| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5096 |
Release id #237162 : Tribute to Vangelis
@4gent,
1) feels you took those quotes out of context
2) I even said to 2 girls on the schoolyard when I was 9 that I'm never gonna have sex because its disgusting
3) Talent added so much of his own, that I consider it an original work, Vermeer traced outlines with pinhole camera, Talent used another work for reference I couldnt care less. |
|
... 192 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
rexbeng
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 37 |
@Oswald & @Peacemaker; thanks I'll have a look. I'm sure you all know what you are talking about. My question was literal; I have no idea about convertors else from those basic ones incorporated in Photoshop and a couple ones on the CPC. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: @Oswald : Please read my post about orange pixels in Vangelis' beard. Then just please answer me this: Do you think those pixels were placed there manually? If so, why would they be placed there manually?
funny, now every pixel artist has to explain why he / she selected this and that color in their gfx or part of their gfx. i have no idea what your goal is on this, but as oswald says, explain it to us :D |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Oswald :
I don't want you to say what I wish you to say. I was really asking you. I thought perhaps you have some theory (or inside information even) about why those pixels would be placed there manually.
Anyway, I don't understand why some of you guys insist on crapping on Electric as if that's some sort of argument in Talent's favor. It comes off as needlessly unrespectful. And it's doing Talent a big fat disservice IMHO. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker
Why do I get the feeling you're playing dumb?
Just go to the preview pic of the demo, the little pic on CSDb. Now when GIF plays this portrait observe how you can see a chunk of Vangelis' hand (orange pixels). That hand is not there, but it's in the original. I asked Oswald about his opinion on why would Talent put that chunk of hand that shouldn't be there manually? |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 275 |
Quote: @Peacemaker
Why do I get the feeling you're playing dumb?
Just go to the preview pic of the demo, the little pic on CSDb. Now when GIF plays this portrait observe how you can see a chunk of Vangelis' hand (orange pixels). That hand is not there, but it's in the original. I asked Oswald about his opinion on why would Talent put that chunk of hand that shouldn't be there manually?
because, you dont seem to know it, on c64 we only have 16 colors and for color shading there is not much choices.
why is there even light green and light blue? :O lol. go ahead mate, you are on something there. haha |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5096 |
Quote: @Oswald :
I don't want you to say what I wish you to say. I was really asking you. I thought perhaps you have some theory (or inside information even) about why those pixels would be placed there manually.
Anyway, I don't understand why some of you guys insist on crapping on Electric as if that's some sort of argument in Talent's favor. It comes off as needlessly unrespectful. And it's doing Talent a big fat disservice IMHO.
I still believe you already know what you want with your orange pixels, so simply tell us instead of playing this game. Why dont you ask Electric about why this or that PETSCII character was placed manually on his Coltraine picture?
Why dont Electric comes off as needlessly unrespectful with his crapping on Talent? He played his game for days here asking for workstages when he already found the image it is based on. |
| |
Aomeba
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 22 |
I would say there is a blurry line between straight-out conversions (no matter how technically perfect they are) and images that bring artistically something new to the table, even if they use images sourced elsewhere. I've at least tried to do something of the latter.
I compare art (pixel art) in this case to music. You can compose something completely new. Or you can sample something old and come up with totally new and unique stuff that sheds new light on the originals, while standing on its own foot.
But as said it's a blurry line, as is the use of conversion (which I have used myself). Yes the origins should be mentioned. I have not. And so doesn't a lot of sampled music say where the samples come from.
Petscii's so hardcore that I don't see a problem using image references. To my knowledge there's no tool that outputs perfect petscii from images.
Please don't make one either. |
| |
The Sarge
Registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 49 |
I would love to have Talent drop in and add to this discussion. I think he is here... If I remember correctly I saw him comment on the Vangelis release before. I'm old as hell now and brain does not work as it used to. :)
Instead of people taking sides and defending this or that it would be much appreciated to get the words from the horse's mouth so to say.
Carrion did this wonderful presentation at X23 showing how he works. I would love to see more of those. We can all learn from that. Of course one doesn't have to do it if one does not want to. But just to calm this heated discussion a bit I think for this case it would be beneficial. Personally I would love to see it. Even though I'm old as hell, I still want to learn new things.
What do you say @talent, up for showing it from start to finish? |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 285 |
@Peacemaker
Quote:because, you dont seem to know it, on c64 we only have 16 colors and for color shading there is not much choices.
Gee, thanks for teaching me. Now I understand everything.
I wonder how will you feel about it once Talent comes clean about this tho... |
| |
Electric
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 39 |
Quoting CarrionPeacemaker Thanks for posting this. I created this anim with passion :)
@Electric.
What is you goal? What is your crusade leads to? I dont expect D-Mage to do next images. Do you want other graphicians stop doing c64 stuff too? Then only you and "real" pixel artist remain on scene?
And yes, I understand all the arguments but for me demoscene is a place to share my passion with others. How they do it is their onw choice as long as we dont harm eachother.
Your crusade Electric is IMO harmful. I have enough of it. Thanks for ruining it for me.
I think the goals have been repeated several times in this discussion already. You have pushed pixels prolly as long as I to know that copying was never liked and converting has been a no-no. This is the core.
This is not my crusade though I’ve now been targeted by several Censor members. In all there are several people who have asked about the details of Talent’s work. What we have got are two short artist’s comments that seem not to match with the outcome but partially. There’s been a long wait for the workstages (or something that shows something else than the final work) and all the rest to be opened up but nothing has really happened. As the “ninja-gate” has been on, this issue became under radar and the (mostly good) discussion has flowed since. The wait for Talent’s own outcome ended last night when Pal made his post with Zbrush ref.
The reason I’ve been active is prolly the fact that this interests me from artist rights -perspective and I’d want the demoscene to grow (even a tiny bit) healthier – to support creativity and to encourage the few newcomers we yearly might get to doing their own work, not to just copy someone else. As Talent is No. 1 artist in CSDB it is also no wonder why people are more interested in his works. I don’t have the time to go and point out all the lousy obvious convs posted here frequently but this case is special – it presents the work of a praised experienced digital artist that fastly became a phenomenon on C64 demoscene with lots of images released in very short time, created with a technique unseen through the 40-year existence of our dear scene. He is something the newcomers too will most likely first check if interested in pushing C64 pixels. Would I encourage them to go to Zbrush and steal someone's work? No. Would I give them some good works to look at, tools and process tips and a pencil / pad to start drawing? Yes.
Repeating again: everyone agrees that Talent does what he does – the outcome is beautiful in terms of the tones especially (though my wife defined most of it as 'sexist' with motifs). What has been wished here is that original artwork would be credited to the whom it belongs and not just tagged with an own signature. This relates with anyone (me, us, you) using references. Stating who made the original is not too much to ask. It’s common manners. Suppose we all could work that out better. There’s nothing taking away the passion… which I see mostly in the challenges C64 and its pixel gfx limitations provide. However, when it comes to simple converting / pipeline gfx it’s very difficult for me to understand where the passion is, unless it some hardcode algorithms one is dealing with.
And will state this once again: I do hate to go through this discussion prolly as much as you do BUT if that is what will make the scene bit healthier and open then it must be done. The private feedback from people (who don't dare to face the bash of such legends as Censor) has been very good. There are lots of people who have thanked for the discussion, privately. I understand it must be painful for you guys but I hope also that you in Censor too reconsider what you see – if you want to continue this path, just clearly credit the original artists. All good then. Problem solved. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 21 - Next |
