GR#007 Yeti Project - Sprite Development

[ndchristie]

I've come out of lurking just for this one topic!  Feel spesh?

I don't really have the time to talk much about this yeti, but after reading this, i can say a few things with absolute certainty that were apparent from the first post and not disproved by the latest:

speed and workflow are more dependent on the artist's confidence in his form than the media itself, and quality is highly dependent on the way a work is shown.

As for your estimate, I actually think there's a dozen people here that could do a nice sketch in 1 hour, especially those who own tablets but not necessarily.  I don't want to call them out, I don't think dick-waving contests further artistic expression, but all of the mods plus fool, st0ven, snake, etc could no doubt lay out a figure with some rough planes and texture sketches.

http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15981.htm# i use Helm as a reference because I remember being impressed with the speed he notes here when he posted it.
Where does that speed come from?  Is it from years working with a mouse?  Is it from years of traditional drawing?  Is it from not really caring about how long he spends on something?  Is it from enjoying what he does?  I can only guess, but I would assume all of those are factors.

The original sketch you posted, the shrunken and cleaned version, it might be good for some places, but it's not good on a very clear or very large screen and because it was not done though by hand, it would take a much longer effort to be made say, handheld-ready than it would take to clean a pixelled image.

In the end my main question though is - why are you so desperate to prove this point?  Are you trying to prove that an ability to place more than a single pixel at a time covers ground more quickly?  We don't need research to show that, it's apparent from its own framing.  Pixel art is about having a quality and attention all its own, not about being quick and dirty (and that posted sketch is REALLY dirty).

If you want to improve your speed and skill with pixels, don't waste your time tying to prove that it's slow, believe in yourself for more than 30 minutes and make things happen.  ignore the clock, ignore other means, find yourself in the media and draw.  If all you're after is becoming a better low-res photoshop artist, there are other forums.  Just making a topic about what you don't want to do and don't think others can if they tried (despite evidence ALL OVER THIS SITE) is confusing to me.

I get the feeling that you're taking things to seriously and from an angle that does nobody benefit.  Turn off the stopwatch.  Paint a tree in your yard.  paint a caterpillar on the tree.  paint your face with jam.  tickle a baby.  REVEL IN SOMETHING.  I don't love the manarilla because helm did it in an hour, i love it because it's so little and freaky and the red is just so rewarding to look at!!The rest of us are almost universally here because we love what we do.  To seek dismissal, to label things impossible (or unworthy)-- these pursuits are fruitless and depressing.  I hope something in here clicks .

[vedsten]

Nice post 

The pink back lightning doesn't blend well for me, but that might be my screen
Other than that, i got no issues, good job!

[EvilEye]

I've come out of lurking just for this one topic!  Feel spesh?

Gee, I'm honored

I don't really have the time to talk much about this yeti, but after reading this, i can say a few things with absolute certainty that were apparent from the first post and not disproved by the latest:

speed and workflow are more dependent on the artist's confidence in his form than the media itself, and quality is highly dependent on the way a work is shown.

As for your estimate, I actually think there's a dozen people here that could do a nice sketch in 1 hour, especially those who own tablets but not necessarily.  I don't want to call them out, I don't think dick-waving contests further artistic expression, but all of the mods plus fool, st0ven, snake, etc could no doubt lay out a figure with some rough planes and texture sketches.

http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15981.htm# i use Helm as a reference because I remember being impressed with the speed he notes here when he posted it.
Where does that speed come from?  Is it from years working with a mouse?  Is it from years of traditional drawing?  Is it from not really caring about how long he spends on something?  Is it from enjoying what he does?  I can only guess, but I would assume all of those are factors.

The original sketch you posted, the shrunken and cleaned version, it might be good for some places, but it's not good on a very clear or very large screen and because it was not done though by hand, it would take a much longer effort to be made say, handheld-ready than it would take to clean a pixelled image.

In the end my main question though is - why are you so desperate to prove this point?  Are you trying to prove that an ability to place more than a single pixel at a time covers ground more quickly?  We don't need research to show that, it's apparent from its own framing.  Pixel art is about having a quality and attention all its own, not about being quick and dirty (and that posted sketch is REALLY dirty).

If you want to improve your speed and skill with pixels, don't waste your time tying to prove that it's slow, believe in yourself for more than 30 minutes and make things happen.  ignore the clock, ignore other means, find yourself in the media and draw.  If all you're after is becoming a better low-res photoshop artist, there are other forums.  Just making a topic about what you don't want to do and don't think others can if they tried (despite evidence ALL OVER THIS SITE) is confusing to me.

I get the feeling that you're taking things to seriously and from an angle that does nobody benefit.  Turn off the stopwatch.  Paint a tree in your yard.  paint a caterpillar on the tree.  paint your face with jam.  tickle a baby.  REVEL IN SOMETHING.  I don't love the manarilla because helm did it in an hour, i love it because it's so little and freaky and the red is just so rewarding to look at!!The rest of us are almost universally here because we love what we do.  To seek dismissal, to label things impossible (or unworthy)-- these pursuits are fruitless and depressing.  I hope something in here clicks .

I was going to do a thorough response to this but then I though why bother, I'll just reiterate my original point:

Talk is cheap, show me something of similar quality done in an hour. So far all I've heard is talk and statements like "you just aren't good enough", and "you gotta have the right workflow" .

I'm a bit confused over why on something meant to be incredibly hairy we'd see the muscles as well defined as they are here, most notably on the arm. To be honest, to my unprofessional eye, the shoulder volumes look better defined in Helm's version, the hair better in the three relevant edits provided - and I also see what look like stray white pixels towards the left, making it look grainier than miscdude's attempt. Maybe there is more to be learnt from them?

As for the stray pixels, those were intentional and were meant to add to the backlighting / reflective effect.

To me it looks good, but its one of those things that some people won't like and some will. It's also possible that I overdid it in some parts, but I'm pretty much done with this piece, so I'll live with it.

[Opacus]

I've come out of lurking just for this one topic!  Feel spesh?

Gee, I'm honored

I don't really have the time to talk much about this yeti, but after reading this, i can say a few things with absolute certainty that were apparent from the first post and not disproved by the latest:

speed and workflow are more dependent on the artist's confidence in his form than the media itself, and quality is highly dependent on the way a work is shown.

As for your estimate, I actually think there's a dozen people here that could do a nice sketch in 1 hour, especially those who own tablets but not necessarily.  I don't want to call them out, I don't think dick-waving contests further artistic expression, but all of the mods plus fool, st0ven, snake, etc could no doubt lay out a figure with some rough planes and texture sketches.

http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15981.htm# i use Helm as a reference because I remember being impressed with the speed he notes here when he posted it.
Where does that speed come from?  Is it from years working with a mouse?  Is it from years of traditional drawing?  Is it from not really caring about how long he spends on something?  Is it from enjoying what he does?  I can only guess, but I would assume all of those are factors.

The original sketch you posted, the shrunken and cleaned version, it might be good for some places, but it's not good on a very clear or very large screen and because it was not done though by hand, it would take a much longer effort to be made say, handheld-ready than it would take to clean a pixelled image.

In the end my main question though is - why are you so desperate to prove this point?  Are you trying to prove that an ability to place more than a single pixel at a time covers ground more quickly?  We don't need research to show that, it's apparent from its own framing.  Pixel art is about having a quality and attention all its own, not about being quick and dirty (and that posted sketch is REALLY dirty).

If you want to improve your speed and skill with pixels, don't waste your time tying to prove that it's slow, believe in yourself for more than 30 minutes and make things happen.  ignore the clock, ignore other means, find yourself in the media and draw.  If all you're after is becoming a better low-res photoshop artist, there are other forums.  Just making a topic about what you don't want to do and don't think others can if they tried (despite evidence ALL OVER THIS SITE) is confusing to me.

I get the feeling that you're taking things to seriously and from an angle that does nobody benefit.  Turn off the stopwatch.  Paint a tree in your yard.  paint a caterpillar on the tree.  paint your face with jam.  tickle a baby.  REVEL IN SOMETHING.  I don't love the manarilla because helm did it in an hour, i love it because it's so little and freaky and the red is just so rewarding to look at!!The rest of us are almost universally here because we love what we do.  To seek dismissal, to label things impossible (or unworthy)-- these pursuits are fruitless and depressing.  I hope something in here clicks .

I was going to do a thorough response to this but then I though why bother, I'll just reiterate my original point:

Talk is cheap, show me something of similar quality done in an hour. So far all I've heard is talk and statements like "you just aren't good enough", and "you gotta have the right workflow" .

I'm a bit confused over why on something meant to be incredibly hairy we'd see the muscles as well defined as they are here, most notably on the arm. To be honest, to my unprofessional eye, the shoulder volumes look better defined in Helm's version, the hair better in the three relevant edits provided - and I also see what look like stray white pixels towards the left, making it look grainier than miscdude's attempt. Maybe there is more to be learnt from them?

As for the stray pixels, those were intentional and were meant to add to the backlighting / reflective effect.

To me it looks good, but its one of those things that some people won't like and some will. It's also possible that I overdid it in some parts, but I'm pretty much done with this piece, so I'll live with it.

Okay. Show you something of similair or better quality of something done within an hour.
Did you even read Nd's post?

I'll post the link again:
http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15981.htm#

That. It's quality wise superior to yours, and done within an hour.

Why are you dismissing every help that's being handed to you?

Are you so incredibly convinced that you are right and everyone else is wrong?
Why is is so important for you to show everyone that it's impossible for you to make something excellent in an hour?

It IS possible to make something of quality in an hour. Something that Mantrilla by Helm proves.
Just because you can't pull it off because of a lack of experience, doesn't mean there isn't a single pixel artist who can.

You seem hellbent on proving to everyone that pixel art is terrible, tedious, time consuming work.
But if you hate pixel art as much as you seem to: Why do you even bother making pixel art?
You've always seemed like a very reasonable person to me, but your attitude in this topic isn't doing that assumption much justice.

[#36005A]

I was going to do a thorough response to this but then I though why bother, I'll just reiterate my original point:

Talk is cheap, show me something of similar quality done in an hour. So far all I've heard is talk and statements like "you just aren't good enough", and "you gotta have the right workflow" .

EvilEye, please at least read the last three paragraphs of ndchristie's post before outright dismissing it. I've been curious about some of those questions too - why are you so intent on "proving" that "good" pixel art can't be done within an hour? Why should it matter?

[dekutree64]

I decided to give this a shot. That's a pretty cool looking yeti, and I was curious how good I could do in an hour/how long it would take me to beat the resize, and I could use the practice anyway. Ended up spending 2.5 hours on it total, but I think the result is pretty good. Not as good as Evil's, but then I am still a semi-noob
Probably could do with a couple more shades for anti-aliasing, but meh, it was just for fun (although I would appreciate any C&C on it).

Anyway, here's my progression to one hour (5 min, 15 min, 30 min, 50 min, 60 min)


Still looking incomplete, and I forgot to color the eyes black :p
This was done just referencing the original sketch, I didn't bother resizing it. At first I was going to make mine more brown but with blueish highlights, but I ended up just working in a few shades and adjusted the palette to be similar to the reference.

Next progression (90 min, 120 min)


Looking much better now, but haven't done the back lighting yet.
Then the finished version, with 2 versions of the palette because I couldn't decide which I like better:


So in the end, I agree it would be hard to beat the resize in an hour, but 2 hours is plenty, and 2.5 hours you can do some real refinement.

EDIT: Haha, I just now realized there are only supposed to be 4 knuckles on that hand Well, one more finger to crush your skull with.

[Helm]

I personally like Evileye's final version a lot and as far as pixel placement goes, the skill on display is more than equal to that which I had back in 2006 when I made my own piece. In fact the deliberation that is on display on this thread certainly leads to artistic growth. The problem with it is that it doesn't have any fur texture to it at all and instead looks like it's made from sharp, angularly cut diamonds (and this isn't only a problem of pixel placement, but much more an issue of color selection... again, overbright, no low colors, saturation issues). So as a texture study of fur it hasn't achieved what Evileye set out to do. It's a great piece on its own and I'm sure he's learned a lot from attempting this, but, there's problems of communication.

This 'put up or shut up' theme is really grating and counterintuitive for a learning environment, which Pixelation is. When someone shows you something and you say "that doesn't cut it (+dismissive emoticon)" it seems to me like you expect other people need to be better than you before they can help you, and that's not how critique works at all, as far as I've seen in my years here. Nobody's going to make your art better than you can make your art, man, because they're not in your head and have different standards. I don't care to show you what I can do in an hour, for example, because art is not a contest, and what looks better is very subjective, and the point isn't to humble you with my mad skillz, it is to help you. Do you need to be humiliated to be helped? Should your ego be broken down before you start approaching things more openly? If so, I'm sure there's people that would step up for the challenge, if you keep asking.

But is that an atmosphere worth cultivating here?

Here's what I've noticed:

1. You like your art more than other people like your art
2. You feel you're a better lowlevel CG artist than a pixel artist, you feel your CG art is better than most people's pixel art at achieving the same goals.
3. Other people don't seem to agree
4. You set out to show that pixel art is more cumbersome and difficult to achieve the same goals your CG art achieves effortlessly

1 Is usually healthy, I mean, if you don't love yourself, who will love you?
2 You *are* currently a better CG artist than a pixel artist. The problem is that these two methodologies do not achieve the same goals. 'Something that looks good in 150x150 pixels' is not the end goal of pixel art. The end goal of pixel art is balance, clarity, intentionality, control.
3 When people don't agree with you, antagonizing them as if they're lying to you and should own up to the truth isn't a very nice thing to do. Sometimes they have a point to not agree with you and what you should do - I suggest - is prod them for explanations on why they feel as they feel, not emoticons and irony.
4 This is completely ass-backwards. What is this external locus for making art? Do it for yourself, man. Do it because you love it. Don't do it to prove a point to an internet forum, they won't love you for it. Make pixel art if you love pixel art, make CG art if you love CG art.


So, in the end, you made pixel art. It took you whatever amount of time. Did you enjoy yourself? Did you see the benefits of a more controlled medium like pixel art? Do you think that you'll do more? Or will you go back to working faster in CG like before? That's more interesting for me to know than all this bullshit about 'do it better yourself'. I'll never make your art better than you, man, because it's your art and that's the point of Pixelation: to help people to get where they need to go, not to show them up with superior skill.

[EvilEye]

Okay. Show you something of similair or better quality of something done within an hour.
Did you even read Nd's post?

Yep.

I'll post the link again:
http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15981.htm#

Yes I saw it when helm posted it in the creativity thread.

And as I told helm, that is a fairly simple piece and certainly doable within an hour.

Maybe I should have explained it a bit more?

*Note I am not trying to rag on helm here, and I am not saying its a bad piece*

But:

1. The pose is very simple. No wild perspective, Nothing that pushes the limits of pixel art in any way.

2. Mostly 90 or 45 degree angles on the body, which are easy to do.

3. The creature is not based on anything that we are too familiar with, so none of the features have to be very correct. I.e. He can have upper arms that are bigger then the foream and noone will really notice. Same with the head and other parts.

4. Very little muscle definition on the fur, makes for much easier work.

5. No fingers or toes, helm cheated a bit IMO and just wrapped them up and hid them.

6. Lighting is actually pretty sparse, there are some parts that should have a lot better lighting but don't. Again, probably because it was done in an hour.

actually helm agreed with me that it was simpler then the piece I was attempting.

That. It's quality wise superior to yours, and done within an hour.

Say hello to your seeing-eye dog for me.

Why are you dismissing every help that's being handed to you?

Very few people have offered any real advice ( except for the edits at the top of this thread ). A lot of the "advice" offered is just arm-chair pixeling and thinly veiled insults.

If you are truly interested Opacus, and if helm doesn't mind, I can point out the flaws in his piece and explain why I don't think its at a similar level to the one I did. I'm sure that would stoke the fires of hell some more, but hey That is, if your really curious and not just saying this to argue.

I personally like Evileye's final version a lot and as far as pixel placement goes, the skill on display is more than equal to that which I had back in 2006 when I made my own piece.

Thanks, glad you like it.

The problem with it is that it doesn't have any fur texture to it at all and instead looks like it's made from sharp, angularly cut diamonds (and this isn't only a problem of pixel placement, but much more an issue of color selection... again, overbright, no low colors, saturation issues). So as a texture study of fur it hasn't achieved what Evileye set out to do. It's a great piece on its own and I'm sure he's learned a lot from attempting this, but, there's problems of communication.

Well that's kind of a style preference, to me that angular cut diamond look is great. Overbright... well again a style preference, I think the colors are nearly perfect. At least they look that way on my computer. The fur more or less achieved what I wanted, I was trying for something close to the sketch and not super-realistic fur.

This 'put up or shut up' theme is really grating and counterintuitive for a learning environment, which Pixelation is. When someone shows you something and you say "that doesn't cut it (+dismissive emoticon)" it seems to me like you expect other people need to be better than you before they can help you, and that's not how critique works at all, as far as I've seen in my years here.

I didn't mean it in that way actually, I was trying to show you the style I was going for was totally different. Bad wording on my part.

Should your ego be broken down before you start approaching things more openly? If so, I'm sure there's people that would step up for the challenge, if you keep asking.

Now now helm. I wasn't the one bragging I could do it in an hour....

2. You feel you're a better lowlevel CG artist than a pixel artist, you feel your CG art is better than most people's pixel art at achieving the same goals.

I feel I'm a lowlevel CG artist? Well I'm about average usually.

Cmon, can't you make a post without trying to insult me here?

1 Is usually healthy, I mean, if you don't love yourself, who will love you?

Thanks Dr helm

So, in the end, you made pixel art. It took you whatever amount of time. Did you enjoy yourself?

I must admit it was somewhat enjoyable, if only to see some people get a little bent out of shape

[Helm]

Oh, about colors and fur texture, perhaps this edit will help:



This took about 15 minutes, if that interests you.

edit: 'lowlevel' I mean as in dealing with 'low' CG, art that is meant to be displayed at small resolutions, few colors etc, I didn't mean low as in qualifer.

[ndchristie]

So far all I've heard is talk and statements like "you just aren't good enough", and "you gotta have the right workflow" lol.

If you read that in my post, there's little use in me writing, since you've essentially presented a message that was not at all contained within my words.

I'm not going to draw something for an hour because while you're right, talk is cheap, there's no point (as I mentioned) with this wild-west dickwaving type method of learning and comparing techniques you've apparently learned from Bleach or DBZ.  It won't do either of us any benefit and I have better ways to spend my time than proving something to you because you're not confident enough in a given media.  If you think I suck, or anyone else here, that's not my problem.  I don't have to pixel a monkey just because you have a bad attitude.

Your arguments are cherry-picked when you want them to apply. If helm makes a chimera it's easier because there's no set guidelines, but when you make a yeti it's somehow more scrutable and more accomplished?  if we compare it to a gorilla, there are some real issues with the anatomy, some issues remain actually even without tying it to a natural creature - the chest is strange and invented in a way that dekutree's edit, that you failed even to recognize despite the fact that he's doing what you asked, actually solves.  the leg and arm muscles are just lumps brought together only by a general resemblance to the greater forms and even then the lighting is strangely described.  The colors are no aid to this and the huge jump from the darkest blue to black only serves to further expose the formal issues.

While the piece is ok and I'm sure you've learned something, you're on no ground to talk about being nearly perfect while throwing out or ignoring all sorts of valid advice and criticisms.  You're also just insulting everyone in a way that's baffling.  "Say hello to your seeing eye dog"??  Is there any reason for that?  What was gained?  Helm and the other mods deserve a round on the house for remaining on-point and respectful.