I don't get it..

[BeZeRkEr]

Why do people think that unless you do your work in MSPaint you aren't good?
Pixeling is pixeling.. Just because you use Photoshop has nothing to do with pixeling skills..

[Deek2]

Originally posted by BeZeRkEr
Why do people think that unless you do your work in MSPaint you aren't good?
Pixeling is pixeling.. Just because you use Photoshop has nothing to do with pixeling skills..

Usually those people don't know graphics at all. Your right, your pixeling skills have nothing to do with what program you use. I say it's how you use your skills that matters. I can easily make something in MSPaint as good as something I would make in Photoshop or Jasc PSP, for example. It has nothing to do with what program you use.

[--Chris--]

I only have MS Paint XD

Actually the program does influence your work, it allows you to do things faster, more efficiently and stress fee along with having tools to improve certain things =/

[AlexH]

I think it's because programs like PSP etc all have tools which allow you to do things faster but usually with less quality in the final product.
Even if the person uses it for a base and then goes back and recovers whatever they've done it is seen by other people as sort of "cheating" in making them.
Although I don't see why people wouldn't use them if they could still get a nice final product with it. Why pass up chances you are given?

[konidias]

It's because most of the time, people that use anything but MS Paint, end up using the filters and special fancy tools that come with the bigger programs. These tools are NOT made for 2D pixel art. Gradients do not pass as shading, and airbrushing doesn't either. Not when you have small pixelated objects.

http://forums.graal2001.com/forums/a...&postid=808592

There is a good example of why using some kind of photo editor is not good for pixelated artwork. He used some cheap gradient tool to make a "shadow" which looks nothing like a shadow. The thing is supposed to be a pole, and it looks as flat as construction paper.

Then there are the people that uses lens flares and even go as far as using some built in effects to texture EVERYTHING they make, so it looks like crap, but they think it looks good because they are using some big program with all sorts of powerful tools.

Sure, you can make the same stuff in photoshop/paintshop as you can in mspaint, but generally, people don't just use the line and pencil tools to draw in a photo editor. I just don't understand the people that think ms paint sucks. Like the person I heard once that said "it has limited colors". I mean wtf, do you even look at the program for more than 2 minutes? If he did, he'd figure out he can pick any color he wants, and not just the limited colors given on the toolbar.

[funnylinkwantsbomys]

Originally posted by konidias
It's because most of the time, people that use anything but MS Paint, end up using the filters and special fancy tools that come with the bigger programs. These tools are NOT made for 2D pixel art. Gradients do not pass as shading, and airbrushing doesn't either. Not when you have small pixelated objects.

http://forums.graal2001.com/forums/a...&postid=808592

There is a good example of why using some kind of photo editor is not good for pixelated artwork. He used some cheap gradient tool to make a "shadow" which looks nothing like a shadow. The thing is supposed to be a pole, and it looks as flat as construction paper.

Then there are the people that uses lens flares and even go as far as using some built in effects to texture EVERYTHING they make, so it looks like crap, but they think it looks good because they are using some big program with all sorts of powerful tools.

Sure, you can make the same stuff in photoshop/paintshop as you can in mspaint, but generally, people don't just use the line and pencil tools to draw in a photo editor. I just don't understand the people that think ms paint sucks. Like the person I heard once that said "it has limited colors". I mean wtf, do you even look at the program for more than 2 minutes? If he did, he'd figure out he can pick any color he wants, and not just the limited colors given on the toolbar.

Yes...i wish their was a amsp program that had more advanced stuff in the menus but everything like pixeling/icons are the same exact and i like how ms paint its not so confuzin. And you know you love how the zooming icon works

[funnylinkwantsbomys]

ps: mspaintrox (see attachment)

[Spark910]

Doesnt it just!

[funnylinkwantsbomys]

Originally posted by Spark910
Doesnt it just!

it ownzzzzz u all (and is very flexible and not so confuzing with so many menus like psp pro) :P

[Soul-Blade]

Originally posted by konidias
It's because most of the time, people that use anything but MS Paint, end up using the filters and special fancy tools that come with the bigger programs. These tools are NOT made for 2D pixel art. Gradients do not pass as shading, and airbrushing doesn't either. Not when you have small pixelated objects.

http://forums.graal2001.com/forums/a...&postid=808592

There is a good example of why using some kind of photo editor is not good for pixelated artwork. He used some cheap gradient tool to make a "shadow" which looks nothing like a shadow. The thing is supposed to be a pole, and it looks as flat as construction paper.

Then there are the people that uses lens flares and even go as far as using some built in effects to texture EVERYTHING they make, so it looks like crap, but they think it looks good because they are using some big program with all sorts of powerful tools.

Sure, you can make the same stuff in photoshop/paintshop as you can in mspaint, but generally, people don't just use the line and pencil tools to draw in a photo editor. I just don't understand the people that think ms paint sucks. Like the person I heard once that said "it has limited colors". I mean wtf, do you even look at the program for more than 2 minutes? If he did, he'd figure out he can pick any color he wants, and not just the limited colors given on the toolbar.

Hmm I agree. Though truth be told, for larger graphics I make a outline, color, and prelim shading in MSPaint and I touch up shade in PSP with only pencil, and a 20% opacity level x-x. Actually, any other tool is worthless in that program, as it is mainly for web graphics. Pixel art is not compatible with it.

[MadWolf]

Photshop can be used to make good Graphics, ofcourse. BUT, photoshop is a PHOTO EDITING PROGRAM. Emphasis on the 'edit' please? MS Paint seems to be a favorite choice because of the fact, it's simple and easy to use. I use for all my pixel work. Ofcourse some poeple out there think your not a Pixel Artist without this handy program. That is false, as there are other paint programs besides PSP and Adobe. One I used to use is GIMP. Veru useful. Pixels + Layers = Sexy.

[konidias]

Originally posted by MadWolf
Photshop can be used to make good Graphics, ofcourse. BUT, photoshop is a PHOTO EDITING PROGRAM. Emphasis on the 'edit' please?

Haha, how about emphasis on PHOTO. I mean, it's made for editing photographs, not pixelating game graphics.

[Deek2]

Gimp=rox. Just as useful as photoshop, and it's free .

[PsYcHoRaYmOnD]

entirely in ms paint....yes i realize its a bit small

[Ghost Pirate]

I use imageready