Shading advice

[Emera]

I've been playing around with graphics lately, recolouring images and adding to some, but I'd like to take it to the next level. I'm interested in getting to a stage where I'm comfortable with creating simple graphics that look good. Obviously, there has to be some sort of starting point. I've managed to create a decent looking (in my opinion) hat shape using the hat template provided in one of Bell's threads. I'm happy with it so far, and was playing around with adding shading. I'm pretty hopeless with it haha. Does anybody have any advice to give me about how I should go about adding shading to this image?

[Crow]

Haven't done any pixels for quite a while now, but maybe this can give you a general idea.

[Emera]

Originally Posted by Crow

Haven't done any pixels for quite a while now, but maybe this can give you a general idea.

Attachment 54324

That's really nice :O Well done! I'll look at that and try to figure something out. Thank you!
-
Had a play around with what you had going there, and I've come out with this.

[Felix_Xenophobe]

Originally Posted by Emera

That's really nice :O Well done! I'll look at that and try to figure something out. Thank you!
-
Had a play around with what you had going there, and I've come out with this.

needs more contrast

[Unkownsoldier]

Originally Posted by Felix_Xenophobe

needs more contrast

agreed, if you notice crow's hat has more definition, if you didn't tell me what yours was it could be confused with a metal cylinder.

[smirt362]

Originally Posted by Emera

That's really nice :O Well done! I'll look at that and try to figure something out. Thank you!
-
Had a play around with what you had going there, and I've come out with this.

Try something similar, but with hues slightly shifting over to blue like in Crow's example.

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by Crow

Haven't done any pixels for quite a while now, but maybe this can give you a general idea.

Attachment 54324

you have a grasp on the concept of shading but no so much with a set light source like graals. Your shading is not wrong but its considered pillow shading. (the devil)


the only problem here is if we look at the hat and try to find its light source. it is what we call "pillow shading" beacause the only way you can get light bright in the front of the hat but dark on the top is if you have a flashlight. or some kind of torche right between you and the hat.

If we use graals general light source its the sun at 45 degrees infront of the player in the sky.

all this to say that the TOP of the top hat needs to be lit up and the rim of the top hat. you have to be able to picture this concept in your mind.

[lavaman]

I recommend playing around with what I was told was called "Dithering".

I'm not sure if that's really what it is called so I made/uploaded a Sword of Dither and a Sword of not so Dither to show what I'm talking about.

[Crow]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

you have a grasp on the concept of shading but no so much with a set light source like graals. Your shading is not wrong but its considered pillow shading. (the devil)

I'm now aware that you don't seem to know anything about what you're trying to actually talk about. Thanks for the insight, I guess?

Originally Posted by lavaman

I recommend playing around with what I was told was called "Dithering".

Dithering also adds texture and should therefore not be used on materials that are not rough. Also, in the past, it was primarily used because of hardware limitations that did not allow a lot of colors. The artists created the illusion of more colors by dithering.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

you have a grasp on the concept of shading but no so much with a set light source like graals. Your shading is not wrong but its considered pillow shading. (the devil)


the only problem here is if we look at the hat and try to find its light source. it is what we call "pillow shading" beacause the only way you can get light bright in the front of the hat but dark on the top is if you have a flashlight. or some kind of torche right between you and the hat.

If we use graals general light source its the sun at 45 degrees infront of the player in the sky.

all this to say that the TOP of the top hat needs to be lit up and the rim of the top hat. you have to be able to picture this concept in your mind.

There's nothing wrong with his shading. Pillow shading is when you let the outline dictate your shading, not that the lightsource is from the front(just that a lightsource from the front rarely looks good anyways, and with certain shapes CAN create pillowshading). However while his lightsouce is somewhat from the front(though off to the side a bit) it doesn't hurt the piece here.

This would be pillowshading:



While I'm here I guess I'll post what I posted on the other forums:

First thing you can probably do to help this a lot is to work on the outline and form. For example since you're working with a small size it's probably best not to use lines to portray volume(such as the hem of the hat) and instead use lighting. A sharp jump from light to dark will imply a corner or edge.

Second, don't use pure greys unless you know what you're doing. A grey with a very light touch of hue looks much more pleasing to the eye. Typically when you're working with darks a hint of purple suits this well. In this instance blue could probably work, too.



After you work on those two things you can start shading. Try to avoid typical gradients. Get a little creative with it. For example typically shiny stuff(like a nice, shiny expensive tophat) could use "streaks" of highlights to make things a little more interesting. Also don't be afraid to play with these things a bit. For example instead of making the highlight go straight down you can make it taper off and disappear. This implies a conic shape to the hat and works with its shape to make it look more interesting than a very stiff hat, even if the lines still imply its edges are straight.

Don't be afraid to break away from the norm or logic to get creative, especially since it's for Graal that implements a cartoony style. You can often break off and do things that wouldn't make sense logically and it still looks nice and fits.

[geneticfrog]

it was acutally a good example of pillow shading but this guy dusti always has something negetive to say no matter what you post apparantly.

just beacause the pillow shading wasnt applied EXACTLY HOW DUSTI SAIS to all surfaces doesnt mean its not pillow shaded on some surfaces that it was applied to...... -_-

[Bam112]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

it was acutally a perfect example of pillow shading but this guy dusti always has something to say no matter what you post.

just beacause the pillow shading wasnt applied to all surfaces doesnt mean its not pillow shading.....

Dusty*

[Crow]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

just beacause the pillow shading wasnt applied EXACTLY HOW DUSTI SAIS to all surfaces doesnt mean its not pillow shaded on some surfaces..... -_-

Pillow shading can be compared to radial gradients. I didn't do that on any surfaces.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

it was acutally a good example of pillow shading but this guy dusti always has something negetive to say no matter what you post apparantly.

What I posted was not negative, and this is the root of what the hell is wrong with you posting. You misinterpret logic and reason as someone being "negative" or that it's something personal. I disagreed with your post, but that doesn't mean it's negative until you make it out to be. Then things go downhill.

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

just beacause the pillow shading wasnt applied EXACTLY HOW DUSTI SAIS to all surfaces doesnt mean its not pillow shaded on some surfaces that it was applied to...... -_-

Except it's not pillowshading and that absolutely nothing is wrong with Crow's edit. In fact it has the same exact shading as mines except it has more buffer shades.

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

"'pillow shading', a great evil spoken of by pixel artists in hushed tones. It is the work of the devil, and appears to assume a single point light source hanging directly between us and our object. "

since there was no brightness ontop of the hat you showed us. yet it was bright infront of the hat. i can only assume the light source was applied as a pillowshading light source.

No, that is NOT what pillowshading is. Like I said before, a lightsouce between the viewer and the object CAN create pillowshading, but not always. It's generally frowned upon to use that lightsource because it's a poor choice and often does create pillow shading, but that is not what pillowshading actually is. When you choose a lightsource between the viewer and a sphere it creates pillowshading because you light the sphere from the center outwards. However if you were to choose this same lightsource with an isometric cube it would not create pillowshading because the lightsource does not agree with the outline and volume of the cube. Not that Crow's hat uses this lightsource at all.

This is where things differ, and why pillowshading is actually when an artist is unfamiliar with volume and lets their shading follow the outline of an object rather than actually using any lightsource at all.

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

What I posted was not negative, and this is the root of what the hell is wrong with you posting. You misinterpret logic and reason as someone being "negative" or that it's something personal. I disagreed with your post, but that doesn't mean it's negative until you make it out to be. Then things go downhill.


Except it's not pillowshading and that absolutely nothing is wrong with Crow's edit. In fact it has the same exact shading as mines except it has more buffer shades.

acutally the front of the hat was bright and had a light source.

the rim had a second light source from a seperate area.

the top of the hat was dark still and thus the light source was in between you and the object.

a form of pillow shading in my book. but again you are never right when dusti is around.( here comes another giant pile of text)

[Crow]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

acutally the front of the hat was bright and had a light source.

the rim had a second light source from a seperate area.

the top of the hat was dark still and thus the light source was in between you and the object.

a form of pillow shading in my book. but again you are never right when dusti is around.

The rim is lit from the exact same light source as the cylindric part of the hat, just not as drastically. The top is lit up as well, again, not as drastically. I overdid my highlights and didn't use bright enough tones on both the rim and the top part. That still doesn't make it pillow shading, and I don't even feel bad about it, because I'm not a graphics guy; I'm a coder.

I actually feel good about it, because I know more about graphics than you do, and it shows. Hooray!

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by Crow

The rim is lit from the exact same light source as the cylindric part of the hat, just not as drastically. The top is lit up as well, again, not as drastically. I overdid my highlights and didn't use bright enough tones on both the rim and the top part. That still doesn't make it pillow shading, and I don't even feel bad about it, because I'm not a graphics guy; I'm a coder.

I actually feel good about it, because I know more about graphics than you do, and it shows. Hooray!

the bright spot o the rim is slightly to the left= the light source is slighly to the left.

the middle part is fully centred = light source is DIRECTLY between you and the object.

the top was dark = tells me theres no source of light in the sky above the hat.

but w/e floats your boat.

[salesman]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

it was acutally a good example of pillow shading but this guy dusti always has something negetive to say no matter what you post apparantly.

just beacause the pillow shading wasnt applied EXACTLY HOW DUSTI SAIS to all surfaces doesnt mean its not pillow shaded on some surfaces that it was applied to...... -_-

Just because someone doesn't share your viewpoint doesn't mean they are being negative. Don't take everything so personally. If you opened up your mind a little bit, you might actually learn something from him.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

acutally the front of the hat was bright and had a light source.

the rim had a second light source from a seperate area.

the top of the hat was dark still and thus the light source was in between you and the object.

a form of pillow shading in my book. but again you are never right when dusti is around.

Just because the front of the hat is lighter than the top does not mean that it the lightsource is coming from directly in front. This is where you're failing at interpreting lightsources. It simply means that the lightsource is SOMEWHERE below the 90degree mark. Also the highlight is slightly to the right of the the tophat.

A gate I made for iClassic:

Would you call that pillowshading? Because the front of the gate is lighter than the top.

[MattKan]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

A gate I made for iClassic:

Well that explains a lot.

[geneticfrog]

"'pillow shading', a great evil spoken of by pixel artists in hushed tones. It is the work of the devil, and appears to assume a single point light source hanging directly between us and our object. "

since there was no brightness ontop of the hat you showed us. yet it was bright infront of the hat. i can only assume the light source was applied as a pillowshading light source.

[geneticfrog]

LOL i was looking at emeras hat -_-....(got back from my friends.. lots of alcohol...) he def has two light sources...

but either way crows light source is still really low its like pointing a flash light at it.

generally for graal the sun is the main source of light in the sky or even indoors the light is still on the cieling so the top fo the hat would need to be brighter.

[Crow]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

generally for graal

Three words that don't go into a sentence when it comes to graphics. Graal graphics are all over the place anyway.

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by Crow

Three words that don't go into a sentence when it comes to graphics. Graal graphics are all over the place anyway.

you can do what ever you want.

but in my book the light source is based on the tileset mainly. even at that i still like making my light source slightly to the right, in the sky.(sun)

I find it promotes a better look in the GFX.

[Crow]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

you can do what ever you want.

Exactly. And the position of my light source won't ever magically turn my shading into pillow shading.

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by Crow

Exactly. And the position of my light source won't ever magically turn my shading into pillow shading.

the source is still directly infront of you and the object.

this is frowned uppon in the gfx world. other then for special cases of course.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

you can do what ever you want.

but in my book the light source is based on the tileset mainly. even at that i still like making my light source slightly to the right. (the sun)

The lightsource of pics1 actually is not to the left nor right. It's directly above, and somewhat to the front of the world. This is derived from LttP. This is why shadows from the cliffs are only cast from behind the cliffs, and not to the side.



There are some abnormalities, like houses casting shadows to the right(implying a lightsource from the left), but even those same houses the roofs are lighter in the front than the sides(implying a top-front lightsource). This is all applicable to pics1 and Graal as well, but none of the tileset or default graphics imply a lightsource from the RIGHT.

Also, since Zelda/Graal is a 3/4th perspective(viewing the world from 45degrees up) this would mean that the lightsource is between the viewer and the world

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

The lightsource of pics1 actually is not to the left nor right. It's directly above, and somewhat to the front of the world. This is derived from LttP. This is why shadows from the cliffs are only cast from behind the cliffs, and not to the side.



There are some abnormalities, like houses casting shadows to the right(implying a lightsource from the left), but even those same houses the roofs are lighter in the front than the sides(implying a top-front lightsource). This is all applicable to pics1 and Graal as well, but none of the tileset or default graphics imply a lightsource from the RIGHT.

Also, since Zelda/Graal is a 3/4th perspective(viewing the world from 45degrees up) this would mean that the lightsource is between the viewer and the world

then again if the LAT put shadows on both sides of the house and the back too it wouldn' be so abnormal. (if the tileset allows)

also the heads on graal the standard ones all the side views are look directly at the head instead of 45 degrees up. there are tons of hats that also show this.

while the back and the front generally are up the sky at 45.

BUT as a whole we can agree the sun is USUALLY the main light source and its in the sky if no light sources are defined before hand.

[lavaman]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

the lightsource is between the viewer and the world

The lightsource is NOT between the viewer and the world,
YOU ARE THE LIGHT SOURCE...

Like a god of the sun watching down upon his/her subjects, observing their meager lives.
With their fruitless toiling you feel pity, lending a helping hand and setting them off on a life of grand adventure.

Leading your subject on through perilous caves and dark dungeons, growing stronger with each trip.
You soon do all their is to do, as strong as they can get, and saved all the people you can save.
Nothing left to do but to send your hero to turn on their fellow adventures.

However with time, weariness and boredom grows.
It grows and it grows... to the point you can bare no longer.
Abandoned and neglected,
the fame you granted your subject fades away and eventually withers to nothing...

Cast from your favor, returning them to the life you once sought to liberate them from.
Shrouded in darkness, cursed to spend eternity in the abyss of nothing, away from your bright gaze.

[DustyPorViva]

Take your opinions here: http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php

Let me know how that goes; that's all I have to say about this. You're speaking things that sound as if you're pulling it directly out of your ass. In all my years of making graphics and being in art communities I have never heard of any of these views you seem so fond of. I am but one person applying my own knowledge that I have learned from many, and you are certain you are too. But I'd like to see how your views stand up with actual art communities full of professional artists instead of bull****ting around here.

[geneticfrog]

dramatic or what.....

in the end all i really said(meant to say since i confused the GFX for a minute) was crows GFX looks like there is a light source directly infront of the hat.... and that is generally frowed uppon for graal servers or in general... beside special cases....

also that the sun is usually the light source on graal so thats why i find it doesnt match graals style.

i also implied i personally like to make GFX with a overhead lightsource slightly to the right beacause that how i learned. i like going from brigh to dark instead of having brigh in the middle and dark on each side.

its not wrong having crows light source but i just find it uglier then it could be. I like dustys hat gfx over all. the overhead left light source looks much nicer.

sue me!

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

dramatic or what.....

in the end all i really said(meant to say since i confused the GFX for a minute) was crows GFX looks like there is a light source directly infront of the hat.... and that is generally frowed uppon for graal servers or in general... beside special cases....

also that the sun is usually the light source on graal so thats why i find it doesnt match graals style.

i also implied i personally like to make GFX with a overhead lightsource slightly to the right beacause that how i learned. i like going from brigh to dark instead of having brigh in the middle and dark on each side.

its not wrong having crows light source but i just find it uglier then it could be. I like dustys hat gfx over all. the overhead left light source looks much nicer.

sue me!

And this is the problem. The only thing you've done so far is to go into threads and **** on people who are actually trying to help. All the while you're not helping ANYONE at all. You have an elitist attitude about art all the while apparently not knowing a ****ing thing about it. And yes, this is a negative post; a negative post directed at a negative person.

You're not helpful, you're not constructive, and you're not ****ing welcome here.

[Fulg0reSama]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

And this is the problem. The only thing you've done so far is to go into threads and **** on people who are actually trying to help. All the while you're not helping ANYONE at all. You have an elitist attitude about art all the while apparently not knowing a ****ing thing about it. And yes, this is a negative post; a negative post directed at a negative person.

Allow me to shorten this for ya Dusty.

Click here to figure Jer out!

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

And this is the problem. The only thing you've done so far is to go into threads and **** on people who are actually trying to help. All the while you're not helping ANYONE at all. You have an elitist attitude about art all the while apparently not knowing a ****ing thing about it. And yes, this is a negative post; a negative post directed at a negative person.

You're not helpful, you're not constructive, and you're not ****ing welcome here.

you act like you own the forums.

i'll post what ever i want bro.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by geneticfrog

you act like you own the forums.

i'll post what ever i want bro.

Never said you couldn't post, and I didn't tell you to gtfo. You're simply not welcome; though I'm not arrogant enough to say that I speak on behalf of any others.

[geneticfrog]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

Never said you couldn't post, and I didn't tell you to gtfo. You're simply not welcome; though I'm not arrogant enough to say that I speak on behalf of any others.

you are in no possition to decide who is and is not welcome.

thanks for your opinion none the less.

[geneticfrog]

thanks for your opinion.

[Crow]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

though I'm not arrogant enough to say that I speak on behalf of any others.

Oh, oh! Here! *raises hand* Me, me! You certainly speak on behalf of me, and probably quite some others as well.

[maximus_asinus]

If Dusty were running for mayor of this forum, I would vote for him. I think he represents the majority of this forum. This Jer is not welcome on our forums!

[geneticfrog]

drama drama drama island.

great joke about dusty as a mayor, I love a good laugh.