611
General Discussion / Re: Bye bye
« on: August 09, 2005, 05:39:42 am »
Good luck with your jobs, Lief. I eagerly await details on the DS game you'll be working on.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
612
General Discussion / Re: hello and helm
« on: August 08, 2005, 09:40:42 pm »
You really need to finish this one, Helm. It's damn sexy!
BTW, did you and ptoing ever get around to finishing your tile collaboration?
613
General Discussion / Re: Pixel school
« on: August 08, 2005, 01:02:45 am »
Sorry about hte post not being too clear, Alex. I try to proofread my posts prior to posting, but I guess this is limited by how well I can actually proofread. What you said is similar to things I was thinking of. There were some things I hadn't considered like with the light not being powerful enough to reach the eye, but I really think I've picked up a good understanding of what you, Helm, and trick were saying. The next thing to do now, I guess, is to practice using this in some art.
Oh, and sorry about branching away from your format, Lief. I'm sure you can agree, though, that this has produced quite a nice bit of material for the wiki.
Oh, and sorry about branching away from your format, Lief. I'm sure you can agree, though, that this has produced quite a nice bit of material for the wiki.
614
General Discussion / Re: Pixel school
« on: August 07, 2005, 11:19:43 pm »
Oh man, I think I suffered an epiphany. Shit, that makes so much sense, Alex, thank you! Alright, so a banana and an apple at nght would be black or near black since they would absorb the blue light and it would therefore not hit our eyes. And now for some examples to see if I learned as much as I think I did.
http://www.ziggum.com/images/Nissan/P5221431.JPG
A banana at night would look a lot like the steering wheel in this picture. Everyhing in this picture looks black bescause it absorbs the blue light that is created. Anything that can reflect blue light(like purple) however, will show up as blue regardless of it's original colour, because the only light being reflected is blue, and nothing else. Also, judging by the lack of anything that looks red, there is nothing that is either orange or red in the cab.
http://rclsgi.eng.ohio-state.edu/~bhandari/chicagosnaps/Nighttime%20chicago.JPG
And for another example, the foreground in this picture is orangey yellow because that's the colour it reflects from the lamp post. I can tell the most of the buildings in the distance are neither orange, red or yellow because if they were then they would've reflected nearby light at the camera. The buildings that are orange near the right, and near the left are likely orange, yellow or red because they are reflecting light.
Mabye there's couple problems there since light isn't always pure, but I thik I get how it would be in ideal conditions.
And I think I get the subsurface scattering thing more too, The reason that subsurface scattering gives a glowing effect and is more saturated is because there's more light hitting the eye. This extra light being the light reflected from layers below the skin in addition to the light reflected off the surface of the skin
Damn, now I can't wait until it gets dark in a couple hours. I'm gonna walk around and check out the shadows and junk. Of course, before I do that I would have to short circuit the city's power supply or something and knock out all the damn street lights. Well, I'll get a little practice at least by seeing how the for the most part I'll jsut be seeing blue and yellow-orange stuff. I guess I might have to plan a visit to the country or something.
Anyhow, thank you Trick, Helm and Alex, I get the feeling that this thread is going to become a big source of the material for the wiki.
http://www.ziggum.com/images/Nissan/P5221431.JPG
A banana at night would look a lot like the steering wheel in this picture. Everyhing in this picture looks black bescause it absorbs the blue light that is created. Anything that can reflect blue light(like purple) however, will show up as blue regardless of it's original colour, because the only light being reflected is blue, and nothing else. Also, judging by the lack of anything that looks red, there is nothing that is either orange or red in the cab.
http://rclsgi.eng.ohio-state.edu/~bhandari/chicagosnaps/Nighttime%20chicago.JPG
And for another example, the foreground in this picture is orangey yellow because that's the colour it reflects from the lamp post. I can tell the most of the buildings in the distance are neither orange, red or yellow because if they were then they would've reflected nearby light at the camera. The buildings that are orange near the right, and near the left are likely orange, yellow or red because they are reflecting light.
Mabye there's couple problems there since light isn't always pure, but I thik I get how it would be in ideal conditions.
And I think I get the subsurface scattering thing more too, The reason that subsurface scattering gives a glowing effect and is more saturated is because there's more light hitting the eye. This extra light being the light reflected from layers below the skin in addition to the light reflected off the surface of the skin
Damn, now I can't wait until it gets dark in a couple hours. I'm gonna walk around and check out the shadows and junk. Of course, before I do that I would have to short circuit the city's power supply or something and knock out all the damn street lights. Well, I'll get a little practice at least by seeing how the for the most part I'll jsut be seeing blue and yellow-orange stuff. I guess I might have to plan a visit to the country or something.
Anyhow, thank you Trick, Helm and Alex, I get the feeling that this thread is going to become a big source of the material for the wiki.
615
General Discussion / Re: Pixel school
« on: August 07, 2005, 07:51:38 pm »
http://www.itchstudios.com/psg/art_tut.htm
So I think I'm beginning to understand this subsurface scattering thing. Light passes under something, bounces around and comes out. Because it has to be able to penetrate, an object like say solid steel, can't have subsurface scattering. One thing I'm not clear enough on, is does the light always make it out of an object? For there to actually be a glowing effect light has to get stuck under the surface right? Or does light have a cumulative effect, where simply hitting a surface temporarily lightens it, even if the light bounces off?
@trick: so based on your example, does that mean that any warm colour can reflect all warm colours, and any cool colour can reflect all cool colours? Like R reflects, R, Y, and O? When I was explained colour spectrum, green was like an in between colour, so does it get to reflect warm and cool colours, or just green?
So I think I'm beginning to understand this subsurface scattering thing. Light passes under something, bounces around and comes out. Because it has to be able to penetrate, an object like say solid steel, can't have subsurface scattering. One thing I'm not clear enough on, is does the light always make it out of an object? For there to actually be a glowing effect light has to get stuck under the surface right? Or does light have a cumulative effect, where simply hitting a surface temporarily lightens it, even if the light bounces off?
@trick: so based on your example, does that mean that any warm colour can reflect all warm colours, and any cool colour can reflect all cool colours? Like R reflects, R, Y, and O? When I was explained colour spectrum, green was like an in between colour, so does it get to reflect warm and cool colours, or just green?
616
General Discussion / Re: Nintendo DS (Just think of the possibilities!)
« on: August 07, 2005, 07:35:52 pm »
I only pray that lucasarts gets off their collective asses and port every last one of their awesome point&click adventure games to the DS. If I could have Day of the Tentacle DS I would be the happiest little boy- man ever.
617
General Discussion / Re: The Most Extreme Off-Topic Thread
« on: August 07, 2005, 07:31:40 pm »
Where did Nem go to?
I have not seen Nemesis.
Where art thou, Nemmy?
http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/pixipedia/index.php?title=Nemesis42
I have not seen Nemesis.
Where art thou, Nemmy?
http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/pixipedia/index.php?title=Nemesis42
618
Pixel Art / Re: Run, ninja!
« on: August 07, 2005, 07:17:24 pm »
The best thing to do, I think, would be to go and look at some references of people running. In fact, I've got a real good example for you right here http://photo.ucr.edu/photographers/muybridge/index66.html (warning:nekkid man ahead) Like every other area of art, animation requires studying from life to improve so take note of how each leg is positioned during each point in a single cycle.
I'm new to animation as well, only been going at it for maybe 1/2 to 3/4 of a year now, so I'm reluctant to really impart any wisdom since I'm pretty much guaranteed to learn in the future that I was either completely wrong or misguided in many areas. However, back before pixelation tooks it's latest nose dive, Sals(Adam Tierney) always posted the same advice to people looking for critique for animations. When I began to take in this advice, I noticed a dramatic increase in the quality of my animations. This increase being that my animations went from crappy-horrible to better. It's his advice that enabled me to make the leap to where I no longer feel completely flustered when starting an animation.
Anyways, Adam's advice basically goes something along the lines of: "keyframes, keyframes, keyframes". If you wanted to, you could animate a 60 or 120 frame running animation just so that you could show the leg in every possible position that it creates while running. There really wouldn't be much point however because it's not like we would notice all those frames. To express movement, you just have to place focus on the key gestures that indicate movement, and these key gestures become your keyframes.
So, try not to create your frames by thinking where the leg will be every .1 seconds.
[. . . . . . . . . . .]
Decide on which frames will indicate the running action better and focus on them
[... ... ...]
Here's an example Adam used once. I recommend saving and taking a look at the individual frames. You'll notice that when the little guy leaps through the air, Adam doesn't place him at the various points he would appear at in the air. Instead, Adam has him pushing off the ground in one frame, at the peak of his jump the next and in the frame following has the guy landing on the wall or floor. That's really all that Adam needs to let us know that the little guy is jumping and landing. If he wanted to Adam could add some more frames to smoothen the jump, but he wanted to show just how valuable keyframes can be when used effectively.
I also made an attempt at an edit for you. Main changes are to his legs which I made to resemble a real person's run more. I kept the hand positions the same to keep with how you imagined them. I did add a little bounce to them, though, as the lack of movement in your version was slightly distracting and a bit odd. If you don't like it go ahead and change it back.
[mine] [yours]
I'm new to animation as well, only been going at it for maybe 1/2 to 3/4 of a year now, so I'm reluctant to really impart any wisdom since I'm pretty much guaranteed to learn in the future that I was either completely wrong or misguided in many areas. However, back before pixelation tooks it's latest nose dive, Sals(Adam Tierney) always posted the same advice to people looking for critique for animations. When I began to take in this advice, I noticed a dramatic increase in the quality of my animations. This increase being that my animations went from crappy-horrible to better. It's his advice that enabled me to make the leap to where I no longer feel completely flustered when starting an animation.
Anyways, Adam's advice basically goes something along the lines of: "keyframes, keyframes, keyframes". If you wanted to, you could animate a 60 or 120 frame running animation just so that you could show the leg in every possible position that it creates while running. There really wouldn't be much point however because it's not like we would notice all those frames. To express movement, you just have to place focus on the key gestures that indicate movement, and these key gestures become your keyframes.
So, try not to create your frames by thinking where the leg will be every .1 seconds.
[. . . . . . . . . . .]
Decide on which frames will indicate the running action better and focus on them
[... ... ...]
Here's an example Adam used once. I recommend saving and taking a look at the individual frames. You'll notice that when the little guy leaps through the air, Adam doesn't place him at the various points he would appear at in the air. Instead, Adam has him pushing off the ground in one frame, at the peak of his jump the next and in the frame following has the guy landing on the wall or floor. That's really all that Adam needs to let us know that the little guy is jumping and landing. If he wanted to Adam could add some more frames to smoothen the jump, but he wanted to show just how valuable keyframes can be when used effectively.
I also made an attempt at an edit for you. Main changes are to his legs which I made to resemble a real person's run more. I kept the hand positions the same to keep with how you imagined them. I did add a little bounce to them, though, as the lack of movement in your version was slightly distracting and a bit odd. If you don't like it go ahead and change it back.
[mine] [yours]
619
General Discussion / Re: Pixel school
« on: August 06, 2005, 11:14:31 pm »Quote
Shadows don't have a colour. It's just the eye mechanism compensating for equillibrium. The complementary shadow colour of any lightsource is the opposite one in the colour wheel. Keep in mind the impressionist yellow banana with purple shadow.No colour? well, shit, that complicates this just a bit.
While I'm thinking on this and looking up on this subsurface scattering stuff, here's another question that this has come to mind. I figure that I'll work on recolouring an older piece to practice this light stuff. The part that's confusing me when doing this though, is what happens to the colour of an object when the light isn't yellow. I know a banana is yellow when the light is yellow, but what happens to the yellow(of the banana) when the light becomes blue?
And since I probably haven't made myself clear enough. In yellow light, the colours I would use for colouring that banana would be "-whitish yellow-yellow-orange-purple". So how does it work with blue light? Something like "whitish blue-blue-purple-yellow"?
Er, and if you don't mind another question, I remember from science that light that is the same colour as an object gets reflected and the rest absorbed(I hope that's how it goes), which is why solar panels are black so they absorb light, and you wear white in the summer to reflect it, etc. etc. But what effect does that have on an objects colour? If a blueberry and a banana are sitting outside at night, what effect will the deep saturated blue light have on the blueberry compared to the banana? And how about during the day?
Thanks again for the reply, Helm. Any access to the wonderful knowledge in that big ol' brain of yours is much appreciated.
620
General Discussion / Re: Pixel school
« on: August 06, 2005, 08:19:47 pm »
I have a question about night time colours, Lief. At nighttime, the only light we're getting(aside from manmade stuff like lightbulbs) is sunlight reflected off of the moon. So, because when light bounces off an object, it becomes tinted by that object, does that mean that hightlights during nightime should max out at an offwhite grey colour like the moon?
And you mentioned many, many posts ago in a reply to a topic, that shadows tend to move towards the opposite colour of the light(blue light means yellow shadows). If the blue light is tinted to red or something after bouncing off an object, will the shadows still be yellow, because of how the light originally was, or will they become green?
And you mentioned many, many posts ago in a reply to a topic, that shadows tend to move towards the opposite colour of the light(blue light means yellow shadows). If the blue light is tinted to red or something after bouncing off an object, will the shadows still be yellow, because of how the light originally was, or will they become green?