|
| |
Released At :
LCP 2005
Achievements :
C64 Graphics Competition at LCP 2005 : #3
Credits :
Download :
Look for downloads on external sites:
Pokefinder.org
User Comment
Submitted by saehn on 17 May 2011
| Dane (wisely avoiding the ongoing discussion) has posted some interesting information in the production notes. Thanks, Dane. |
User Comment
Submitted by Hein on 17 May 2011
| Even though I don't like the style of this image that much, I'm curious to know where the line between copy/original is placed. Who decides if there's enough creativity involved? (Copyright infringement?) I think this is not the place to debate such things tho, maybe there's a thread allready about this topic somewhere... |
User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 17 May 2011
@Carrion: 1. What Sander said. 2: What crap? What are you afraid of? If you are doing wirejobs or copying stuff in a competition you should be honest and tell that and provide the original. The scene is what we make it, and many does not think copied/transferred gfx belongs in compos.
Mermaid (and I) do not tell people to stop doing anything - do whatever you please, but it is fucking boring to sit for weeks pixelling and then compete in a compo where there are wirejobs or copies with no originality winning or taking the top scores. That's what it all is about. The best fucking 1337 megaartist should win compos and inspire others, not the best copy routine. The solution is simple: add a copy compo at parties.
Demos and other releases is another thing. Gfx is just a part of a bigger creation there, and can be made in whatever possible/impossible way. |
User Comment
Submitted by STE'86 on 17 May 2011
| its a portrait of Christina Ricci done from a photograph. its hardly a bloody scandal is it? how else was a portrait of Ms Ricci going to happen? anyone here got her number to see if she will pose? no? |
User Comment
Submitted by Sander on 17 May 2011
User Comment
Submitted by Radiant on 17 May 2011
| I have no doubt Dane did the dithering manually on this one. |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 17 May 2011
| GIMP's positioned dither pretty much does that. |
User Comment
Submitted by STE'86 on 17 May 2011
| well it is an uncommonly "koala" like dither pattern to have been created by an app. whose pattern conversions tend to either swing towards the machine hatching of "pattern dither" thru FloydSteinberg style diffuse dither. i have yet to see any app come up with "koala" dither when dropped to so few colours. i could be wrong but thats been my experience. |
User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 17 May 2011
Anyone who think I am bored / being a witchhunter: Well. I'm not saying anything with my posts of the original photos/artwork.
I think people maybe want to see the originals - be it for comparing (If Dane wanted to impress, then showing the original will make his conversion more impressive, isn't that true?), or just to discuss tecniques.
Maybe there are one or two who think it is a hand pixelled picture (it WAS put into a compo and won #3 @ LCP 2005).
But then again: I will keep on posting the originals because it is interesting; if I am offending someone: sorry. Did not mean to. |
User Comment
Submitted by STE'86 on 17 May 2011
It's ok, cut it out, stick some nonedescript swirly clipart from the photoshop disk in the background make it nufli and everyone will say it's "newschool" and give it a 9.
sarcasm? moi? |
User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 17 May 2011
| I am not very bored, mostly fascinated by the fact that this pic was #3 in the gfx compo @LCP 2005. |
User Comment
Submitted by TheRyk on 17 May 2011
Quote:Maybe some people who just found out about http://tineye.com/ wanted to give it a try?
Won't turn me into a conversion witch hunt deputy, but quite interesting!
Quote:Did I leave it on CSDb without posting the original picture under production notes? You've got a point there. If people freely admit that sth. is converted, they'd not risk being prosecuted or "tracked down". |
User Comment
Submitted by Mermaid on 17 May 2011
It's pretty obvious to me that this is a 1:1 convert.
Quoting Lemmingto me it seems that you've only written about 'copying' but I could have missed something there.
Quoting Mermaidhow boring and pointless 1:1 converts are.
Quoting MermaidYes, by all means go ahead and copy (and I mean *copy*, not retouch scans) great artists, that is a great way to get better at drawing and learning about anatomy and such. I have no problem with that, it'd be nice to see the original pics though. But is it really necessary to submit those (practice) copies to a competition |
User Comment
Submitted by lemming on 17 May 2011
First of all I was referring to what PAL wrote about his last ninja pic (which I think is superb) with that last comment.
Work has definitely gone to rasterize and colorize this picture so I don't get it how it could be classified as "1:1 copy". I personally find the use of colors particularly cool here.
Yes, I know what these methods mean whether it's standard repainting or wiring, to me it seems that you've only written about 'copying' but I could have missed something there.
|
User Comment
Submitted by Mermaid on 17 May 2011
Lemming: hang on, now you are using the word "repaint" - which is not the same as "1:1 convert". You can't accuse me of saying repaints are pointless when what I actually said was *converts* are pointless. You do know the difference, right?
If you actually, you know, READ the thread about this topic you would know that I said several times that copying (as in, repaints) is a great way of learning more about anatomy and so on. Ie. not pointless.
That still doesn't mean that you should enter your anatomy studies/naked women with dragons studies in a graphics competition though. |
User Comment
Submitted by lemming on 17 May 2011
So you mean that repainting is not boring and pointless unless it's in a compo after all or just when it's done by you? You know, that "boring and pointless" Last Ninja pic by PAL was not in a compo either.
And come on, who's claiming that A PICTURE OF CHRISTINA RICCI would ever be drawn from the scratch?
|
User Comment
Submitted by Mermaid on 17 May 2011
Was "Yuri the Cosmonaut" a competition entry?
Did I try to hide the fact that it was a copy?
Did I leave it on CSDb without posting the original picture under production notes?
Quoting PALthe entries in the double screen compo do lack the personal touch and some really are booring stright converts
And yes, doing an original picture is infinitely more interesting to me than doing a copy. |
User Comment
Submitted by lemming on 17 May 2011
You're twisting PAL's words there. Was Yuri the Cosmonaut boring or pointless for you to draw or what's the difference here?
|
User Comment
Submitted by Mermaid on 17 May 2011
Yes, Pal said pretty much anything anyone had ever said in that thread, including how boring and pointless 1:1 converts are.
And it's not a trend, people have been posting originals for years, like it or not. |
User Comment
Submitted by lemming on 17 May 2011
That rasterizing certainly did not come there by itself.
I don't like this trend of looking for "wired" pics. I suppose PAL said it all on the doublescreen-topic..
|
User Comment
Submitted by Sander on 17 May 2011
| Ouch, certainly looks like a cheap wire job. |
User Comment
Submitted by Mermaid on 17 May 2011
I've been posting original pics here for many many years now, actually. It has nothing to do with boredom or G*P.
Maybe some people who just found out about http://tineye.com/ wanted to give it a try? I don't know. |
User Comment
Submitted by TheRyk on 16 May 2011
| Indeed, the GP guys seem to be a little bored at the moment. ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by saehn on 16 May 2011
Is this "Find the Oregano Week" on CSDb?! :-)
 |
User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 16 May 2011
|
|
|
 | Search CSDb |
|
| Navigate | |
|
| Detailed Info | |
|
| Fun Stuff | |
· Goofs
· Hidden Parts
· Trivia
|
|
| Forum | |
|
| Support CSDb | |
|
 |  |
|
