| |
v3to
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 150 |
Double Screen Compo Voting
Okay - all entries are in and it is time for voting.
Take your time and check the pictures properly. If you like to check it on a C64, I'd recommend to turn off the volume, because music tends to alter atmosphere. Now here come the rules:
---
CHOOSE 3 FAVORITES - NO MORE - NO LESS
SEND YOUR CHOICE VIA PM TO ENTHUSI OR ME
OR BY MAIL TO << COMPO[AT SPAMSUCKS]C64PIXELS[DOT]COM >>
PLEASE DO NOT FORGET YOUR HANDLE/GROUP OR NAME
---
Deadline for voting is June 7th 2011 (know it is a long term but c64pixels-visitors are watching random)
Good luck to all contestants !
---
Looking Outward by Celtic, code by Zielok
Additional content according compo rules: Music
Format: MultiColor
---
Monroe 6569 by Diggr
Format: Charmode
---
Asteroidmine by Grass, code by Cruzer
Format: MultiColor
---
The Raven by Dane
Additional content according compo rules: Dark red and dark grey are laced
Format: MultiColor
---
CARGO by Twoflower, code by Cruzer
Additional content according compo rules: Music
Picture format: MultiColor, 4-colors, Colorscheme is matching Charmode
---
A Kind of Magic by Yazoo, code by Axis
Additional content according compo rules: Music, scrolltext (can be disabled by pressing spacebar)
Picture format: MultiColor
 |
|
... 195 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Alias Medron
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 39 |
I'm with Jackasser here..
I don't care if a picture in a demo is retraced/repixeled converted etc as long as it looks good.
Ofcourse the handpixeled one has an extra WOW factor but in a demo whan we talk about still images it just has to look good in my opinion.
The gfx competitions are a completely different thing though..
and by the way.. i guess we're in a loop here.. this conversation goes on for years in the scene and comes up again and again. And in the end it's not about converting or not.. it's about honesty. It's about giving credit to original artists.. |
| |
Mermaid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 335 |
Quote:you're missing one crucial point about this thread and that is if one should be allowed to submit such picture to a compo or not.
This. While I *always* care if a picture is traced/copied/a retouched scan/original/whatever, the point of this whole thing as I stated several times is not about making copies in general, this is about entering them in a competition.
Quote:Yes, by all means go ahead and copy (and I mean *copy*, not retouch scans) great artists, that is a great way to get better at drawing and learning about anatomy and such. I have no problem with that, it'd be nice to see the original pics though. But is it really necessary to submit those (practice) copies to a competition and possibly beat people who came up with their own motives from scratch? Why not come up with something yourself? |
| |
Mermaid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 335 |
Quote:in my experience, those who act like that have never done their art "for real" against a real life deadline. to me and i would guess most of the "old guys", anything goes except machine/application conversion and "digital" reproduction.
This "old girl" has done "art" for a living too, you know, "for real", without tracing or rotoscoping, against very real deadlines. And I'm hardly the only one. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
MANY compo winners have been copies over the years haven't they?
some subjects were known, some slipped under the radar.
this:
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=4650&show=review
I have no doubt is actress Theresa Russell.
Copy? yes, because its unlikely that that artist got Theresa Russell to sit for him :) probably from a publicity shot.
Hand drawn? definitely.
Valid art? why not? He's drawn it and it's obviously technically acceptable because i can see it's Ms. Russell.
Now lets take another Russell:
recognised in the artworld as classic film poster art. original copies of this regularly change hands at auction for several thousands of pounds...
yet...
is one of the many publicity shots from the film.
see what i am getting at here?
kneejerk reactions to "no copies" simply do not recognise the fact that actually transferring a recognisable image from another medium to the c64 BY HAND in 16 fixed colours at 160x200 in 4 colours per 8x8 is an artform in itself and indeed one that the original artist MIGHT NOT be able to accomplish himself/herself.
Steve |
| |
Wile Coyote
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 636 |
Original pixel work is great.
Pictures based on existing pictures can also be great, and not so great.
By saying great and not so great, results in 4 categories:
The not so great wired image:
Ill leave you to decide what you consider to be an ugly wired image.
The great wired image:
Leguan / Hi-Lite - an impressive wired image.
The not so great pixeled image - based on existing image:
Ill leave you to decided on what example fits here ;)
The great pixeled image - based on existing image:
Li2 / Deekay - a great pixeled image based on an existing image.
-
Then theres the images that are wired, then worked on by hand, producing various results. These are the images that produced mixed results when entered into compos. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11100 |
Quote:Ill leave you to decide what you consider to be an ugly wired image.
Fantastica. original by you know who, palette saturation prepared in PSP, converted using IFF-Converter, pixelbugs fix0red by myself. done during the party and released for shits'n'giggles using a rather obvious fake handle.
i pity those who voted for it basically =)
STE: most (if not all) pictures by AEG are indeed copies, handpixelled using the good old grid transfer method. for originals check the german "was ist was?" books, they were a major source of "inspiration" for him :=)
|
| |
Mermaid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 335 |
STE: Amazingly, you are still missing the point. This is not about film posters. This is not about how loader screens were made in the 1980s. This is not about copying Vallejo for your own benefit to improve your draw-naked-women-with-dragons skills. This is not about reliving your youth by drawing pretty copies from 2000AD and posting them on CSDb. This is not about copying or wiring pretty pictures and putting them in a demo so people can go ooh aah look how pretty.
This is about taking a picture and copying it 1:1 (or colouring a scan) and then entering that copy in a graphics competition.
No matter how you twist and turn it, the fact is that copying something is not the same as coming up with something original. It does not even come close. Different leagues. If people are so keen on copies then by all means arrange a copy competition (like c64.sk had cover competitions) and keep the copies out of the graphics competitions. Submitting a 1:1 copy in a graphics competition in 2011 is lame.
And STE and others, for the love of Torquemada, stop using what happened in the past as some sort of eternal excuse for whatever goes on in the present. These are different times and it is never too late to start doing something original. |
| |
Malmix
Registered: Jul 2004
Posts: 11 |
To me a C64 graphics competition is about pictures pixeled by hand because that's how it's done on the C64. There is no C64 Photoshop. All you've got is 16 colors and your own eyes to decide what pixels should be set to what color to get the best result. If the result is your own original work that's awesome but most people (including myslef) may rather stick to redrawing to avoid lame results.
Now about the C64 gfx == hand pixeled part obviously not everybody agrees. Some people may think that unless the rules state otherwise it's totally okay to convert. So what about...
1. State that converted gfx are not allowed. Most people who are into machinary converting will accept this but to minimize cheating demand workstages.
2. State that converted gfx are allowed. Some pixel artist will still participate while some won't bother.
In the end it's about what the compo is about. :) |
| |
Mermaid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 335 |
"redrawing to avoid lame results" - yeah, there's the problem I guess.
Fear.
Fear of placing low in the competition if you enter something you came up with yourself.
Fear of people mocking your skills if everything isn't anatomically correct.
Fear of dropping in the charts if you start doing your own work instead of relying on someone else's original.
Fear of people questioning the work you did in the past if suddenly your pictures aren't as amazing as they used to be when you were copying. |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 674 |
fear brought us fire! ;-)
But I agree: placing pixels so something is shown on a real c64 in the end and creating pixels are two very different things.
The PC or not PC discussion is something completely else. You can very well create pixels using modern PC tools ;-)
And at this point I completely agree with Mermaid again.
Future compos may ask for graphics which contain own, new, created content. But graphics on c64 never were only about placing pixels AND being an artist. And they dont have to be in 2011. The Gollum pic of x2010 i.e. showed: "Hell, I can place pixels and I own c64 restictions" but it did not say "Look, I am an creative Artist" like i.e. Ptoing's entry.
Both are valid.
Pictures that reflect "look, I can use a converter", however, should not be submitted to compos. Yet, it is the full responsibility of the scener what to do and what not to do. We are all grown ups and should be able to judge properly. Furthermore we should not care too much about 'uneducated' people judging without caring about the background information. Hell, we have demos here with 5 downloads and 10 votes ;-) |
| Previous - 1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 21 - Next |
