Pixelation
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Helm on January 11, 2008, 09:41:23 pm
-
ilkke said on another thread the following:
Maybe this is a good time and place as any to say something that's been on my mind for quite a while now.
Now, pixelation is all about helping each other etc, but I was surprised to find that some of the PJ challenge winning entries have been 'fixed' by a number of people on this here forum. This is of course very good for the picture itself but I'm not sure how it relates to the challenges as a form of sport and positive competition. What's more, there are WIP threads on PJ exclusively for challenges. The only difference is that on PJ ppl don't take and modify your palette or image directly! I've seen such modifications get taken for granted and left in the final challenge entry, and I personally think that sucks ass. It may be ok for noobs to build their confidence in this manner but is pretty much vucking up the point of challenges when someone who already knows their shit comes here to have his entry 'pimped'. In the end ppl don't even give credit to those who have helped them.
My suggestion is to limit PJ challenge threads here to just verbal comments and suggestions, or NPA interventions and examples that can't be used as part of the entry.
This never happened in a challenge that I entered or anything, so I'm not saying this out of envy.
Sorry if this is the wrong place and sorry if it's already been discussed.
A dime for your thoughts.
My thoughts on the matter soon. Discuss.
-
Pixelation is for helping people with their art. Edits are a powerful tool to do this. If someone takes an edit as is and posts it on PJ without mentioning it's been edited and who did the editing, that falls under art ripping and PJ should deal with it according to their rules and restrictions. It's not Pixelation's job to do PJ's job.
It's not good for the picture itself as you say to have it 'fixed' by someone and then take their edit and pretend its yours. If this happens, it's wrong and it doesn't help anybody.
If you look at an edit, see what you did wrong and fix that, that's perfectly fine in my opinion and exactly what this forum is about. If the other people on PJ also need critique, this is an open forum. It's not Pixelation's care if the people over at PJ edit art or give good critique (or if the don't give useful edits or critique, more to the point), nor do we have to legislate, so to say, around that.
Pixelation challenges have always been about incentive. A reason to do more art and get better. Communal spirit to push along, not about being omg #1. This is the sort of shit that killed the demoscene, and we're not about to encourage it, from a moderator standpoint. Officially, Pixelation does not care who wins competitions and what assets they utilize to do this over in PJ. Take it over with them if you want something to change. We are not affiliated directly to synchronise organisation. This is an open forum for help with pixel art and if that gives an edge to someone in winning an internet art competition then fine, just as long as he's not stealing anything.
'noobs' <- nobody here is considered a noob. Such attitude is not encouraged, we're all here to learn and help others.
'someone who knows their shit' <- nobody here is master pimp of pixel art, we're all learning. I don't like it either when people come here just to showcase and get ass-pats and don't care for critique that people post, but what can you do.
My suggestion is to limit PJ challenge threads here to just verbal comments and suggestions, or NPA interventions and examples that can't be used as part of the entry.
I don't think this is a good idea. PJ is PJ and Pixelation is Pixelation.
-
Hmm...
I agree with Helm for the most part, but do we want people who would do that here? ???
I think claiming an edit is yours is grounds for a strike, at least...
-
Strikes go for what people do on the premises, generally, though.
-
But it's not only wasting the effort of members here, it's taking recognition from them too.
-
But it's not happening here.
-
But it's not only wasting the effort of members here, it's taking recognition from them too.
I understand the issue about mods not being able to or not wanting to do much about something that doesn't happen on another site (too much drama). But if individual artists notice that it's happening and subsequently ignore the users future requests for help/edits, etc. hopefully eventually they'll get the message. It takes a big chunk of time to write out advice and post edits, so why waste it on someone who is ungrateful for that help.
-
I really do agree that is very much a communal thing here at pixelation, I know I've learnt most of what i know from watching other threads progress, with the amount of critique and personal suggestions visual aid just seems nescissary. It's not only the initial poster who benifits from edits and critique take the featured chest ( http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?board=11.0 ) for example. Yes each artist goes through somewhat of a journey but with the amount of discussion and clear explainations its very hard not to pick up anything on the way even if you don't contribute in the thread.
Of course there are some skilled pixel artists here, but not all of them bother to make an active contribution to help people other members all of the time, just look at the last few months for example. I've noticed most the contributions are by pixel artists who are generally learning themselves, its the act of group opinion that help most of all.
I do understand what you mean though ilkke. It's a challenge so competition is inevitable when there's ranking involved and it kinda seems like it's unfair if someone's entry has had an overhaul of terrific critique. Especially if the end result is a direct influence of a particularly excellent edit.. I suppose it depends on how serious you are about being number 1 on PJ, I for one would prefer to test myself and see what I can produce on my own and afterwards see where I went wrong with some group critique to help me for next time. Afterall you can't have you're hand held all the time, some time or other mother pixelation has to let you walk on your own.
-
The only difference is that on PJ ppl don't take and modify your palette or image directly!
People do. I do. As far as I'm aware PJ encourages this as much as Pixelation does.
I've seen such modifications get taken for granted and left in the final challenge entry, and I personally think that sucks ass. It may be ok for noobs to build their confidence in this manner but is pretty much vucking up the point of challenges when someone who already knows their shit comes here to have his entry 'pimped'. In the end ppl don't even give credit to those who have helped them.
PJ has the much same rules (though possibly not explicit) about using edits as Pixelation. Use as a reference, not as a base.
If some one is using an edit to reference as a learning tool then I can see no wrong, challenge or otherwise.
If they are using it wholesale then that certainly is a problem and you should report it to a PJ mod.
-
I think that the competition states that your work must be 100% original, strictly PA, and done within the deadline, as well as the unique challenge rules.
However, this has never excluded receiving outside opinion. Knowing your helpful contacts is part of the real world and therefor fine for competition.
Pixel by pixel edit-stealing is of course breaking the 100% original need, and by that is a direct disqualification if anyone chose to pursue it. I do make a point of posting either very early wips (where the pixels hardly count), or an already submitted piece (and not changing my entry until after judging). I've also only submitted one piece to a weekly challenge (hopefully 2 by Sunday), so I'd consider myself pretty impartial.
Forgot to say too that the results are popular vote, and, past a certain point of "good jobbyness" seldom have to do with pixel technique nearly as much as with the appeal of the subject matter. Certainly the order of the top three is all concept and not skill.
-
As a frequent user here on pixelation, and on pixeljoint, I guess I have to give my 2 pesos:
To be honest, I've never had any issues with a member asking for help here or on the pj forums. I can also say that I've NEVER noticed a direct correlation between users submitted wips here at Pixelation for pj competitions and the people who win. I have noticed, however, that the winners of the competitions, are usually frequent Pixelation users, or frequent pj posters, who have developed some great skills over the years. That just goes along with the territory of practice makes perfect. As far as any one who's used a piece directly edited by a member here, you can either report it to the mods and admins at PJ, or even me if you wish, and we'll review what's going on. Getting help is one thing, but using rips and edits is intolerable in my opinion. I'm still kinda' iffy about allowing linearts in pj, to be honest, as I only want people to birth original ideas, and not develop problems another user has.(like a constant cancer that can't be stopped, due to a low excuse of "style" to hide behind)
I'm in agreement over keeping these websites in "friendly separation" mode, as they are two different beasts all together. (none better than the other, just different) And I don't think hindering the amount of help users offer will make matters any better. Yes, the user base here does seem to have some great talent, and critique, but that's mainly due to it's small user base of active members, while PJ has a larger user base, making it difficult to focus some great attention or critique towards some of the people who ask for it. Either way, competition is a great motivator for young artistic minds, willing to improve. Ever since pj competitions began, the amount of submitted art, and quality of certain users has improved GREATLY, in my humble opinion.
So again, Ilkke, if you feel a user's edited piece was directly taken in vain without permission, contact or advise the square heads of the round table(pj admins and mods) and we will deal with it accordingly...just my opinion. ;)
*I hope this thread was ok to respond to, don't mean to reopen any dead topic or anything...
-
The topic was started yesterday so it's not dead of course, and thank you all for posting.
-
I don't really think its an issue. I (like most others i hope) am participating in the weekly challenge for fun and to try and get better... I couldn't care less about the pixeljoint award thing.
anyone who takes edits of their work as their own is only cheating themselves.
-
If you look at an edit, see what you did wrong...
That's the only thing I took exception to. An edit isn't to fix something "wrong"... but, I would say, to demonstrate a technique, method or change that might be more effective. Your fundamental argument is fine... I just didn't like the use of the word "wrong". I don't think this is a math equation that has a correct answer, but there are certainly more effective methods that an edit can help illustrate.
-
I don't think there's any math equation. When you see an edit of your work and you decide that the edit does things better than what you did then from your own point of view you've done something wrong and can amend it by following the example of the edit. I don't really want to argue over scemantics, though I can see how someone would object to what seem like objective value judgements about art, but then again I never claimed to make objective anything.
-
You're right, it is a petty argument of semantics, since we seem to agree on the nature of edits. I just think that referring to edits as helpful advice rather than "correcting" something wrong helps make them more palatable for critique... who likes being told "you're wrong".
That does bring up another thing that I think could go a long way to help people give more effective critiques. Pixelation has always been a terrific site for constructive criticism on artwork, something many art sites I have visited don't have. A large part of this is the members who take the time to reply and give helpful suggestions and art advice. However, I think a number of critiques forget to point out what the person is doing right. It is much easier to point out what someone can work on... but takes work to point out what they are doing right. The most beneficial part of positive criticism is not turning the artists away... Telling someone their piece needs to work on anatomy, scale, composition and shading are valid criticisms... but nobody likes to hear nothing but what they are doing wrong. A little positive feedback makes a lot of difference, and I think sometimes it is missing in lengthy critiques.
-
nobody likes to hear nothing but what they are doing wrong
I don't mind. I'd honestly rather know what should be done better, rather than expecting people to sugarcoat it for me. :y:
-
nobody likes to hear nothing but what they are doing wrong
I don't mind. I'd honestly rather know what should be done better, rather than expecting people to sugarcoat it for me. :y:
A lot of people, myself included, like to think and act that way until we get a real string of "no no no!" posts. At that point, it moves from "here are things i need to work on" to "oh my god this will never be good!" and it helps tremendously for someone to say, for instance, I like the color of your grass ;). Not only is there finally a glimer in the dark, but you get to cross one thing off your long list of things to get right.
-
It's ok to get some ass pats every once in a while for things done right, but I don't necessarily believe it to be a requirement in posts giving pointers about what "could" be easier on the eyes. To me, it's just extra cannon fodder, dancing around the point, or basically someone trying to be nice, and cancel out any negative statements that the recipient may have previously read. We've all done it before, and can't deny it: " Well, the neck seems a little long, and body seems out of proportion to his legs...but I like what you've done with his hair : ) " To me, it's a matter of being polite and showing some respect for another fellow artist, so you don't come off like a total jerk ( A mother's teachings go a long way...) Though I NEVER have believed that a critique NEEDS constructive, AND positive feedback. I guess to put it in simple terms, it's ok to be positive or nice as long as the issue has been addressed clearly(not that the word "issue" signifies any negative statements overall...Ugh, I feel like a politician, trying not to use the word "right" or "wrong" in this whole damn post. I've been "PC"-ified through artistic revision.)
-
well there's a HUGE difference between an asspat and somebody saying "this one part looks good, so you can move on and use it as a reference mark as you go about the rest of your pieces"
there's also the sort of "alright, that looks better! here's what to work on now" posts that are a lot more helpful than posting an edit just to hear what else sucks without feedback as to whether you've improved anything.
-
I agree there should be positive parts in a critique usually. This goes especially when you're giving someone verbal feedback on their art because if you rub them the wrong way with negativity from the go they won't be listening to you at all and the critique will be lost. This isn't as big an issue online, where even if you're annoyed by the critique you got somewhere you can still return to the same post when you've cooled off and get what you need from it, it'll always be there for you to read and turn the annoying into useful advice.
From a teaching standpoint, balancing the good with the bad is certainly a very real thing to keep in mind. Here online not so much but still as B.O.B. says, being nice to people is always good karma.
However having been here for a long time I've realised another thing. Completely sidestepping an artist's ego when giving them critique (meaning, not sugarcoating at all, telling it like you see it) is a very valuable lesson to them as well. This goes mostly for people that are going to go pro on some capacity, but simply withstanding even cruel critique without sweating it or throwing artiste hissy fits is an invaluable skill to have. In that respect if someone blows up here once or twice due to critique, goes away, comes back, but eventually grows thicker skin, that's another service from Pixelation rendered, in my mind. The trick is to avoid the ego, not hurt it, not induce hopelessness on the artist. Just list the flaws as you see them, and when they adress them tell them they've done good.
-
As long as someone has some back up for their opinions being blunt and to the point is fine in my opinion, I too have had my work drawn over, paintings painted over and parts completely erased where my tutors have tried to urge me to try another approach, leave my comfort zone and generally to move me to develop as an artist. Of course it can seem rude and people usually take it negatively but in the end it's the fastest way to improve.. Compliments are great when you see some genuine improvement but I think its kinda unfair on the artist lingering on parts that people like rather than tackling real issues about their work. I'd rather people try to push me in the right direction than try to fill out their posts with both negative and positive observations just for fairness sake, if you genuinely like a part of my work by all means tell me, id hate to know its just to balance out your dislikes about the work.
It is how your words come across, you could point out something that he/she just doesn't want to hear, or say it just say it all too honestly, and as Helm says your critique would just be lost usually by being easily offended. I've seen some threads where the artist is looking for advice about a certain part of their work when there are overall bigger issues that need to be focused on, everything but what they're looking for can be totally ignored. It's totally their loss in the end because at the end of the day we're giving out free advice, you'd be stupid not to at least take whats said into consideration.
-
I think I understand the forum's philosophy on this matter now. It DOES make sense.
Since a lot has been said since my post, I feel an urge to clarify my position.
To be honest, I suggested allowing/not allowing certain things just to get a response, to get people to discuss this. Of course there is no problem with the forum(s), the problem is always with those ppl who try to manipulate rules and/or others' expectations. In this sense, less rules is always better. I don't agree with Helm about the reason for demoscene's 'death' but that's another matter.
I'm not the one to care much about winning a challenge, but I kinda invest my emotions in this pixel scene and the people that it consists of. If I think that someone has made a tremendous improvement and I go out of my way to congratulate and support him, then I'm naturally disappointed at best when I later discover that things are not as they seem.
I don't feel that someone tried to trick me, I just feel that information flow has been obscured, so to speak. I also feel that this doesn't have to be like that, and it just bothers me and that's that.
I also never meant to use 'noob' as a derogatory term, and I think it is pretty clear. I believe it is a short for newbie, a beginner. Or am I wrong?
I'm glad to see that the thread has taken another direction now.
-
I don't agree with Helm about the reason for demoscene's 'death' but that's another matter.
If you don't think so I'd like to hear your opinion on the matter since as you say the original point of the thread has been resolved.
'noob' is usally a derogatory term. It's not much shorter than 'newbie' 6 letters to 4, so it must serve some other purpose.
-
A lot of people, myself included, like to think and act that way until we get a real string of "no no no!" posts. At that point, it moves from "here are things i need to work on" to "oh my god this will never be good!" and it helps tremendously for someone to say, for instance, I like the color of your grass ;). Not only is there finally a glimer in the dark, but you get to cross one thing off your long list of things to get right.
I'm sort of detached when it comes to art though because I know that each piece is a stepping stone towards my improvement. Crits help with this, and I don't particularly need reaffirmation of it's coolness or w/e because hopefully I'll be moving past it soon. Maybe phrased badly, I dunno. :-X
Though I'm sure with games, and, you know, stuff you have to actually live with it's a different story. :)
-
I would like to add two points!
ONE - This may be semantic pedantry, but constructive criticism does not imply complements or positive feedback or asspatting or spoonfeeding or reacharounds. Allow me to illustrate:
CRITICISM: "This sucks."
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM: "This sucks, and here's one way to fix it, so it doesn't suck anymore."
CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM DELIVERED IN A POSITIVE WAY: "Wow, I love what you did there, but what if you tried X on Y?"
I think we can all agree that the mods crush anyone who simply posts criticism, and that constructive criticism by itself is too helpful to risk missing it by requiring a little complement to go along with every point, AND that there is plenty of column B and C all over this board. Some of us at least are relatively busy, but still want to help; efficiency sometimes means no time for cuddling or a kiss on the cheek after our rough rendezvous.
TWO - But, I may be a special case, I grant that! I require constant criticism and berating just to keep my enormous artist's ego in check. When everyone I know looks at my art and says "oh goodness that is fantastic you should draw pitchers for a livin!" it is of the utmost importance that I be able to go somewhere and have someone tell me its shit, and it WILL be shit until i put my nose down and bother to actually put effort into the damn thing. If you can't handle that, you shouldn't be an artist, because anyone who has anything worthwhile to teach you will, in one way or another, tell you that, and if you're not ready for it, you could blow everything.
-
I have to say this is a great thread.
I think it totally depends on the person your criting, a more 'advanced' artist should be more open to a blunt critique possibly showing them an outsiders perspective on things because he may be more experienced be they like everyone else need a second opinion from time to time, even if they've had their fair share of ass-pats in the past. And with the amount of critique they have received in the past should be more open to what people can say, I doubt a well established artist would be so easily offended by a comment unless it was purposely said to offend.
The bulk of this forum are generally around the same level I'd say and if an artist is trying to do something in particular, chances are someone has done something similar before. So as a group would be more well informed to how to go about it, with the mix of personal opinion and basically 'being on the same page' as you'd say, critique should as cow mentioned should make up stepping stones pushing the artist hopefully in the right direction, or at least allowing them to make their own choices.
But for people new to the world of pixel art it's mostly a personal challenge trying to learn the tricks of the trade so the whole sugarcoating is definately nescissary imo in order to incourage the artist onto a steady learning curve. It's no good destroying their hopes and dreams by deconstructing their work to shreds when what they need is the means to understand the basics, careful wording, positivity on small improvements and not being patrionizing is whats needed I think. Do you remember how fustrating it was first trying to pixel? I agree you should take the effort into consideration, as Adam mentioned it's unfair to the artist even if its really flawed to be so negative when the effort has clearly been made.
Its no good expecting new artists to know what you're talking about when you throw jargen at them, suggest things out of their reach and post edits that will just leave them thinking 'are you kidding I can't do that', so even if you could possibly do a phenomenal edit that can show up all their flaws and suggests the way to go it can actually be unfair considering they aren't discovering for themselves at their own pace. Leading back to Ilkke's original statement Its hard to believe some people have improved that quickly and learnt so much in such a small space, especially when the piece has had such a stong influence from a fab edit.
-
@Terley: You are right, but what do we do with Helm then? We should prolly add a disclaimer to the front page along the lines of:
"Warning! This website contains Helm, who is able to give you great criticism but has a habit of feeding on human flesh" ;)
@AdamAtomic: Well, there are POSITIVE and NEGATIVE motivation. Positive motivation is when you need encouragement to press on. Negative motivation is when you need difficulties to keep your will going. Generally people tend to fall into on category or another. Regardless of that, I personally believe that negative criticism has a higher constructive value, cause ppl tend to know what they do good and need help in perfecting the things that they don't. There's always someone better at something than we are, and it does us good to keep people like that around.
@Helm: The death of the scene, an essay. Coders, a pivotal demoscene 'class', have always been HIGHLY COMPETITIVE. This is more or less what created the scene in the first place. Graphicians (official term) and musicians were rarely so much focused on "bigger, faster, better, more", which is easily understandable cause art is harder to compare. The shift in the scene came about with the changing of the profile of people who comprise the scene. Around the mid-nineties, even the demo parties were shifting more towards Doom tournaments than scene-related competitions. These gamers also became the majority of the audience. PC never had the kind of community interaction that Amiga or C64 had, although (and perhaps because) it had a lot more people involved. It maybe became too easy to make drop shadow and lens flare logos, manipulate scans, or make techno music; let alone code without real hardware restrictions. The scene effectively 'died' when it became flooded with these lukewarm (at best) 'efforts'. Towards the turn of the century, the PC had sort of a demo scene renaissance when a new aesthetic arose, regardless of the fact that the scene was creatively 'dead' for a while already. Unfortunately for us, this new aesthetic was visually almost exclusively clean-cut (and VERY avant-garde) design, and pixel art such as pixel logos were very rare.
The scene always had it's cave-ins, most notably lousy public taste (naked chicks and dragons, anyone?), but this is probably true with any community that encompasses a large enough crowd. Even on PJ, where all the members are supposed to be artists, there is more appreciation for flashiness than originality.
I noticed before that in contemporary pixelling circles, there is a tendency to reference the demo scene in a negative context, but I must say that it pretty much shaped my tastes visually and musically, enabled me to get in touch with some great people from around the world long before internet made that a common practice, and helped me 'find my place' and set some sort of personal goals. It was immensely gratifying, and I can only those years of free-flowing creativity with the hippie revolution :D
If I ever say that something is scene-ish, it is usually in a very positive context.
-
I think you are are simplifying this a bit, Ilija. As far as Graphicians go, they also had competitions, which resulted in copying, scanning, reverse engineering workstages, all this was just because there was stuff to be won and respect to be gained. As far as bigger, better, faster, more goes, at least on the C64 this goes for graphics as well, tho the new modes were of course invented by coders.
-
Well, Sven, if your coder invents a new graphic mode, that doesn't make you a better artist, does it?
Besides, the amount of 'respect' to be won is very much comparable to respect here or on PJ and cheating to obtain it is equally pointless.
I did simplify, but I don't think that competition equals cheating. I'm sure there are other people than myself who can separate these two, and as long as there are, having a competitive environment doesn't mean you have to cheat.
When you see others cheat tho, and get away with it, then you feel miserable.
There is a bright side to this, tho. Back in the days, Jamon and I thought that people really drew all that shit out of their heads and we tried much harder to reach similar level of skill. :D
One very relevant factor for the demise of the scene that I forgot to mention is the fact that a LOT of people were getting recruited for game development on demo parties. That contributed a lot to draining the blood out of the scene, although I guess it is rather logical.
-
Do you remember how fustrating it was first trying to pixel?
The first thing I posted on Pixelation was a fighter sprite that was inspired by a sprite made by stoven which I had found on the boards at the time. I posted to get critique and said I'm not certain whose sprite the inspirational one was but it was inspiring enough to try my hand blah blah blah and I got one reply only, by some dude who said 'the artist you're ripping off is St0ven'.
Just so we all have some perspective of where this community started as far as manners and critique goes, and where it stands today.
"Warning! This website contains Helm, who is able to give you great criticism but has a habit of feeding on human flesh"
Wink aside, I don't remember ever being rude to a person I was trying to help. I am direct, but that's a character trait that doesn't stem from my ego or insecurities, it stems from a whole point of view about life which I don't really have to explain and can only hope carries through in some capacity for the people that know me.
The scene always had it's cave-ins, most notably lousy public taste (naked chicks and dragons, anyone?)
The reason these things rose to prominence is because art was being presented in the context of competitions, and was not even scrutinised for a long time. You got a picture up in the big screen and people would vote. This is shit, this isn't a process of appreciating art. Of course teenagers with lots of free time but no real drawing skill of their own would end up COPYING boobs and dragons because that's what teenagers think will get votes on the big screen. And they did. This is the artistic downfall of the demoscene. Aesthetic bankruptcy. Nobody credited who they copied, because who cares when you're on the big screen. Lented strength, people thinking they're awesome, everybody telling them they're awesome when they know deep inside they don't even know how to draw. Do you know Lazur? Check out some of his 'no copy' work, 15 years after the demoscene heyday to see if he's learned how to draw yet. He hasn't. This is a very peculiar situation, an artistic disease and it taught me a very important thing:
competition has no place in one's inner quest to become the artist they want to be.
but this is probably true with any community that encompasses a large enough crowd. Even on PJ, where all the members are supposed to be artists, there is more appreciation for flashiness than originality.
As soon as you put little buttons with 'rating' under images... you cultivate this sort of aesthetic disinterest.
I noticed before that in contemporary pixelling circles, there is a tendency to reference the demo scene in a negative context
You should know that the reason Pixelation is aware of the demoscene more or less right now is because Ptoing, myself and a few others pushed for that. And we didn't do it in a negative context. You should also know that if right now index painting and pixel art are considered two things that are different it is also because we promoted knowledge on what Deluxe Paint actually does (the 'dirty' tools and such) just so the demoscene copiers would no longer have the same allure they had in the early 90's by obfuscating their methods and never explaining their processes. Do you know how demoscene art looks to a person that only has ever used MSpaint? Is it fair to not dispell that illusion? They never do! They never explain how they make their art, they want you to worship them uncritically.
I learned a lot from studying demoscene artwork. I learned that only a few of these people were actual artists with artistic considerations and aspriations. I learned that great technique doesn't equal aesthetic coherency. I learned that just because something is flashy it doesn't mean it's well made, or that it serves a good purpose. These are very valid lessons and I urge everyone to study the history of the medium (pixel art) and the history of the demoscene and make up their own minds.
Just because I am now informed in most aspects of the demoscene I have the courage to speak my mind and underline the bad aspects of it. This does not discount the little great (NO COPY) art that was made during that period, nor does it go to say that these people weren't amazing technicians, they were. I just don't like boobs n' dragons on big screens for asspats and points by one's loser friends. To quote a demo that says it best: Lame Lame Lame Boobs Lame Code Lame Lame Lame Lame.
but I must say that it pretty much shaped my tastes visually and musically, enabled me to get in touch with some great people from around the world long before internet made that a common practice, and helped me 'find my place' and set some sort of personal goals. It was immensely gratifying, and I can only those years of free-flowing creativity with the hippie revolution Cheesy
If I ever say that something is scene-ish, it is usually in a very positive context.
I do as well, as long as it's not a copy.
Also you should know, you think we disaprove of the demoscene? What do they think of us? Where are the pixelling gods now that the competitions are over? Why aren't they here helping people with their dithering and aa? What do they think of the contemporary scene? You know we had Mirage from the c64 demoscene over here and what he tried to pull was a stunt to show (as I understand it) that we worship SNK and Capcom and japanese game art unciritcally and that's all we do here? And we get the odd person every year coming to post art he made 10 years ago to get asspats in here, that's all the demoscene has use for Pixelation.
Of course you wouldn't get a positive attitude and want to help people when for 10 years the whole point of you making art was to defeat the other lamers.
Well, Sven, if your coder invents a new graphic mode, that doesn't make you a better artist, does it?
Besides, the amount of 'respect' to be won is very much comparable to respect here or on PJ and cheating to obtain it is equally pointless.
That's something Pixeljoint has to deal with. Here in Pixelation, that shit doesn't fly. We made sure of that.
So you should be talking to the PJ administration, really.
I did simplify, but I don't think that competition equals cheating.
You bet it'll mean cheating when it's a competition between teenagers for bragging rights with little to no moderation.
There is a bright side to this, tho. Back in the days, Jamon and I thought that people really drew all that shit out of their heads and we tried much harder to reach similar level of skill.
I had the same thing going. I actually learned to draw dragons and not copy Erlwood, so good for me, but still, that stuff they pulled? Lame Lame Lame Dragons Lame Boobs Lame.
-
don't particularly need reaffirmation of it's coolness
That's not what I'm talking about....
What i mean is when, after you have found a list of things that suck and you've made changes but you just don't know what you are doing and someone confirms that the steps you are taking are actually in the right direction, it's far more motivating then when you make a bunch of changes and STILL don't know if it's working or not because all you hear is crap crap crap. That's all I mean.
Now actually don't get me wrong, I like the PJ staff, but they are a gallery site - a showoff site in many cases. This is a critique board and the staff is far more dedicated (and capable - sorry jal) of providing even the best artists with things to work on. Actually, around here the really good guys tend to get a lor harsher critique because they have shown an ability to handle it and improve.
-
When you know the "crap crap crap" posts are diverted away from the thing you're tweaking, that's when you know it works. ^-^