|
| |
|
Tribute to Vangelis [2023] |
Released At :
Transmission64 2023
Achievements :
C64 Demo Competition at Transmission64 2023 : #2
Credits :
| Code | .... | Bob of Censor Design |
| | | Edhellon of Censor Design, Resource, Royal Belgian Beer Squadron |
| | | Firehawk of Censor Design, Hoaxers |
| | | Swallow of Censor Design |
| Music | .... | LMan of Censor Design, Maniacs of Noise, MultiStyle Labs, Performers, Remix64.com, Tristar & Red Sector Inc. |
| | | psych858o of Censor Design, Elysium, Genesis Project, MultiStyle Labs |
| | | Swallow of Censor Design |
| Graphics | .... | DeeKay of Censor Design, Crest, Oxyron |
| | | Talent of Censor Design |
| Design | .... | Talent of Censor Design |
| Idea | .... | Talent of Censor Design |
| Charset | .... | Talent of Censor Design |
| Loader | .... | Bitbreaker of Nuance, Performers |
| Directory Art | .... | DeeKay of Censor Design, Crest, Oxyron |
SIDs used in this release :
Download :
Look for downloads on external sites:
Pokefinder.org
User Comment
Submitted by El Jefe on 2 January 2024
| Thank you, Talent!! A Happy new year to you, too!! |
User Comment
Submitted by Talent on 1 January 2024
Let all these greedy, malicious ****'s to suck their own acids. All these lies and speculations instead of making a tribute to Vangelis.
HAPPY NEW YEAR to all others! |
User Comment
Submitted by LMan on 15 December 2023
| The point was not whether a reference was used, which never was in question, but that you cannot pull a Talent-style pic out of a converter or a photoshop action. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 15 December 2023
As the discussion was moved to: https://csdb.dk/forums/?roomid=12&topicid=163401#163424
… posting this fast made GIF in here too for the following reasons:
1) The release page is where links outside CSDB most commonly direct to.
2) This image in the demo was the 'WOW' moment.
The original used here is built out of two images © ZBrush artist vahidahmadizb2016. |
User Comment
Submitted by PAL on 15 December 2023
So in the end it come down to the simple fact.. all the best still remainig pixel artists on the c64 and all there was before do simply not understand how one can pixel like Talent do and so in the same way and same quality every time... like the highlights are always on same pixel and so on... Talent must have the pattern in his head and we are not inside his head.
I bow down as I said and simply say: WOW... it is better than all ever tried to pixel on the c64 and he outshined everyone in just 2 years - from first pixeled image released, total same after... it is truly amazing...
Keep cool stuff coming. |
User Comment
Submitted by PAL on 15 December 2023
I never wanted to be part of a discussion about orginality, I have used images and photos many times... and used 10-150 hours redoing the stuff to fit the c64... I just posted the source of the portrait, I am a 3d professional and know many artists doin great stuff in zbrush and other softwares.
The only thing I have said here to Talent, and Talents talent is that it is beyond me how great he gets them to be on the c64... so do not make me a part of anything bad in all of this.
Your PAL |
User Comment
Submitted by El Jefe on 15 December 2023
> The old Comments-Closed->Copy&Paste To Forums is getting a little dull and feels a little too much like Kindergarten-Cop.
Full-ack! Im pretty astonished that you finally made up your mind for that!
> But would be great if commentors keep behaving and(!) think twice if anything gets too much of a philosophic/meta/fundamental discussion (THEN forums is the way to go, of course, either start topic or just hijack/necromance any existing Thread you might come across using "Search Forums").
I just wondered about the wrong racism accusations by Hedning being tolerated in the AI Ninja compo comments. If im not mistaken, in the past, any topic would have been closed by mods in the past as soon as this kind of discussion would have come up.
Im looking forward to a more open way of moderation here on csdb and hope this does not only count for polemic events some moderator creates here, but for everyone. |
User Comment
Submitted by spider-j on 15 December 2023
I'm no graphician. Just a musician who didn't properly credit WHAM in my last release assuming iAN would find out by himself for HVSC STIL :-)
But I must admit that this Vangelis portrait doesn't look that there were
Quote:5-6 photos from net
used as reference, but that one "photo" of the below linked 3D render pictures.
I personally don't think it's "converted", but I do understand people (especially other graphicians) can get upset when the reference isn't made clear even after asking.
But also to not upset Bob: great Vangelis tribute btw. Really nice demo with cool music and graphics! Loved Vangelis as a kid. Great job – no matter what references were used. *thumbsup* |
User Comment
Submitted by TheRyk on 15 December 2023
Quoting 'Shocker'Given how the discussion is developing I suggest to take it to the forum (Hi csdb mods!).
*sigh*
Skimmed and scanned the textwalls but so far couldn't detect any posting which is clearly offtopic (i.e. having lost any touch with the RELEASE), neither did I find anything really offensive as of yet, but maybe that's only me (to me 'bullshit' is just a synonym of 'nonsense'). However, postings tend to get a little epic here, speaking of size, not quality.
Bottom line:
My drama senses don't really tingle.
The old Comments-Closed->Copy&Paste To Forums is getting a little dull and feels a little too much like Kindergarten-Cop. But would be great if commentors keep behaving and(!) think twice if anything gets too much of a philosophic/meta/fundamental discussion (THEN forums is the way to go, of course, either start topic or just hijack/necromance any existing Thread you might come across using "Search Forums"). |
User Comment
Submitted by Frostbyte on 15 December 2023
| That's not at all what I said @Oswald, and you know it. :) |
User Comment
Submitted by 4gentE on 15 December 2023
OK Oswald, dont kill me, but it seems to me that these words you wrote in another forum thread contradict what you’re saying today. Of course, it’s possible that I’m misunderstanding something, or that you simply changed your mind.
Quote: So a picture must come with workstages, prooving that it was done out of pure skill of the pixeler himself only. No copy, no wiring, no retouching, thats lame!
Quote: There are pictures released with workstages all the time, there was that website "art that ISNT" collecting scene pictures, and the originals they were copied off side by side. Laughing off the copiers.
So we have moved away from mid 90s standards when copied pictures - doesnt matter how it was done until looks cool - was ok, to the standard that only original artwork counts. |
User Comment
Submitted by El Jefe on 15 December 2023
| I could not express it in a better way than Frostbyte has just done! Kudos Jani! |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 15 December 2023
| Frostbyte, indeed bullshit, download a Vangelis portrait from the internet, change a few pixels (notes), then you get this? Bullshit :) |
User Comment
Submitted by Frostbyte on 15 December 2023
@Oswald it's not about envy, at this stage it's about calling bullshit. Let's compare this to music. If someone would take a song, make a sid tune out of it, maybe change a few notes in the intro and 2nd verse, and then call it their own work, everyone would tear this musician a new one. The tune would be flagged as a cover, a remix at best, to credit the original artist.
Now, why is this so difficult with graphics?
"BTW I used about 5-6 photos from net to create this original portrait that has the ethereal feel"
Everyone can see that this is 95% Vahid Ahmadi's original work, with a bit of shuffling and a keyboard slapped on the side. I'm sorry, but calling it "original portrait" is just bullshit. Talent had his chance to credit the original author, but instead decided that as he'd combined some bits and bops with Vahid's work, it is now his own. This is not respectful behaviour, and as a professional artist himself he should know better.
I don't think that following the same principle as with music to credit the original author(s) is too much to ask, is it? Why is it made into such a big deal?
Now I would love to fully compliment the awesome quality of the c64 version of Vahid's work by Talent, but simply lying about the originality makes me even more suspicious about the process. However all our doubts in that regard are SUPER easy to remove. For next pic, provide workstages or a timelapse. Until then, I'm also going to call the stories about meticulous hand pixeling from start to finish bullshit.
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is. |
User Comment
Submitted by 4gentE on 14 December 2023
| I don’t understand why there was no credit to or even mention (or maybe there was but I missed it) of the original Zbrush artist. Surely the amount of work put into sculpting, texturing etc. deserves a mention. Simply one artist paying respect to another artist’s effort. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 14 December 2023
@shocker, they are just envious, and they finally found something to criticise Talent for. They even suggested earlier that its a convert.
But they are in the wrong, Talent has about 30 years of pixel pushing behind his back, he was in the game industry, he did an art school, even book illustrations, probably can draw better than any one of them.
Also I've heard PAL was pixeling over sourced images aswell :)
and so did Vermeer.
and every coder every checked effects how it is done, and learned from books and other coders, so they are super lame copycats aswell. |
User Comment
Submitted by El Jefe on 14 December 2023
Given how the discussion is developing I suggest to take it to the forum (Hi csdb mods!).
@Oswald: So, do i get it right, that other than claimed before this one is based on this actual portrait done by vahidahmadizb2016 and not composed from "some photos". Well the portrait actually looks somehow nice, but the criticism here is not about the visual quality of the pic, but about the source and how it came to life. |
User Comment
Submitted by Peacemaker on 14 December 2023
"I think its ammazing that after 40 years someone can come around and pull such a gap on everyone else."
and i think that is exactly the problem for some people. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 14 December 2023
@Electric, I've seen this picture months before release and it was obvious from day -90 that this is based on something from the net. Doesnt take away anything from the genious of the picture imho (Remember Vermeer or Vallejo?), you are just envy because of Talents crazy ability. But writing 100s of comments will not make you better and Talent worse. Can you take whatever Vangelis picture from the net and do this quality? NO. Its totally not easy and not copying and not converting (I have coded countless color conversion algos, nothing comes near to this, not even far) and pure art what Talent achieved here.
and btw I have no idea how Talent works, also I couldnt care less that we are both in Censor, I simply love his style, I think its ammazing that after 40 years someone can come around and pull such a gap on everyone else. |
User Comment
Submitted by PAL on 14 December 2023
Again, kudos to you for turning pixels into poetry and insane riddles on the Commodore 64! I didn't think the C64 could host such pixel parties placed like that and over and over again, same quality every time. Your talent - Talent - from July 2, 2022, until now is like pixel art from another dimension – mindblowing, to say the least! The rest of us, the old timers that mostly fart and pick our nose, are scratching our heads and butts in pixel confusion. It's masterpieces, riddles and a pixel enigma that you put out - every time!
I salute your work, and I'm genuinely happy to have this pixel wonderland entertaining us. My heart's warm, but my brain's doing somersaults trying to figure out your pixel wizardry!
Cheers to you and your mind-boggling talent - Talent! |
User Comment
Submitted by El Jefe on 14 December 2023
| Hmm ... now it IS about time to show some workstages. ;-) |
User Comment
Submitted by 4gentE on 14 December 2023
| Down to skin blemishes and a burst capillary in the eye. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 14 December 2023
OK, Pal was faster than I. Wanted to wait until morning for Talent's possible answer and decide if to post or not but… there you go.
I suppose we all agree that the real artist here is vahidahmadizb2016 and not Talent.
Straight link to the vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MCAw-2kVV0&t=1s |
User Comment
Submitted by 4gentE on 14 December 2023
| Ahem ahem. Slam dunk? Is that the term? |
User Comment
Submitted by PAL on 14 December 2023
| A great tribute to Vangelis on the commodore 64 - It is absolutely fantastix! |
User Comment
Submitted by PAL on 14 December 2023
I must say, your pixel art has left us all scratching our heads in amazement. Rumor has it, even 3D specialist Senior Member VAHIDAHMADIZB2016 on the ZBrush 3D forum gave a virtual high-five for your Commodore 64 masterpiece! I didn't know pixels could party so hard on a C64 – it's like you threw a pixel rave, and everyone's invited!
Seriously though, your Photoshop skills are like magic. I tried pixel art once, back in the days and some times after 2008, and let's just say it turned into a pixelated mess like you all know – Carrion's tutorials and I never quite saw eye to eye how he worked with them other than them videos but man I was amazed by that also. Your patterns and dithering skills are basically unicorn-level rare. I've been staring at them, trying to decode the pixel mysteries, and it's like solving a delightful puzzle created by a pixel sorcerer beyond the human realm.
I'm waving the white flag here – you've got a talent that's beyond our mortal comprehension. Some have even started a secret society to discuss your pixel prowess, but no one can fathom how you've reached such pixel enlightenment. Consider yourself officially crowned Pixel King (or Queen) in our baffled minds on the commodore 64 scene.
Keep dazzling us with your pixel wizardry - it is awesome to see them integrated with parts coded by bob and them other and all the awesome music!
https://www.zbrushcentral.com/t/vangelis-portrait/445217?fbclid.. |
User Comment
Submitted by Bob on 14 December 2023
It's just a simple ask, Portrait of Vangelis since you bluntly high-jacked the channel with your accusations ;)
"if anybody can do it" so can you right?
So now the only right thing to do is to provide your own "Tribute to Vangelis" which this channel is ultimately is about to celebrate him ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 14 December 2023
@Bob Heh, you surely studied your Trump - pointing the finger other way to blur it all. If you want to see what I do you can google. I'm hiding nothing.
@Oswald I don't see anything doomed here but the best way to defend would be to open the case, not to ask every Censor member to slag the ones asking the questions. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 14 December 2023
"And thanks for going after me - it proves me we're after something that might hurt."
... and if noone says a thing, then we try not to gather attention to this crime :) Either way the secret Censor conspiracy is doomed :) |
User Comment
Submitted by Bob on 14 December 2023
| @Electric: Paint a portrait instead ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 14 December 2023
OK, wrote PM to Talent. Let's see if he answers. If you know he will not, please inform. Then it might be time to do some image searching.
And thanks for going after me - it proves me we're after something that might hurt. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 14 December 2023
| I think its a tribute to Talent's talents that some of the greatest pixelers try to discredit him :) Dont think anyone else can draw like this, no matter what tools you use, this level needs handwork and years of practice. |
User Comment
Submitted by Bob on 14 December 2023
After all your accusations to the left and right? do you really think Talent will cave in and provide you or anyone else for that matter with works stages?
No...
While you are at it please paint a portrait your self ;) since proportions in your gfx seem to be an issue, and if you think everything is automated, please do it your self as you said "that everyone can do it" ;)
Prove me wrong ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 14 December 2023
@Bob Not really in agony though I do have a flu if that's what you mean :)
Just to mention: do I enjoy writing about this? No, I definitely do not. But I see it important that the scene would be (at least bit) more transparent with it and the original artists would get their credits. We’re not China (yet) and talking about 'CSDB Top 1' artist in this case.
So: workstages.
… when it comes to my actual work ask an artist and illustrator it’s very common to come up with copycats - to point it all out and have discussion is the daily work of several author's rights organizations I’ve been involved with. In those cases it’s often question of actual laws. In C64 scene’s case it’s merely about pride and what is right and what is wrong. |
User Comment
Submitted by Bob on 14 December 2023
it's my pleasure to see you in agony Electric, please keep on ranting ;)
PS this is a thread about a "Tribute to Vangelis" if you haven't noticed.
I thought you knew that bashing on Censor won't help your cause ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 14 December 2023
@Firehawk It is not bashing to ask to see the workstages, which until now has not been delivered with any of Talent's work though asked several times by many people in different posts here and in FB.
As said, the images look like converts of references or collages retouched. If references were used the original artists (photographer / illustrator) should be credited. This was not done so it is stated as 100% own work.
@Iridon I suppose everyone can see that the dithering is automated with retouching. The question here is that where does the ‘original’ image come from? … From the author or from someone else’s portfolio. If the latter, this should be credited or referenced as text or with workstages. If someone thinks this is too much to ask, then I do not agree.
When using someone else’s work the one copying is not just taking the motif but also stealing the composition, ideas, details etc. That’s where the ‘art’ is here, not in technical ability to make it look good on C64 (which is necessary in good pixeling of course). |
User Comment
Submitted by Jazzcat on 9 December 2023
| Excellent demo and SID references. Superb pixel pushing by Talent who masters the heartfelt tribute. Thank you. |
User Comment
Submitted by Iridon on 9 December 2023
I really don't get this discussion. There is different types of Art. This clearly is a more composition art based on photo reference. And the workflow to get from those photos have many ways which some can be partly automated, still its all about the end result where one clearly can see the effort and quality control that goes into it.
Do I think some of the dithered is partly automated? Of course I do (I think he works in a 256 color masterpalette made by dither crossmixing the 16 C64 colors and then blended together with 1px Y offset - basically optical color interlace and works on the picture in this mode and then convert it with some tool back and forth to 16 color) Or maybe I am wrong and he painstalkling place all dither pixels by hand (but I am sure there is this 256 color picture behind to guide the dithered mixed colors) Anyhow it do not matter. To be able to get the amazing end result he needs to be aware what colors makes the best dither mixes or it will look like shit. He needs also to clean up the 256 color image repaint stuff to have the right colors of the 256, and after its converted to 16 colors it probably have tons of color clashes than needs to be fixed and for sure a lot of other by hand pixel cleanup and redithering. The craftmanship of good dithering it down to the mind, not about to put all dither pixels by hand. If that is a crime then so is also using a dither brush. Or any true color software with antialiasing. Or to use an Airbrush vs a bristle brush etc. As long as the composition and work has its fair share of unique work and the end result is great then its fin in my book. If the end result is to be called art, illustration etc. I don't know and i don't care. And neither does Art itself. Art just want to be free. |
User Comment
Submitted by Firehawk on 6 December 2023
Talent made several composition changes throughout the process based on new restrictions and lifted restrictions (imposed by me - the coder of the part). I see no reason to suspect any conversion being used (I've worked with many "professional" graphicians this way - among others JOE and PAL). Repixelling and recomposition and keeping the whole "soul" of the image would be difficult for someone without the skills Talent has. His dithering has always been outstanding and he puts a lot of work in it (perfecting it) - I tried to change one pixel (in Wonderland 14) due to some strange restrictions (that was difficult to explain) and got my ass handed as he spottet it immediately.
I can vouch for him, and there is no reason that he should need to prove it to anyone else.
This type of bashing here is something you see in facebook and other social media with low-brow people - we are (or should be) better than this. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 6 December 2023
@LMan I suppose the speculation will be endless until we see Talent's workstages. Before that it all seems just too fishy to be left without attention, for scene’s sake. As I wrote somewhere else several times (and what also ZOO’s rules emphasize), we (the scene) should encourage creativity and original art.
When I see the workstages that truly present this stuff is his own original art, I’m very willing to say I was wrong and will DEEPLY apologize for all the harm (on my knees). |
User Comment
Submitted by LMan on 6 December 2023
No, that is not what I said.
However I'll drop out of the discussion, it seems to become endless. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 6 December 2023
@LMan You’re exactly right here. Converting can be done by anyone (as we’ve seen the past day here in CSDB too).
Concerning the rest I’m just quoting my earlier post to High Voltage Graphics Collection -group in FB:
“Yes, we all have worked on a lot of things but what does it has to do with this? Well, at least it emphasizes the fact that there is a lot of knowledge and tools behind the pic. Just also note that commercial art like game art has always utilized whatever ways to create. It is a field where image banks etc are commonly used to create 'new', where other works are examined and utilized as part of 'creation'. A step from game industry to the field of individual art - like pixel art - is relatively big in terms of what you are allowed to do for your 'own original art'.“ |
User Comment
Submitted by LMan on 6 December 2023
@electric that's quite an assumption/accusation you are putting up. I don't know if people are generally aware that Talent is in the pixel art and illustration business for ages, and professionally.
If it was as you say, everyone should be able to do Talent quality graphics. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 6 December 2023
@Oswald You seem to take the ‘engineer approach’ in here with a oneway solution to the problem. This is not how drawing works. Stating that Vermeer or Vallejo (which a 15yo me liked but later realized it’s just sexist crap) would ‘just copy’ would prolly be a great insult to them both. In Vermeer’s case you’d prolly get earfuls from the art experts if said something like this in public. As Vallejo is still alive, you can ask this from him straight as well.
Just note that both of the artists that you mention can actually DRAW without help of references too, from their heads and memories. Just google their sketches. This ability is of course essential – if not, everyone could be the artist (which they are not).
One thing must be made clear in spite of repetition: you can NOT compare direct tracing of a photo / image with drawing by looking. Tracing can be done by anyone, but with drawing… it just does NOT work like that. Try out and you will understand.
I give you a practical excercise that you (or anyone) can try out there:
1) Print a perfect circle
2) Turn the paper, place it against window and trace the circle with a pen
3) Take another paper, look at the printed circle and draw it by hand
4) Compare the results
Conclusion: The other circle is stiff and close to the printed one while the other one is loose and clumsy – seems like tracing the circle did not really make you any better artist. You can repeat this thousand times and you still won’t get the perfect circle (no one can). However, the latter circle is your ‘original’ that no one can copy (by hand).
My daughter likes to trace stuff from anywhere on my studio’s light table and this 5yo is pretty good with it. I always of course encourage her with anything creative. However, after she tries to repeat the tracings afterwards without the light table, it does not really work – she gets frustrated and even cries. We’ve had lengthy discussions on HOW things are drawn and she has started to understand that it’s not about the tracing but learning to actually draw.
And to stay in the topic: still no workstages from Talent?
The more I’ve now taken a look at his images the more they all seem like PhotoShop collages run through dithering, fixed a bit and then converted. What raises my (ninja) eyebrows is also the fact that the style of drawing seems to change all the time from bit cartoony to photos and all in-between. Sorry to say, but this is usually a sign of a true copycat. Adding the recent productivity and knowing how painfully slow it is to actually pixel for C64 I just want to see the workstages to actually believe these are pure, own, original artworks. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 5 December 2023
| @Electric, you seem to claim somehow Vermeer or Vallejo draw what they draw out of "nothing", while as I already have pointed out they were clearly copying from photos, and outlines using a pinhole cam. |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 5 December 2023
@LMan You placed one very important pair of words in your first sentence that is ’try to’.
This is precisely what makes the difference between an inkjet print of a landscape and a painting painted by observing it. Digital copy is a 100% copy of the original (we all know that) while human-made copy is a try-out.
Just so you note: observing ain’t only ‘looking’ at something. There are several senses present. It’s also understanding of light and shadow and colours of them – colour theory. In our human world there simply ain’t ‘just looking and copying’ – we are clumsy and what’s causing some lag are the brains that work in-between of our eyes seeing and the hands doing. Everything we experience is processed, individually.
It is no wonder why 2000s has brought thousands of photorealistic artists to the art scene and different fields of illustration – now also to the C64 scene. The tools change the making but - what is more important - tools do not change what art is about. It is not only about technical approach but one’s ability to bring ‘that something’ in it, individual approach. If it would be otherwise, anyone could be the artist… and up today it is not like that – I can see million bad artists copying others, another million of mediocre mostly copying as well (which is even worse) and some good ones that walk their own way.
I have done, teached and written about art enough to know at least a bit what I am talking about. When I compare the students of early 2000s to what is today I can see a slight difference:
When working on an image +20 years ago most of them used to have their desk full of books. These books were used as references for what they were making. They stole a visual idea from there, composition from there, colour palette from there and so on… in order to create something they called their ‘own’. This process does not really differ much from what AI does. It relies on close analysis on images and styles in order to use them for own benefit. That ain’t bad knowledge of course but this kind of process does not really teach too much as it is a shortcut. The real idea was to learn to see and sense ‘beyond the image’.
20 years later the student’s desk has a laptop - there ain’t any books but reference boards with googled stuff, folders of images organized with the name of specific one image, pinterest notes etc etc. What is different is that a lot them work digitally. With the new tools they can perfectly trace whatever they want, modify it (with 3D etc) so it does not look like ‘the original’, prepare a photoshop collage to be projected on the canvas where they trace it with paint and call it their ‘own’. What I see here is merely craftmanship (which ain’t bad) but not that much originality.
I would say that most of the people want it the easy way and I suppose this recent discussion on conversions here in CSDB is about that as well. While old painters used to study for years (and only some of them become very good), 2020s artists wants ‘what’s in their mind’ done as fast as possible. The capitalistic world gets faster and faster. Slowness seems to be an error. There is also lots of competition and C64 scene has been about that since the beginning – “Who’s on top of the charts this month?”
When I look at where I did learn (and learn) the most, it has always been the most difficult work – live drawing and starting with a white paper.
Starting from scratch on your own is scary as hell. It’s existential. This is also what I often ask from the students. I also make them use the equipment and colours they hate and work on sizes uncomfortable (big or small). It’s about hard work and no shortcuts. If one manages this, then everything else is easy - even the work on digital platforms.
And to stay in the topic – what @Frostbyte wrote: would love to see Talent’s work flow and image (like that big Vangelis portrait) pixeled from scratch. |
User Comment
Submitted by LMan on 5 December 2023
@Electric a photorealistic painter painting from a live model will try to "copy" the image before his eyes. That's why the model has to sit still at constant lighting. And if you're not equipped with the rare skill of a photopgraphic memory or exceptional talent in getting the proportions right, you rely on "cruches" like photos.
While I agree with what you said if we're talking about quick and dirty converts, that is not at all what Talent does.
Instead, what you wrote describes the process quite well: "The result is not a copy of the original but a well processed and thought individual outcome that could not be reproduced. It’s also an outcome of a years long practice and mastering in techniques." |
User Comment
Submitted by Frostbyte on 5 December 2023
@Talent the large portrait and the cable from Spiral, and especially the perfect dithering on the former look absolutely stunning. So stunning, that people (like me) start questioning if it is really possible to do such dithering by hand. :)
Not necessarily for these images, but for some future work of yours it would be awesome to see a video, a timelapse or such demonstrating the pixeling work. This would certainly remove any doubts people have about the process and skills.
Now I hope you don't take this as an offence. Sometimes some artists just create something that is so outstanding that people have hard time believing what they are seeing. :) If you can rub off the thin veneer of doubt from your pixeling skills, many (including yours truly) will certainly join the praising choir! |
User Comment
Submitted by Electric on 5 December 2023
@Oswald You're right about Vermeer, Vallejo and the rest – they used models, photos and whatever references. That is - however - totally another thing compared with having few googled photos in PS and doing bit of this and that on them. This would equal to Vermeer and Vallejo having ALREADY a painted image in front of them that they merely just 'fix’ to look like their ‘own’.
Indeed, it’s very wrong to compare Vermeer or Vallejo with PS collage conversions. What they did (and what art is about) was that they observed the for example the model and drew / painted what they saw. There was ‘nothing’ in the beginning – after the model is not present there is nothing left but the work they made. That is the meaning of ‘original’ – think about the word.
The result is not a copy of the original but a well processed and thought individual outcome that could not be reproduced. It’s also an outcome of a years long practice and mastering in techniques. It is not a ‘process’ you can adopt to with a shortcut and repeat it by clicking “Play” in the PS actions.
Please, no false comparisons like this anymore.
Copying is totally another case. |
User Comment
Submitted by Talent on 5 December 2023
Just for the record, making a portrait basicly means, that a person sits for you while you paint (or photo) the subject of the portrait (copy him/her as lifelikely as possible). In case the subject can't be present for obvious reasons to sit for a painting, the painter can use photographs or other reproductions of the person. The artist's goal to add the own style and fill the work with spirit and emotions. In case of a C64 as media even to make the large amount of mental work and design to create a vision against the strong limitations by using the poor possibilities in terms of palette and resolution.
BTW I used about 5-6 photos from net to create this original portrait that has the ethereal feel, that befit the sad case of the tribute and filled the pixels with life and soul to express my appreciation to Vangelis. |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 5 December 2023
| its a portrait so it is fair using a photo as reference. What would you say to brutalist painters that paint photorealistic paintings based on photos? Vallejo used photos for references. Cheater ? Vermeer used pinhole camera still he is held as one of the greatest. This original work craze must stop at some senseful point. |
User Comment
Submitted by Morpheus on 4 December 2023
| Talking about the end portrait of Vangelis in this demo: It's obvious to me that, and correct me if I'm wrong Talent, you've been pixelling over the original photo that's out there on the interwebs. And that's OK if it's not something you would try to hide and claim as your own work. Also, that's been done in other forms since the 80's to get the perspective right, etc. And it's not in a graphics compo. Personally though, I prefer all the artists that base their images on original work rather than using images found on the web that they've made a composition of in Photoshop. That's real art and real, hardcore talent. For graphic competitions, workstages should definitely be mandatory. |
User Comment
Submitted by Talent on 2 December 2023
| I can assure everybody that I do not use any programs or converters, but only photoshop in indexed color mode c64 palette (CD inhouse, something between pepto and colodore; makes no difference at endresult) with 2:1 aspect ratio (brick pixel) and my eyes $ right hand pixeling. |
User Comment
Submitted by Stinsen on 1 December 2023
| Last pic is just amazing. <3 |
User Comment
Submitted by Wile Coyote on 28 November 2023
| @Jammer Talent appears to have super human pixel pushing skills. Truly amazing. |
User Comment
Submitted by Joe on 28 November 2023
User Comment
Submitted by Jammer on 28 November 2023
| Funny enough, Electric also suspected Talent of converting in FB posts. I have no idea what kind of godlike converter would produce results like this ;) Or these are just graphicians being salty because of reasons? ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by Oswald on 28 November 2023
| 100% pixel pushed, this is Talent's style |
User Comment
Submitted by Wile Coyote on 28 November 2023
| The great looking full screen portrait, is it 100% pixel pushed or is there a fancy unreleased converter being used? ^_^ |
User Comment
Submitted by Jammer on 28 November 2023
| Fullscreen portrait is just WOW! <3 |
User Comment
Submitted by HCL on 28 November 2023
| Looks great in every aspect! |
User Comment
Submitted by Didi on 26 November 2023
Getting more and more used to Talent's style: Looks fantastic!
Cool tribute overall. |
User Comment
Submitted by Shogoon on 26 November 2023
| Fantastic tribute to amazing artist. <3 |
User Comment
Submitted by Smasher on 26 November 2023
| very nice. that end pic is out of this world! |
User Comment
Submitted by katon on 26 November 2023
| Hearty congratulations to the entire Censor team! You are all extremely talented and amazing! |
User Comment
Submitted by Talent on 26 November 2023
| Thanks for the comments. I had to design the border gfx of the portrait very carefully to cover large territory still fit in the limits. |
User Comment
Submitted by WVL on 26 November 2023
| While watching the compo, Genius said that Talent's pixels look smaller than those of others. And they do. Amazing! |
User Comment
Submitted by trident on 26 November 2023
the best scrollball / sphere wrapper on the c64! from what i can see the two primary innovations here are the clever use of sprite priorities to get that sweet zoom and the seamless use of x/y expansion to make it zoom even more. i guess the shape of the sphere lends itself particularly well to this zoom/priority idea as this one zooms more than the bagel in Plastic Fantastic which looks like it is based around a similar idea. looks great!
also, in the final picture, those border sprites blend together with everything so perfectly that you can feel that a lot of work went into making it that smooth. |
User Comment
Submitted by Scrap on 26 November 2023
| that unique gfx style is sooooo amazing! |
User Comment
Submitted by Yogibear on 26 November 2023
| Great tribute! Would be great if more graphicians could produce an awesome full screen picture like in this demo! |
User Comment
Submitted by DeeKay on 26 November 2023
pvcf: Firehawk border black magic! ;-)
Talent had done the pic beforehand, and from what I know it was Firehawk's job to squeeze it into the upperlower border limits, including all the coloring, of which Talent uses a LOT of in his unique style...
This picture is so amazing it continues to blow my mind...
P.S: You're back? New music soon? ;-D |
User Comment
Submitted by pvcf on 26 November 2023
| How the Hell they Achieved this Fullscreen Picture ? I know this must be an insane Spritesplitting but there is no Flickering visible ? |
User Comment
Submitted by Brush on 25 November 2023
The balls! :) And final picture! These were the highlights of the overall very pleasant demo.
Congrats guys. |
|
|
|
 | Search CSDb |
|
| Navigate | |
|
| Detailed Info | |
|
| Fun Stuff | |
· Goofs
· Hidden Parts
· Trivia (1)
|
|
| Forum | |
|
| Info on other sites | |
|
| Support CSDb | |
|
 |  |
|
9.4/10 (40 votes) 