eigenbom
|
|
« Reply #60 on: December 19, 2014, 05:58:29 PM » |
|
Hey Richard Phipps! Seems like a good idea, and I had a quick play with it. The concept could work well if you could automate a lot of the shape things, like maybe click-and-drag for rotating a tixel, or allowing someone to paint a shape and automatically smoothing it, etc. Currently its quite overwhelming with all the variations of tiles, orientations, gradient orientations, etc. But I can see it being super useful if you're making a game with that style and use it everyday, so I look forward to seeing where you take it
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #61 on: December 20, 2014, 07:44:01 AM » |
|
Surt: The graphics are pseudo-vector in that they are actually scaled bitmap tiles. The graphics are rendered to a normal bitmap at the start of the program and then treated as a normal texture.
Eigenbom: Yes it does really need some tools to make the smoothing easier and more automatic.. :/
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Torchkas
|
|
« Reply #62 on: December 24, 2014, 08:50:20 AM » |
|
I think it looks really artificial. It's like there wasn't really much work put into the actual artwork. I know they're just test sketches but I don't think the outcome is very appealing. Shaders will always end up giving you visual quirks that would have been polished out with hand-drawn art. I guess it's cool that resolution shifts don't ruin the cleanness of the vector graphics aesthetic, but vector graphics still keep their retro-futuristic style. I admire the idea but the results are disposable in my opinion.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #63 on: December 25, 2014, 01:51:30 PM » |
|
Well, obviously I disagree. It's probably just a different style than normal pixel work or vector work, so not everyone will like it. I always intended for it to be a way to avoid blockiness when enlarging pixel art, rather than compared to pixel art viewed at 100% or vector work.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hapiel
|
|
« Reply #66 on: December 29, 2014, 01:52:06 PM » |
|
It sounds like a great concept! I downloaded your program and tried to trace some of my pixel work, but I failed.. It is a bit too tricky to use, and keeps not doing on the canvas what I expect it to do.. When I do not try to go over my own pixel work it does work, but it is difficult to select previously used colors or tiles, or am I missing out on a trick?
|
|
« Last Edit: December 29, 2014, 01:59:47 PM by Hapiel »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #67 on: December 31, 2014, 03:34:24 AM » |
|
There is a colour tool to select a colour from an existing tixel. You can also hold down left-control and then use the right mouse button over a tixel shape to select that colour.
Does that help?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #68 on: January 15, 2015, 01:34:06 PM » |
|
I'm going to try to add a few tools to make it easier to use. The first one I'll add will be a line tool which will make it easier to add straight line edges. The second will be an smooth line edge tool, and the third will be smooth area (or full image) tool. In other to get the second one to work I need the smooth routine in place and that's what I've been working on. It currently favours dark over light colours and this has the effect of enlarging dark areas and shrinking light ones. The reason is because it adds the line shape tiles around the solid dark tixels. I could make it treat dark areas and light ones equally but that would mean each line edge would need two tixel shapes (one smoothing the dark edge side and one for the lighter side). It's really hard to explain, but something like this: instead of this: I could do this, but it would make it much harder to manually edit line edges. So.. even though it will never look as good as the HQX and XBR class of routines, it's going to be used as more of a quicker way to select edges to smooth then a fully automatic process. Anyway, here's what it looks like at the moment (I know there are some errors):
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
eigenbom
|
|
« Reply #69 on: January 15, 2015, 10:32:39 PM » |
|
Woah, keep it up, you may be onto something awesome! :D
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #70 on: January 16, 2015, 01:08:28 AM » |
|
Thanks Ben! (Favouring lights over darks here and with some bits not smoothed properly..)
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
eigenbom
|
|
« Reply #71 on: January 16, 2015, 01:33:28 AM » |
|
Wiew its da mooonma
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Miziziziz
|
|
« Reply #72 on: January 16, 2015, 06:01:36 PM » |
|
This looks really cool! Going to try it out when I get back to my computer
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #73 on: January 17, 2015, 02:43:16 AM » |
|
I was wrong. Although it's harder to edit manually the smoothing style used by HQX looks much better, so I had a go at implementing something similar. I will have to add more automatic tools for the line editing, but I think it will be worth it. It was a real pain in the arse to get right as it doesn't use a look-up-table for the pattern possibilities like HQX but instead multiple rules and colour checking. Still after working on it all day yesterday I've gotten it implemented. There are still a few error cases, but it looks a lot better:
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #74 on: January 17, 2015, 02:45:14 PM » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Miziziziz
|
|
« Reply #75 on: January 19, 2015, 07:12:15 AM » |
|
Wow, that looks really cool! Kind of reminds me of Rogue Legacy with the color scheme. I really like the aesthetic using the shapes creates
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #76 on: January 19, 2015, 08:40:33 AM » |
|
Thanks, but I can't take credit for the original image as that is from Moonman. I just used it as a test for the smoothing routine.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lee
Level 1
|
|
« Reply #77 on: January 19, 2015, 05:00:01 PM » |
|
I don't understand the reasoning for most of the sub-tile based shapes (thin lines, the smaller squares/circles/diamond shapes)... Doesn't that defeat the point of the tiled/smoothed pixel art aesthetics? And the orientation selections has tons or repeats and then half of it is just inverted (for the two tile long sloped triangle half the tiles are the same as the other half of the triangle). Also, since the output is supposed to be nice and smooth, the aliasing is a big problem. Is this a product of the implementation or something that could be fixed?
I understand the appeal of tile based vector graphics which can easily be converted to scaled pixel art, but not this implementation. What I mean is that you have a grid of tile references to pre-set vector tiles, rather than a grid of vector shapes that have tiled bounds. Taking the right angled triangle for instance; to me drawing the whole (tile aligned) triangle and then having each tile saved as a vector makes more sense than setting each individual tile to parts of a whole vector triangle. The only downside to the former method is that you can't draw half of a two tile wide triangle. But on the other hand how can you even use half of that triangle? Nothing will connect smoothly to the 'cliffed' edge (well actually for this particular example that cliff should be exactly half-way down the tile, but for triangles of length 3 tiles or higher...). Point is there isn't any use for broken up triangles, or parts of circles, so you'll be manually placing every tile of the whole shape anyway.
It's like surt said, with the current implementation it's like an ASCII editor with vector characters. I personally would love it if it was instead shape based with tile/grid based positioning (i.e. same end result different implementation). I guess it is just a problem of expectations.
The interface is really nice and slick though. I hope this isn't too harsh or overly critical.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
happymonster
|
|
« Reply #78 on: January 20, 2015, 12:50:25 AM » |
|
Hi Lee, I'll try to address your points Some of the thin lines, smaller squares/circles/diamond shapes do break the idea of smoothed edges. However I added them for those who like to use other shapes to make graphics, in the same way people do with ANSI editors. The orientation section just manually shows all the possible combinations, even if some of those combinations result in duplicate shapes. In order to avoid that I'd have to add code to detect and remove duplicates, or pre-store that in data files. At the moment that's not a priority for me. I haven't seen a problem with any aliased output, can you please show me a screenshot and I'll have a look at the problem? At the moment the editor is as Surt said like an ASCII editor with vector graphics. The next step which I am working on is to provide more automatic tools, for example the image smoothing I've posted pictures of, manual line drawing, curves, etc.. This will be the next program layer above the basic single tile drawing you have now. I've tried to refer to the program as painting with tiles rather than shapes, as it's not as clever or advanced as a full vector program. But I couldn't honestly hope to compete with those! The more automatic tools will make things a lot easier though once I add them in. Thanks for the comments, I am glad you like the interface and style.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lee
Level 1
|
|
« Reply #79 on: January 21, 2015, 12:04:09 PM » |
|
Examples of aliased output? Every image in this thread except the HQX style smoothed images... Also drawing tiled "vector shapes" isn't really that complex, the only complex part is curved lines ( http://slabode.exofire.net/circle_draw.shtml - but treat the arc as a polygon instead of a line strip): But you're already doing some kind of vector drawing... I don't see how plotting a (non-preset) triangle shape at tile x that is three tiles long is "clever or advanced". Plus it would enable any length triangles.
|
|
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 04:54:20 PM by Lee »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|