| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Weapons of Choice?
Been away from the scene for some time, and was wondering what the latest tools people are using for GFX these days?
I did most of my work on Artist64 with a nifty neos mouse. |
|
| |
Compyx
Registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 631 |
It seems to me that most people now use a PC to do their graphics and convert them with programs like Congo.
I've personally always programmed my own gfx-editors and used those.
You could always look at the C64-tools on this site and try some of them.
Sorry I can't be of more help...
|
| |
Dane
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 421 |
Paint Shop Pro, a FLI-editor, a bitmap-editor, my X-fli editor. Think that's it. |
| |
Shake
Posts: 133 |
for me Interpaint because of it's fast and easy interface + mouse support, looks a bit like Deluxe Paint. Sprites with Graphcreator II/Shape or Spritepad (PC).
for ifli etc this topic may be interresting for you:
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/forums/?roomid=10&topicid=12124#12140
just recently Plush has released an improved version of gunpaint by Dow Jones: Gunpaint V1.1
|
| |
Twoflower
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 434 |
Paint Shop Pro, Dolphins FLI-editor (curse be upon Sagas soiled creation, but it got a really nice zoom mode), Bitmapeditor from Twilight and Suxxeditor from Contrast for multicolorbitmap. Bitmapeditor v1.9 from The Fly/System for working in singlecolor hires. And Royal+HCE from Iopop (unreleased) for multicolorhires w. interlace.
If you like painting with mouse, or in a commercial program, Interpaint is the only solution worth mentioning. |
| |
blackdroid
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 84 |
Uhm Amica Paint with ps/2 mouse beats Interpaint imho :) |
| |
Sander
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 487 |
Advanced Artstudio with an Arcade double-fire joystick. Photoshop + Congo for singlecolour graphics. |
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
For IFLI I've always used Funpaint 2, though I intend to properly try out the Plush version of Gunpaint at some stage. For multicolour bitmpas, I've used several programs, though lately I'm leaning towards Advanced Art Studio. If I do things on the PC I use GFX2 or sometimes Photoshop (depending on what I want to do) with Konv1 to convert things back to C64 formats. |
| |
Cruzer
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1048 |
photoshop and my own converters. |
| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1568 |
And since today we have Project 1 aka Oswald's Painter for the PeeCee:
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=17531&show=notes
R. |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Amica paint for sketching,I am more into FLI nowadays.
I recommend UFLI by Crest,if you have the patience for it.
It does have it´s restrictions though but it beats the flickering of interlaced graphics.
No PC programs for me,I am too oldskool for that. ;) |
| |
hollowman
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 474 |
paintshop pro and ms paint on pc. deluxe paint on amiga. konv1 and some own tools for converting from pc, and mainly drazpaint on the c64 |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Thanks for all your suggestions. It's given me plenty of things to take a look at.
I was wondering if there are any apps that support mouse emulation under winvice?
Bizz. |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 1510 |
Amica Paint 1.8 does, afaik. |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Maybe it's just me, but I'm having difficulty getting Amica Paint working with mouse emulation under WinVice.
I load the mouse extension in Amica Paint, enable mouse emulation in WinVice and can I get the pointer to move? No!?
Anyone help? |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Are you using a PC mouse or a C64 mouse?
I don´t think it works with PC mice,tried it myself,but nothing happens.
|
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
RTFM! Press ALT-Q to enable mouse emulation, ALT-Q again to disable it. |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Thank you for that. I'm aware of Alt-Q to enable/diable mouse emulation - I've even used the command line to enable mouse emulation and specify the port... but can't get it to work with Amica. (The little joystick indicators show that the mouse button is being recognised...)
Oh well... How likely is Neos mouse emulation going to be included in the next version of WinVice... and when will the next version be available... ;-) |
| |
Clarence
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 119 |
Bizzmo, maybe you have an inappropriate version.
Download:
More Tools
Run Amica Paint from the menu. Select 'mouse 1531' enable mouse emulation (alt+q), there you go.
|
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Quote: RTFM! Press ALT-Q to enable mouse emulation, ALT-Q again to disable it.
I have also RTFM. ;)
Art Studio works fine,AMICA paint won´t.. |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Thanx Clarence!
Finally I have a working version!! 8) |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Many thanks Clarence! :-) I guess I have no excuse for being so unproductive now! I'll have a play tonight! |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
Can anyone recommend me a font/logo editor ?
I tried FontEd 3.1/faces ? but it has this weird
12x16 format, and fuxx up my gfx.
I will need something to do normal charsets, hires and vanilla multicolor.
Best, if its controlled with keyboard.
|
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Yoh Rambones,
cool to read that you want to do some serious graphics! 8)
For making multi-color logos,I use Amica-paint and then convert them to char,using the Centauri logo-editor.
For creating regular charsets (1x1,2x2 etc..),I recommend the Atrix Char-editor.
I find it a real pleasure to work with.
But if you need a 1x2 editor,I recommend my own editor. ;P |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
Quote: Thank you for that. I'm aware of Alt-Q to enable/diable mouse emulation - I've even used the command line to enable mouse emulation and specify the port... but can't get it to work with Amica. (The little joystick indicators show that the mouse button is being recognised...)
Oh well... How likely is Neos mouse emulation going to be included in the next version of WinVice... and when will the next version be available... ;-)
I used to have a Neos mouse aswell, it never functioned with Amica paint, only with the enclosed Neos software, which was tape load and save only, so I never used the software, nor the mouse.
Why not use Photoshop for any kind of graphics?? Also fonts are easily converted from hires bitmap to characterset.. or is that considered cheating? |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: I used to have a Neos mouse aswell, it never functioned with Amica paint, only with the enclosed Neos software, which was tape load and save only, so I never used the software, nor the mouse.
Why not use Photoshop for any kind of graphics?? Also fonts are easily converted from hires bitmap to characterset.. or is that considered cheating?
Are you pixeling with Photoshop. It is well within the functions of Photoshop to pixel graphics. Now, I use the Commodore programs to do the pixel graphics because I know that what I see in VICE is what it would look like on the C= of course with the technical factor of SVGA screen vs. TV/Composite monitors. Another topic altogether. I would set VICE to give me the most TV-ish look and feel to get the idea of how it would aproximately look on a 1702 monitor.
I use VICE because of the means of getting the graphics out to the group as quickly as possible because I do not have any means to transfer the files in a quick manner.
I know that MANY that do Photoshop work do NOT pixel their graphics very much and they OFTEN use a "smear" tool to soften edges and OFTEN only do pixel touch ups on the RARE occasion. I know as I have seen this in College classes that teach Photoshop. I have had digital graphics classes in the past.
The problem with conversions is the left over "artifacts" (ugly pixelated junk pixels - to explain it in layman term), which would need to be cleaned up.
|
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
Yes, Photoshop is good enough for c64 pixel graphics, allthough the pixeldoubling has to be done by hand, just like figuring out the 3 colors per char (or 2 if hires), but with an 8x8 grid its quite easy. I do use Drazpaint to do the finishing touch, also to set some colors in a way that programmers can use the graphics.
With todays modes of xfli ufli superfli interlacedturbofli with sprites underneath the border, its a different story I guess. |
| |
Dane
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 421 |
Quote: Yes, Photoshop is good enough for c64 pixel graphics, allthough the pixeldoubling has to be done by hand, just like figuring out the 3 colors per char (or 2 if hires), but with an 8x8 grid its quite easy. I do use Drazpaint to do the finishing touch, also to set some colors in a way that programmers can use the graphics.
With todays modes of xfli ufli superfli interlacedturbofli with sprites underneath the border, its a different story I guess.
Interlaced turbofli? OMG! Send me the editor! |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Hein, I use/d a tool called "Artist 64" which utilised the NEOS mouse. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that it really needed and was designed around the mouse.
While it supported joystick - it needed far too much moving around the screen to select options to ever be considered friendly (no keyboard shortcuts etc).
With the mouse it was fantastic... without, well you woulnd't even consider it!
Bizz. |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
Quote: Hein, I use/d a tool called "Artist 64" which utilised the NEOS mouse. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that it really needed and was designed around the mouse.
While it supported joystick - it needed far too much moving around the screen to select options to ever be considered friendly (no keyboard shortcuts etc).
With the mouse it was fantastic... without, well you woulnd't even consider it!
Bizz.
I've given my Neos mouse to Compyx, or he's left it at Ben's place, who most likely has thrown it in the trashcan. Else, Compyx could be filling up disks with great graphics utilizing the Artist 64 programm.. |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
Quote: Interlaced turbofli? OMG! Send me the editor!
I'm sorry, I dont have an editor for that.. well, photoshop ofcourse, which can be used for interlaced turbofli aswell.. 512x1024x256 resolution, allready invented, but not yet released.. (unfortunately I wasnt able to use the 1024x1024x256 resolution mode, because I needed an extra nitro for that, but I'm broke.) |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
I guess that's having to use some very impressive realtime decompression routine too! ;-) |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: Yes, Photoshop is good enough for c64 pixel graphics, allthough the pixeldoubling has to be done by hand, just like figuring out the 3 colors per char (or 2 if hires), but with an 8x8 grid its quite easy. I do use Drazpaint to do the finishing touch, also to set some colors in a way that programmers can use the graphics.
With todays modes of xfli ufli superfli interlacedturbofli with sprites underneath the border, its a different story I guess.
True. I know ALOT of Photoshop users who can't pixel. (Draw pixel by pixel). I know Photoshop as with Microsoft Paint and many other programs are good enough for pixeling.
If you can pixel your graphics really well - pixel by pixel - I would have no reason to look at is as "cheating".
A graphic artist / graphician is judged by their skill and end product. Honest skill and usage of skill is admirable no matter what the tool is. I would use ALOT of different tools for different things. It makes sense to have it done with the right tools. |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: I'm sorry, I dont have an editor for that.. well, photoshop ofcourse, which can be used for interlaced turbofli aswell.. 512x1024x256 resolution, allready invented, but not yet released.. (unfortunately I wasnt able to use the 1024x1024x256 resolution mode, because I needed an extra nitro for that, but I'm broke.)
What is Interlace Turbo FLI ?
|
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Quote: I've given my Neos mouse to Compyx, or he's left it at Ben's place, who most likely has thrown it in the trashcan. Else, Compyx could be filling up disks with great graphics utilizing the Artist 64 programm..
We both know he'd sooner write his own editor. |
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
Quote: Yes, Photoshop is good enough for c64 pixel graphics, allthough the pixeldoubling has to be done by hand, just like figuring out the 3 colors per char (or 2 if hires), but with an 8x8 grid its quite easy. I do use Drazpaint to do the finishing touch, also to set some colors in a way that programmers can use the graphics.
With todays modes of xfli ufli superfli interlacedturbofli with sprites underneath the border, its a different story I guess.
You can create a 2x1 custom brush to deal with the C64's double pixel size.
I guess hires modes would be pretty easy to pixel in photoshop, you could just use three layers, one for the bitmap, one for the sprite and one for the background. The only problem is you would also need someone to create a converter to get it back on the C64! (any takers? :) ). |
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
I have nothing against people using any method to produce their graphics. Photoshop/digitise/convert... who cares as long as the result is good. As long as it's not just done as a shortcut to produce a result without putting any effort in...
I don't know about anyone else, (and this may just be rose tinted spectacles...) but it just doesn't "feel" the same doing 64 graphics on a PC... |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
Quote: We both know he'd sooner write his own editor.
Most likely yeah.. so his right hand would be programming, and his left hand doodling at the same time, just to find out it will end on a never-to-be-released-slideshow-disk. |
| |
Tch
Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 512 |
Quote: I have nothing against people using any method to produce their graphics. Photoshop/digitise/convert... who cares as long as the result is good. As long as it's not just done as a shortcut to produce a result without putting any effort in...
I don't know about anyone else, (and this may just be rose tinted spectacles...) but it just doesn't "feel" the same doing 64 graphics on a PC...
I think you are totaly right here.
It has never appealed to me to use a PC for making C64 graphics.
It´s like using a car to finish the marathon. ;P
That´s also the reason why I don´t like convertors of any kind.
But I guess it´s a sign of the times,that only the "result" counts.
Whoever said "the journey is more important than the destination"?
I like to play the game without ´steroids´ though.
(Besides,I have to keep myself occupied :P) |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: I think you are totaly right here.
It has never appealed to me to use a PC for making C64 graphics.
It´s like using a car to finish the marathon. ;P
That´s also the reason why I don´t like convertors of any kind.
But I guess it´s a sign of the times,that only the "result" counts.
Whoever said "the journey is more important than the destination"?
I like to play the game without ´steroids´ though.
(Besides,I have to keep myself occupied :P)
I have nothing personal against someone who uses the PC to make C64 graphics but skill, time and talent needs to be involved. A good graphics artist of any kind should be able to pixel even in Photoshop or any other PC graphics tool and produce great pieces.
A graphician shouldn't need to pixel totally every piece of work BUT should be put in effort and often pixeling is involved to make a good piece whether it is done on the PC side or the C64 side BUT I don't think a quick slap together job really qualifies as showing good skill and talent.
I think the bottom line is quality. In the case of Hein and some of the top talented graphicians that I have seen, including DK, TCH and others - there is quality in their pieces.
I think it is the OVERALL end result that matters and that the job isn't "PhotoChopped" and actual work has gone into the piece.
|
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
The way I see it is that there's basically two ways you can make C64 graphics on a PC
First of all you can hand draw an image at 320x200/160x200 (depening on the mode) on a blank screen, using the C64's palette and requiring all of the same skills needed as if you were using a native program, but with a few extra perks such as a high quality mouse, custom brushes, flexible zoom modes and so on.
The other alternative is where people either take some scanned image, or perhaps even an image they drew themselves, but at a high resolution and 32 bit colours. They then use a tool to 'downgrade' the image to the C64's resolution and palette and finally touch up any errors in a C64 editor.
The later, to me, seems like a total waste of time as you're not accomplishing anything on the C64 for youself, a tool is doing all of the work for you. Converting some scanned image using this kind of aproach seems to have become acceptable in some people's eyes when it's just for use in a demo, but unless it helps create strong theme of some sort, even that holds little appeal to my eyes. And if you're creating some great work on the PC, why then downgrade it to the C64 anyway?!
The first of the two examples I see as being completely different. A graphician decides where to set a pixel based on experience of what looks right to their eyes, combined with a knowledge of how to use the C64s features. The impression you have of how to use those pixels doesn't change significantly no matter which platform you're using. As I've said before on these forums, I don't believe my own pixelling would be improved just by using a PC tool to create it.
Until a couple of years ago I did everything the old fashioned way using C64 tools only, but I started to play around with some pixelling on the PC and I have to say I find the whole process much more enjoyable. I think the main advantage is the improved functionality of modern day software makes you feel to have much more freedom, you can easily make shapes, create curves, move elements around etc. All of this which ultimately leads to a better composition.
I still use C64 tools for most of my recent releases, though that's only because I know some people still believe that using a PC is cheating. This isn't something I agree with myself, however. Certainly if I was beaten in a compo by someone who had hand-pixelled a picture on a PC when I had created my work on the C64, I wouldn't feel I had been hard done by.
sorry this got a little long :) |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: The way I see it is that there's basically two ways you can make C64 graphics on a PC
First of all you can hand draw an image at 320x200/160x200 (depening on the mode) on a blank screen, using the C64's palette and requiring all of the same skills needed as if you were using a native program, but with a few extra perks such as a high quality mouse, custom brushes, flexible zoom modes and so on.
The other alternative is where people either take some scanned image, or perhaps even an image they drew themselves, but at a high resolution and 32 bit colours. They then use a tool to 'downgrade' the image to the C64's resolution and palette and finally touch up any errors in a C64 editor.
The later, to me, seems like a total waste of time as you're not accomplishing anything on the C64 for youself, a tool is doing all of the work for you. Converting some scanned image using this kind of aproach seems to have become acceptable in some people's eyes when it's just for use in a demo, but unless it helps create strong theme of some sort, even that holds little appeal to my eyes. And if you're creating some great work on the PC, why then downgrade it to the C64 anyway?!
The first of the two examples I see as being completely different. A graphician decides where to set a pixel based on experience of what looks right to their eyes, combined with a knowledge of how to use the C64s features. The impression you have of how to use those pixels doesn't change significantly no matter which platform you're using. As I've said before on these forums, I don't believe my own pixelling would be improved just by using a PC tool to create it.
Until a couple of years ago I did everything the old fashioned way using C64 tools only, but I started to play around with some pixelling on the PC and I have to say I find the whole process much more enjoyable. I think the main advantage is the improved functionality of modern day software makes you feel to have much more freedom, you can easily make shapes, create curves, move elements around etc. All of this which ultimately leads to a better composition.
I still use C64 tools for most of my recent releases, though that's only because I know some people still believe that using a PC is cheating. This isn't something I agree with myself, however. Certainly if I was beaten in a compo by someone who had hand-pixelled a picture on a PC when I had created my work on the C64, I wouldn't feel I had been hard done by.
sorry this got a little long :)
I use the PC but using VICE emulation and C= software. It SOLVES two issues for me.
A) The content is already C= graphics format and B) I solve the issue to getting the content TO my group members ALOT quicker as I don't "currently" have an effective means of getting the GFX work to my group mates via my actual 128D over the net quickly. The 3rd benefits comes with the fact that I have ALOT of disk space.
The benefit is in this factor that ALONE is beneficial. The beauty to me is seeing it APROX. like it suppose to look as I am making it. This make development easier BUT I doubt it is really cheating in any sense AS I am still pixeling my graphics. I might do a little proof of concept work on the PC in MS Paint. The beauty in WHAT I do and how I do it IS that I can develop sprites, fonts, pics and all this on the PC via emulation and get it onto the web in a flash. Ok, I do save on load/save time with warp mode. But I don't think it is cheating per se. Except for in a time competition. Since I am not in a time competition and the time frame that I have to worry about is the basic due date of when the works need to be in.
|
| |
Dane
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 421 |
I tried pixeling X-fli on my old c64. It didn't work, my sight was too bad to view it in in unzoomed mode. So I'm sticking to doing them in VICE. |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: I tried pixeling X-fli on my old c64. It didn't work, my sight was too bad to view it in in unzoomed mode. So I'm sticking to doing them in VICE.
Doesn't the editor have a Zoom mode where you see the pixels in an enlarged form ?
I would say trying to pixel any work without zooming would be incredibly difficult.
|
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 933 |
I have to disagree with Deev on the 2nd way of creating gfx, especially if its for a demo.
Spending much time on detailed pixel work isnt something special anymore, because its just a matter of time. A good composition, theme or emotional matter is what I like more.
It's like watching the new Star Wars films, glorious visuals, but terrible script and story. |
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
Actually, I do kind of agree with you on this. What I was more saying I don't like is where someone will just wire a photo of some random girl, or perhaps some artwork from an advert, a book etc. that doesn't really fit any purpose and is not their own creation. Another example of what I don't like would be where someone might create a logo by simply wiring their favourite font, but creating a logo on a PC when it displays some interesting design (even if it incorperates that font) can be good. I think using more modern technologies to produce C64 graphics is okay and I certainly don't think we should always stay in the stoneage setting everything by pixel by pixel, but I think what you create should be for a purpose and there should still be some creative process involved.
I guess this is probably a third way to produce C64 graphics on a PC :)
I don't believe this sort of thing should be allowed in graphics compos mind you, although a seperate compo where the graphician is judged entirely on their ability to create an interesting composition would be quite interesting. |
| |
Dane
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 421 |
Quote: Doesn't the editor have a Zoom mode where you see the pixels in an enlarged form ?
I would say trying to pixel any work without zooming would be incredibly difficult.
Sure, it has zoom-mode, but I want so see it in original size as well to get it right. Just too blurry on an ordinary tv. |
| |
Twoflower
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 434 |
Is it just me, or is this discussion about as obsolete as Reflex-demos? I guess people on this scene have different views on how to make graphics, and whether or not it is the originality or the resulting artwork which weights heaviest and so on. But let's face it - why don't accept the scene as it is. If someone firmly believes that pixeling an entire picture on a limited platform (which the C-64 is) is teh shit, then let them hold on to their values. If someone believes that porting fonts and Vallejo-pics or photos from an Elle magazine is teh shit, then let them believe that. Noone should try to force values of what art should be about upon others, that's something which grows individually and over time. Let's accept each attempt to make art as art, and then judge the results according to our beliefs. I may not like certain graphics made for this platform, but I sure respect their intentions and dedication.
Yeah, and this is a boring conclusion to a pointless thread, i'm very well aware of that. |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: Sure, it has zoom-mode, but I want so see it in original size as well to get it right. Just too blurry on an ordinary tv.
Ok, I get what you are saying. When I set the PAL Emulation settings (not the video mode setting as it this setting I am referring to can be used in the NTSC video mode), I can't see the individual pixels as well as it gets blurry.
I know what you mean because I use it in VICE for both PAL and NTSC mode for giving me the "TV-ish" feel as EVEN on NTSC TVs/Monitors will have the same blur. I know what a Commodore looks like on an NTSC 1702 monitors. Since it is the closest to the look and feel to TV, I use it to see how it would look aproximately on a TV but I don't use this setting during the creation of the works EXCEPT for viewing it but I view the pic in full in this setting but I ALSO view the pic in full without this setting.
Ok, I'm somewhat anal retentive in my getting the works to look how I want it to look. I probably do more of this stuff than some graphicians do.
|
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: Is it just me, or is this discussion about as obsolete as Reflex-demos? I guess people on this scene have different views on how to make graphics, and whether or not it is the originality or the resulting artwork which weights heaviest and so on. But let's face it - why don't accept the scene as it is. If someone firmly believes that pixeling an entire picture on a limited platform (which the C-64 is) is teh shit, then let them hold on to their values. If someone believes that porting fonts and Vallejo-pics or photos from an Elle magazine is teh shit, then let them believe that. Noone should try to force values of what art should be about upon others, that's something which grows individually and over time. Let's accept each attempt to make art as art, and then judge the results according to our beliefs. I may not like certain graphics made for this platform, but I sure respect their intentions and dedication.
Yeah, and this is a boring conclusion to a pointless thread, i'm very well aware of that.
Bottom line would be judging graphics as art as they are art.
There is a line the art world between creating something, mixing content from magazines and combining it with creative aspects to make something new and of course just porting a pic from a magazine and throwing in a sprite logo.
I can see mix-composition where you may combine a photo of someone (perhaps someone you know) or photo from a magazine and mixing it in with another composition in a creative way with a quality of works. It is like an art gallery on our screens. Of course, the pics should fit well with the demo/game itself ofcourse. The whole composition isn't always just the pic but all that is being viewed so in other words the whole demo and the demo pages themselves are part of the composition. If we are going to present something, it makes sense that it ties well with the rest of the works. I also think about the music as well and it also should be fitting.
|
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Of course the practicaility aspect also comes into play here. Ok, it'd be nice to do everything on the 64... but not everyone still has the ability to have it set up all the time, and as already pointed out.. using a PC means you can move the images around the net and not have to worry about if your foppies are still going to format!
At the end of the day it's all about whatever your comfortable with. Let people judge you by what you do - not how you do it... |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Not all graphics are art. Not all graphicians are artists.
<subliminal message>
And hey, TIMANTHES! WHOOHOO!
</subliminal message>
:)
|
| |
Bizzmo
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 82 |
Well I certainly wouldn't consider anything I did as "art" as such! Just something to pass the time! |
| |
Wildstar
Registered: Nov 2004
Posts: 50 |
Quote: Of course the practicaility aspect also comes into play here. Ok, it'd be nice to do everything on the 64... but not everyone still has the ability to have it set up all the time, and as already pointed out.. using a PC means you can move the images around the net and not have to worry about if your foppies are still going to format!
At the end of the day it's all about whatever your comfortable with. Let people judge you by what you do - not how you do it...
True, True.
As for me, I judge the works fundamentally like any other artwork under the basic principles of basic design. Art must have form and therefore must have organization OR inventive arrangement of all the visual elements according the principles that will develop unity in the artwork.
Most pieces that I have seen do have it. It isn't something one must analytically think about but often is done without much effort.
For me, I am not too anal and am loose and open minded.
Without form, it is pretty much "scribble". After that, I look then to content continuity. Of course, if there is content continuity problems, it would be a matter of disunity. Of course, I have to be loose and open minded to the content and figure the content.
As with any good piece of art, to be good, it MUST capture and hold attention otherwise it is boring and I loose attention but this is a smaller part.
|
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: |
[Wanders past]
In ye olde days (from about 1991 onwards) i was using Deluxe Paint and either the Pu239 Koala converter or, for three colour wash graphics, my own tool that could take two raw bitplanes and merge them into a bitmap - most of the time i was drawing in zoom, the only features i used a lot that can't be found on the C64 are things like the stencil, the shade feature and the circle tools.
These days i'm using a Windows box running ProMotion (which is able to match all my most used DPaint features) kitted out with the Pepto palette and it's zoom grid set for attribute cells, then shovelling the output through either ImageWire or my prototype Koala converter (planned for ImageWire 1.1 if i ever get around to it) which tags cells where i went mad with the colours so i can fix 'em manually or it can best guess. But i'm still doing the bulk of the work a pixel at a time at 8x zoom... =-)
[Wanders off again =-] |
| |
VoDKa
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 32 |
Scetching done in ProMotion on PC.
Pixeling done in ELiTe-PAiNt (my never-will-be-finnished MC-bitmapeditor for PC)
On C64, I prefere Suxx Editor/Contrast & the FLI editor from FBI-Crew.
..But I think I have done my share of joystick-painting during the 80:th & early 90:th, and nowdays I´m lazy and stick to PC. |
| |
Zeus
Registered: Jun 2005
Posts: 16 |
Quote: Scetching done in ProMotion on PC.
Pixeling done in ELiTe-PAiNt (my never-will-be-finnished MC-bitmapeditor for PC)
On C64, I prefere Suxx Editor/Contrast & the FLI editor from FBI-Crew.
..But I think I have done my share of joystick-painting during the 80:th & early 90:th, and nowdays I´m lazy and stick to PC.
Did someone already tell you that it´s a pitty and shame you won´t finish you painter for PC? :D |
| |
Sledge
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 102 |
Yeah.. I agree that he should finish it too. Tried to convince him on LCP2005 without results :)
I use different editors for different tasks. When I do logos I outline them first in a good old program called Paint Magic. It has very nice paint features, good copy mode and a nice zoom mode. I like it alot. For more detailed pixel by pixel stuff I use Drazpaint most of the time. But sometimes I keep coming back for the not-so-good-at-all Koala Painter. Since I'm not really a fan of anything besides plain multicolor, I seldom paint in other formats. I have done some Fairlight logos in FLI, but it was never released though...
On the PC side I use Gimp on Linux when needed. But mostly I enjoy the feeling of creating stuff on the C64 directly. It's the use of this old computers that still keeps me with it. Doing all the stuff on PC would spoil my fun ;) |
| |
Alias Medron
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 39 |
i use amica paint for mc pics wich is the best for that kind in my oppinion.
art studio for hires.. FLIP for fli and drazlace.
(oh.. and all those weird Dane editors :)
still.. it s hard to do all that in a real c64 today mostly because of lack of time.. so vice with the right pallette is the way to go.
i only miss the joystick pixeling theese days.. mouse does the job too but it's not the same feeling :)
|
