| |
Carrion
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 317 |
Who needs Timanthes anywy.
First of all... Timanthes rules it's a great tool.
... but lately I started to use a method/process using Photoshop to achieve 8bit pixel art. The technique gives you control over everything from dithering to color rams plus all PS tools/filters.
IMHO the results are amazing. I think It could be a ultimate converting tool or more precisely a great tool for prototyping/sketching.
The only problem for demoscene could be that results are IMO so good it's hard to tell if it's wired or not.
Take a look:
http://crrnpixels.tumblr.com/post/89843863323/using-photoshop-f..
To convert picture made by Made it took me 10 minutes.
more examples here
http://crrnpixels.tumblr.com/
Please keep in mind that in the examples on the blog no single pixel was put by me. All magic was done by Photoshop.
In next few days I'll post more on my blog describing the method itself. |
|
... 45 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Mr. SID
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 424 |
I'm still amazed. This is me pixel n00b playing around for 15 minutes:
This might be huge for making logos... I'll be having fun with this for sure!
It's cool because it's not a conversion tool, but you can actual paint with this and see the c64 result in real-time. |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1578 |
And this is Project One/Koala (done in about 30 seconds...)
 |
| |
Mr. SID
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 424 |
So which one does look more hand-pixeled?
Oh, btw:
:) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
well, you have to give it to Carrion, that the realtime aspect is ammazing of the setup.
Guess PS supports scripting, so a scripted layer could do other conversions than gradients too. Question is the speed. |
| |
Sounx
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2006
Posts: 30 |
Taking all of the fun... Out of the job! :)
I prefer oldskool pixeling above anything else. I enjoy the process of pixeling and creating and definitly not 'just' the end result. Probably also the reason why I finished only very little of the things I started on the c64...
Which is not to say that I condemn c64 pixel tools like Timanthes. Quite the contrary, I love the many options and freedom these tools offer when compared to doing GFX in Amicapaint on the 64 with a joystick...
But I stil think the main point of being creative with graphics on a computer should be that most pixels are placed there by the graphician him/herself, rather then a computer that does this for him/her.
So for me, better conversion is interesting in that it can save time. But the actual pixeling is what I enjoy doing and better conversion just means I have less pixeling to do. It also means the picture hardly feels like my own expression and creation, which might not be obvious to the outside world, but it would still negativly affect my personal opinion and feel everytime I see it.
So in all, I think Timanthes, P1 etc. are MORE than a 64-pixelor will ever need!
But I should also mention that doing graphics on the c64 has always been something like my second or third hobby, so I might be less demanding then the people who see art as their main hobby and expression of creativity (which is often the case with the 'better' graphicians, IMHO, as they mostly have better understanding of the process and more eye for details). |
| |
Mr. SID
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 424 |
Perfectly understandable.
But I have very little patience when creating graphics, placing lots of pixels manually might be therapeutic for some, but it's frustrating for me, because I often enough have to redo large parts after seeing the result and the dithering is just a little bit off. I hate that.
So I'm all for tools that accelerate a somewhat mechanic process. I also prefer to auto-generate speedcode, and would never type in long lists of LDA/STA by hand, but some people did that too.
This will have very little impact on the C64 scene anyway, but in other areas (retro iPhone games) it can mean that someone can create rather good looking pixel-art in minutes instead of hours now. |
| |
Carrion
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 317 |
Quoting Mr. SID
This will have very little impact on the C64 scene anyway, but in other areas (retro iPhone games) it can mean that someone can create rather good looking pixel-art in minutes instead of hours now.
and that's Exactly why I started to look at this method. I needed to streamline the process of creating "pseudo pixel art" for my mobile games.
and again this is not to replace pixeling. it's to speed up the sketching and starting quick with your idea for next c64 pixel art. after all you have to come back to timanthes or P1 and fix color slashes ;) |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 504 |
Quote: So which one does look more hand-pixeled?
Oh, btw:
:)
none of all, that's the sad thing. I expect nothing less however, until i see a bunch of really convincing worksteps.
Also that approach sounds close to what i implemented into mufflon: taking colors and seperate then into hue brightness and saturation. The hue and saturation then determines what gradient to choose, including ditherpatterns of 25/75 50/50 75/25. The brightness determines the index into the gradient, and voila, things look pretty c64ish, however still not handpixelled as they look simply too perfect in little details, and as they lack glitches in lighting, perspective and whatever makes drawing exciting. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
Bitbreaker, thats what Timanthes does (and I copyied it into p1)
It would be interesting to experiment with Joe's 136 colors, what if the gradients would be built from those ? :) |
| |
algorithm
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 705 |
What is really needed for users that use the pc to pixel is accurate crt/pal emulation that takes into account black bleed and blooming. What may look great on the pc would look not too good on the pc |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Next |
