AuthorTopic: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint  (Read 41161 times)

Offline deziresoft

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #70 on: March 01, 2009, 09:13:28 am
Well, that's good to hear.  You should be a bit more lenient on work.  I am still sorry for coming off too strong. :P


~Joe

Offline crab2selout.png

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 643
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • lost my left-most pixel in the war
    • View Profile

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #71 on: March 01, 2009, 11:09:12 am
I think any definition of pixel art has got to have some lovely images to back up the words. Visual props for a visual art. A metal slug 3 screenshot or bitmap brothers piece would probably help a little to clear up what pixel detail is with "dirty" tools. Maybe two or three images with an explicit disclaimer that they represent the tiniest sampling of the pixel aesthetic. Just so teh newcomers don't get any bright ideas about the 3 images representing boundaries which all pixel art must fall within.

I kind of wonder if a more general defintion taht focuses on the need for control and precision at the pixel level and less on the invalidness of gradiants and AutoAA would work better. Part of the problem taht we've been talking about is the damage caused by artificial limits being imposed on pixel art. Both those defintions still have that problem even with this escape clause at the end
Quote
Effects of this kind must be cleaned up manually by the artist to...

Still, both definitions are good steps in a positive direction. And I'm glad to hear that Miascugh's piece is back. It's been interesting reading this thread, so many people that I didn't realise were working behind the scenes at PJ. You guys/girls and the Pixelation crew are a great bunch and I really appreciate the effort you guys put into these places.

Offline Helm

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

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #72 on: March 01, 2009, 12:52:47 pm
That definition: if you just said

'The end result must belie a careful consideration on the part of the artist in maximizing the potential informative quality of his pixels both solitary and in groups. If it's sloppy or it looks like the computer was making a lot of choices, it will not be accepted'.


I know this sounds a bit technobabble, but it's really a very concise definition. Along with a few 'This is pixel art/this isn't pixel art' pictures below I think it'd be enough.

Offline Larwick

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 738
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • Larwick
    • http://www.pixeljoint.com/p/3794.htm
    • View Profile
    • Artstation

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #73 on: March 02, 2009, 02:26:03 am
Having visual aids is a brilliant idea. Strange that it wasn't thought of before. Thanks crab2selout.  :y:

Just so you all know we're making progress over at PJ with thanks to everyones input.

Offline pixelblink

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • pixeljoint

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #74 on: March 02, 2009, 07:02:04 am
ptoing: I hadn't previously found the trial version link on the website until recently. I wasn't truly that obvious, but I have now downloaded it and I'm going through the learning curve on it.

The crew and myself at PJ have been talking about site upgrades and redefining the rules for quite some time. In fact, we're currently discussing implementing a wiki styled format for all of this. We're not as complacent and stubborn as one might think but we've got to be patient as our site owner and coder works at a slower pace than we'd like. Still, the work is getting done and communications are always improving. On top of that, mods have/are being replaced over the years. I feel that the core team is pretty much now in tune with each other (especially after this topics conversation). I sense that it's more growing pains than anything. The site has grown exponentially over the past, what, 5 years I've been there (essentially for the beginning) and what used to be acceptable in the past and what used to be the common train of thought has changed and grown over time. Believe me when I say I want to see the site continue to grow and succeed but that can only come about with strong moderation and passionate people to build a stronger and more intelligent community.

Though intelligence doesn't necessarily mean using bigger words to describe things, does it? I know that we need to define our roles and rules wtih clearer intentions and clearer words so that everyone can understand where we're coming from and how the membership is intended to be implied. I am open to inviting consultants to help us with the upcoming wiki for definitions and whatnot along the way and I hope we can count on the support of everyone here to help bring along the required positive changes that will take place over time at PJ.

@Xelados: I don't quite see what you are referring to. I looked up your name at PJ and found the one image you submitted that was rejected but found no discussion surrounding it. No PMs were made from you or to you that I can see. Perhaps a decision was made in haste on either side and, should you decide to give it another spin, I'd be happy to discuss any issues with you.

Offline Helm

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

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #75 on: March 02, 2009, 07:23:40 am
I miss the old Pixelation before the hoity toity artfag attitudes.

Although you had a rocky start around here that cost you two strikes, you seemed to have taken the repeated hints and had settled down for a while. I knew from then that your situation could go either way as from experience people that are communally disruptive will remain so because what fuels them is not the sort of thing that can be amended with 'slaps on the wrist' from an internet community. Nonetheless I have hope and who knows sometimes things just go better for the 'troll' in their personal lives and it just so coincides with their stay around here and they relax. Apparently a lot of of other people hoped the same, we've tried to help with your art as much as we could and although there seemed to be progress and integration now you say these things which sounds pretty ungrateful to me. If you don't want to be a positive part of this community I can give you your last strike and you can go take a year-long timeout from socializing at Pixelation. Perhaps being here isn't helping you on a deeper level anyway at the moment, given your attitude. I really would rather not give you the last strike even though you're pushing for it. Is everything alright otherwise in your life?

Sometimes the problem is not with the communities you seem to have run-ins with, sometimes it's with you. Anyway, in the case that you'd rather not get the last strike and want to work through your concerns with Pixelation (always willing to listen both in pubic and in private) pro-actively, then please retract the above quoted insult to uh... everyone that has posted in Pixelation.

Pixelblink: having a site owner/coder that is absent/isn't working as fast as you'd like it a surefire way to get swamped down to a standstill eventually. Happened with Pixelation to the point where the active moderators effectively staged a coup to resume some sort of control of the place (today's Pixelation is what we have to show for our ninja tactics). This generated some bad blood, but it was the price that had to be paid. I'm not saying you would have to go to the same drastic measures, but if Sedge can't be around as much as you'd want him you should discuss some sort of mitigation of server control with him so you can get things you need done today, today.

re: What used to be acceptable then isn't now: I think when everything is set and done you reevaluate all pieces in the gallery and restart the rankings exactly because of that.

Offline Feron

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1123
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • Carpe Diem
    • View Profile
    • Pixelheart

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #76 on: March 02, 2009, 08:23:55 am
I'm not ungrateful for the help I've received. Is it not possible to appreciate what's been given to you but still have issues with the underlying social atmosphere? I really don't think your threat's necessary; it's a single sentence that, while negative, isn't going overboard. People are allowed to have constrasting opinions here, right?
There's contrasting and plain out rude.

Quote
It'd be nice to be a "positive part of the community", but I really don't know what that entails. I don't have the traditional schooling that you, Nate, or the other big names have. Comparitively, anything I could contribute would be of lesser quality, and I have no intentions of misleading artists. So in that field, I'm worthless to the community. I could (try to) be a well-liked and respected member, but how much of my personality would I have to coat with a veneer of fakeness in order to gain social acceptance?
Positive part of the community: just be nice to people, give critique and helpful advice.  Don't be an ass, and sometimes read what you've wrote before you post it.  I don't know where you're getting this sense that everyone here is art-schooled.  I'd most people here are hobbyists.  Solid art background will make anybody better at any artform.  Stop worrying about other people's skill, just focus or improving your own.  I think you care to much about what you think others will think of your work.  This is not a gallery its a place where people will help you regardless of skill, provided you don't call everyone here an "art-fag".


Quote
To sum things up, I'm thankful for the help I have received, but that doesn't mean I have to regard those that help me as gods. Everyone's fallible, right? And it doesn't say anywhere in Pixelation's rules than you're not allowed a dissenting opinion, especially if it's expressed in a civilized manner. Like mine.
No one is asking you to respect anybody as a god.  Stop trying to make hierarchy where there is none.  It's never nice to see someone banned, but it looks like it will probably go that way.  Have a nice year :)

Offline Dusty

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1107
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #77 on: March 02, 2009, 08:25:53 am
I never had traditional schooling and I never seemed to have a problem around here...

Offline Helm

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

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #78 on: March 02, 2009, 08:38:32 am
The focus of this thread is another so I'll have to be brief.

Your concerns about 'traditional schooled' artists becoming significant here in Pixelation and actually of what the value of being significant here really is show that you misunderstand the purpose of this place. Every opinion is welcome, critique that could be bad for the artist is usually neutered out by contrasting opinions, everybody helps everybody and that's how Pixelation was and will remain. I resent the implication that there are 'big names' here. Are Atnas, Willows, Rosse or Eyecraft 'big names'? Because those are the last people I remember giving cookies to for great helpful critique in the last few weeks and that's just at the top of my head.

I asked you to retract a clear insult, yet you understood me to request that you do not have differing opinions on the whole. This I must take as a symptom of your sadly distorted perception and so here's your third strike. A year is enough time to tour the internet for places more befitting you if you so desire or to just reconsider how this one is to be used. If you chose to return then, you'd be welcome.

I honestly wouldn't mind exploring your sentiments more fully because there are worthwhile things we could discuss (as we have in the past every time you got a strike) but that would not be in my capacity as a moderator of Pixelation, as you are now banned.

Offline pixelblink

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • pixeljoint

Re: Pixel purism and the PixelJoint

Reply #79 on: March 02, 2009, 08:41:33 am
What I'm getting from Xelados' posts is a matter of perception which, to my eyes, is exactly what this thread started on. People have perceived PJ as being unfair and uneducated, among other things, and needs focusing and a staff of mods that are in the spotlight to solve issues instead of corrupting their own definitions of what is acceptable and what isn't. I won't defend Xelados' strongly negative statement but it holds merit to the discussion of how these two sites are perceived and perhaps it's something that the moderation team here needs to discuss amongst themselves. I won't force that conversation as the main focus here is PJ and not Pixelation but I think that it opens a theme that may need to be addressed in the future.

Personally, I see these two sites handling art theories completely differently. I see PJ as being a bit more open to everyone's personal style and allowing them to explore their own path while I see Pixelation as discussing serious art theory and formalized training to be put to work. I see no flaw in either sites functions in that manner. One would learn from each or at least have the opportunity to learn from each method.

And, while I do agree one shouldn't mince words when they're passionate about an idea (whether it's in a negative context or not), I do feel that words like "art fag" is pretty much derogatory and also stereotypes and generalizes a large group of people who come from - and learn from - different backgrounds.