(04-02-2014, 11:39 AM)Iocus Wrote: Clearly, he isn't following a specific style reference, so I think we can forget about style and build off from what he has here.



I cleaned it up a little for you, using your latest revision as reference. I reoriented the lightsource (as you can see, you had a lot of conflicting lightsources there), and threw a couple of suggestions on how to shade the jacket (I think I'd pick the 3rd one, myself.)

Since black (or black-like colors) is a very dark color, you don't need as many shades as you would with other parts.

This is perfect...
Am I allowed to use this for the rest of the sheet, or is it just for reference?

Using someone else's edit is generally frowned upon (yes, I know you asked for permission)

Even so, that edit still has 22 colors (not counting the background) which is far, far more than it needs.
You'll have to get rid of redundant shades regardless.

You can make the same image with about 8-10 colors. But guiding yourself with Iocu's edit would be a step on the right direction.

Less than that, probably.
All of the colors are so dark and blue and green are so close together that with some creative hue shifting you can probably optimize the color count to around 6 colors or so.

Just wondering, how come there has to be less shades? I'm removing some at the moment, but I'm just wondering.

I don't mind at all if you use my edit, but don't take it as the best this sprite can get. Listen to the others to see what they recommend, and work on making it better.

I was mostly showing you how to shade it in a more proper way, but the jacket was really hopeless as it was so I changed the palette a bit.

EDIT:
To answer that question;

Spriting is all about making the best out of limitations. Using an excess of shades makes it look gritty and busy. Also, having a whole bunch of shades often goes hand in hand with having low contrast, among other things.

(04-02-2014, 04:12 PM)ClubbyBear Wrote: Just wondering, how come there has to be less shades? I'm removing some at the moment, but I'm just wondering.

Aside from making the sprite a lot harder to make in general, your contrast is so low that you can't see about half of those shades anyway. They're so close together in brightness (well, darkness in this case, ahaha) that your eye naturally blends them together into a single shade. In other words, you can't tell the difference between the shades, so there's no need in having the difference in the first place. Because of that, you optimize your color count and make those two shades a single shade.

For example, the bear's eyes are actually green, but the green is so dark that it looks black. You can't tell that the eyes are green at a 1px scale and I could only tell that both after zooming in and artificially making the colors brighter in Photoshop.

When the sprite is actually animated and moving this effect is only amplified because at 60 fps you're not gonna see a miniscule difference between shades when each pose is only on screen for 1/60th of a second.

In other words, you're making more work for yourself for no reason since nobody can see what you're doing anyway.

Higher contrast makes your sprite stand out and makes the features easier to see, while low contrast makes your sprites look dull and uninteresting.

Removed a couple shades;

I'll attempt a new palette, too, and if I succeed I'll post.

Thanks for the explanation ViperShark, I was just confused because before I had never heard of this issue.

Also, can you change your outline color from pure 0,0,0 black, please?
Paint doesn't play well with transparency and automatically turns it into black. Naturally my first move is to fill-bucket the black background, which causes this to happen.

Ok, this version has a slightly lighter outline.

e-er i'm honestly not sure which one is your version, ahahah

can you put only your latest one (unless you label them before/after)

(04-02-2014, 08:36 PM)Vipershark Wrote: e-er i'm honestly not sure which one is your version, ahahah

can you put only your latest one (unless you label them before/after)

The one on the right is his edit, the lack of extra shades is more noticeable on the right ear (it's right). It's a step forward, but look at this.

I took out each and every color you had here (Or I at least think I did, some of them looked so similar to each other that it was hard to get each individual color) and as you can see, the darker colors are all just too similar, which can make viewers, like Viper, not even recognize a simple edit.

I figured the one on the right was the correct one but I really wasn't sure because the number of colors went UP.

There are 23 colors plus transparency now, when before there were 22.
Honestly, Here's what I suggest doing:

Take this base and start over.

You have so many redundant shades (the green of the eyes is a different green than the pants, some of the shades on the hands are different than the ears, etc) that it's not even worth the effort to try to get them all.
Just take your lineart and start over again with a new palette.

Actually, I've been working on that for a while, since Level One posted. I made a new palette and used the suggestions for the eyes.
Also, my version was on the left, but I'm starting over from Iocus' base again.

---

Should be using 15 colors including the transparency, tell me if any changes need to the palette or anything could be reduced

As in, 24 colors plus transparency.
How did your color count go UP?