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 - Cure
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 57

Pixel Art / Re: something is wrong with my pixelart?? (can anyone help)
« on: September 01, 2015, 05:20:08 pm »
i dont know how to see where the light comes from.

This highlights a fundamental problem. Before you try something as complex as a human face, you should learn the basics of how light works and how basic geometric forms are lit. practice drawing spheres, cylinders, and cubes in perspective and according to a distinct light source.

Right now you don't know how to think in 3d or know where shadows and highlights should fall, so what you have is a flat image made up of symbols rather than forms. You need to teach yourself to think about the form and planes of objects, and where light strikes those planes. There are exercises to cut down on symbol drawing, such as drawing an image upside down, but I'd also recommend you use photo references when you're working so that you can study how features actually look.

Purism is a dead-end. You shouldn't try to have a small palette to have a small palette and nobody should care or commend you for your small palette. You should have a controlled palette (of whatever size, as long as you can control it) if that leads to more coherent art.

preach it

2D & 3D / Re: Official OT-Creativity Thread 2
« on: April 14, 2015, 07:40:12 pm »
Been absorbed with designing posters for a while but still finding time to get personal work done. The first image is the creation of Adam, it's the last 'funky' piece I'll make for a while other than acrylic work at live painting events. The second begins a new series focusing on Southern identity (SE U.S., that is).

full size:  /  full size:

Pixel Art / Re: C&C for starrmazer art.
« on: March 02, 2015, 07:16:43 am »
I must be the only one here that prefers neofotistou's original take over the other versions. It's a lot cleaner, simpler, less bulky. reads better.

General Discussion / Re: Pixel art book
« on: February 20, 2015, 10:29:08 pm »
Guys how can you not be aware that this is currently being made?

Plus Michael is a pretty cool dude.
I had no idea Frario was making a guide to pixel art. Should be a good resource, glad it's free too. Will be following that project.

Would still be nice to have a physical book though, the community could make the examples instead of using stuff from copyrighted video games.

Ok, let every person who claims to own the copyright and/or intellectual property to a specific piece of information/knowledge step forward
Very few people literally no one is making legal threats, I don't think that's the most important issue here. Let's return to your first comment- why should those of us who see the book as problematic feel "foolish?"

I'd advocate for the opposite, for this dude to make his book download-for-free and proudly saying "I CAME UP WITH ALL THIS SHIT" in the front page in 40 point font.
I'm ok with this. I composed my own tutorial (based on ideas that are not my own) because I wanted there to be an easy and free resource for learning about pixel art, not because I wanted credit for the ideas or to see my name in print.

the book is not as high quality as it could be if it would have gone through a peer review process. There are problems with the shading and with the AA in the example pages.
. . .
I think there is more to learn from an active community with "fresh" information, interaction and by actually doing stuff than by merely reading books because of the one-directional nature of information flow between author and reader.
these are both good points.

gnosis is free. knowledge is for everyone.

that's the point...

Someone took the time and effort to write a book/summary on a topic you hold dear, and the problem is?... seriously, think about it, specifiy it and spell it out. I'll bet you're gonna feel pretty foolish once you break it down.

The problem is the information in this book was thought up and compiled by the community, to be freely distributed to anyone interested in our artform. Someone repackages it and wants to sell it back to us, but what is the benefit of this? Other than the benefit to his own wallet? It doesn't seem to serve the community, they can learn these things for free from the original sources.

I'll try my best to not get banned for this post.
Go shove your shitware up your asshole, bitch!

Well you tried your best.

Quote from: Lunarovich
What we call a pixel art can be best described as a crossover of digital painting and the traditional art of tapestry
Quote from: Lunarovich
You start with a grid and you fill its cells with square patches of color
I start with a blank canvas, the same as when I paint traditionally. I don't consider the grid until I'm pixel-pushing toward the end of the image.
Quote from: Lunarovich
A specific role that a colored cell plays in the final image is determined by its relation with other cells. With the adjacent ones, in the first line. It means that the image is never a simple sum of its colored cells. Rather, it is an organic composition where the grid position of the colored cell determines its specific role in the image taken as a whole. For example, a cell with a certain color that is surrounded by lighter cells gives a shadow effect. Surrounded by darker cells, the same cell with the same color results in a highlight, etc.
I didn't follow any of this.
Quote from: Lunarovich
The capacity of the single cell to influence the whole image - or at least adjacent cells - is made possible by the size of the cell. Obviously, the minimal size of the cell should not go bellow the naked eye visibility. Otherwise, a single cell color change would not have any effect on the image. The minimal "brush" size of our digital painter would have to grow in order that he be able to control the effect of a single color placement gesture. That would, however, transform our grid art into an ordinary form of digital painting - one that we normally do in Gimp or Photoshop. The grid art would lose its proper essence and it would cease to be what it is.
I think you're a little concerned with the visibility of squares. As Ryumaru and Carnivac have pointed out (and Pix3m proved with an image), this is a strict and contemporary definition. In the days of CRT monitors, the pixels were blurred, which affected the medium and how the artists created images (e.g. dithering was a much more useful technique.) Likewise, "hi-res" pixel art that "loses" the grid is fine too (see: Panda, Elk, etc.) The bit about losing its "proper essence" and ceasing to be "what it is" is especially nebulous.
Quote from: Lunarovich
That said, two minimal conditions must be fulfilled in order to call something a grid art:
- The image has to be a) grid-structured and b) a minimal patch of color should be a square that fits exactly the size of the grid cell.
- A single grid cell must be visible to the naked eye.
I've seen pixel art that uses a triangular grid, an offset-brick pattern, and non-square rectangles (either tall or long).
Quote from: Lunarovich
We do not want our art to be defined by something as volatile as screen technology.
I think it's defined by its medium of expression. We can't divorce pixel art from its dependence upon and history with the computer. It is true that there is a tradition of grid-based art (beadwork of the Native Americans, dyed inlays on colonial American furniture, mosaic pattern from the Islamic Golden Age, etc.), but it would be simplistic to reduce pixel art to just this impulse. That would reduce pixel art to just the 'tapestry' mindset you described earlier, with no regard for the importance of the 'digital' or 'painting' aspects that you yourself say are foundational.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 57