It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:17 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 10:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:43 am
Posts: 1589
Something is doing superfluous gamma correction most likely.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:35 pm
Posts: 3153
Location: Nacogdoches, Texas
Paint? Yuck!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:18 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10164
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
I love MS Paint for doing sprite work. The XP version was much better, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:43 pm
Posts: 1311
Espozo wrote:
Paint? Yuck!

There's no need to act that way if someone wants to use simple software that you don't like.

I agree that XP paint was better for the purpose, just because the UI is more concise and out of the way, and some tools don't apply AA without a clear option to disable them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:43 am
Posts: 1589
GraphicsGale completely dethrones any version of Paint though, especially when it comes to managing the palette.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 19343
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
mikejmoffitt wrote:
I agree that XP paint was better for [pixel art], just because the UI is more concise and out of the way, and some tools don't apply AA without a clear option to disable them.

That's one thing I like about GIMP. It has the brush tool, which applies AA, and the pencil tool, which doesn't apply AA. The eraser tool has a "Hard edge" checkbox for whether to apply AA or not, as do the elliptical and lasso selection tools. And its UI pretty much stays out of my way once I turn on single-window mode. Furthermore, GIMP has "rearrange color map" which is convenient.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 5:45 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10164
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
mikejmoffitt wrote:
I agree that XP paint was better for the purpose, just because the UI is more concise and out of the way, and some tools don't apply AA without a clear option to disable them.

Besides the AA, my biggest complaints against the new MS Paint are the selection tool (you can't make a new selection near an old one because there's some sort of proximity threshold now, and it's hard as fuck to get the selection to start at the pixel you want) and the shapes (which are now treated as objects until you click away ).

Sik wrote:
GraphicsGale completely dethrones any version of Paint though, especially when it comes to managing the palette.

MS Paint is far from being the definitive sprite creation tool, mainly because of the lack of layering and any sort of palette management, so you may need to use other tools. My own conversion tools can recognize palettes drawn in the image itself, so the lack of palette management isn't really a problem for me.

tepples wrote:
That's one thing I like about GIMP.

GIMP is cool and all, but I find it too bloated for simple pixel art. I feel exactly the same about Photoshop.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2015 6:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:35 pm
Posts: 3153
Location: Nacogdoches, Texas
mikejmoffitt wrote:
There's no need to act that way if someone wants to use simple software that you don't like.

I didn't mean to hurt any feelings...

tepples wrote:
That's one thing I like about GIMP. It has the brush tool, which applies AA, and the pencil tool, which doesn't apply AA. The eraser tool has a "Hard edge" checkbox for whether to apply AA or not, as do the elliptical and lasso selection tools. And its UI pretty much stays out of my way once I turn on single-window mode. Furthermore, GIMP has "rearrange color map" which is convenient.

Yup.

tokumaru wrote:
GIMP is cool and all, but I find it too bloated for simple pixel art.

That's why you hide a lot of features, although I see what you mean.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 7:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 3:43 am
Posts: 1589
Neither GIMP nor Photoshop were designed for pixelart but for editing of way more complex images, so it's no wonder that doing pixelart with them is much harder than one feels it should be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 8:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:35 pm
Posts: 3153
Location: Nacogdoches, Texas
Gimp is quite a bit more barebones than Photoshop though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2015 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 19, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 2426
Here is the palette for the first BG layer.

Code:
BG palette 2:
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,10,6)
rgb(0,21,8)
rgb(8,28,9)
rgb(21,31,15)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(6,0,3)
rgb(13,1,4)
rgb(20,5,5)
rgb(26,12,5)
rgb(31,20,5)
rgb(0,3,6)
rgb(0,7,11)
rgb(3,13,18)
rgb(8,21,24)
rgb(17,28,30)

BG palette 3:
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(0,0,0)
rgb(21,0,0)
rgb(27,6,0)
rgb(31,13,0)
rgb(31,21,0)
rgb(31,27,6)
rgb(18,8,6)
rgb(25,16,12)
rgb(29,23,18)
rgb(30,27,23)
rgb(31,31,27)


BG palettes 0 and 1 are reserved for BG3.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2015 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:03 pm
Posts: 5898
Location: Canada
Sik wrote:
Neither GIMP nor Photoshop were designed for pixelart but for editing of way more complex images, so it's no wonder that doing pixelart with them is much harder than one feels it should be.

I find GIMP is quite good for pixel art, and use it frequently for this. I found this tutorial helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PONe4IIYSnQp

The only ways I find it lacking are that palettes are not very convenient (though they can still be done), and it's not very good at all for animation.

For animated pixel art I use Aseprite, which I think is not as good an image editor as GIMP but is quite good for animation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:55 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10164
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
I haven't used GIMP in a while, but I remember testing animations with it. IIRC, each animation frame is a layer, and you can specify delays and other parameters using the layer's name. Then you can just go to Filters -> Animation -> Playback to see the animation. Do you need more than that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:03 pm
Posts: 5898
Location: Canada
Yes GIMP has very minimal support for animated GIFs, and there is a playback tool. It is very rudimentary, and awkward to use. A real animation tool is light years beyond this, really.

Aseprite lets you switch frames with a keypress, use several layers each animated separately (GIMP is using layers in lieu of real frames, preventing this possibility), easily change speeds and partial loops, onion skin to trace over previous frames, etc. etc.

There's really no comparison. GIMP's animated GIF support is a just barely working hack. Aseprite is designed around the task of animation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:35 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10164
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
rainwarrior wrote:
GIMP's animated GIF support is a just barely working hack.

There's no arguing that, but for simple sprite work I think it's enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group