4 ms·

> as blocky as possible That's the thing, good pixel art should be _as unblocky as possible_. By working against hardware limitations and with the particular p

> as blocky as possible That's the thing, good pixel art should be _as unblocky as possible_. By working against hardware limitations and with the particular properties of a CRT screen, artists are able to create amazing-looking pictures with extremely limited means. > use pixels as your brush and embracing the limitations > don’t know if that Sarge cats image is manual The Sarge's cats are a great example of pixel technique, not composition or emotional depth. It's a sketch, painstakingly drawn by hand (most likely using the keyboard or a joystick), each pixel truly placed and selected individually. It's made using precisely the care for each pixel you talk about, but the care has been taken to hide the inherent blockiness and low colour count. I suppose it's a generational thing. Having grown up with CRTs and low-res, low-colour machines perhaps creates a different kind of admiration for the immense skill needed to make a lowly C64 or Amiga 500 appear capable of something it's not. Here are a few examples of such graphics from the game Agony from 1992: http://amiga.lychesis.net/game/Agony.html http://amiga.lychesis.net/game/Agony.html

dahart 6y ago
> good pixel art should be _as unblocky as possible_. [...] I suppose it’s a generational thing. Yes, exactly, that might be part of the disconnect here. It used to be the aim to make art unblocky, in the 80s, when there was no choice, when the highest res was 320x200 with 16 colors. Today, there is zero reason for blockiness, ever, you never have to see pixels again. It’s an aesthetic choice to make blocky looking art that is reminiscent of the 80s. And it’s also part of the contest rules for the link you’re commenting on, making it blocky looking is required. The term pixel art today, unlike 40 years ago, is referring to choosing to be blockier than necessary. If you make something as unblocky as possible, that is now called “art”, not “pixel art”, since it’s trivially easy to get rid of visible pixels and avoid a blocky look. Unblocky is the default, and now it’s harder to be blocky than not. I do hear what you’re saying - that manual anti-aliasing - is one of the old techniques that made good computer art back in the day. You’re right, it’s true, it just works against today’s pixel art goals.

dahart 6y ago

> good pixel art should be _as unblocky as possible_. [...] I suppose it’s a generational thing. Yes, exactly, that might be part of the disconnect here. It used to be the aim to make art unblocky, in the 80s, when there was no choice, when the highest res was 320x200 with 16 colors. Today, there is zero reason for blockiness, ever, you never have to see pixels again. It’s an aesthetic choice to make blocky looking art that is reminiscent of the 80s. And it’s also part of the contest rules for the link you’re commenting on, making it blocky looking is required. The term pixel art today, unlike 40 years ago, is referring to choosing to be blockier than necessary. If you make something as unblocky as possible, that is now called “art”, not “pixel art”, since it’s trivially easy to get rid of visible pixels and avoid a blocky look. Unblocky is the default, and now it’s harder to be blocky than not. I do hear what you’re saying - that manual anti-aliasing - is one of the old techniques that made good computer art back in the day. You’re right, it’s true, it just works against today’s pixel art goals.