. I dunno, is this called banding or is this just unnecessary AA? Someone please tell me. Actually here's edit to show how to possibly fix this among other things.



I removed the unnecessary buffer. Much cleaner don't you think? Also, I changed the size and shape some. The silhouette is very important. I emphasized the wing and shrunk the tail feathers. Also notice I took away some attention from the not-so-important tail by adding more darks and taking away lights. Back to the silhouette. The beak, wing, and head feather are the main features people notice when they look at Natu. Don't be afraid to stray from the concept art a little, this is game art, and what reads the quickest is what you should use. I changed his beak shading to emphasize it's shape. Also the straight line I gave it puts more recognizable Natu design in the sprite because he is kind of regal and statuelike. Also I got a creepy :j expression from the original beak so I promptly changed it into the trademark <>____<> that belongs to Natu with that horizontal line. Not to mention his beak has some flat properties which would make a harsh shadow like that believable. It's like a slightly flattened egg, or if you put it into low poly, a pyramid with a skinny base.

I think I had more to say, but I'm sure you can figure it out by looking at mine and also by looking at what I didn't do and seeing if you can fix that. Your other pokemon will benefit from this cleanup and adjustment as well.

For example, on Diglett's dirt mound, maybe you could make the mound have more of a rocky consistency by changing the sides from /   \  to <   >, if you understand what I mean.

[Gil]

Actually all around his outline there is an unnecessary buffer. I dunno, is this called banding or is this just unnecessary AA? Someone please tell me.

Banding is more of a visual effect resulting in a very peculiar optical effect that causes the smooth transitions to rupture. In this case it's more of an over-AA or blur yes. Try looking at Dogmeat's dragon thread to get an understanding of the peculiarities of banding.

I agree on the edit though, the dark shade on top might be a bit redundant.

[Jad]

Just to clear stuff up once and for all!

Banding - Smooth blurrrr



What was going on wasn't as much banding as the AA creating new more square shapes, something that happens a lot with AA, and banding is one of the major things that can happen, that is, the AA shades creating imaginary 'bands' that make the minds imagine shapes that aren't supposed to be there! O:

Actually it's kinda clear to me what's happening, it's just the powers of contrast at work. The shades close to each other on the same pixel line look darker or lighter than the one directly next to them, thus the staircase banding makes sure the left side of a band always looks lighter than the right one (in this example)

Anyways this is on the edge of being off-topic, but it's always good as a reminder! Always think about and reflect about banding in your works, and then come here and discuss it! : D Good night!

[Atnas]

Thanks Jad! I think I knew what it was at one point when Arachne explained it so nicely but I forgot it. I had it in my mind that banding was some sort bordering AA along -  Ah screw it, I won't rationalize further. So glad for the visualization!