AuthorTopic: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!  (Read 80593 times)

Offline ErekT

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

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #80 on: January 05, 2014, 01:55:08 pm
Quote
The question is: is it necessary? To me, it doesn't seem to be the point to eliminate each and every single/isolated pixel that exists on the canvas, but rather avoid them where possible.

Necessary? Personally I don't think so. I won't abandon the single pixel for future stuff I make because I still think it has its uses. But I'll be cutting down on using it quite a bit.

But as an exercise I thought the point was to push yourself to find new solutions to the regular one-pixel fallback whenever possible, even when you think a single pixel might be more ideal. And imo it's very possible here.

Offline Vagrant

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • At your service.
    • @VagrantPixels
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/43310.htm
    • View Profile

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #81 on: January 05, 2014, 11:26:41 pm
Yup, I was getting to it. But I have to agree with Crow.

Quote
The question is: is it necessary? To me, it doesn't seem to be the point to eliminate each and every single/isolated pixel that exists on the canvas, but rather avoid them where possible.

Necessary? Personally I don't think so. I won't abandon the single pixel for future stuff I make because I still think it has its uses. But I'll be cutting down on using it quite a bit.

But as an exercise I thought the point was to push yourself to find new solutions to the regular one-pixel fallback whenever possible, even when you think a single pixel might be more ideal. And imo it's very possible here.



It is possible, but it kinda looks like a blurring effect was applied. Single pixel AA effectively defines the structure loads better however, with those angles. It's simply sharper.

Offline ErekT

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

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #82 on: January 06, 2014, 12:09:12 am
Yeh, I might have gone a little overboard with the AA there. Here's another two.



All down to personal preference in the end what solution you like best of course.

Offline ptoing

  • 0101
  • ****
  • Posts: 3063
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • variegated quadrangle arranger
    • the_ptoing
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/2191.htm
    • View Profile
    • Perpetually inactive website

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #83 on: January 07, 2014, 04:01:24 am
I have to say that the double pixel 45 degree lines and generally fattened up outline stuff does not look great to me in most cases. It works better in some, like the back of the head of Viewtiful Joe, than others, such as long 45 degree lines, imo.

Also the fact that a line like this should be lighter than the colour it is intended to be, due to rules of antialias and if not done right a diagonal fattened line will look significantly thicker than a straight line).

I like the general idea of keeping clusters efficient, but I do not see the problem with single pixel outlines at all (look at Mia's lovely work, among others), or with single pixel step AA. If you have the colours to fit in 3 pixels of different value for AA in a place which ideally should have 3 pixels worth of AA, then 1 pixel, 2 pixels, 4 pixels, or 3 pixels consisting of less colours will likely give a worse result.

I have not had the time to experiment with this more, so this is all just from analytical thought and not from proper testing, which I will get to once I am back home (mid Jan) and have some time for it.
There are no ugly colours, only ugly combinations of colours.

Offline Mathias

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

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #84 on: January 07, 2014, 02:20:14 pm
I couldn't find the difference.
There it is:

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #85 on: January 07, 2014, 05:53:09 pm
I have to say that the double pixel 45 degree lines and generally fattened up outline stuff does not look great to me in most cases. It works better in some, like the back of the head of Viewtiful Joe, than others, such as long 45 degree lines, imo.

Also the fact that a line like this should be lighter than the colour it is intended to be, due to rules of antialias and if not done right a diagonal fattened line will look significantly thicker than a straight line).

Beyond outline, for an example of how it can look pretty cool in general, see Mrmo Tarius's works. However you might call this already a style in itself rather than a style agnostic method.

I tend to agree though, which is why I made it an optional tool for surgical operations. I just threw it in here to see what happens, but overall it's probably much less relevant to pixel art than "cube art"; in the next dimension it's more a concern about surface smoothness than outline thickness, since it can look really shitty when all those corners of cubes are sticking out like spikes, partially overlapping on perspective in an annoying way pixels wouldn't, the visual interference from that on the move, when there's a lot of it for intricate "texture". So I'm trying to get away from that ugly notion of "retro romance" that's driving that scene, and more towards an interpretation in creative terms of simplicity, control and tidiness, that makes visual sense and rekindles it with pixel art more on a philosophical level, so to speak. But in the end, how well that really works out is yet to be determined in ongoing research.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2014, 07:45:11 pm by RAV »

Offline Vagrant

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • At your service.
    • @VagrantPixels
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/43310.htm
    • View Profile

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #86 on: January 07, 2014, 06:33:31 pm
It's already influencing my own works.



But I'll still keep my single pixels where I need them. Now they are so much fewer.
Going back and re-doing an old piece can be a pain. It's most effective when you do it from the ground up, again.



Conclusion: Awesome thread and exercise.

Offline Cyangmou

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 929
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • cyangmou
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/32234.htm
    • cyangmou
    • View Profile
    • Pixwerk Homepage

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #87 on: January 07, 2014, 10:25:32 pm
It's already influencing my own works.

But I'll still keep my single pixels where I need them. Now they are so much fewer.
Going back and re-doing an old piece can be a pain. It's most effective when you do it from the ground up, again.

Conclusion: Awesome thread and exercise.

Indeed
I also got much more sensitised to single pixels within my new pieces since I tried this exercise

 ;D
"Because the beauty of the human body is that it hasn't a single muscle which doesn't serve its purpose; that there's not a line wasted; that every detail of it fits one idea, the idea of a man and the life of a man."

Dev-Art
Twitter

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #88 on: January 11, 2014, 01:27:38 pm
I'm glad you are finding a use for this :)

Offline Cure

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 565
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/2621.htm
    • facebook.com/logantannerart
    • View Profile

Re: NEW CLUSTER STUDY THREAD!

Reply #89 on: January 11, 2014, 08:08:02 pm
I have to say that the double pixel 45 degree lines and generally fattened up outline stuff does not look great to me in most cases.
...
I like the general idea of keeping clusters efficient, but I do not see the problem with single pixel outlines at all
I agree with this. the fat 45 degree lines tend to be the clunkiest issue I come across using this method. This is a good practice for learning to create ideal clusters, but following the 'no single pixels' method too strictly limits the amount of solutions to pixel-pushing problems. In my opinion, it's best to use this method in moderation and still allow for plenty of single pixel usage. There is a difference between 'stray' or 'trapped' single pixels, and single pixels that serve a necessary function.


I've continued applying the no-lonely-pixels rule to Grishkin: