First Steps on Pixel Art

[kamol]

Hello there,

I already recently introduced myself and now would like to show you my first steps in pixel art.

Those following guys were created 2007 for the online platform Supertopic and subject to conditions of a creative commons licence. My aim was to build them as simple as possible so you could easily get a clue what the express. Also they were wished to be somehow "different" to what is usually used as smiley/emoticons. The choice of color was inspired by the colours of supertopic.de (as soon as you are a logged-in member everything now shown blue there turns to bright orange). I also tried to make them look as if they interacted with eachother if posted in a row.

---------





Some are static, some are animated as you can see. I’d appreciate your opinion so what do you think?

[Anarkhya]

Hello!

To be honest, what you submitted is not really pixel art, there is pixel work but what you have is more a hybrid thing (half digital-half pixelled).

[kamol]

Ah, ok, I should have known that this gradient thing could brake my neck here. Sorry for that...

So in other words those emoticons are not the kind of work that is to be discussed here, right? Maybe I have to have a closer look at my former little pixel experiments and see if something there is worth to be shown here. Or I just keep on reading all your posts untill I have someting new to show that fits into this discussion board. Thanks anyway. 

[Helm]

Stepping aside from whether your art is pixel art or not, does it benefit from the gradient, you think?



here's an 8 color version of your little guy. Does he lose that much for not having the gradient?

[Anarkhya]

Does he lose that much for not having the gradient?

Actually I do think that you'll make him loose his life by suppressing the orange tequila feeling, here is my 2 cents on this point, 4 colors :

[kamol]

The gradient was explicitly wished by the client I fear. It was supposed to make the character look more vivid. But thanks for the effort anyway. I am actually thinking about a similar set in greyscale or maybe just black and white, so maybe I could manage to make it to real pixel art there.  


edit: God, my English must have become rusty after all the time. Sorry for that.

[Anarkhya]

I am actually thinking about a similar set in greyscale or maybe just black and white, so maybe I could manage to make it to real pixel art there

Don't be afaraid to do so (you can also simply pixel rewrite a sample of your actual set) I also suggest thinking/reading/digesting about pixel, pixel def, pixel relations... it will help you to understand what is going on here.

[Mathias]

I would just like to say wow, you really image linked every single one of those individually.

[st0ven]

I would just like to say wow, you really image linked every single one of those individually.

hehe yeah its kindof fun to see all the [image] tags quickly replaced by an army of little orange peg guys.

Issue of palette conservation aside, I kindof like the little guys, the do instantly read 'emoticons' to me for sure, the shape youve given them helps make them look a bit more unique to the cirly face ones (just as the square ones on pix help make them look unique for us here).

given for what they are, i actually dont even mind the fact that youre using a gradient on them. i think that for a community that doesnt need to focus on the hardcore aspects of things the gradient makes it look very smooth at 1x, and the saturation of your oranges and yellows does well for its visibility.

having said that, the pixel art aspect in application on these guys is rather elementary, and while ive seen much much worse on other smiley sets, i dont think youll be able to get much rouse out of this effort on this forum with these. I can say 'yeah they look cute' which might really be the only thing that youre looking for, and in a sense i suppose i could say well done for that. theres nothing really more for me to say than that though.


wait wait  - are you ALSO sketchydan ? 

[kamol]

wait wait  - are you ALSO sketchydan ?  

Well... er.. let me think...


no.

edit: But thanks for your feedback anyway. I wasn't aware enough of the fact that you guys here are rather severe in your graphical restrictions. But nevermind, I know now what you are driving at here and i find it quite interesting to give it a try. So let's see if I can do any better. I am currently working on something simple in pixel art to get a clue about it.

[Anarkhya]

severe in your graphical restrictions

I won't say "severe". It's difficult to use words to explain this (especially when you're not english) but think about how these tiny connected pixels transform/represent/metamorphose our vision. When I do digital art, I dont want to see pixels, because they represent evil, aliasing, jaggy and so on, They represent an unwanted computer flaw rendered by our screen.  When I pixel, on the contrary, I accept these dots as a fundamental part of my creating experience. Understanding this leads me to a new world, a world of illusion, where I, as a puppeteer, manipulate the molecular elements computer-rendered in order to trap human eye.

At least, this is how I feel  when I see this. Now what do you feel?

[kamol]

Well, yes, I see your point. But all this might not be as new to me as you might think. I like to play Sonic or Golvellius on my little 8 bit Sega MasterSytem sometimes, I just loved playing Zelda on my Game Boy Classic when it was released. I recently played Chrono Trigger on my NDS and of course payed much attention to all the pixelled elements and characters in those. Well, of course this is all about watching and consuming and not about creating this stuff...

But apart from that the difference might be where I come from: I am a graphic designer focussing on web design, not an illustrator. Usually it is my job to make things functional and as easy to understand as possible for others by using all the tools and possibilities one has, of course including gradients, photography, antialiasing, even filters maybe and all that crap. At best I use some very basic pixelbased drawing to make very small interface icons look sharper and crisper.

There were and are some pixel art influences on the graphic design scene of course, too, like maybe the works of eboy for example, which I allways liked. But that somehow often seems to me to be a more playfull and free way to work with that pixel style, it might be even mixed with vector graphics or photography if it benefits the result.

To me it seems this here maybe is more about the handcraft of pixel art, old school style - which is good! I like and appreciate that. I just wasn`t aware enough of that when I posted my emoticons up there. I skimmed through the board rules and definitions, though.  

As I said in my introduction I am a beginner at this kind of art. All I did up to now in this direction is some very low level stuff about 7 years ago and I do remember this was allready a challenge to me, haha:



Well, maybe I can improve a bit and learn from you all.  

[CrazyMLC]

As far as Web Design goes, vector is where it's at. The ability to resize things while keeping the same resolution is invaluable. Perhaps you want a logo on a banner, but then you want it on a business card, and all sorts of versions and sizes pile up.
Messing with this would be a huge pain in pixel art, but with vector you just resize and you're a-okay!

However, smilies are different as they rarely need to be resized, and their small size is ideal for pixel art.


Most of this sites assistance will be irrelivant, however, since this art isn't really pixel art.
Although, this community is serious about art in general, so some help can probably be provided.
It's kind of hard to critique multiple images though, as it's hard to pick one and critique it and only it. I'd recommend posting a single image and applying anything you learned to everything else privately.


The gradient is nice, but seems a little monotone, since yellow and orange are very similar colors. It's easy to recognize as a smiliey though.

Some simplification could be in order, as such a vast amount of smilies can be really daunting. If you look at the smilies on this forum, you will see that there are (comparitavely) few, but they cover broad ranges of emotion.

Also, the little guy is lovable, but he looks like a weird french fry... *shrug*

EDIT: I'd recommend changing the color to show emotion as much as possible.
Red = angry/passionate
Yellow = hyper
Green = sick/calm
Blue = passive/sad
etc.

[kamol]

Also, the little guy is lovable, but he looks like a weird french fry... *shrug*

I don' t mind this association much.  

EDIT: I'd recommend changing the color to show emotion at much as possible.
Red = angry/passionate
Yellow = hyper
Green = sick/calm
Blue = passive/sad
etc.

Would possibly be a nice thought. But those were supposed to fit in the customer's corporate design so they had to be orange mainly and not too colourfull. The large number of emoticons works fine on that supertopic-forum by the way. I guess it's just another kind of communication there - more offtopic, more privat stuff and kind of quite different subjects going from photography to art to design to illustration in general to books to films... even to cooking and gardening.

[Anarkhya]

There were and are some pixel art influences on the graphic design scene. But that somehow often seems to me to be a more playfull and free way to work with that pixel style. To me it seems this here maybe is more about the handcraft of pixel art, old school style.

This is also a thing I wanted to emphasize, I make a difference between pixel style (eboy and co.) which appears to me as a graphical trend/fashion treating pixels in a lousy/unmistakable/stationary way in order to run a business, on the other hand I see pixel art as a medium/disicipline trying to evolve and assert its existence outside of ephemeral trends.

[kamol]

Nevertheless they are related, don't you think? I see that what you call pixel art is somehow limited in its restrictions and it can be fun to work with those and see how you can fool ones eyes to make them see sceneries and creatures that actually are just made of piles of little squares with only a small number of colours. And on the other side I know the pixel style thing was kind of a graphical trend a few years ago and, yes, it was annoying sometimes to see all the graphic designers and illustrators copying each other (like we allways tend to do...   ). But on the other hand I think both topics could benefit from eathother - as long as you are willing to give it a try.
 
Or to say it clearer: From a distance you might think "aw, pixel style is simply a trendy and useless way of making things look somehow interesting from and to some people who haven't got a clue about where this all came from." And from a distance I might think "aw, pixel art is only some highly developed handcrafted but nerdy way of illustrating some random manga characters, aliens and rpg/fantasy stuff over and over again without a deeper meaning to form, statement or concept behind. " But both thoughts are not true really, I guess. The bounderies are fluid I would say in German, which means there are probably no strict bounderies in art and design at all as long as you are not stuck to a tool/handheld/screen/whatever that gives you the restrictions we are talking about. It's all just a matter of where your main focus is by creating something.

Oh, and by the way, as I am new here on this forum I am not sure if this kind of discussion is welcome at all or if maybe everyone is hacked off by all the slipslop I am going on about without presenting any pixel art worth to be shown at all. Please tell me if that's the case. But as far as I'm concerned I do enjoy this discussion with you and the others, so thanks.  

[CrazyMLC]

As long as posts don't break any rules, they're usually allowed.


To me, pixel art is being able to control your piece with the utmost precision. You have direct control over how your art looks.

And, I'm not entirely sure what that last post was about, but I think I agree. As I get better at pixel art I see myself improving at sketching and other art forms. They work off of the same principles, really.

[Moribund]

Hey I know I'm not really at the level where I can be giving sprite advice, but here's a small edit with a darker outline and an attempt at AA. If the place it's going to be used has one consistent background, anti-aliasing on the outsidde would look good as well.

[Anarkhya]

From a distance, "pixel style is a trendy and useless way of making things look somehow interesting from and to some people who haven't got a clue about where this all came from."
From a distance, "pixel art is only some highly developed handcrafted but nerdy way of illustrating some random manga characters, aliens and rpg/fantasy stuff over and over again without a deeper meaning to form, statement or concept behind. "

Well, IMHO, pixel style can't be anything else than a trend. Because I think that only the output (and I suspect there is a clear populist intent behind this) is desired. If ,suddenly, the "wow it looks like an oil painting" became a fashion, most of graphic designers (and their not so educated clients) would try to reproduce the same effect within digital field. But, would it be oil painting?
Don't know if my example is the best one but I think you'll catch the idea.

The bounderies are fluid, there are probably no strict bounderies in art and design at all as long as you are not stuck to a tool/handheld/screen/whatever that gives you the restrictions we are talking about. It's all just a matter of where your main focus is by creating something.

But I see pixel art as a medium stuck to computer rendering... because there is no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors relating to each other that can be viewed or created outside of our monitors... don't you think?

[kamol]

Well basically you are right of course. But one could also say that the actuall idea is not so new at all - its just another tool and a different medium that defines the restrictions. 

[Anarkhya]

No, no, you won't fool me with this trick

I classify Mosaic in a different topic relating with other tools and restrictions because

... because there is no computerized pixels, no animation, no RGB colors relating to each other that can be viewed or created

[kamol]

OK, I give up, you won´t be on my side, I guess. 



And now for something completely different...

[PypeBros]

OK, I give up, you won´t be on my side, I guess. 

Beside any "I'm doing pixel art for xxx years and I can tell you mosaic isn't pixel art", give a look at the mermaid. yes, it's made of small, coloured tiles, and there is even some dithering here and there, but nothing forces the artist to place his tiles on a grid, and he's massively exploiting this when doing curves. If anything, I'd say cross-stitching might be the analog discipline that is the closest to pixel art, but there again, analogies and similarities is all I'd dare to draw.

"no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors"

Not every pixel art pieces are animated, right ? and some of them simply used restricted palettes (Like cross-stitching has to work with a restricted amount of tints). Given how pixels on CRT look different from pixels on PAL from pixels on our modern LCD grids, I wouldn't be too much picky about "electronic pixels", personally.

[The 7th Sin]

There were and are some pixel art influences on the graphic design scene. But that somehow often seems to me to be a more playfull and free way to work with that pixel style. To me it seems this here maybe is more about the handcraft of pixel art, old school style.

This is also a thing I wanted to emphasize, on one hand you have the pixel style (eboy and co.) which is simply a graphical trend/fashion treating pixels in a lousy/unmistakable/stationary way in order to run a business, on the other hand you have the pixel art which is a medium/disicipline/art trying to evolve and assert its existence outside of ephemeral trends. That's two different things.

Forgive my interjection here but I could not sit by and just let this comment pass.
I know I'm a junior user here and all, and that I may not be the greatest at the arrangement of pixels, but to say eboy's work isn't a form of art seems absolutely ridiculous.
I understand that artists don't like to see their art form commercialized, but eboy clearly utilizes the pixel medium in an efficient and artistic way.
You should keep in mind that design is just art being practically applied to the world.

I would also like to take a moment and address the main issue of this thread, is what we're looking at pixel art?
I would say yes, but not entirely.
It is important to realize that a piece of art doesn't have to be restrained ENTIRELY to one "medium".
I think the mixing of "mediums" in this piece still allow for it to be posted as pixel art.
Despite the fact that the piece has over "x" number of colors, the faces and motions the emoticons make are CLEARLY a form of pixel pushing.
I think we need to try and be accommodating to new blends and forms of mediums, even if that means that they don't fully meet the "standard" we, personally, look for in our art.
I don't mean to seem offensive to anyone with this post, especially Anarkhya, even though I know I have kind of targeted your comments with my rebuttle, I just hope that we can welcome Kamol to these boards and not shoot him down for breaking the normals of what we "expect" pixel art to be.

[Anarkhya]

give a look at the mermaid. yes, it's made of small, coloured tiles, and there is even some dithering here and there, but nothing forces the artist to place his tiles on a grid, and he's massively exploiting this when doing curves. If anything, I'd say cross-stitching might be the analog discipline that is the closest to pixel art, but there again, analogies and similarities is all I'd dare to draw.

I agree on similarities, but these similarities are not solid enough IMO. Saying that pixel art exists as a modern form of mosaic art appears to me as an accurate shortcut, mostly because mosaic isn't supposed to be made on a pixel made monitor. This computer device leads to computer specifics work and output: thus no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors relating to each other...

"no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors"
Not every pixel art pieces are animated, right ? and some of them simply used restricted palettes (Like cross-stitching has to work with a restricted amount of tints). Given how pixels on CRT look different from pixels on PAL from pixels on our modern LCD grids, I wouldn't be too much picky about "electronic pixels", personally.

Well, not all pixel art pieces are animated but all are potientially animated, mosaic can't do this. the electronic pixel is a kind of unsatisfying/approaching word to describe my thoughts, the exact word should be something like computerized pixels maybe... well, you get the idea, I guess I don't have the sufficient ease at english to find the most appropriated word.

but to say eboy's work isn't a form of art seems absolutely ridiculous.
I understand that artists don't like to see their art form commercialized, but eboy clearly utilizes the pixel medium in an efficient and artistic way.

Efficient and artistic? Ok. Why not? But give me more of your thoughts about this, just go deeper to express/illustrate your views.
I'll really enjoy to continue this discussion but just saying efficient and artistic is not enough... You need to explain your statements.

You should keep in mind that design is just art being practically applied to the world.

Ouch! Please define "art" right now... I want to hear you on that point.

I think we need to try and be accommodating to new blends and forms of mediums, even if that means that they don't fully meet the "standard" we, personally, look for in our art.

I'm requiring assistance on this very topic because I feel I won't speak alone in the name of pixelation. Anyone willing to submit thoughts about backing up the pixel art definition ?

I don't mean to seem offensive to anyone with this post, especially Anarkhya, even though I know I have kind of targeted your comments

You have targeted my comments, yes, and this is not a problem for me, because these are only ideas/concepts/thoughts and I like to play with them, they are not my property and they can live/evolve/die. As long as you explain your thoughts.

[The 7th Sin]

I would just like to start by saying, I am very glad that we can exchange our thoughts and opinions like mature individuals here, even though we may disagree.
I know some forums would have already degenerated into a massive flamewar over my comments.
That being said, onward.

Allow me to address your first point concerning Eboy's art.
It is difficult for me to imagine their work as anything other than art, I mean their works are color and lines in an aesthetically pleasing fashion.
I think this fits the basic premise of a two dimensional work of art.
(I would really like to hear what you think makes their works not art, so I could elaborate in a more specified manner.)

Personally I carry an extremely broad definition of the word art, I include everything from film, music, sculpture, paintings, graffiti, sidewalk chalk drawings done by a three year old on the pavement, screen printing on t-shirts, idle doodles in the margins of notes, album covers. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

When I said design was art applied to the practical world, I mean, objects by design are utilitarian, take shoes for example, by design they are only a means to shelter our feet from harm, but the through the application of art we make them aesthetically pleasing.
The shoes aren't like a traditional piece of art, that hangs on a wall, but they still display the aesthetic principles we, as artists, use for our guidelines.

Your third point of discussion really brings us into muddy waters.
I understand that this is a forum reserved for pixel artists, I don't think it would be appropriate for an artist, such as a watercolor painter, to come here and ask for critique.
However, let me pose this question to you.
What if the watercolor artist had painted a mural of a building on a hilltop, then scanned the image and "pixelled" the building.
Leaving a final image of watercolor style hill and a pixel art building.
Can he still come here for critique on the pixel portion of his painting? Or must we completely disregard his artwork because it follows some but not all of the requirements here?

One additional question for you, Anarkhya, do you think architects are artists?

(edit: there was a confusing grammatical error.)

[Helm]

Well, reading this forum frequently I think the "standard" and what we "expect" (which relates with pixel art definition) has been clarified enough in many threads here... But I'm requiring assistance on this very topic because I feel I won't speak alone in the name of pixelation. Anyone willing to submit thoughts about backing up the pixel art definition ?

Yes, for what it is worth I do not see the need for a hard official distinction between what eboy does and pixel art because what is a 'stylistic trend' and what is 'true art' seems to be a fluid and socially-relevant issue and is up for interpretation. I do not see the need for Pixelation to endorse a value-judgment based system of belief because it is not a person. It is a forum and a forum is built around communal interests. To the degree that Pixelation endorses some practices and not others it is only in what ways Pixelation can help pixel artists with their art. We classify between digital art and pixel art (and some shades in between) to preserve the scope and focus of the forum not to say 'this type of art is bad and unartistic and this type is good and true art'.

I have my own opinions and they generally apply to what I do with my own art, they are not prescriptive about what other people should do with theirs.

I tried to nudge this thread towards helping each other and not debating if something is pixel art or not by my opener comment, but it seems this thread wants to head that way, so okay, sure, explore the ideas, just please don't strawman each other. I don't see why eboy is 'not art' because it is design and why something that is a style is not also potentially artful and generally, why is 'art' high praise?

Of course there's a relevance for Mosaic work for pixel artists because the mode of control is very similar. Is pixel art so tied to the digital format, or is it tied to the constraints of it, which can be (and have been) replicated outside of computer monitors?

[kamol]

I tried to nudge this thread towards helping each other and not debating if something is pixel art or not by my opener comment, but it seems this thread wants to head that way, so okay, sure, explore the ideas

By the way, I would not mind you to push this thread to the discussion board if that helps. I don't want anybody to be pissed off because it is not about a concrete artwork anymore but all talk and opinions only. I still enjoy the discussion though, let´s forget about the emoticons I posted up there. 

[Anarkhya]

I do not see the need for Pixelation to endorse a value-judgment based system of belief because it is not a person. It is a forum and a forum is built around communal interests. To the degree that Pixelation endorses some practices and not others it is only in what ways Pixelation can help pixel artists with their art.

@ALL: OK. I've edited all my posts and corrected my thoughts translation in this thread to be clearer. I don't want to represent pixel art or pixelation, I just want to discuss/share/debate.

Allow me to address your first point concerning Eboy's art.
It is difficult for me to imagine their work as anything other than art, I mean their works are color and lines in an aesthetically pleasing fashion.
I think this fits the basic premise of a two dimensional work of art.
(I would really like to hear what you think makes their works not art, so I could elaborate in a more specified manner.

ok. after re-examining the situation, I have to correct things and thoughts to explain where I came from. My reaction is connected with the eboy (and their long list of copiers) extreme popularity among the general audience thus making them so-called pixel art gods (at least this is my conclusion when using web search engines to look for pictures with keyword pixel art). So what I'm saying is that eboy, sadly, are engaged into a form of pixel art monopoly leading, among other consequences, people to think that pixel art is by nature isometric.

They also have chosen a set in stone way to represent pixelling: oversimplified shapes and shading, huge and non-homogeneous palettes, stationary style, mass produced art (this last point makes me think that they are skilled blue-collar workers more than artists). For these reasons, I find harmful that the equation pixel + art = eboy is considered valid in the public eyes.

Personally I carry an extremely broad definition of the word art, I include everything from film, music, sculpture, paintings, graffiti, sidewalk chalk drawings done by a three year old on the pavement, screen printing on t-shirts, idle doodles in the margins of notes, album covers. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

Now, for the "art" definition, yours seems to be more a list of examples than a definition so I want to hear your deeper views on that. Regarding the "art or not" matter here is my present location on the road to understanding, I consider that an artwork implies at least:
A human aesthetical intent (aware of being an intent and aware of being aesthetically pleasant or unpleasant) to translate an invisible idea into visible reality in order to provoke/deliver an emotional response to the spectator.

But please note that my definition is a temporary one (mainly because so far I don't fully understand what is aesthetic, I thought I did but I realized I don't) and is built on moving foundations.

However, let me pose this question to you.
What if the watercolor artist had painted a mural of a building on a hilltop, then scanned the image and "pixelled" the building.
Leaving a final image of watercolor style hill and a pixel art building.
Can he still come here for critique on the pixel portion of his painting? Or must we completely disregard his artwork because it follows some but not all of the requirements here?

I have to skip this right now because I'm running out of time, but I will transmit my answer later

One additional question for you, Anarkhya, do you think architects are artists?

Well...Let me think about it... Thinking of them as artists would force me to look at their creation as artworks, and the move is not natural to me but well I have to admit that the vision of some buildings affected me, however, was I affected because I felt beauty or because I admired the skill? This is difficult, I think you're leading me to the "craftsmen or artists" question...

[PypeBros]

defining art is certainly tedious, but I'd daresay that one criterion is that an artwork isn't supposed to have a purpose, or at least, its aestethics shouldn't be constraint by a purpose. That usually rules out most form of architecture, and a large part of design/craftwork.

[Moribund]

That is merely a limitation, and doesn't pixel art thrive on limitation?

[kamol]

Uh, the question what is art - I have seen other communities stumble about this before, I guess the definition of art is defined individually.

That is going to be hard to explane now: In German language I am always on about telling people to differentiate between art and and somehow nice looking pictures and objects - which is more precisely to be called illustration in my opinion. And illustration to me is not art in a deeper meaning just as design is not art to me. Its rather some pretty and/or functional handcraft to make something work better or to casually comunicate with people in a way, maybe, and it is somehow related to art of course. But real art to me is something that is meant to touch people deeply, to stimulate and to make them think, even to make them change opinions or perspectives. Doesn`t matter if this works on a large amount of people or just on the artist him- or herself though. And it doesn't matter if it is commercial or not. And again of course the bounderies whrere this would begin and that would end are not that clear... But as being a graphic designer I would never call myself an artist - my aims are just not that ambitious.

But I know that the English language is more open in the definition of art and almost anyone that is creative in a way is called an artist. Quite confusing to deal with that for me, in a way.  

In other words: you might fiercely disagree but pixel art as you define it here to me is not really art, at least not by my German definition. Its more exactly some kind of illustration first of all. Which doesn't mean it is not possible to create real art by pushing pixel I guess.

Beat me up now, if you want.

[PypeBros]

In other words: you might fiercely disagree but pixel art as you define it here to me is not really art, at least not by my German definition. Its more exactly some kind of illustration first of all. Which doesn't mean it is not possible to create real art by pushing pixel I guess.

I see what you mean, but I'm not convinced it can be applied so fast. Drawing is art -- that is, a discipline. When Leonardo da Vinci do drawing, it's an artwork -- a piece of art that tries and communicates something deep through mastering of a discipline; when I do, it's just a sketch.

When I play Legend of Zelda on the guitar, it's barely entertainment; when I practice Recuerdos del Alhambra sufficiently and put the last droplet of my soul in playing it, I'm approaching what artwork could be (merely approaching, unfortunately). I think the same can apply to pixel art.

[kamol]

I agree so far. And it cerntainly it is not that simple as I just wrote it down.

Bringing up Leonardo da Vinci's drawings and comparing it to ones sketches today - regardless of weather those are good or not - you may not want to ignore the fact that in da Vincis times anatomical studies for example were something outrageously new and, the way da Vinci learned it, something strictly illegal and dangerous, too. We all benefit from his work today. So one should always keep in mind the temporal context and the originality in art as well as the plain result.