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.


Messages - pixelblink
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15

1
General Discussion / Re: Firefox 3 blurring pixel art question
« on: March 17, 2009, 07:07:29 am »
there is a voting enhancement which can, apparently, improve our chances of getting it expedited.
Perhaps we should encourage everyone to create an account and vote

2
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: March 02, 2009, 08:41:33 am »
What I'm getting from Xelados' posts is a matter of perception which, to my eyes, is exactly what this thread started on. People have perceived PJ as being unfair and uneducated, among other things, and needs focusing and a staff of mods that are in the spotlight to solve issues instead of corrupting their own definitions of what is acceptable and what isn't. I won't defend Xelados' strongly negative statement but it holds merit to the discussion of how these two sites are perceived and perhaps it's something that the moderation team here needs to discuss amongst themselves. I won't force that conversation as the main focus here is PJ and not Pixelation but I think that it opens a theme that may need to be addressed in the future.

Personally, I see these two sites handling art theories completely differently. I see PJ as being a bit more open to everyone's personal style and allowing them to explore their own path while I see Pixelation as discussing serious art theory and formalized training to be put to work. I see no flaw in either sites functions in that manner. One would learn from each or at least have the opportunity to learn from each method.

And, while I do agree one shouldn't mince words when they're passionate about an idea (whether it's in a negative context or not), I do feel that words like "art fag" is pretty much derogatory and also stereotypes and generalizes a large group of people who come from - and learn from - different backgrounds.

3
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: March 02, 2009, 07:02:04 am »
ptoing: I hadn't previously found the trial version link on the website until recently. I wasn't truly that obvious, but I have now downloaded it and I'm going through the learning curve on it.

The crew and myself at PJ have been talking about site upgrades and redefining the rules for quite some time. In fact, we're currently discussing implementing a wiki styled format for all of this. We're not as complacent and stubborn as one might think but we've got to be patient as our site owner and coder works at a slower pace than we'd like. Still, the work is getting done and communications are always improving. On top of that, mods have/are being replaced over the years. I feel that the core team is pretty much now in tune with each other (especially after this topics conversation). I sense that it's more growing pains than anything. The site has grown exponentially over the past, what, 5 years I've been there (essentially for the beginning) and what used to be acceptable in the past and what used to be the common train of thought has changed and grown over time. Believe me when I say I want to see the site continue to grow and succeed but that can only come about with strong moderation and passionate people to build a stronger and more intelligent community.

Though intelligence doesn't necessarily mean using bigger words to describe things, does it? I know that we need to define our roles and rules wtih clearer intentions and clearer words so that everyone can understand where we're coming from and how the membership is intended to be implied. I am open to inviting consultants to help us with the upcoming wiki for definitions and whatnot along the way and I hope we can count on the support of everyone here to help bring along the required positive changes that will take place over time at PJ.

@Xelados: I don't quite see what you are referring to. I looked up your name at PJ and found the one image you submitted that was rejected but found no discussion surrounding it. No PMs were made from you or to you that I can see. Perhaps a decision was made in haste on either side and, should you decide to give it another spin, I'd be happy to discuss any issues with you.

4
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 26, 2009, 04:11:05 am »
it is difficult being bombarded with such animosity towards myself after trying to keep the site going for so many years, I must say. I don't claim to know everything and sure, I can be misguided at some times, but I feel I do good most of the time on PJ. It's discouraging to see so many people offer up their rants and not be able to provide any solutions.

That said, all I can say is I, personally, am on a continual journey to improve my knowledge and skills and that sometimes puts me in the wrong. I have no problem saying that I was/am wrong in some of my beliefs.

Ai=Neota ... thank you for letting me know sooner, btw. I am sorry that it went down as it did.

It's been a battle, trying to get all the pj mods on board when some of them leave and then return and then leave again. New mods join and stir the pot some more, giving doubt to the methods and thought processes we previously had. Things weren't always this chaotic or muddled, I'm sure you'll agree. Mostly, I try to jump in and resolve issues and back up what my peers have already said... which can also be wrong sometimes.

There is no instant simple solution to the problems we might face at PixelJoint but we try to solve them together. At least I am attempting to be a part of the solution rather than find ways to be part of the problem... though you might think differently. I wish there WAS more of you guys there helping to build the community and solution process.

5
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 25, 2009, 08:12:36 pm »
the complete quote:
"PJ standards for creating pixel art dos not allow the usage of these 'dirty' tools. Basically, pixel art should be able to be drawn by manually choosing colours and placing them 1 pixel at a time... NOT by doing all of that and then using 'dirty' tools to create highlights and shades. There is NO way 728 colours is at all acceptable for a piece to be submitted at PJ."

how am I contradicting myself? It is clear to me that I said "should be able to be drawn" I'm sorry if that leaves it up to interpretation but that means that the end result should look like it was done as such giving the end result a look and feel to it. The process is somewhat important but the end result is what is seen and judged upon. And you can't deny that a little of the process is important to know.

The end result being a messy 728 colours, which is outlandish to me for such a piece. It didn't feel like pixel art methods were used and dirty tools had been put to use. The end result (I'm going to use this term alot now) was sketchy and suspect. Would you have thought differently in my case?

6
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 25, 2009, 03:55:53 am »
...Only watch the end product for NPA...

and how does one watch for NPA without doing what we're already doing? There are always blurred lines between what each of us construes as NPA and it becomes a challenge for sure.

And Shark/Feron: it's good to see you still kicking around here :) I think the topic is relevant to both sites and this can only be a resourceful conversation for all of us

7
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 25, 2009, 03:16:11 am »
I understand your intentions, Gil. I am always grateful that someone wants to stand up and defend their beliefs. I respect you alot for that and don't hold it against you. That said, I think you should continue jumping into this discussion as I'm sure you have alot more to say on the matter.

Question though, what "excellent improvements" are you referring to? I am open to any ideas that could benefit PJ as a site and as a community.

8
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 25, 2009, 02:42:42 am »
I wasn't personally involved with the removal and readdition of miascugh's piece but I didn't have a problem with it nor did he seem to have a problem with dogmeat's request either.

I am continually mystified by the handy tools everyone's talking about with ProMotion and would like a copy of my own so I can see what they actually do.

[EDIT]

And I agree with you, ptoing. I think for me, personally, I am more annoyed by seemingly useless high colour counts more than how a piece was created.

[/EDIT]

9
General Discussion / Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint
« on: February 25, 2009, 02:20:45 am »
I don't see where the "elitist" stance comes from but I do agree that we (PJ) are purists to some degree.

It's been always a constant struggle to define what the borders of pixel art is or isn't. High grade and high colour counts have always been suspect in using tools and methods that go against the traditional low colour and "pixelly" style that has often attracted most people to the art from to begin with.

It seems quite silly that one would submit a copy/trace/grid of another image thereby claiming it as their own as well and that does seem to be a large amount of the old demoscene... that's not to say ALL of them. I respect and enjoy alot of the demoscene art that comes our way and welcome everyone to the community. I also welcome their art to the community as long as they can try and understand the views as stated by both the community and the moderators. As a moderator myself, I am ALWAYS open to communication and resolution as long as I am approached without outward defiance and rants about how much of a "nazi" I am or we are. I really don't find that to be a good way to begin finding solutions.

So let's say that PixelJoint WOULD accept any and all remotely viewed as pixel art pieces? What about all the lackluster 5 minutes doodles as well? What would the outcome be? Would we just become another pixel art gallery as seen at deviantART? What are the pros and cons?

I am open to your thoughts :)

10
General Discussion / Re: Index painting?
« on: September 18, 2007, 10:59:37 pm »
ahhh... thanks for enlightening me Helm. I'm not really a fan of these pieces as "real" pixel art myself, and your description of the process doesn't change it for me either. I find it's a way of cheating the process and 99% of these images that are subitted to PJ don't explain themselves or the process they do it in. Hence the reason they sit in the queue forever or start flame wars.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15