STE'86

LOL Emkay you really are a dick aren't you? if you had actually bothered to look at csdb, you would immediately see that many of the pics WERE done by a "starter"... ME. STE'86 csdb page my total time doing c64 graphics "back in the day" (bar 1 pic) fits into about 2.5 years. some of us moved on back then and havent had the "advantage" of dicking around with the same 8 bit computer for 25 years. you would also see that my final c64 entry was sept 1989 and i didnt go "active" again till sept 2010. so all your previous nonesense about us being "c64 freaks (sic)" is a bit nonsensical seeing as neither Pete nor myself made it out of the 80's doing c64 "scene" stuff. oh and as to the "immediate launch" conversion, the mid grey is far too dark and is totally overpowered by the white and the others are too close on the luma scale to provide a decent depth of field. lighten it up. Steve

really? and as one who probably more than most has had his sig removed from his stuff by multiple demo groups over the last 25 years i can tell you it gets right on my tits. and as I and i have to say most on here seem to agree to, why the hell should i have to embed a sig on MY art in order for it to survive a conversion by some numpty who hasnt the talent to draw it for themselves? Steve

err point of order here... if nobody "cared" then your little piece of retroland wouldnt exist would it? obviously people still care ow we wouldnt be producing new art for 25 year old machines would we? Steve

I'll tell you what... i would rather see them and more like them in any post from you than ANY amount of half arsed c64 port jobs. particularly when you remove the real artist's sig which is incredibly insulting. So please carry on posting your own art, i dont care if it's totally original or copied from a "real life" source/poster whatever. as long as its been touched by your own hand and not simply a "wire job" you will certainly get no disparaging remarks from me. Edit: you see if you do your own stuff you learn, you get better. Hell i can even teach, which would make a few people raise their eyebrows on here. Steve

positive atari vibe? when 85% of the pictures on here are convertsthat have had their original artists sigs deleted? how is that positive? positive is when people on here are creating their own artwork on the a8 to add colour to i would think. as i have been trying to get people on here to do actually. and thats basically RAM and Tezz really isnt it? Steve

you know emkay i might be alot more impressed by your 1991 "prowess" if they werent c64 images u have "converted" and removed the sigs on. why the hell is someone who never appears to have ever drawn a pixel on his own in his life so interested in a graphics app anyway? really, why do u care if it works or not? if all you intend to do with it is steal c64 images and pass them off then i think a fully working g2f would be totally wasted on you. Steve

as pete said, the blade is blue because there is only ONE shade of grey on the amstrad. in fact contrary to certain peoples practically baseless opinions on here, the amstrad colour set is no great shakes. true is very bright and saturated, but it has colours that are wasted because they are almost duplicates of each other and of the colours that are available only really the blue set can be made to "ramp". which is why most amstrad games are predominantly blue. the lack of a grey ramp is particularly a problem i find. true, it's nice to draw in because there are no colour placement restrictions ( a bit like a lo res ST). but in all honesty i feel the same now as i did then: that i wouldnt trade the c64 colour palette for the amstrad one. except maybe the red Steve

here's an amstrad version thats converted from the c64 but had an artists touch to help it along a bit (me)

what "artist" are you talking about? the pic still has dokks name on it. dokk never did an amstrad screen in his life it's a port job. same as g2f only to the amstrad. which is a boatload easier i can tell you so again i say there was no "artistic decision" Steve

LOL emkay you realise why the amstrad version substitutes a blue scale for a grey one right? well maybe u don't? possibly if you didnt live in your own insular little world, you would know that the Amstrad always uses blue scales in substitiute for grey ones because it only has ONE grey. thats the story. no artistic reason. simple reality, it hasnt got a decent greyscale. you see when u have actually worked on other platforms (like myself and other on here) you tend to pick up such knowledge thru practical experience. Steve

great stuff. lets make it look even more monochrome. now we're getting there... it's beginning to look just like a normal a8 chroma/luma ramped "mono" pic now this is precisely the result of people getting obssesive in the use of ramped colour fades when the machines can do it. just like the st and amiga artists did when those machine first arrived. Steve

yeah you do that Emkay and if you overwhelm g2f like you do the pokey, chances are we'll all go fcking blind. Steve

If I could live with a coloured frame, the result would be more similar. Please note that I also have not used any mid-line changes, which also mean an improvement, especially in the 'critical' section. It was an interesting task as there are several places where the C64 colour clashes are rather obvious. As a funny side-note, you aren't able to port the image back to the C64, achieving the A8 look. As a final result, I strengthen my initial statement, that working on original art makes not only more fun, but is also more useful. Do you remember: http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/134852-atari-v-commodore/page__st__10850__p__1861936?do=findComment&comment=1861936? The chicken... and as my side note i would like to say... dokk would have done that pic in about 10 hours and its taken over 2 weeks to wire it and not have it look as good. thanks for trying tho. i did say it was a valiant effort. Steve

one problem. this ISN'T atari art. there is no atari version. THIS IS C64 ART. Steve

i think thats a pretty resounding "NO" from me good tutorial tho. its a valiant effort but its not as good as dokks original. sorry. especially considering the effort involved to do the a8 version compared to the c64. also bearing in mind you actually needed a c64 original in order to ddo the a8 conversion in the first place. all this says to me tho is stop trying to replicate complex c64 stuff and draw stuff your machine CAN do. Steve

love the sepia one. captures the spirit of the the original "raiders" book cover and poster. but a totally different pose obviously. have you done any other stuff? 2nd post on AA doesnt "gel" with such an accomplished image. it feels like i am looking at someones stuff i should recognise even actually Pete has just said via messenger that he thinks some of the dithering style on the image makes it look like I did the pic. but i'm "pretty" sure i didnt if you have more please post them. kudos to you for drawing and posting an image of someone very recognisable to the viewers. many these days seem very unwilling to art based on recognisable subjects. Steve

oh FFS somebody post the obvious answer????? no??? ok then i will. because Druid 2 the game existed on the c64 and not the A8. and it was a loading screen see how easy was that to answer? next!. Steve

right ok for the benefit of the whole thread in one concise post... YES it is pixel perfect, the technique used was probably ROTOSCOPING using PS, PSP, GIMP whatever u want. they can all let you do it. It is the same technique that illustrators and animators the world over use to transfer photographs to their media and have done for 60 odd years. it allows you perfect accuracy in laying out your design, but still requires you to actually pixel it in by hand. I have absolutely no doubt that it IS hand pixelled because i have spent time since my return to 8 bit trying to get PS to convert stuff seamlessly to the 8 bit platform and i can honestly say that u cant. it still looks as bloody awful when you convert now with no artistic intervention and talent, as it did 20 years ago when people first tried on the 16 bits. i also know that SIT had no need to "cheat" in any form because he could do it 20 years ago so there is no reason he couldnt now. the modern technology has, i have found just made life easier by letting you do things faster, more accurately and lets you experiment more than in the old days. oh and that pics looks just as impressive (possibly even more so) when converted "Juno" style in white,light green, dark green and brown. you remember Juno, Emkay? that was another c64 pic by Bob you ripped off without crediting for your game Steve

oh this could be good...

yeah it looks really nice in blues (you were right Pete you called it exactly right when you said what he would do. i owe you a fiver) and as well as looking nice its also pathetically lame to change a sig on something that you have just converted. Steve

oh here we go tweedle de has arrived to back up tweedle dum. must you persist in trying to goad me into a vs thread yet again you pathetic little man? i will not be baited into a vs thread by you or any other muppet frequenting these boards when i am trying to TEACH and ENCOURAGE people to use this machine. why dont you bugger off and actually make something constructive on this, your preferred machine? "walk the walk" instead of "talking the talk" as they say.

emkay i have no interest in entering a "pissing contest" with u on the relative merits of being able to display all available colours vs 4 in bitmap mode without programming trickery. and i could post you DOZENS of c64 images that g2f wouldnt have a hope in hell of converting and you know it. i am however trying to encourage anyone reading this who may be interested in doing graphics on the a8, that they CAN do quality graphics in only 4 or 5 colours, and not to feel hamstrung by not having the g2f or programming knowledge to add more colour themselves. if u feel that art u posted is of quality, why dont you have a go at something similar. at least then you will turn from a "talker" to a "doer" but if you think that pic is in the same ballpark, quality wise as Golem, you are dreaming. Steve

aha as if to illustrate my point about greyscale, this was in the x2010 compo theres very little to prevent Atari would be artists tackling stuff like this. Steve ok i know its got white in too but i'm pretty sure G2F in auto would cope

hmm... I can't see how something which gets people actually doing something instead of just talking about it is ever a waste of resources. if nothing else it may have inspired someone else to have a crack at using g2f. and god knows you need a few more active "doers" on here. Steve

most designers would call photoshop PS and paintshop PSP (paintshop pro) however, most of the apps are fairly interchangeable PS, PSP and GIMP all do pretty much the same kind of stuff in this scenario, with photoshop only being any more advanced when designing for print. (however as tezz said, with gimp being able to do layered indexed colour, it is more advanced than photoshop for 8 bit graphics) Steve edit with GIMP obviously having the tremendous advantage of being able to import all the photoshop layered files AND being FREE