So, I tried to create a "better" tree...
I'm a programmer that just got interested in (pixel)art to be able to make his own assets for hobby projects. So it's not great but I'm going to explain what I tried to do and why:
First I made the trunk and then imagined the tree sourrounding it. It's conical shaped and has volume so I just added a lighter green and traced the curvature of the tree-cone. (3rd Image) This helps a lot making the tree look three-dimensional.
The next step I tried to add details but lost the lines a little. The tree looks flatter then in the 3rd image. But at least the surface is obviously ruffled now so it looks more organic. To make it look ruffled I tried to shade the "green" of the treetop by deciding wether pixels would be facing up or down. Pixels facing up received a lighter green, pixels facing down received a darker green. Adding light and shadow is what usually gives depth to an image. If you don't do it or you don't do it correctly your brain will still recognize the tree because of its silhouette and color but it won't be able to make a 3-dimensional representation of the 2d image. If you look at the trunk of my tree - it seems as if the left side receives a little more light then the other. This really helps - if you know where the light source you can deduct in what direction a pixel faces and from that construct the object. (Amazing, what our brains are capable of in terms of image processing) Sadly I messed up in the leaf area - I just considered top/down directions but based on what light direction the trunk suggests the left side of the treetop should have received more "light" pixels then the right side. Also thinking a tree is "green conical shaped and ruffled" is maybe a little too simple to create a "realistic" image of a tree! A reference picture or a bit more fantasy might have helped...
Hmm... been rambling a bit. If anyone of the pro's disagrees with my self analyzation and wants to point out other errors I made I'm glad to learn!
