| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 680 |
Event id #3450 : C64GFX.com Loading Screen Compo 2024
No serious rules for this compo.
You can remake/remaster an old loading screen or create a loading screen for a game that doesn't already have one... or even for an imaginary game. NO RERELEASES - this must be new material.
Acceptable formats:-
- Multicolour Bitmap
- Hires Bitmap
- PETSCII
We will split the compo into those 3 categories.
NO FLI, no interlace, no raster bars, no sprite overlays, no animation, no music. No graphical changes or enhancements at all - keep it plain.
Of course you can use an initial fade in so long as it's fairly quick (less than 5 seconds).
Voting will be done on the new C64GFX.com voting platform. You can register for that now (just hit the "register" bar at the top). Please enter your handle as your username. Votes will only county from CSDb registered users on this compo - we will confirm with all voters if needed before voting completes.
Voting will run throughout the compo and for an additional approx 2 weeks. Don't save your votes till the last minute as I will close voting sometime between 14th and 16th October (ie. you won't know exactly when).
Votes will be kept private until the voting window closes - and will BE MADE PUBLIC after that window (down/up voters beware).
We'll use the squared-average formula again to work out final results.
Have fun :-) |
|
... 36 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
jmin
Registered: Feb 2024
Posts: 10 |
Quote: It's a 99% match of the reference and the pixeled image. I'm removing 1% for corrected fingers. :)
Rexbeng said it.
If it's converted and touched up afterwards or or pixeled over I can't be arsed to find out right now.
So I don't think its fair to say this reference is in the same ballpark as the Batman or any other characters used in the other entries here.
The answer is right there in post #9:
Quote:Pixeling over an AI generated image is really not different from pixeling over an image sourced from the web or other media
as well as in the initial comment of the pic
Quote:AI was used to generate the trooper picture (included in the pack) that was then brought to pixels
I know, English is neither mine nor your nor rexbeng's first language, but come on.
For the other pics mentioned (OK, for Batman it's just the logo), look up the box art and the pics. Of course we've lifted those too, that's the whole shebang of loading screens and going for a 99% match is more or less the goal of these pics.
Next up we're arguing if bringing MI gfx to the C64 is worth cheering or not because they're 99% matching the original paintings or PC/Amiga gfx (and before you ask, of course it's worth cheering, because porting gfx or code or whatever is a creative endeavor in itself) |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 680 |
I think we're missing the point here ..
CSDb currently has the comment system for allowing people to talk about how art was created. Which is great.
With C64GFX, I wanted as much as possible for compos to keep everything on a single page ... so you can vote on images, change your mind, compare against others in the compo, etc etc.
But with that, we were losing "detail". The tagging system works to an extent .. but doesn't give the greater detail. Whether something was started from a blank canvas, or from a reference pic, or is a paintover, etc etc.
The scene has a long history of drama with "No Copy" .. and now AI enters the fray as well. To me it doesn't matter if you reference a Google Image, photo or an AI drawn image (some will of course be harder to prove than the other). Referencing is fine IMO.
Painting over a photo or image I'm not too keen on .. not for serious artists, anyway (just to stop people looking at my own "art" .. I'm a coder and a "joke-artist" - if I ever win a graphic competition then we KNOW that the system is f***ed).
Anyway, everything was allowed in the loading screen compo, and still is. But we -will- add detail given to us about how art was created. For now, I'll take that just from the original artist - which seems to cause enough drama it seems - but later on we may ask the community about whether there're better ways to do this. There -have- been cases where art has been more directly copied without attribution .. and if people can submit sufficient evidence of such copying/drawing over..................
As I say, though.. for this compo, everything is allowed. People can vote how they like. Some can vote on how deserving the work done may be to win .. others may simply decide that the final presentation is all that matters and it doesn't matter how that was arrived at? We're all adults. |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 680 |
With that, I am re-adding the comment on Rexbeng's pic. It's made from his words, it's not misrepresentation .. I carefully built that, to fit the limited space I had, from Rexbeng's comments here.
Rexbeng is an amazing artist - but he's admitted that this isn't his usual style. I'd like to see more from him like this. I don't think there's anything wrong with doing this at all - so long as it's done openly. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@jmin:
I wasn’t going to take part in this, but you leave me no choice.
Firstly, I’m sure that You, being a gfx artist yourself, know the difference between “using reference” and putting a picture into Photoshop, then pixelling over it in a layer above. Let’s say that the misunderstanding is in the language barrier.
Secondly, the funky angle of the barrels that idiotic “AI” churned out was not made right manually for the final picture, but it was made even worse, so that the whole rifle now stands under completely wrong angle losing all sense of perspective. OK, at least the barrels now stand under the same (albeit wrong) angle. So, AI job was not artistically enhanced in the process, it was actually kinda made worse. The hands are about the only thing that benefited in the pixelization proces, and a pretty darn good job was done on the hands!
One just has to look, and not even look very hard to make a judgement.
These are some of the reasons why I don’t care for this pic. You, on the other hand, like it. And this is perfectly OK. But what you’re ending up doing is gaslighting Raistlin and The Sarge by your insistance. |
| |
rexbeng
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 37 |
I think we all agree that Raistlin's initiative with the gallery and the compos is amazing and was much needed. I am also pretty sure that he is open to suggestions about additional features. However, there should be no need for him to 'police' releases; it's up to the creator of a picture to supply all necessary info. So, this is mostly a job for the scene to consider.
@4gentE. With regards to references and how they are used. Hm. I think I might be missing the point, as I don't really get what is the difference between 'using reference' and 'pixeling over' when talking about pixeling images. Care to elaborate? |
| |
jmin
Registered: Feb 2024
Posts: 10 |
Gaslighting wasn't my intention, the arguments thrown around are just new/strange to me and (of course) an old hat for everybody else around, so sry about that.
As for the difference, I'm not an artist, I just like to push some pixels around until they fit. Albert (and other tools) allow loading up a reference pic and for what else could that be used as for pixeling over, especially when pixeling for a "loading pic" compo where turning artworks into pixels is key.
Guess, all is said from my end 🤗 |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4732 |
Oh no. Not again...
 |
| |
rexbeng
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 37 |
Hahah! I do believe you need a new dolphin though. This looks too traditional for 2024. :D |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
Quote:Care to elaborate?
No. |
| |
The Sarge
Registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 49 |
@Hedning. That dolphin is wired. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 - Next |
