First Steps on Pixel Art

[Anarkhya]

No, no, you won't fool me with this trick

I classify Mosaic in a different topic relating with other tools and restrictions because

... because there is no computerized pixels, no animation, no RGB colors relating to each other that can be viewed or created

[kamol]

OK, I give up, you wonīt be on my side, I guess. 



And now for something completely different...

[PypeBros]

OK, I give up, you wonīt be on my side, I guess. 

Beside any "I'm doing pixel art for xxx years and I can tell you mosaic isn't pixel art", give a look at the mermaid. yes, it's made of small, coloured tiles, and there is even some dithering here and there, but nothing forces the artist to place his tiles on a grid, and he's massively exploiting this when doing curves. If anything, I'd say cross-stitching might be the analog discipline that is the closest to pixel art, but there again, analogies and similarities is all I'd dare to draw.

"no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors"

Not every pixel art pieces are animated, right ? and some of them simply used restricted palettes (Like cross-stitching has to work with a restricted amount of tints). Given how pixels on CRT look different from pixels on PAL from pixels on our modern LCD grids, I wouldn't be too much picky about "electronic pixels", personally.

[The 7th Sin]

There were and are some pixel art influences on the graphic design scene. But that somehow often seems to me to be a more playfull and free way to work with that pixel style. To me it seems this here maybe is more about the handcraft of pixel art, old school style.

This is also a thing I wanted to emphasize, on one hand you have the pixel style (eboy and co.) which is simply a graphical trend/fashion treating pixels in a lousy/unmistakable/stationary way in order to run a business, on the other hand you have the pixel art which is a medium/disicipline/art trying to evolve and assert its existence outside of ephemeral trends. That's two different things.

Forgive my interjection here but I could not sit by and just let this comment pass.
I know I'm a junior user here and all, and that I may not be the greatest at the arrangement of pixels, but to say eboy's work isn't a form of art seems absolutely ridiculous.
I understand that artists don't like to see their art form commercialized, but eboy clearly utilizes the pixel medium in an efficient and artistic way.
You should keep in mind that design is just art being practically applied to the world.

I would also like to take a moment and address the main issue of this thread, is what we're looking at pixel art?
I would say yes, but not entirely.
It is important to realize that a piece of art doesn't have to be restrained ENTIRELY to one "medium".
I think the mixing of "mediums" in this piece still allow for it to be posted as pixel art.
Despite the fact that the piece has over "x" number of colors, the faces and motions the emoticons make are CLEARLY a form of pixel pushing.
I think we need to try and be accommodating to new blends and forms of mediums, even if that means that they don't fully meet the "standard" we, personally, look for in our art.
I don't mean to seem offensive to anyone with this post, especially Anarkhya, even though I know I have kind of targeted your comments with my rebuttle, I just hope that we can welcome Kamol to these boards and not shoot him down for breaking the normals of what we "expect" pixel art to be.

[Anarkhya]

give a look at the mermaid. yes, it's made of small, coloured tiles, and there is even some dithering here and there, but nothing forces the artist to place his tiles on a grid, and he's massively exploiting this when doing curves. If anything, I'd say cross-stitching might be the analog discipline that is the closest to pixel art, but there again, analogies and similarities is all I'd dare to draw.

I agree on similarities, but these similarities are not solid enough IMO. Saying that pixel art exists as a modern form of mosaic art appears to me as an accurate shortcut, mostly because mosaic isn't supposed to be made on a pixel made monitor. This computer device leads to computer specifics work and output: thus no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors relating to each other...

"no electronic pixels, no animation, no RGB colors"
Not every pixel art pieces are animated, right ? and some of them simply used restricted palettes (Like cross-stitching has to work with a restricted amount of tints). Given how pixels on CRT look different from pixels on PAL from pixels on our modern LCD grids, I wouldn't be too much picky about "electronic pixels", personally.

Well, not all pixel art pieces are animated but all are potientially animated, mosaic can't do this. the electronic pixel is a kind of unsatisfying/approaching word to describe my thoughts, the exact word should be something like computerized pixels maybe... well, you get the idea, I guess I don't have the sufficient ease at english to find the most appropriated word.

but to say eboy's work isn't a form of art seems absolutely ridiculous.
I understand that artists don't like to see their art form commercialized, but eboy clearly utilizes the pixel medium in an efficient and artistic way.

Efficient and artistic? Ok. Why not? But give me more of your thoughts about this, just go deeper to express/illustrate your views.
I'll really enjoy to continue this discussion but just saying efficient and artistic is not enough... You need to explain your statements.

You should keep in mind that design is just art being practically applied to the world.

Ouch! Please define "art" right now... I want to hear you on that point.

I think we need to try and be accommodating to new blends and forms of mediums, even if that means that they don't fully meet the "standard" we, personally, look for in our art.

I'm requiring assistance on this very topic because I feel I won't speak alone in the name of pixelation. Anyone willing to submit thoughts about backing up the pixel art definition ?

I don't mean to seem offensive to anyone with this post, especially Anarkhya, even though I know I have kind of targeted your comments

You have targeted my comments, yes, and this is not a problem for me, because these are only ideas/concepts/thoughts and I like to play with them, they are not my property and they can live/evolve/die. As long as you explain your thoughts.

[The 7th Sin]

I would just like to start by saying, I am very glad that we can exchange our thoughts and opinions like mature individuals here, even though we may disagree.
I know some forums would have already degenerated into a massive flamewar over my comments.
That being said, onward.

Allow me to address your first point concerning Eboy's art.
It is difficult for me to imagine their work as anything other than art, I mean their works are color and lines in an aesthetically pleasing fashion.
I think this fits the basic premise of a two dimensional work of art.
(I would really like to hear what you think makes their works not art, so I could elaborate in a more specified manner.)

Personally I carry an extremely broad definition of the word art, I include everything from film, music, sculpture, paintings, graffiti, sidewalk chalk drawings done by a three year old on the pavement, screen printing on t-shirts, idle doodles in the margins of notes, album covers. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

When I said design was art applied to the practical world, I mean, objects by design are utilitarian, take shoes for example, by design they are only a means to shelter our feet from harm, but the through the application of art we make them aesthetically pleasing.
The shoes aren't like a traditional piece of art, that hangs on a wall, but they still display the aesthetic principles we, as artists, use for our guidelines.

Your third point of discussion really brings us into muddy waters.
I understand that this is a forum reserved for pixel artists, I don't think it would be appropriate for an artist, such as a watercolor painter, to come here and ask for critique.
However, let me pose this question to you.
What if the watercolor artist had painted a mural of a building on a hilltop, then scanned the image and "pixelled" the building.
Leaving a final image of watercolor style hill and a pixel art building.
Can he still come here for critique on the pixel portion of his painting? Or must we completely disregard his artwork because it follows some but not all of the requirements here?

One additional question for you, Anarkhya, do you think architects are artists?

(edit: there was a confusing grammatical error.)

[Helm]

Well, reading this forum frequently I think the "standard" and what we "expect" (which relates with pixel art definition) has been clarified enough in many threads here... But I'm requiring assistance on this very topic because I feel I won't speak alone in the name of pixelation. Anyone willing to submit thoughts about backing up the pixel art definition ?

Yes, for what it is worth I do not see the need for a hard official distinction between what eboy does and pixel art because what is a 'stylistic trend' and what is 'true art' seems to be a fluid and socially-relevant issue and is up for interpretation. I do not see the need for Pixelation to endorse a value-judgment based system of belief because it is not a person. It is a forum and a forum is built around communal interests. To the degree that Pixelation endorses some practices and not others it is only in what ways Pixelation can help pixel artists with their art. We classify between digital art and pixel art (and some shades in between) to preserve the scope and focus of the forum not to say 'this type of art is bad and unartistic and this type is good and true art'.

I have my own opinions and they generally apply to what I do with my own art, they are not prescriptive about what other people should do with theirs.

I tried to nudge this thread towards helping each other and not debating if something is pixel art or not by my opener comment, but it seems this thread wants to head that way, so okay, sure, explore the ideas, just please don't strawman each other. I don't see why eboy is 'not art' because it is design and why something that is a style is not also potentially artful and generally, why is 'art' high praise?

Of course there's a relevance for Mosaic work for pixel artists because the mode of control is very similar. Is pixel art so tied to the digital format, or is it tied to the constraints of it, which can be (and have been) replicated outside of computer monitors?

[kamol]

I tried to nudge this thread towards helping each other and not debating if something is pixel art or not by my opener comment, but it seems this thread wants to head that way, so okay, sure, explore the ideas

By the way, I would not mind you to push this thread to the discussion board if that helps. I don't want anybody to be pissed off because it is not about a concrete artwork anymore but all talk and opinions only. I still enjoy the discussion though, letīs forget about the emoticons I posted up there. 

[Anarkhya]

I do not see the need for Pixelation to endorse a value-judgment based system of belief because it is not a person. It is a forum and a forum is built around communal interests. To the degree that Pixelation endorses some practices and not others it is only in what ways Pixelation can help pixel artists with their art.

@ALL: OK. I've edited all my posts and corrected my thoughts translation in this thread to be clearer. I don't want to represent pixel art or pixelation, I just want to discuss/share/debate.

Allow me to address your first point concerning Eboy's art.
It is difficult for me to imagine their work as anything other than art, I mean their works are color and lines in an aesthetically pleasing fashion.
I think this fits the basic premise of a two dimensional work of art.
(I would really like to hear what you think makes their works not art, so I could elaborate in a more specified manner.

ok. after re-examining the situation, I have to correct things and thoughts to explain where I came from. My reaction is connected with the eboy (and their long list of copiers) extreme popularity among the general audience thus making them so-called pixel art gods (at least this is my conclusion when using web search engines to look for pictures with keyword pixel art). So what I'm saying is that eboy, sadly, are engaged into a form of pixel art monopoly leading, among other consequences, people to think that pixel art is by nature isometric.

They also have chosen a set in stone way to represent pixelling: oversimplified shapes and shading, huge and non-homogeneous palettes, stationary style, mass produced art (this last point makes me think that they are skilled blue-collar workers more than artists). For these reasons, I find harmful that the equation pixel + art = eboy is considered valid in the public eyes.

Personally I carry an extremely broad definition of the word art, I include everything from film, music, sculpture, paintings, graffiti, sidewalk chalk drawings done by a three year old on the pavement, screen printing on t-shirts, idle doodles in the margins of notes, album covers. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

Now, for the "art" definition, yours seems to be more a list of examples than a definition so I want to hear your deeper views on that. Regarding the "art or not" matter here is my present location on the road to understanding, I consider that an artwork implies at least:
A human aesthetical intent (aware of being an intent and aware of being aesthetically pleasant or unpleasant) to translate an invisible idea into visible reality in order to provoke/deliver an emotional response to the spectator.

But please note that my definition is a temporary one (mainly because so far I don't fully understand what is aesthetic, I thought I did but I realized I don't) and is built on moving foundations.

However, let me pose this question to you.
What if the watercolor artist had painted a mural of a building on a hilltop, then scanned the image and "pixelled" the building.
Leaving a final image of watercolor style hill and a pixel art building.
Can he still come here for critique on the pixel portion of his painting? Or must we completely disregard his artwork because it follows some but not all of the requirements here?

I have to skip this right now because I'm running out of time, but I will transmit my answer later

One additional question for you, Anarkhya, do you think architects are artists?

Well...Let me think about it... Thinking of them as artists would force me to look at their creation as artworks, and the move is not natural to me but well I have to admit that the vision of some buildings affected me, however, was I affected because I felt beauty or because I admired the skill? This is difficult, I think you're leading me to the "craftsmen or artists" question...

[PypeBros]

defining art is certainly tedious, but I'd daresay that one criterion is that an artwork isn't supposed to have a purpose, or at least, its aestethics shouldn't be constraint by a purpose. That usually rules out most form of architecture, and a large part of design/craftwork.