It will change, but craft and "look what I did" won't go away.
The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
81–90 of 102 posts
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#82Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#83Focusing on "copying" seems like missing the forest for the trees. There's the copyright angle, but copyright laws are unnatural obstacles designed to give the original author some control over what happens after publishing. They're not fundamental, we made the laws. What is fundamental is this: every artist starts out by copying the works of others. It's how you learn. And in that framing, once you publish your deri…
This sounds so insane to me. If I own land and grow a tree on it, the tree and its fruits are private property forever (mine until I die, then inherited by my children, then their children, or sold, transferred, etc ad nauseam). At no point does the tree become "public", that would be utter nonsense. It is property. Why should my ideas then be anything different? They come from my head. I own myself, including my hea…
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#84Curious not to see the term rotoscoping mentioned. As a lot of what is shown in copying some pictures is effectively that, isn't it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping
Spaceballs’ State Of The Art and 9 Fingers are a couple of Amiga demoscene productions that relied on rotoscoping.
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#85Curious not to see the term rotoscoping mentioned. As a lot of what is shown in copying some pictures is effectively that, isn't it?
Rotoscoping is specifically tracing over a sequence of images - usually video or film frames - to create a sequence of drawings that can be used in an animation workflow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping Spaceballs’ State Of The Art and 9 Fingers are a couple of Amiga demoscene productions that relied on rotoscoping.
I still see them as largely related? That not considered the case?
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#86Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#87The creative part in a demo wasn't the the art itself, the subject, the composition, etc., no, it was representing something thought impossible. Eventually, kinda like how photography changed painters' relationship with realistic representation, more powerful tech did the same with these types of demos, so the medium moved on.
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#88>It's a place of refuge from the constant churn of increased efficiency Increased efficiency also seems to be part of its appeal. The limitation is you can't increase efficiency by just upgrading computer specs, but instead have to find innovating ways to use the existing resources as efficient as possible to make something great. These kinds of optimization or compression problems seems like something AI would be ve…
AI would be helpful for finding innovative solutions? Are you talking about some sort of hypothetical future Super-AGI?
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rotoscoping is specifically tracing over a sequence of images - usually video or film frames - to create a sequence of drawings that can be used in an animation workflow. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping Spaceballs’ State Of The Art and 9 Fingers are a couple of Amiga demoscene productions that relied on rotoscoping.
Right, I suppose you would call what Norman Rockwell was doing was tracing? I still see them as largely related? That not considered the case?
Using a model is posing a live person and/or some objects and setting up lights and painting from that. Artists have done this for years. I've done this. Rockwell did this.
Using photo reference is taking photographs (yours or others') and working from those. I've done this. Rockwell did this too!
Tracing is placing your reference image beneath or over your canvas, and tracing the contours you see in it. Tracing paper, chroma-key, projectors, camera lucidia, tracing the image onto acetate and taping that to your Amiga's monitor to trace it again in DPaint, dropping ref into one layer in Photoshop and working over it in another one, these are all methods of tracing. I've done them all! Rockwell probably did this now and then, with the caveat that a pro's tracing is a very different beast from a beginner's - it's easy for a beginner to just trace the contours with no thought as to how they come together into a 3d shape, and get a drawing that feels dead and lifeless and subtly wrong. Saying someone's work looks like a tracing is kind of an insult.
Rotoscoping is explicitly a process of tracing/referencing a sequence of images to produce a sequence of images rather than a single image. It is related! But this article is entirely discussing the way demoscene artists would reproduce a static image, so roto does not apply here. Rockwell painted static images; he never did this.
(It's certainly possible that Rockwell could have taken single frames of film and had them printed for reference, but that's still not roto. Roto's explicitly an animation process that results in a series of drawings based on your film/video ref.)
Re: The curious case of retro demo scene graphics
#90I would contest that choosing not to reveal the use of AI is due to an agreement of the nature of the behaviour. In an ideal world that could maybe be the case, but I think the driving force behind secrecy is harassment. There are those who use AI as part of their process proudly, but secretly, because they know they will receive abuse. I really wonder how some people think of themselves as artists while simultaneous…
GenAI tools absolutely suck at pixel art from my experience. They can mimic aspects of the look at the display layer, but they are fundamentally bogus. Sprite animation in particular is bad unless you build a bespoke engine to spit out sequential PNGs. A poser will give, but not withstand (and internalize) critique. An artist is too busy producing or suffering to care.
The same could be said of a lot of retro themed games. They frequently do not adhere to the same requirement such as number of colours per attribute cell. Nevertheless, they are producing a style that they are aiming for.
But I agree that GenAI tends to suck at pixel art. It will be interesting to see how much that changes. More importantly poor quality art is still art, and frequently making poor art is the first step towards making great art. You don't have to like or applaud things you don't feel are very good. It is just not kind or useful to attack the artist.
>A poser will give, but not withstand (and internalize) critique. An artist is too busy producing or suffering to care.
This is my sense as well. The bulk of the aggressive behaviour seems to be coming from people whose identity values that they can produce things others cannot. Those who like just producing things are still just producing things.