Pix3M

Quick question, have you perhaps had any formal education in graphic design or Art of any kind?

 

Eh, maybe one drawing class and a photography class in high school.

I find this interesting considering you had before said multiple times that "tool used doesn't matter" yet you make that the focal point of the thread

 

I did it mainly for teh luls because I kept seeing silly praise at other people's work just because it was made in MS paint. Just wanted to make a point, and I even added a a few links in the video's description to bigger, better works made in MS paint.

I really like them.

 

I don't want to be "that guy" on the internet, but do you take requests?

 

No. I take RL money commissions. Those things were merely practice as I want to make ones for the main six for practice before I go offering commissions again.

Hmm... how about making several movies and stitch them together?

 

I tried doing that with some other program, but I noticed that the color changes going from one video segment to another. Not sure if want, and not sure how I can avoid that.

Eh, I'll try it again. It's probably the compression that messed up the color.

Well, you have quite a lot of options, if you want to keep it simple I would use something like VirtualDub to make a movie out of it.

 

Else, I suggest using something like Camtasia, which takes care of pretty much everything and you can do some light editing afterwards. ( Like I did here -> http://mlpforums.com...peed-vectoring/ )

 

Aww nuts. I got virtualdub but can't get it to load multiple sequences as I've broken up my gallery of PNG images by deleting certain frames I don't want as they were basically me clicking out of MS paint to reply a youtube vid lolol (i.e. I'm missing frame number 99 and 100 so it stops loading at the 98th frame because 99 and 100 doesn't exist)

So I want to make a video of myself making something cool with MS paint.

I downloaded Snappy v1.5.4 as it was a program that can take a screenshot when I click, and it was what I wanted as I don't want to make a video with times where nothing is happening and times where I blaze through things.

I stopped despite how I wasn't really finished, but I'd thought I would explore the program a bit more. I tried saving the 700+ frames it recorded as an AVI, but I can't get farther from choosing a compression method as it gives me an error for everything I have chosen so far.

I can, however, export the 700+ frames as individual PNG files. If that's what I will end up doing and I cannot figure out how to export my work so far as an AVI, what is the quickest way for me to compile them into a movie?

Well Oryx, I'm curious to see if you have done any ponies in this style to start with. 8x8 is pretty difficult to work with. The smallest pony I ever sprited was 16x16.

One using this silly song, starring Applebloom, or some other trouble-maker.

Mind=blown. I'm going to stick with traditional, non-technological media.

 

Keep in mind that when working with bigger pieces with regular-ol' digital paintings, you can just use a bigger brush to cover more area. Pixel art is very different as it's a digital medium that takes advantage of the smallest element of the computer screen (thus achieving a quality on the computer screen that no other medium can compete with), so one does not simply use a bigger 'brush' with pixel art.

I used a few for this one. Character ref, not pose ref. X3

As for show-acc. I guess I don't draw show-acc anymore. (see above post by me, yay!)

 

In that case, I suggest going for head proportions that are not so 'tall', but go for much circular ones. Round and fat = cute. You could also experiment with fatter, rounder, or stubbier legs that are less elongated as they're long and skinny enough that I couldn't tell that you were aiming for a cute chibi look. The ears could also be stretched lower and farther back as show-accurate ears are more rounded.

Consider using references, if you want show-accurate art.

Dang, if MLP:FiM used pixels instead of vectors (*gasp!*), that's what they would look like!

 

Who uses pixel art for large-scale animations though?

Here's a fun thought... These images are 100x100 by size, totaling 10,000 pixels in the entire image. They take hours to make. Imagine doing HD stuff which probably has more or less 1.4 million pixels in one frame, and on top of that, you would want a 20 minute animation at around 24 fps so that's about... 40 billion pixels to juggle. If a 10,000 pixel image takes hours, imagine 40 billion pixels, and not only that, but you also want the frames to smoothly transition to each other!

Story of the blank, and tvtropes were the first places where I heard of FiM... and bumped into R34 stuff that really caught my attention.

Then some silly cultural anthropology class with a basic sentiment of questioning culture made me wonder "If practically anything can be justified with cultural logic, then what's the deal with MLP?"

Bam.

Eeyup.

They are meant to be used as avatars, so I made several different sizes from 150x150, 100x100, 75x75, and 50x50. Their dA page also provides a download link for them if anyone needs the resizes that I made.

Pinkie: http://fav.me/d57at4k

Applejack: http://fav.me/d57j6on

Rarity's eye outline is kind of like a line with a half-circle line on top. I believe that shape is rather unnatural for an eye even among other cartooning styles I've seen so far, which might be why you might find it unnatural... that is if that's the eye you find to be unnatural.

How about instead of having a half-circle for the shape of the eye, what if we take the right-most "point" from the line and half-circles and move it upwards, creating a shape that is more show-accurate? Eh, not sure if that's the best suggestion possible.

You know, I had a friend (he makes signatures pretty well...) tell me that using "color theory", such as complimentary, analogous, and triadic, is something I should keep in mind. Obviously, I didn't listen. I feel like what you are saying here is pretty similar to what he is talking about, right?

I'm sure that's also very useful to know, but I'm sure that wasn't what I was talking about. I'm suggesting that instead of adding new colors that doesn't exist in your piece, you can always try to use colors that you're already given. IMO, the rainbow colors used in your RD sigs are a little too different from the exact colors used on RD herself. You could see if trying to adjust the rainbows to match her rainbows could create something more coherent, but eh. Only one way to find out.

I have read about this before, and once again, I totally push it aside. I feel like it is kind of hard to do the Rule of thirds when the picture you are working with is around 600x100. But, I understand what you are saying.

 

I have noted what you said, and I will start experimenting with all of it. Thanks!

 

I know what you mean, considering that I also work with something that's also difficult. Can you imagine trying to apply rule of thirds to a portrait of a pony? Best I can do at the very least is place my subject slightly off-centerl.

The brony phenomenon will not last if we're gonna be sticking true to FiM forever. FiM can only last for so long.

To be fair, the fanbase's powerful creative potential WILL find ways to work around the fact that FiM is trademarked. If we're gonna be creating non FiM pony stuff, the brony thing can probably grow beyond its dependency on one show that can only be around for so long.

If I can point anything out, the signatures are poorly 'focused'. You have the characters you want to include, but at the same time, you have very distracting color schemes, especially with the RD sigs.

You have Daring-do and her earth-tone color scheme but the greens and blues in the background. What if we were to change the green to brown and the blue glow to a purple glow? I'm certain that the daring-do sig will be more coherent as you get some colors to appear in more places. The more colors you add into a piece, the more difficult it is to create a good color scheme as it gives you more balls to juggle. Not sure what to do with the RD sigs though as her color scheme slams you with a rainbow worth of colors to juggle.

You may also want to look at art composition, which is basically how you place the elements of what you're making. It's what separates boring photos from more exciting ones. If there's something you should know, you do NOT place things dead-center (which I avoided in my avatar by placing it slightly off-center).

Fun link: http://en.wikipedia..../Rule_of_thirds

Anyone ever tried silkworm larvae?

0/10 because I hardly visit forums nowadays.

I'm a nobody on this site for all I know

The colors need to be more vibrant. The neck and eyes are a bit weird. And, which pony is it. I am still on season 1.

 

If I'm imagining how the art looks in person and not through difficult photography (TS/OP should have taken the picture with a LOT more light, I can tell that it was taken in a dark room because of the amount of noise you normally see with low-light photography), I don't think colors need to be more vibrant.

In fact, too many vibrant colors can cause colors to clash and make a disharmonious composition.

Ahh thanks! Sorry i made it on flash. But that's good to know i'll re-put it up now!

 

Awesome. The quality is MUCH more bearable now

that's damn sweet, i applaud you for that.

But there are plenty of art programs out there that would make your life easier

 

I'm a pixel artist; I take advantage of the pixel, the smallest element of the computer screen. My form of digital art needs nothing more than basic tools. If there are fancy tools out there that my program doesn't provide that makes work faster enough to be worth adjusting to a different UI, I'm not convinced.

You should have saved this as a PNG, not a JPG because this picture was almost all areas of solid color.

If you look closely around the outlines you can see how colors are messed up a little bit. Those areas of messed up colors are called artifacts. You probably do not want that. That is what JPG's can do to your work especially if your work again as large areas of solid color. JPG's are meant for photo's not for pictures like these.