| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
Release id #77865 : VW Kever
Pull your head out of the ass, and get those converted pics deleted from this database, before its all pure crap! |
|
... 91 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Sander
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 496 |
Quote: Simple rules:
1) no converted pics
that's it. the rest is not possible to control.
Think of all the possible speculations/discussions that will emerge from this.. No, don't think that would work either. |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
ok discussion seems to go to the hell (as usual) so I'm deleting the crap and the spin-off crap.
have a nice day,
roman |
| |
LOGAN
Account closed
Registered: Aug 2003
Posts: 71 |
Well maybe I'm rather looking ad a good image which is converted than a bad one which is not converted. What if I especially designed an image to be ported on PC, is that so bad? I know it has been done before.
But I guess converting because you can might be not that special. Still, its an (small) effort to make some releases and in these times there isn't as much released as say 20 years ago.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
Quote:I would be happy without any new rules, just use common sense
that doesnt work. we wouldnt have needed all the rules for cracking if it did. giving someone a "free hand" and letting him decide by "common sense" is by far the worst of all options. and infact its kinda bizarre that YOU are the one suggesting it =P
Quote:Simple rules:
1) no converted pics
that's it. the rest is not possible to control.
and who tells if a picture is actually converted? and what counts as a conversion? i dont see this working either.
|
| |
A Life in Hell
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 204 |
Quote: Simple rules:
1) no converted pics
that's it. the rest is not possible to control.
Not to defend these two releases, but devils advocate: Du gemeiner Mörder - Du bist Böse (screenshot is not right, btw.... but ignore that). Maybe shameless, but actual compopic which Rayden claimed at the time was hand pixelled on Amiga.
Failing that: Devils advocate #2: The flip disk picture in Fuck the Scene , done in a PC editor that is - essentially (it's a bit more complicated than that, but work with me here) - a hacked up gimp with a realtime convertor. (for the record, I also took the photo that was based on - does that count as creative input?)
My point being.... even without bringing in the "convert and clean up" stuff done in things like timanthes. So do you draw the line at "no converts that are not original artwork). But where is the line between "convert and clean" and "i am a convertor that just happens to be a human"?
If it's just "being a human conertor is hard", what about the coder implementing the digital one? Not that I like these releases, but then, I did enjoy data-land's stuff, and I just don't think it's that simple... |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Quote:Not to defend these two releases, but devils advocate: Du gemeiner Mörder - Du bist Böse (screenshot is not right, btw.... but ignore that). Maybe shameless, but actual compopic which Rayden claimed at the time was hand pixelled on Amiga
When it was released at party, in the compo it deserves to stay in the database and trashed and spitted on by the angry audience.
When it's just straight to CSDB upload ( I rather avoid using a word release here ) it must avoid looking like obvious convert at all costs. Otherwise it's very probabble that someone identifies the original and it get's deleted in the process..
Btw. I made that screenshot.. it's from "the best of party compos" gallery. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
one thing that seems to actually be applicable is indeed "if it was released in a compo then it stays". however, thats an exception, not the rule =)
alih made some good points there imho. eg i made a converter myself, which i spent a lot of time and effort making. now if i convert some pic with it, and maybe it even looks nice, who decides wether it would stay or not, and based on what? does it matter what the original source of the picture was? is the motive relevant? or who made it? (i dont even want to imagine what drama potential is in "moderators use common sense and have free hand" combined with another "wrath design releases another flood of design experiments" =))
that said, personally i could live with another, much more radical rule: no standalone gfx and msx releases at all (except for compo releases). delete everything that doesnt resemble atleast a very basic demo and/or is made with some kind of demo creator/picture shower/psid64/etcblabla. and that mostly not to get rid of the effortless crap discussed here (because i seriously dont give a damn) - but to push all the other - at times very good - gfx and msx into actual demo productions. maybe even reviving good old "in between parties" releases :)
|
| |
A Life in Hell
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 204 |
Quote: one thing that seems to actually be applicable is indeed "if it was released in a compo then it stays". however, thats an exception, not the rule =)
alih made some good points there imho. eg i made a converter myself, which i spent a lot of time and effort making. now if i convert some pic with it, and maybe it even looks nice, who decides wether it would stay or not, and based on what? does it matter what the original source of the picture was? is the motive relevant? or who made it? (i dont even want to imagine what drama potential is in "moderators use common sense and have free hand" combined with another "wrath design releases another flood of design experiments" =))
that said, personally i could live with another, much more radical rule: no standalone gfx and msx releases at all (except for compo releases). delete everything that doesnt resemble atleast a very basic demo and/or is made with some kind of demo creator/picture shower/psid64/etcblabla. and that mostly not to get rid of the effortless crap discussed here (because i seriously dont give a damn) - but to push all the other - at times very good - gfx and msx into actual demo productions. maybe even reviving good old "in between parties" releases :)
Dumb question: Why is ccde with no grpahics considered superior to graphics with no code? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
because coders have a bigger schlong! |
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
I think we should think like this:
"Would it be uploaded / accepted to CSDb if it was released in 198x?"
If the answer is 'yes', it should be in CSDb.
Would Cyborg Pic or Girl Nr.4 be made without a single form of conversion...?
Or would we accept a picture like Graphics Integrator Picture today?
Why change the threshold today?
Quote:Dumb question: Why is ccde with no grpahics considered superior to graphics with no code?
Because you can't port a PC demo to C64 by only pulling it through a convertor. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 - Next |
