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.


Topics - Helm
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6

11
General Discussion / Second Cluster Study - Knights of the Round
« on: January 01, 2013, 05:55:01 pm »
Hello, hello!

I've talked a lot about clusters and all my theories and examples involve the new school clean pixel displays we now work on. However pixel art came to be mostly on old bleedy CRT monitors both for computers and  - more importantly for us - on arcade cabinets. Many of these CRTs running all day were blown out all to hell. Phosphorous glow would leave red trails after sprites, curvy screens would deform the art, flickery scanlines would change pixel values, and non-standard pixel ratios would squish or stretch accordingly.

We won't be emulating all of these effects, but even at the best of times, The artist would have to live with phosphorous glow, scanlines and different aspect ratios.

What I want you to do is take a look at  Capcom arcade classic, Knights of the Round.

We'll be focusing on the Arthur sprite in particular



It's interesting, isn't it? Running on CPS1 hardware. Like all (most?) old arcade cabinets, it has a weird pixel aspect ratio. 12:7, 384x224 pixels,  but still stretched into 4:3 screen aspect (something CRTs are a lot better at than modern non-CRT ones). It has a 16 bit color range, which is pretty much limitless for our intents. The original sprite has 26 colors. CPS1 was really powerful, compared to any 16 bit home console! I was wrong, Carnivac below catches the the sprite is 16 colours without the sword! So feel free to work with a 16 color palette just for the sprite either with a weapon separate (good time to make your own completely original weapon!) and its separate weapon palette, or one using the same palette as the sprite for extra challenge!

What I want you to do is to edit this to your heart's content. Change the colors and use whatever shading method you'd like. Just try to keep it within the aesthetic context of the old arcade game as you understand it. For my edit I based my changes on the thought that this game is trying to convey the bright, well-light context of a board game and the characters are pawns on a meticulously crafted battle map. My theory is supported by the in-between level assessment with people shuffling figures about. I took it as an approximation of a paper and pencil and lead figurine dungeons and dragons-esque session. So I tried to color and tint my sprite like someone would paint a lead figurine. Keeping the strong, saturated primaries but adding tints and dirt and stuff. Still not making it more realistic, just adding more clarity and refining the areas of complexity at the same time. I removed a lot of colors, as well.

You can look at my edit after you've done yours by clicking here.
And then you can look at the filtered version. We'll be filtering your edits Pixelation-side as well. Don't bother trying to filter them on your own, the exercise is exactly about not knowing how your art would look on an old CRT first, and then comparing and picking up practical knowledge. I have many notes on what I've learned from comparing the filtered version to the crisp edit, but I'll save them for after we've done a round of edits.

HUGEASS scanline filtered image!
NEW AND BETTER SCANLINES

12
General Discussion / Help me with the next Cluster Study
« on: December 30, 2012, 06:34:15 pm »
I need someone who understands graphics filters well and can help us apply an HLSL filter from MAME to single images we draw, possibly write a very simple drag and drop utility that will output a filtered file from a raw file that anyone can use. I do not need this to be fancy, it can be hardcoded to just one filter at specific specs (something like this http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/447311-Mame-HLSL-Effects-The-way-Arcade-games-used-to-look!?s=84d6dc2d9196f7fc793bbfd6f296c809) that we can use as a reference for learning purposes.

If none of this makes sense to you, carry on. If you can help, please post here. We might not even need a coder, just someone who knows how to apply the MAME filter at specific specs in photoshop or any other similar program.

13
General Discussion / Altered Beast - a cluster study
« on: November 29, 2012, 04:35:27 pm »
So I've been looking at Altered Beast for the Mega Drive lately. It's one of the first games I played as a child on my brand new 16 bit console and it's stayed with me. It's a deeply flawed game that would be of little interest to anyone who doesn't study the history of videogames and/or has nostalgic ties to it. But the art in it is very interesting to us pixel artists. I won't go into a full commercial critique here because that's a bit too broad for what I want us to do in this thread. If you haven't played Altered Beast, you could do worse than watch this Chronsega episode to get a feel for it.

Now I want you to look at the isolated main character sprite.



This is a reduced version from the arcade game's sprite, made to work with Mega Drive bitlengths and limits. But don't look at the arcade original too much because here's what I want you (us) to do:

I want you to modify this sprite using what you know now about how pixels work together. Do not change the palette or the outline of the sprite too drastically, do not completely remake it in a different style or machine spec. Just take what is already there and polish it using current techniques. Feel free to edit the anatomy and design of the sprite within the limits of the original aesthetic, as you understand it.

This excercise is useful because it shows the fundamental qualities of pixel art. Your edit should be something that theoretically, were the original artist working on the game to think of it, could have implemented back in 1989.

My version is below. Do not look at it before you're done with your version. Then feel free to compare and contrast, justify your changes or challenge mine. We can look at a few more sprites from this era and/or game later on, perhaps.

Here is my edit

And my edit notes:

1. What I've understood of the game is that it wants to be beefcake, but not in an ironic way (if irony were even possible in 1989 in Japanese game design). Practicality is not a concern, strength is symbolized through muscles. Muscles ultimately lead to becoming beyond-human, in-human. The undertone is similar to that of bodybuilding. So I looked for reference in contemporary body building, especially after the Arnold revolution, which also is not concerned with people being practically fit or strong or athletes, but with the symbol of strength in-itself.

I sculpted the body further and especially the legs which I believe where a big missed opportunity for conveying beefcake by Sega's artists.

2. Besides those alterations, the rest is a thorough cluster study, most of which is best contrasted against other cluster studies you've hopefully made.

3. I did some reuse of the secondary colors in primary spaces, as I am wont to do. Not much more can be done (I think, feel free to prove me wrong) without altering the palette wholesale.

Feel free to post your versions below, as well as talk to any length about the topic.

14
General Discussion / On getting critiqued and battling critique
« on: August 19, 2012, 01:14:08 pm »
I've been giving and taking art advice for a long time. I would say the main categories of people posting on Pixelation, as differentiated by how they react to critique and edits, are the following:

1. Users that never post any updates to their piece. Sometimes they never post again on Pixelation at all. Other times they may start another thread with new art too, but they do not follow up with updates and progress on their stuff.

2. Users that react to critique by trying to address near-all points given to them in their updated art.

3. Users that filter the critique they get and address what they find they need to and do not discuss why they left this or that piece of advice out.

4. Users that filter the critique they get and address what they find they need to and discuss what and why they filtered out in great detail.

Here's what I've noticed about how these different categories show in how they develop.

Users of the first type do not progress fast, or I do not know if they progress at all because they never post again. They want to show off. Pixelation sometimes is not for the weak of heart. The benefit is that critique is put in writing so they can revist the critique that hurt their feelings a year from now and see if there's anything to it then. As a personal aside, this type of orphan thread breaks my heart a bit  :-[

Users of the second type seem like perfect c&c recievers, and perhaps they're very useful to an art critique community and they do seem to progress very fast... in their one thread. They soak up critique like sponges and their piece becomes better very fast. But they do not systemize, there's no structure in how they incorporate critique. They're 'augmented' by the Pixelation method of shotgun critique, but when they go off the drugs, they revert to a less amped version of themselves. Of course there is a cumulative progression, but appearances can be decieving. It often seems to me these users take the word of others over their own senses. This is useful for beginning artists. At some point however, I do think artistic progression necessarily becomes more esoteric and the artist needs to stop trying to create art that pleases everyone. The end goal is not to make a piece of art nobody would have any critique for.

Users of the third type to me seem to progress slower. Sometimes they're second type users that have moved on into themselves. They take what critique they need and do not discuss too much why they didn't take the critique they didn't. It's just my experience that the type of progress their artwork benefits from from their stay in Pixelation is not very blatant. They fix their AA, they may stop banding, they tighten up. It's that 5%. They don't move by leaps and bounds because they're themselves enough by now. They are secure. They're using Pixelation like a service, to get that last polish pass. As I've noticed these users end up either as fixtures, giving critique to others, or they tighten up their tech and leave, which is totally fine.

Users of the fourth and final type seem self-conscious to me. They have an ego thing sometimes that pushes them to want to tell you why your critique is false. Sometimes they are right and the critique is no good, sometimes not. It's besides the point. It seems to me this attitude leads to people becoming better artists slower and better at structuring argumentation. I'm not going to say Pixelation isn't here for the latter. Art discussion is valid, and nobody here is a teacher of authority to have a final say. I'm just noticing that this is a type of repeated behaviour. The reader might be well-advised to consider if they fall into this category and if they do, to ponder if what they're hoping to achieve in Pixelation is to become better pixel artists as fast as possible or instead to become better orators.

As a user that's been here a long time, if I may give a piece of advice is that you shouldn't fight critique. Filter it as you wish, but don't write me a story about why you won't incorporate a suggestion. There's going to be a lot of critique thrown your way and it's officially a-ok with Pixelation decorum to not address every person and why you won't do every little thing they've told you in long-form text. Users will contradict each others' critique. It's impossible not to. This is a great thing. Leave it up to them to discuss and compare why this is or is not a good idea you're being given. Make up your mind privately and move on with the art, not the argument. You'll become better, faster like this.

If you see people in your thread bring up critique you filtered out again and again, your filter's may not be very brave, though. Adjust accordingly.

Furthermore there is a significant life skill in my advice. When a tutor of any kind is giving you a piece of their mind, they may be well-meaning or they may want to hurt your feelings. Make up your mind privately. Either do what they want you to do, or don't do it. But don't have an argument. Because if you do, you're making it an argument about YOU. It becomes about you talking about what's going on in your mind. In art, at the end, nobody in the audience will be privy to your internal explanations on what you did. They only experience the end result. Don't make the appreciation of that experience contingent on them having a private conversation with the artist. Battling critique is just training artists-to-be to not make self-contained art.

15
Pixel Art / Magician - NES shopkeeper girl
« on: December 12, 2010, 11:47:45 am »
Hi. I like images of vendor and shopkeeper girls in videogames. There's this one that's my favorite from old NES game, Magician



I find it very charming, the girl looks youthful and innocent. But the pixel art is kinda rough (so much better than a lot of NES-era pixelling, still). I edited it a little, first to remove banding and then I thought what the hell let's do this properly and did quite a bit more.



I changed the colors but I didn't add more of them. I've been wondering what more to edit. Do you think, like a friend I showed it to that the hands foreshortening just doesn't work and the hands need to be completely redrawn? What about the bricks in the back? I don't want to steer too far from the original because as I said, I find it charming. But a few more tricks might help. Here's what I don't want to do:

1. Add more colors

2. 'Fix' the value range any more than I already have. Part of the charm of the image is that it's like it has a gamma fault to begin with.

3. Make the palette newschool, you know, tints and smart stuff. I like it monochromatic


I'm toying with the idea of making the candle throw off a light circle around it but actually in real life candles aren't like, torches, so the original might be a better thing. I could antialias the flame a bit.

Suggest changes or edit them yourself or fix my bad changes, whatever. Let's play around with this old piece of artwork a little.


EDIT: also here's a good chance to dump images of shopkeeper girls from videogames for me. There's just so many. Remember the AD&D arcade games? Those had some good ones. Forgotten Worlds had another of my favourites. If you find any, let me know.

16
General Discussion / Pixel art and Sharpness
« on: November 24, 2010, 11:51:02 pm »
I want to discuss something. Is Pixel Art inherently tied to very very sharp art? Can you make pixel art that is blurry or very soft or does that defeat the purpose of the tool you're using? Where does AA stop being useful? Perhaps we're underusing AA? If you pixel something that is for all intents and purposes identical to vector art (only slightly sharper, of course) is that self-defeating? Does Ai (the pixelation user, not Artificial Intelligence) with his shade routines augment or disorient the focus of pixel art?

If pixel art is all about sharpness, then why do we have that 'sweet spot' of AA ? Why don't we just pixel with sharp colors all the time and embrace jagginess? And how about demoscene-like art that is trying so much to hide its individual pixels and edges?

I am not advocating any position here, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

17



Sketch:



Steps:












I couldn't ink it so I pixelled it!

18
Pixel Art Feature Chest / GR#015 - Death Walks - Realistic Face
« on: February 10, 2010, 03:43:33 am »


This has been an experiment in working from a messy cg base and reigning in the end result on the pixel level. It took about 15 hours and I can't say I consider the end result a complete success as there are many places where pixel clusters are sloppy still but I'm afraid I have reached the end of my patience.

Here are steps:



This is the original sketch at half the size I worked on. As you can see what drew me to to it was the gestural strength, most of which I like to think I retained in the final piece.


Here the palette is initially attempted.

You can see an unfortunately textured attempt in the corner of the halo here, which I later discarded.

The long hard work of reigning in the messy pixel clusters from the color reduced version begins in earnest here.

And ends here.

Critique is always welcome but nitpickery not really encouraged (meaning, I'm aware of many places where a final hand would help smooth things out but it's not something I want to do right now). Discussion on the attempted experiment and results are more what I'm after. Does this work as pixel art? Is it too messy? What would you have done differently? Do we *want* to classify such things as pixel art? Are 15 hours of trying to reign in bad pixel choices made by a computer a worthwhile endeavour. So on. After we're done (and I might even have the time to go over it and smooth a final few things out) I will also submit this to PJ with full transparency of the process and with a link to this thread so if we have something worthwhile to share with the world at large about CGI reduction - to pixel art methods and concepts, we can try here.

20
General Discussion / Eyecraft is a mod!
« on: December 04, 2009, 09:12:03 am »
Due to outstanding service. Give him a hug :)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6