Pixelation
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: hapiel on January 28, 2013, 12:33:34 pm
-
Hey guys,
Here is an idea that I had today.
There is many characteristics of pixel art that I like and that can not be reproduced without working on pixel level.
Also there is a very tiny audience interested in pixel art and especially large work takes an over average effort to make.
I am not an experienced digital artist, but I believe that there is lot more possible when you would use vectors, textures, photo editing, auto aa & gradients etc which are common in digital illustration.
How would we be able to create a modern hybrid?
Characteristics of pixel art that I would like to keep:
Crispy horizontal and diagonal lines
Pixel thin highlights and outlines
Impossibly bright colors
Probably you guys have more ideas of characteristics that are important and unique to pixel art.
What I would like to start an open discussion about is:
What is it that we have learned from pixel art that we can now bring to other mediums?
When I google for hybrids, I mostly find artwork that features big squares, but that is obviously not what I am looking for :(. I might be doing some experiments of my own in the coming time. Please share your ideas!
-
Vector work that respects the pixel grid can often be a nice aesthetic, similar to pixel art. I saw a nice one on kickstarter recently, which I've forgotten the name of, but there's also Army of Trolls (http://www.armyoftrolls.co.uk/)' re-envisioning of their old Push Push Penguin game:
original:
http://www.download-games.gr/wp-content/gallery/push-push-penguin/push-push-penguin-2.jpg (http://www.download-games.gr/wp-content/gallery/push-push-penguin/push-push-penguin-2.jpg)
vector:
http://www.armyoftrolls.co.uk/website/portfolio/ppp_vector_stylee_BIG.png (http://www.armyoftrolls.co.uk/website/portfolio/ppp_vector_stylee_BIG.png)
-
Much as pixel art is raster, I see vector as a very viable solution to replicating the blockiness and pixel clusters: a good example is Mrmo Tarius's work, in which I see the pixel and vector work converging.
If we're not staying in the digital realm, various printing methods have some affinities with pixel art technique, much like Cure's experiments.
There are bound to be more mediums!
-
Impossibly bright colors
This is something I don't see very much in vector stuff, to me vector almost always seems to have drab muddy colours, unless it is very simple with large fields of solid colour.
I think AoT stuff above demonstrates this (though better than most), the vector version lacks a good deal of the vibrancy of the pixel version.
I'm not sure why this is, all the anti-aliasing mixing stuff to a disagreeable average perhaps?
-
Few other media have an explicit grid. I have only found cross stitching and bead weaving. Mosaics can be a grid, but most don't use one. Pixel art is really a product of the technical design of low resolution computer monitors.
Tourist
-
Impossibly bright colors
This is something I don't see very much in vector stuff, to me vector almost always seems to have drab muddy colours, unless it is very simple with large fields of solid colour.
I think AoT stuff above demonstrates this (though better than most), the vector version lacks a good deal of the vibrancy of the pixel version.
I'm not sure why this is, all the anti-aliasing mixing stuff to a disagreeable average perhaps?
Probably just AI always defaulting to CMYK, but maybe people not snapping to the pixel grid making unnecessary AA contributes a bit too.
-
Funny I just happened to be reading this as I came in here.
http://2dwillneverdie.com/tutorial/vector-to-pixel-building-your-sprites-in-adobe-illustrator/
1-Cluster theory thinking.
yup. Making our blotches of color in beautiful shapes matters.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/baybaybom/ss-genjuro3_zps4ca6c5fd.gif)
I've always wanted to point out that sometimes designing them less to tell the shape of the object, and more to show off beautiful shapes is a good approach too. Samurai Shodown exemplifies that.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/baybaybom/Astaroth-SMT2_zps904b0d25.gif)
Shin Megami Tensei, on the other hand is the opposite end of the spectrum. Purely functional and minimal.
2- vector art following a grid like it has been said. But I just realized that +restricted angles could be IT. :p
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/baybaybom/mpoSalute_zps45cd9686.png)
only 90º and 45º for starters much like this MetalGear Portable OPS logo.
http://www.puppygames.net/revenge-of-the-titans/ this game could be an example...except he overdid it with the gradients and smooth stuff IMO
EDIT: How did I NOT think of ridiculous fishing?
(https://i.imgur.com/f89f9BT.jpg)
http://vlambeer.com/press/sheet.php?p=Ridiculous_Fishing#images
3-Limited palletes.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/baybaybom/Lurking-magpie-linocut-york_zpsc2cf57df.jpg)
in this respect I think printmaking processes could be helplful. For example Sherrie York who did the print above uses reduction linocut.
http://www.sherrieyork.com/reduction-linocut-process.html
Which means that she starts from the lightest shade, and cuts away at printing darker and darker shades until she gets the full picture. I feel that has the same concern over palletes as pixelart without limiting it with a hard number (8, 16, et all)
Notice how this uses gradients without overdoing it unlike Revenge of the Titans.
http://www.linesandcolors.com/2012/12/29/sherrie-york/
http://brushandbaren.blogspot.com/
Seriously check that girl out :p
http://hifructose.com/2012/10/17/victo-ngais-action-packed-illustrations/
This guy has the same quality, no idea if he uses printmaking but he must've at some point ( or is maybe inspired by ukiyo-e)
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1499165518/ukiyo-e-heroes
that, of course earns Ukiyo-E heroes a mention :p
The Reductive linocut process can be emulated in photoshop or any program by drawing a big broad shape and duplicating the layer, ereasing things away from it each time a darker shade is implemented.
I used to think recoloring on the fly was unique to pixelart but it's quite possible in vectors, and it's readily implemented in ToonBoom.
4-Pixel artifacts obsession
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b340/baybaybom/jeremy-dower-4_zps5c88ae5a.jpg)
RGB offsets, scanlines, moire effect, even the tinted screens of magnetically broken CRTs. it all can be used to achieve a great otherwordly effect
http://www.jeremydower.com/ art is a good example, he goes so far as to use R G B lightsources
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUXBCdt5IPg
Even in 3d like Tool's "Vicarious". See how it can be a whole atmosphere?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia6XoAZUUCY
CRT+magnets goodness.
5-Sheer Nostalgia and "Voxel Art"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHrarYI-vo8 Pixel invasion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoFYEtj2tDw 3D Dot Game heroes
et all, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.
EDIT:UGH I just realized I missed color ASCII art.. :p I'm sure I'll think of a lot more
-
Crispy horizontal and diagonal lines
Pixel thin highlights and outlines
Impossibly bright colors
Aye, those things are nice. The 3rd one doesn't seem unique to PA, though.
I'd like to see pel-shading: a 3D rendering tech that draws things with those pixel-craftish aspects. Seems feasible to me. (I program, but not graphics programming.) Stick in some integers to define the colour count, outline thickness, etc. It wouldn't be able to replicate more complex styles, not without some more involved tuning. But it could provide an economical way to include 3D geometry in a 2D pixel-crafted game with some visual coherence.
-
Well, pixelation was forced to revert to a backup version and one great reply by Facet went to fuck.
Facet can you PLEASE repost that? there was an animated video there that made heavy use of gouache-ish brushtrokes that is like one of my dream animation styles.
(Thought I had bookmarked it but I didnt =( )
in that reply facet discussed how it's pretty darn common now of animes to "seamlessly" transition in and out of cel-shaded CG and hand drawn CG.
I know what you're talking about but I disagree. I know they do it in futurama but it's pretty damn seam-y. The only anime example that I know of that does this Berserk Golden arc, and I still can see all the seams, it still feels too 3D mostly because of the timing.
Also, I think cel-shading isnt really comparable to pixelart, it's too simplistic.
I think manga artstyles are more comparable because they've got bigger ramps in their shading and use things like stipling and crosshatching.
Jojo's Bizarre adventure opening. I like how they emphasize keyframe animation.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_EmTy7gEZ-OY/SyAWqfl5IQI/AAAAAAAABSw/-jP3guNZuu8/s1600/fd03.jpg)
and Freedom ova opening
(http://youtu.be/gbIy0zMukn4?t=56s)
I think they pretty much just draw all of the lighting with textures and turn off lighting. Seems pretty darn time consuming, a lot like drawing all the backgrounds one by one for each shot in 2D.
(https://i3.ytimg.com/vi/6BBPaRWvT18/mqdefault.jpg)
Meet buck is a similar short (http://vimeo.com/17535548) although I think it's a little more advanced, they occasionally use actual lighting for things like sillouething the figure or providing fill lighting.
But that was before I knew anything about paperman.
(https://i1.ytimg.com/vi/TZJLtujW6FY/mqdefault.jpg)
have you guys seen paperman?
Here's a an analysis post on paperman (http://chrisoatley.com/making-of-paperman/)
And an interview with the project's head (http://www.awn.com/articles/short-films/inside-disney-s-new-animated-short-paperman/page/2%2C1)
Basically Dinsey made a short that is basically a test on succefully 3difying had drawn animation. it's very smooth and looks like actual hand drawin animation,there's lot of theorizing about how it was made, it seems most of it was just 3D modeling and sticking to the conceptart faithfully, but part of it is a vector based 2d drawing tool that they're still developing, but not much more than that is known, it appears disney is keeping the lid on it because they are still working on it.
(http://puddlesgathering.com/blog/ani-sm_chun_li_punch_color.gif)
The closest thing to paperman I've seen is this, which apparently works by making automatic tween frames (maybe warp puppet too?) with After Effects (http://sykosan.deviantart.com/art/Chun-Li-Punch-Color-299028445)
-
I know this topic is old as shit, but I wanted to post about the behind the scenes of guilty gear xrd and damn if this is not the best place to do that :o >:(
Behind the scenes article translation
Page 1 (http://www.polycount.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2099538&postcount=229)
Page 2 (http://www.polycount.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2107579&postcount=241)
For visual refference...if you live under a rock and havent seen it =O
it's just nuts how good this is...and they're doing it the hard way. the shader is just normal cel shading + a bunch of tricks
-
Ahhhhh
I had posted Alberto Mielgo's stuff here (Tron Uprising, Beatles Rock Band intro) and the servers went down nixing a few posts. I think this is the video Conceit mentioned (http://www.pinkman.tv/pill.html) I can't remember what my point was, but non-vector flat and painterly is pretty sweet, somewhat pixel like. I think I PM'd the links but forgot the thread.
Don't look up Mielgo if you don't want to see lots of boobs.
-
I was gonna bring up the guilty gear stuff, it's just so absurdly cool. That kinda thing is the bigger "threat", if that's the right word, I feel it can get that crisp aesthetically focused vibe while having a lot more utility.
I see pixel art is something really close to low poly, something at the base of an art form that needs sharp attention to detail in order to work, I think it's best when it's utilizing it's strengths, low colour palettes, crisp edges, strong clusters, and worst when it's trying to be highly rendered digital art. But that's largely taste. Either way I think that toon shady stuff is a cool progression, a process more interested in general aesthetics and style then pure rendered detail, so there is some similarities cross medium there.
I guess whats new is that 3D a few years back realized it didn't have to look detailed or real in order to look good and now we are in this enormous blossoming of style. I'm not sure what that means for pixel artists, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone developers a shade or technique to mimic the look.
Reminds me of stumbling into this IRKALLA fanart from Mr Howard Day.
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/9cdfbd892c304a10713f9050c401986e/tumblr_nbwhfmwJD11qd1fhxo3_250.gif)(http://33.media.tumblr.com/226e06294cbb42f028e64abad1ce93c5/tumblr_nbwhfmwJD11qd1fhxo2_250.gif)
official
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/9247454428093df64d59d90479d63781/tumblr_nbwhfmwJD11qd1fhxo1_r2_500.gif)
fanart
I think it takes most aesthetics of the qualities of the original and transfers them pretty well without losing much, of course the pixel art would be faster, right until you got to the animation at least.
That's the thing really, 3D always always has the upperhand in animation (and dynamic lighting I suppose). They haven't quite gotten traditional animation beat yet but even then the best traditional animation is often 3D assisted in the complex parts.
Anyway, food for thought.
edit: one thing i'll add about the guilty gear stuff is that the mouth animations look absolutely atrocious. one thing they haven't mastered I guess.
-
I'm gonna drop this here: Ghost Trick - Phantom Detective
Pretty sure it's 3D animation (and it's crazy good), but the game really "feels" like pixel art.
I'm not sure how they achieved that, I guess they just really had a gread render... *shrug*
And on the NDS screen it just looks fabulous.
(http://lparchive.org/Ghost-Trick-Phantom-Detective/Update%2008/11-eveningpatrolmaaan.gif)
(Also the game is amazing and everyone should play it)
-
It's actually very simple to 3D render to pixel art. Almost no shading / lighting, readable shapes, no shape smaller than 1 px on the scene, and it just simply works.
-
whoa! ;D I kinda gave up on this topic picking up steam again, glad to be wrong :crazy:
@Facet heh, I feel like that's a "classic" now. Definitively still awesome.
@Elian @AlcopopStar I'm glad you guys brought up Ghost Trick - Phantom Detective and howard's IRKALLA stuff, I remember seeing em and liking em.
@Tim: Glad to hear that! heh, that sounds like what's going on in Ghost Trick, but howard's IRKALLA fan art and all the GGX tricks ( I'm talking about HOW they achieved the aesthetic, which is described the behind the scene links), Paperman, hell, fucking Journey if we're gonna round up examples...they all give me a lot of hope that basically any aethetic can be done well in 3D, although, clearly it wouldnt be as easy as a base pixelart aesthetic.
@Alcopop, I like the discussion you bring up, about pixelart being like lowpoly and I largely agree, it's much of the reason I finally started to branch out a bit, when you see stuff like these games and David Oreilly shorts (http://vimeo.com/davidoreilly/videos)
(https://i.imgur.com/cXP46Zt.jpg)
you realize that it's about picking an aesthetic with strict rules, and in there you can find incredible variety and many new forms of expression for each set of rules. That provides that feel of making pixelart that we love, and it can be done anywhere and with any selection of tools. Actually,here's a really interesting essay Oreilly made about this (http://files.davidoreilly.com/downloads/BasicAnimationAesthetics.pdf), I feel this is what pixelart is about beyond pixels
Where I see your point is when you say that really detailed pixelart is less interesting.
I see your point because I feel that when it's too much about detail and it starts to not show the tells of the technique it does become a bit like a really hard to do version of what people are already doing in ultra realistic photoshop images and in AAA 3D, that on top of that doesnt have a chance of being as detailed as either of those two things, because so much time is being spent on overcoming limitations instead of just adding detail.
(https://i.imgur.com/8CtnzRm.gif)
The demoscene pixel pieces that were done with "dirty" tools and were almost exact copies of photos in magazines would be a good example.
But I dont exactly agree because I think many different aesthetics can be done in pixelart, and it's possible to think it's just flat colors and squary looking stuff, like discussed in the Modern day pixelart? (http://wayofthepixel.net/index.php?topic=17151.0) and Uncanny Valley and Cuteness (http://wayofthepixel.net/index.php?topic=16506.20) topics.
(https://i.imgur.com/lv0S2kL.png)(https://i.imgur.com/LklMYOG.jpg)
Everything starts getting homogenized to the same Sword & Sworcery aesthetic ( Darkfaxlz calls it hipster pixel XD ).
(Not that I think there's anything wrong with that look, it's fucking awesome to animate and it portrays things very economically, but nobody wants there to be just one flavor of icecream :p)
I think what's key is what Oreilly says, being coherent to whatever rules you started with, when you do that your piece will look good regardless of medium. (for example in the uncanny topic, I think much of the problem is we have engineers putting realistic faces with less realistic movement or behavior, or unrealistically cute faces with realistic details, the incoherence is what's uncanny)
What is key to me, about what I like in pixelart is that whatever you portray is portrayed in the most economic way, that direct focus on what the artist saw as beautiful in whatever is being rendered makes me feel like I'm being shown beauty, instead of just replicating in a phenoenom in a more mechanical way.
The more complex the phenomenom is, the more elements you'll have to bring in, but if there is still less elements than in the real thing, I still get that feeling of being shown beauty by an artist instead of having the object replicated.
(https://i.imgur.com/0DgFS2T.png)
The water in this Fool piece has that (http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/29178.htm), but his art in general is a bit too detailed for my taste, kind of like most of Metal Slug pixelart. They're both incredible anyway :p I guess it must be zoomed in for me to like it XD
I guess another way to put it is
I want you to show me what you felt when you went there, I dont want you to bring me there.
-
I largely agree with you, especially about the aesthetics being a set of rules, and David OReilly is a great artist to bring up.
I guess what I'd say to that is that while pixel art is applicable to all sorts of different styles, or sets of rules if you will, it has, as a medium, specific strengths and weaknesses that make some styles and rules more successful then others. Now i'm not trying to lay down hard and fast truths here, but generally I think we can look at PA from four different approaches in order to examine these strengths.
Artistically: Now, this one is a little redundant, but i'll say it anyway; anything goes. I want to make it clear that I am not trying to lay down the law on what pixel art is and isn't, I just want to make some observations, and if anyone is just creating for their own self satisfaction, then an objective framework isn't going to mean much, that aside we can begin to look at PA in more utilitarian ways, through both aesthetic success and economical (time or money) feasibility.
Historically: First however it’s always good to touch on historical context. If aesthetics are a set of rules, then we can see early pixel art as inherently having there own, perhaps unintentional, definitive aesthetics (due to the technological limitations). C64 restrictions for example, while it's an odd set of rules in the abstract it undeniable has it's own specific look made widespread through the necessity that the technology of the time demanded. It’s important to note here however, a lot of early pixel art wasn't trying to look like pixel art, a lot of the time It was trying to look as high resolutions and high fidelity as possible. This isn't true across the board of course, many games and companies found their feet with the art form aesthetically quite early, but I feel it’s still important to note, as many techniques that some feel are integral to the medium, AA and dithering for example, have historically been used more as an attempt to hide pixels then to express them.
Aesthetically: I view pixel art as a minimalist purification of digital bitmap based art, it stripes digital art to it’s literal base component pieces, and gives you manual control over where they go and how they are treated. In this way it gives us an opportunity to examine digital art in a stripped back fashion, what happens when we remove a million colours and leave 8? what happens when we take full control over the specific shapes and blocks of colour in any given place (clustering). The answer to me is we can create really aesthetically powerful things. It requires these aesthetic rules as a way to differentiate it from general digital illustration, and it has these rules encoded in it’s history. In this way it lends itself to an aesthetic treatment in a the same fashion that low poly does. Low poly is strong because it’s lost it’s capacity and hopefully intention to successfully be high fidelity or “realistic” art. Instead it simply tries to look good with what it has. This is why modern low poly often looks so great in comparison to your typical muddy modern fps. It focuses on colours, it pays attention to dynamic lighting, it relies on making the most of its shapes and textures. It needs to do these things in order to be successful, as it can't rely on looking realistic as a means for graphical success. There is a similar history here with pixel art, there is a reason early low poly looks, in general, so awful. It’s because a great deal of it was trying to look more rendered and more realistic then it was actually capable of being. It was stuck in that graphical rat race which valued looking real over looking good. Fortunately that emphasis has flipped these days and in that way I think we have seen a rise in styles that emphasize looking good, over looking real. That “hipster” pixel art you mentioned is one of them.
This is not to say that rendered pixel art is necessarily bad. There are plenty of pieces that look wonderful, and I think to a large extent it’s the specific treatment that is important. What I am saying is that pixel art is at it’s most powerful and relevant in a given image when it is not visually interchangeable with another medium, in particular digital illustration. Works where the pixel is integral to the art are more qualified to be pixel art over something that uses pixel art as a means to achieve a higher resolution look. Perhaps a good comparison is the way same way a pure photo-realist oil painting might be impressive, but the medium is ultimately more associated with a painterly, even impressionistic look; A look where the brush strokes and paint play a large role in the aesthetic of the image itself. Pixels are our paint. Therefor I value work that expresses them more highly then work that attempts to hide them. Works with large colour ramps or excessive dithering do note lend themselves well to the medium. This does not disqualify a rendered approach but does place it within the bounds of a set of aesthetic rules that attempt to utilize the pixel as the primary means of expression.
Economically: The last, and perhaps most practical viewpoint is one of economics. What can pixels achieve that in a given time that another medium cannot? Obviously, one of those answers is a pixeled aesthetic, however, and I think that, and this is the crux of this thread, pixel art can lose that territory, mainly to 3D art, which through forms of rendering, can take the pixeled aesthetic while retaining the incredible power that 3D offers (in particular dynamic lighting and animation). Ghost Trick is a good example of this, and while it hasn't mastered the approach it’s getting pretty close. Now not everyone has a Ghost Trick budget to work with, and 3D is expensive, but I think it’s our job as pixel artists in a new era to discover areas of aesthetic expertise that other art forms cannot easily claim. to some degree I think this is why the “Hipster” aesthetic of Hyperlight Drifters has been so successful; it is minimalist, colour focused, obviously pixeled, blocky and simple to create smooth animations in. To put it simply, it’s good territory for pixel art.
So with all that in mind I feel that as I said before, at least to me, pixel arts primary qualities are low colour palettes, crisp edges, strong clusters. Elements that accentuate and complement the pixel, which is after all, the prime element we are working with.
What all this means to any pixel artists working out there, keep up your draftsmanship, it crosses into all mediums. And if work gets a little tight, maybe look into low poly, it combines well with pixeled textures and shares a lot of aesthetic similarities.
-
We've been comparing here the traitmarks of artworks. Another thing to compare is the very work of art. What are you doing? And when we look at the identity of the deed, are the kind of difficulties not part of that identity? In an absolute sense there is no replacement for pixel art; it is what it is.
A certain way of crafting has advantages and disadvantages, and this is what guides the art, different chances for certain decisions that go a different kind of creativity/solutions that lead to a different outcome. If doing something feels unnatural/inconvenient, you look for another way doing it or prefer doing something else more in its place.
Thus the most iconic styles of pixel art, in popularity representing the medium, are those that are most effectively expressed and efficiently made in that medium, according to its advantages and disadvantages -- this, on some level, any audiences understands and takes pleasure in; it looks interesting when there is a clever application of style to situation; smart is beautiful. Clever solution to constrain can keep up with unproblematic perfection; imaginative application can keep up with foundational originality.
So the question is, when you look to "replace" pixelart, for example with something 3d:
do you want to eliminate the problems pixel art is known for by creating it entirely differently?
or do you want to inject problems into pixelart that you solve in the patterns it is known for?
to be answered by and for yourself. Joy and beauty be with you. Power to the pixel.