AuthorTopic: Rock tiles, Over detailed?  (Read 7931 times)

Offline Ovyx

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #10 on: April 28, 2011, 09:19:55 pm
Well I use Gamemaker for pixeling, but I should learn how to use photoshop. I'll try and get ahold of. Thanks!  ;D

Offline Elk

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 294
  • Karma: +0/-2
  • Choice Architect & Nudger
    • elkdarkshire
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/4683.htm
    • darkshire
    • darkshire.elk
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #11 on: April 28, 2011, 09:40:25 pm
Frankly, Photoshop is sh*t for pixelling. 850 dollar-price tag for functionality you don't need. No animation capabilities as far as I know, either.

Graphicsgale is really good, and free too. I hear Promotion is great but I could never get used to the interface.

Thats very rude for you to say, I only use Photoshop for pixeling and animating and nothing else :)...
Open for business
elkdarkshire@gmail.com
Elk#2299

Offline ErekT

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • fistful of pixels
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #12 on: April 29, 2011, 04:54:09 am
Well isn't it?

Photoshop is the industry standard for image editing but for pixelling it is, in my own personal humble opinion, shit. That's just not what it was made for. You use Photoshop and you prefer it because you're familiar with it and know all you need to know to work with it. That's cool. Of course it is. I'm happy for ya! :y:

But when someone asks for recommendations about pixelling programs that has good anim capabilities and layers then is Photoshop reeeally the first thing you'd recommend? 850 dollars? No animation timeline? No good palette control? Etc etc...

Offline Elk

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 294
  • Karma: +0/-2
  • Choice Architect & Nudger
    • elkdarkshire
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/4683.htm
    • darkshire
    • darkshire.elk
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #13 on: April 29, 2011, 05:29:22 am
But when someone asks for recommendations about pixelling programs that has good anim capabilities and layers then is Photoshop reeeally the first thing you'd recommend? 850 dollars? No animation timeline? No good palette control? Etc etc...


850 Dollars...

on the Adobe website it says US$699 for Photoshop CS5...and you don't even need that ALL...never
and if you're not using it commercially...well...you know the trick -.-

Photoshop ImageReady (comes with version 7.0) is very awesome and has everything you need for pixelart, and has very good animation capabiities aswell...

Also, to not go off-topic again...

http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?topic=11619.0
Open for business
elkdarkshire@gmail.com
Elk#2299

Offline Ovyx

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #14 on: April 29, 2011, 05:58:05 am
Well, ImageReady sounds lovely, but unfortunatly I have CS3, which does not come with ImageReady, or so I think.. Iv'e never explored it throughly, it is kinda intimidating.. O, and uhm, sorry for being off topic.  :-[

Offline ErekT

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • fistful of pixels
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #15 on: April 29, 2011, 06:19:51 am
Uh? The Adobe page tells me 849$ excluding taxes.

https://store3.adobe.com/cfusion/store/index.cfm?store=OLS-AP&storeRegion=HK&nr=0#

Anyhows, 700$ or 850$, it makes little difference. It's still astronomically over-priced, at least for pixelling purposes.

On-topic: Agree with the suggestion to block out the scene beforehand. It's somewhat difficult for me to make out what I'm looking at right now. The perspective looks like 3/4 top view but it's for a side-scroller, rite? If so then it might be good to put detail mainly where you want the player to focus, that is the platform where the hero guy is running around. Background layers and that area below the platform where you have lots of detailed rocks and stuff right now shouldn't steal too much attention.

Offline blumunkee

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 325
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #16 on: April 29, 2011, 06:29:50 am
You can still animate in newer versions of Photoshop, using layers as frames. It's a pain compared to programs with a concept of separate frames and layers, but the help files are there if you need them.

Yes. I think you are over-detailing (a little, not a lot). Look at the backgrounds here:

http://www.neo-geo.com/reviews/neo-reviews/lastblade2/lastblade2.html

Subtle shading, minimal anti-aliasing. Background details are meant to be just that, background. Let the foreground objects capture most of the player's attention.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2011, 06:34:44 am by blumunkee »

Offline pistachio

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 639
  • Karma: +4/-0
  • Mostly lurking
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/125138.htm
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #17 on: April 29, 2011, 01:39:05 pm
Off-topic, anyone? :lala:

Oh, good, it's getting back on track. Me? I don't have anything much to say other than what everyone else pointed out. Especially Blumunkee.

One thing I might suggest, though, is to bring the values down a notch. It seems pretty distracting about now what with how bright it is.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2011, 01:41:42 pm by pistachio »

Offline Mathias

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1797
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • Goodbye.
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/9542.htm
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #18 on: April 29, 2011, 01:48:58 pm
. . . No animation timeline? No good palette control? . . .

Yes, animation timeline.




Not a big Photoshopper are you? PS has always had indexed color mode, too. Allows palette control, but disables things like layers and all other RGB mode functions. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, PS is NOT intended for pixelling. But I do all my pixel work in PS and so does Elk. We both get decent results I think, hehe.

For the record, I recommend Pro Motion for pixelling. Not PS. Most are overwhelmed by scary ol' PS.





As for the rocks. I say yes; they're over-detailed. Mainly I say that because you admit to a bad lack of control when pixelling, as if the end-result of you pixelling isn't what you want. You even posted the rocks image here for feedback. Obviously then, there's something wrong. You don't need us to tell you that. The fact that you felt compelled to post here for crit is evidence enough that you need to change something, is it not? You need to be happy with your own work.
And unless your foreground stuff is super high-contrast and bright I doubt the OP's bg tile is working. Post a whole scene so we can see it in context.
Garish palette too, dude.

Offline ErekT

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • fistful of pixels
    • View Profile

Re: Rock tiles, Over detailed?

Reply #19 on: April 29, 2011, 02:00:48 pm
 !yus!