Pixelation
Critique => Pixel Art => Topic started by: eobet on October 14, 2006, 07:29:17 pm
-
Ever since I saw my first Bitmap Brothers' game I've adored pixel art, and the pixel art of the demo scene was just uneblievable (Made's stuff especially). Henk Nieborg is also awesome. I need to find a copy of Lomax again.
But anyway, I never felt that I was any good at pixel art. I'm used to be more into pencil sketching and these days, I mostly use my Wacom board. However, I did dabble a bit in placing pixels by hand, so I thought I'd post here and see what you think:
Knockdown Karate graphics
(http://www.eobet.com/temp/karate_native_american.jpg) (http://www.eobet.com/temp/karate_pyramids_grayscale.jpg) (http://www.eobet.com/temp/karate_pyramids_color.jpg)
This is so old, but I think it's my first real serious pixel art attempt. It was made for a shareware game for the old grayscale PalmOS devices (which later turned color as seen in the last picture, but the two on the left only have four shades of grey). The game was released, but never using my graphics (I do have an internal release with them, though). Unfortunately, the developer switched to PocketPC despite Gameloft (a big publisher back then) having shown interest in the title.
Steem buttons
(http://www.eobet.com/temp/eatpoo/steemicons.jpg)
These were made for an old Atari STe emulator and I'm still actually pretty proud of them. Working with 16x16 icons in 16 colors wasn't easy, and I must confess that I suprised myself several times at how readable the images became. I especially like the joystick. Can anyone tell what brand and model it is?
Anyway, so that's what I dare to show you, but I'm looking forward to your comments and crits.
I will probably mostly lurk here, since I very seldom do pixel work these days, but I do enjoy looking at everyone's art here!
Btw, does anyone know where the Amiga demo scene pixel gallery called... gfx2art (I think?) went... I can't find any evidence that it ever existed in Google... very weird.
-
Nice, I like the houses.
-
Nice, I like the houses.
obviously you can't tell whats pixelled an what isnt.
gradients look ugly. Whats with the scaled vector images aswell?
As for the first game mockups - more contrast. You should change some of the hues also. Texture is massivley needed on the sand, pyramids look ok, just a bit bland.
-
Ack, sorry! I just read the rules for this site, so I removed that house, as it wasn't 100% hand pixelled.
The last image, however... the rules talk about using Photoshop tools and such, and I know using a vector based app is as far removed from pixel pushing as you can get, but has anyone tried this technique before? Perhaps you don't want to discuss it here, though. Let me know and I will remove it as well.
Which then only leaves the really old and basic looking stuff. Whoops!
As for the first game mockups - more contrast. You should change some of the hues also. Texture is massivley needed on the sand, pyramids look ok, just a bit bland.
If you read the description, you will see that it was made for PalmOS, which only had four fixed shades of gray, and depending on the device you had, those shades could actually be green instead! Granted, the color image could perhaps be improved, since I believe that palette was around 200 colors, but it was my first try.
-
Vector is not pixel-art and therefore also does not qualify.
I was refering to the color version aswell. I think you should work on it - as it has potential.
-
Btw, does anyone know where the Amiga demo scene pixel gallery called... gfx2art (I think?) went... I can't find any evidence that it ever existed in Google... very weird.
gfxzone. It's almost always down. Infact, it looks like it's down right now.
-
Feron: get off your purist horse there buddy.
Scaled down vector art is pixel art too if done correctly. These aren't the best quality vector reduxes I've seen, but they're probably better than what a lot of people could achieve by hand.
Also: eobet: the AA doesn't work on these smaller icons, they just blur it up... The AA would work if it were more subtle,
-
Scaled down vector art is pixel art too if done correctly. These aren't the best quality vector reduxes I've seen, but they're probably better than what a lot of people could achieve by hand.
What the hell. Photoshop color reductions arent considered pixel-art so why should these be. And they are only better than many could do is because the're made by a computer not by an artist.
And i'm hardly a purist - i just know what pixel-art is.
-
Since when is photoshop color redux not pixel art? I use it in most of my pieces and no one ever complains?
And they are only better than many could do is because the're made by a computer not by an artist
And what would be wrong with that? If he can make art with his computer that others can't do by hand, then that's more power to him, no?
-
Since when is photoshop color redux not pixel art? I use it in most of my pieces and no one ever complains?
And what would be wrong with that? If he can make art with his computer that others can't do by hand, then that's more power to him, no?
Great color-reduced art is not pixel art, but that's okay. Color-reduced backgrounds or props or characters are also not pixel art, unless you go back over the entire piece by hand and correct every pixel. It doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, especially if it yields the results that you want, and you did the source art with color reduction in mind. However, it does not magically become pixel art just because it is small and uses few colors.
-
Rule 3: Post only pixel art.
Now this is a bit of a controversial subject, but it hopefully can be cleared out at least so we can go on with our business here: Pixel Art, is art where there's specific attention paid to the fine manipulation of picture elements. It deals with the informative quality of specific, single pixels. If the art you're about to post has not been pixel-pushed on that level, don't bother. Automatic AA, soft brushes, filters, smudge tools, all are indicative of index-painting, or at least dirty-tooling, but do not always mean your art will not benefit from pixel-level critique. If you've made something using some of these tools and then you're able to reign the piece in by optimizing the palette into using the best possible amount of colors, went in and pushed single pixels until everything is right, then it's probable we'll be able to talk about your art and how it can be made better. Always be clear of how you made things, only post concept art when it's relative to a pixel-art piece you've made and never never try to decieve us. As above, workstages and process animations are optional, but always welcome.
I have no objection to using color redux in games or what-not. "Pixel Art, is art where there's specific attention paid to the fine manipulation of picture elements. It deals with the informative quality of specific, single pixels. If the art you're about to post has not been pixel-pushed on that level, don't bother." These haven't been all done by hand and therefore do not qualify as pixel-art.
And what would be wrong with that? If he can make art with his computer that others can't do by hand, then that's more power to him, no?
No. thats more power to his computer. computers are not people.
-
Ok, again, I'm sorry.
I left the last image because I wanted to see what the reactions to pixel-art-by-vectors would be, but I realize now that this is the wrong forum for it. I did not understand how purist this art was. But should I repost the image in the general forum is someone wants to continue discussing it, or is it pointless, since anything but hand placed pixels seem to be off-limits? (Is even a Wacom tablet allowed?)
(If anyone wants to look again, the image can be found here (http://www.eobet.com/temp/work-detail.png).)
-
Its not about being pure, I think the problem was that it simply wasnt pixel art. We're not a general art forum, the entire point is to post pixel art only in the pixel art section.
-
maybe people could put a tag in the topic title saying" game art" or something, that would include color reduction in pieces, then people could give critique on how it fits with the other elements in the piece?
-
Its not about being pure, I think the problem was that it simply wasnt pixel art. We're not a general art forum, the entire point is to post pixel art only in the pixel art section.
That is what I misunderstood. I thought that as our tools since the 80s had evolved into Wacom tablets and vector based programs, so had the pixel art followed, kind of... as long as the result looked like pixel art, it wouldn't matter how it was constructed. But I guess pixel art is not like, say, impressionism, but more like... pointillism, perhaps?
-
Something like that, yeh. "Real" "pixel art" is when each pixel is placed by hand (but not necessarily one by one) with intent to affect the end result.
Kinda.
-
Not sure if this has been said, but the images are jpegs. Big, big no no.
-
You people dissapoint me...
Pixel art is about expression yourself in a medium where the size of the smallest grain matters, no more, no less.
I create my pixel art with 3D programs, generators, filters, photoshop, the whole smack. I always make sure the options allow me to keep full control, and that's it.
Pixel art is not the tool you use
Pixel art is not the ammount of time you put into it
Pixel art is not an art style
Pixel art is not defined by colour count or size
Pixel art is not the individual placement of pixels
-> Pixel art is about working with the disabilities that come with the size of a pixel
Individual pixels are visible, so a single pixel can mess up the look of something, creating the need for an almost pixel perfect execution. Since the size of a pixel is technology based, pixel hand goes hand in hand with other restrictions such as colour restrictions, size restrictions and other things, but they are just intimately connected to pixel art. Isometric magazine art drops all the other restrictions and just uses the visibility of the smallest part as a stylistic bonus for example. That's why you won't find too much AA in those pieces. Once a pixel becomes invisible due to the medium, as is the case with higher resolutions or CG art, where the pixel becomes invisible because it's surrounded by too many others, it loses the right to call itself pixel art. A correct definition for pixel art would be:
The art of working with or around the visible size of a pixel
-
wrong.
Pixel art = creating art pixel by pixel
the rest falls under the category of CG. If you want to still disagree, give a potential employer your spiel the next time you're being interviewed for a pixel art job.
-
If you're going to bring jobs into the argument, when it comes down to it and you've got deadlines looming, any process that results in quality art is perfectly valid. A sane employer isn't going to hire or fire you over your ability to stay within arbitrary constraints like no auto-AA or automatic color reduction. It's all about the end product, if it looks good, it really doesn't matter how you did it.
Anyway, how about less useless arguing about exactly what pixel-art is, and more pixeling?
Eobet, I would give you some critiques, but I guess the stuff you've still got up is old and it'd be useless to you. I really liked what I saw of your vector stuff, you should show it all off here (http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?topic=2184.0).
-
Make your art any way you like. If the process is foreign to what we are endorse here, there might not be much critique that we can offer you. It's as simple as that.
Gil, you should know better than to derail threads with how 'disappointed' you are in us. Stick to the topic. What can and what cannot be posted on this forum is covered now by the terms of usage.
-
Eobet, I would give you some critiques, but I guess the stuff you've still got up is old and it'd be useless to you. I really liked what I saw of your vector stuff, you should show it all off here (http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?topic=2184.0).
As I mentioned, I've moved away from hand pushing pixels but am interested in getting back into it, so I don't mind critique at all, or even paint-overs (if you do this on these forums). The karate stuff is obviously trying to do a IK+ game without upsetting Mr. Maclean too much. I must admit that the belt pixels are actually stolen from Studio 3's unauthorized update, IK 2000! I also looked at the wonderful and unique Atari ST version of the original International Karate, but I could never reach that level.
I also posted in the linked thread as you suggested.