The VG Resource

I like your animation at the bottom!

Thank you again, I can't tell you how overjoyed I feel that you actually wished me happy birthday three times...

Oh but this isn't about me it's about you and your cool Pokemon animations! Big Grin

the biggest problem is that 99% of your work presented here is not pixelart at all, thus making all our CC not too useful.

open up MS paint (or any pixel level image editing software), draw pixels and then we'll talk.

(08-21-2011, 11:19 AM)Gors Wrote: [ -> ]the biggest problem is that 99% of your work presented here is not pixelart at all, thus making all our CC not too useful.

open up MS paint (or any pixel level image editing software), draw pixels and then we'll talk.

It's funny how if you would actually take the time to zoom in and look at his amazing work, it's all pixels. So what if he didn't use MSpaint or anything of the same matter. He still had to use his program to make the image, and in turn it still came out pixelated. It's amazing work. Your just unappreciative of somebody else's way of making pixel art. I've seen his program, he can make vector with it. Yes. But he can also dumb it down to pixels. Take some time out of you busy schedule to actually look at the art on hand instead of crit it on sight. If you try harder in your crits, he'll try harder in fixing it.

thanks for completely missing the point on pixelart

A quick browse on wikipedia gives me this entry about pixelart:

Quote:Pixel art is a form of digital art, created through the use of raster graphics software, where images are edited on the pixel level.

thus, his work isn't pixelart. Why? Because he didn't edit images on a pixel level, but rather by making vectors, and then, as you said, 'dumbing down' to pixel. To be a proper pixel, he needs to scrap all those vector generating programs and make all the lineart with MS Paint pencil tool.

Once you stop sucking his dick and realize all this, then you can make proper criticisms.

(08-21-2011, 11:46 AM)Gors Wrote: [ -> ]thanks for completely missing the point on pixelart

A quick browse on wikipedia gives me this entry about pixelart:

Quote:Pixel art is a form of digital art, created through the use of raster graphics software, where images are edited on the pixel level.

thus, his work isn't pixelart. Why? Because he didn't edit images on a pixel level, but rather by making vectors, and then, as you said, 'dumbing down' to pixel. To be a proper pixel, he needs to scrap all those vector generating programs and make all the lineart with MS Paint pencil tool.

Once you stop sucking his dick and realizing all this, then you can make proper criticisms.

For one, yes wikipedia is right about pixelart. But you missed what I said. He doesn't dumb down the vector to pixels, he can make the pixels with his program. So stop acting like you know what he is using, you obviously don't. None of these are vector generated. Pixelart isn't only made with select programs, anything can make pixelart. Also if you read anything else on this topic than you'd know that he already went through the wikipedia. Which he explained in a wall of text. which I will not qoute.

and since I praised him for his work I'm apparently sucking his dick?

You sir need to grow up and try harder to keep good work on this forum.

This is computers
everything you see is pixels

anyways
if you want to make pixels, you should make pixels
if you want to make vectors, you should make vektors
if you want to make 3ds, you should make 3ds
everything else is really pointless if you arent working inside a particular restriction system (like nsmb which uses prerendered 3D sprites because the system wouldn't have the power to calculate all that in real time and yet a 3D style was chosen for whatever reasons)

just look at the massive amount of aliasing and jumping pixels in animations and whatnot you're getting when you use vectors and then cut them down to small palettes to gain a pixel style. They lack the attention to the pixel level we pixel spriteurs are looking for. They don't look clean, lightsources aren't clear and animations look like rubber with painted-on shading.

Why am I even writing this, it's not like I would actually care. :I
Or actually know anything. Well, I'm gonna eat now.

(08-21-2011, 11:52 AM)Mr_L Wrote: [ -> ]For one, yes wikipedia is right about pixelart. But you missed what I said. He doesn't dumb down the vector to pixels, he can make the pixels with his program. So stop acting like you know what he is using, you obviously don't. None of these are vector generated. Pixelart isn't only made with select programs, anything can make pixelart. Also if you read anything else on this topic than you'd know that he already went through the wikipedia. Which he explained in a wall of text. which I will not qoute.

and since I praised him for his work I'm apparently sucking his dick?

You sir need to grow up and try harder to keep good work on this forum.

since you're so dense about this, I'll just try again for the last time.

all you see in this screen is made of pixels. But that doesn't make everything in this screen pixelart. Why?

Because they were generated by something else. The guy who did the font, for example, didn't take time to carefully place each single pixel of the letter. The banners in every site are made of pixels but aren't considered pixelart because the guy who made them didn't place all the pixels individually in a sensible way to create the work.

So, Pixelart is a kind of art where you place each pixel to form a coherent imagery, as seen here

[Image: Funnie-very-Funnie%E2%80%A6.gif]

[Image: Funnie-very-Funnie%E2%80%A6.gif]

where the effects, lineart and shading were all made by the pixelartist through pixels.

Now, I highly doubt that OP took the time to use more than 30 colors per frame in each animation all by himself. It's obvious when it is pixelart and when it isn't.

Pixelart is a branch of digital art, but not every digital art is pixelart.

(08-21-2011, 12:04 PM)Gors Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-21-2011, 11:52 AM)Mr_L Wrote: [ -> ]For one, yes wikipedia is right about pixelart. But you missed what I said. He doesn't dumb down the vector to pixels, he can make the pixels with his program. So stop acting like you know what he is using, you obviously don't. None of these are vector generated. Pixelart isn't only made with select programs, anything can make pixelart. Also if you read anything else on this topic than you'd know that he already went through the wikipedia. Which he explained in a wall of text. which I will not qoute.

and since I praised him for his work I'm apparently sucking his dick?

You sir need to grow up and try harder to keep good work on this forum.

since you're so dense about this, I'll just try again for the last time.

all you see in this screen is made of pixels. But that doesn't make everything in this screen pixelart. Why?

Because they were generated by something else. The guy who did the font, for example, didn't take time to carefully place each single pixel of the letter. The banners in every site are made of pixels but aren't considered pixelart because the guy who made them didn't place all the pixels individually in a sensible way to create the work.

So, Pixelart is a kind of art where you place each pixel to form a coherent imagery, as seen here

where the effects, lineart and shading were all made by the pixelartist through pixels.

Now, I highly doubt that OP took the time to use more than 30 colors per frame in each animation all by himself. It's obvious when it is pixelart and when it isn't.

Pixelart is a branch of digital art, but not every digital art is pixelart.

I know that. But pixel art isn't made pixel by pixel.

Pixel art is made when you place the pixels. Not every individual pixel. but Pixels.

What if I use the line tool on MSpaint? Is that not pixelart anymore?

because with tools like that than your way is flawed because you didn't place all the pixels, you generated those pixels. You didn't place them yourself.

Now did you?

What Gors is trying to say can be summarized in the following link:
http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_po...?TID=11299

Specifically,

http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_po...318#139318

Quote:Why not all digital art is pixel art
Pixel art is set apart from other digital art forms by its focus on control and precision.
The artist has to be in control of the image at the level of the single pixel, and every pixel should be purposefully placed.

Other digital art forms use many tools you won't find in pixel art. The reason pixel artists don't use these tools is because they place pixels in a manner that the artist can't predict. These automatic tools blur, smudge, smear or blend the pixels. Any tool that places pixels automatically (which means the computer makes decisions about the placement of pixels rather than the artist), is generally frowned upon in pixel art. Remember, pixel art is all about control.

You'll often hear people going around complaining "This isn't pixel art, it has too many colors!" This isn't because there's some unwritten rule in pixel art that says "it's only pixel art if it has [X] number of colors", you're allowed to use as many colors as you want. The main reason that people complain about color count is that a high amount of colors can indicate the use of dirty tools. Dirty tools create a lot of new colors in order to achieve their blurring, smudging, or transparency effects. People also mention high color counts because larger palettes are more difficult to control, but we'll get to that later.

Quote:
So if I don't use any blur effects or filters or fancy tools, it's pixel art, right? Anything made in MS Paint will be pixel art?
No. It's not the program that determines whether or not it's pixel art, it's how it is made.

Quote:Every pixel does not literally need to be placed by hand
The job of the pixel artist is not to manually place each and every pixel. You aren't expected to behave like a robot, filling in large areas with thousands of single-clicks of the pencil tool. The bucket tool is fine. The line tool is fine. What's important is that the artist has control of the image at the level of the single pixel, not that you create the image one pixel at a time.

Alright, I'm not taking this crap anymore,
I know it's not pixel art, but I never said it was,
Please see the spoiler for the honest truth on the whole situation, many of you will find it useful for future cases, but be warned, it is not for the faint of heart, or dull of mind.

The whole truth

So (according to you) sprites is being obsoleted. Why are you putting effort into making sprites then/post here? Why aren't you improving your skills at making vectors/3d models? Transforming either of those into sprites takes literally NO EFFORT. There's this option in photoshop called "Color Reduce" that does the job for you. Even considering that, the fact that our technology can process large color count makes that pointless too. By posting here, you're implicitly asking for advice on how to improve the SPRITE phase of your graphics. If you're not interested in doing that, then you shouldn't have posted in the section called Spriting and Pixel Art. If you want criticism for your vectors, we have a forum for that. It's called Creativity.

Alright, you present a good point, but the category isn't what's bugging me, it's the way people continuously are calling it shit over and over again... it's extremely unwelcoming, it's off topic, and when i do get a response, it only goes into mostly why i'm shit or about the style is shit, and then the improvements are an afterthought to save them from looking bad.
whether i'm doing vector works, or sprite setups, it doesn't matter... There will be people who want to put me down just to do it, tsr is the only place on earth where I left on a bad note, that's because people love to bicker, but don't want to look bad, so they try to get their facts straight by basically coming up with reason to make themselves appear presentable, or just go all out and no one cares...
It will not matter where I post it, but i will ignore every irrelevant comment that I come across, there's a huge difference between critiques and barbariansm..

this thread:

[Image: laughing.gif]

tl;dr: I believe sprites will end soon, let me make an account on the spriters resource

you were all incompetent realising not every single sprite on earth is done thru pixel art, hence why spriting and pixel art are two completely different things that, while related, do not necesary mean the same thing.

anything can beused to make a sprite. anything. giving that sprites are functional elements in a game to represent teh user's interaction with the software. hence why you have prerendered sprites done using 3D models, or your traditional pixel art sprites, or even vector graphics.

while OP's work was criticized as far as technical aspects could be criticized, most of you blindly jumped into the "its not done by hand its not a sprite waaa waa" bandwagon gorsal started FOR NOT A SINGLE GOOD REASON and focused onyl on the issue of them not being done by hand. wich was completely stupid as far as this forum goes, considering its called "SPRITING & pixel art".

at some point, surprisingly, i feel bad for OP being bashed away. not like i give a damn about his animations(they're still bad as far as animationg goes, and sporting a one millon thousand frames sheet clearly shows you have no idea what is the actual purpose of skeletal animation)

not to mention, i am the fucking sprite mod here so i believe it is up to me whenever a thread on this particular section of the forum gets closed or not.

Quote:Just a fair warning to the rest of you pricks, I don't give a shit what you think of my style's looks unless if you actually have something to say about what I have provided. So spit it out right the first time, or don't post at all.

See, this is still what I'm not getting.

what's the point of turning them into sprites when you have vectors.

If your style is suited to using vectors,

well,

why not just use the vectors?

The entire thing about your sprites is still pointless by now.
You made them sprites by turning the vectors into rasters, where at least the vectors were clean.
I can understand that maybe making the vectors in the gifs give them rough edges to fit the 256 colour limit, but even then if reducing the colours makes more than the edge rough,
using vectors in the first place shows why you shouldn't have used vectors.

Like I said earlier, the downsizing is making these things uglier,

Rough edges, using gradients, random changes in pixels caused by this downsizing,

none of these things look good in the slightest,

(I do also think gradients in vectors are also ugly, since they really are.)

which I why I brought up the idea you should change how you make these things.

Your style,
isn't working, no matter how much you think it does.

Garamonde

Gors

Mr_L

Gors

Mr_L

Previous

Gors

Mr_L

x0_000

PRIMAL MORON

x0_000

PRIMAL MORON

Gors

Cobalt Blue

Proton