General Spriter's Showcase!

[Sir Sivelos]

Thank you for the critique! The first two were scratches I made in Photoshop, so there is bound to be SOMETHING wrong. And yes, I must admit, my faults with Hydraviary are in the wing placement and eyes. But the thing is, I arranged Hydreigon Parts and Braviary Parts into a form I liked, and then recolored it. So, I guess there can be some faults. I was actually thinking of making a rival to it called Braveigon, which is the opposite of Hydraviary: A Braviary but with Hydreigon parts. I dunno. XD

And as for Imperion, his shiny form was meant to reflect his original typing. He was Dark / Dragon when I first made him up; as it was kind of a rivalry between Celestion and Imperion. Y'know, the Benevolent Psychic/Dragon Celestion versus the Barbaric Dark/Dragon Imperion. But then I made it Ground versus Sky, but I wanted to focus on the fact that Celestion being CELESTIAL, as he was the Celestial Pokémon. So I made him Psychic, and then Fairy instead of Flying, kind of like how Lugia is psychic despite being the Guardian of the Sea. But yeah, the dark coloring for Shiny!Imperion was meant to reflect his original typing. :I

[Sir Sivelos]

Hahah, thanks. XD

Yeah, I remember a lot of people liked him. It's a shame the comments were removed, so I can't reminisce on it. But then again, the trolls REALLY abused the comments section, soooo... :I

[Pokeman]

Well, uhh... My first scratch. Yeah. I think it turned out pretty nice.

[Suicune's Fire]

Well, uhh... My first scratch. Yeah. I think it turned out pretty nice.

It's pretty good considering it's your first. :] In most places where you have bone-coloured parts, the outlines are a little too light. Like with the sprite itself, you have to shade outlines according to the light source. Most of your shading is pretty minimal and it's also hugging the outlines, which is not usually how you want to shade things. For instance, on the wings, you have layers of light, medium and then dark shading. If you have a look at this charizard sprite, you can see that the shading for the wings comes more in "sheets." It's a large blob of light shading, then on the dip where light wouldn't touch it, there's dark shading.



Replicating this is a good idea. :] For other parts of the shading, make sure you shape them according to whatever you're shading and also remember not to make it hug the outlines. It's important to shape your shading because that's what gives definition to the shapes you're shading. For example: look at that charizard's leg. The lighter shade is rounded over the thigh, then it drops off into a darker shading because there would be less light on that spot. It gives the effect of a shape. Taking a look at similar shapes on sprites will help you learn how better to shade. :] Nice job so far though!


~SF.

[TheoreticalSelkie]

So I made a fakemon while trying to work with the no banding restriction (mostly because I read that cluster thread over at Pixelation holy cow they're scary) and I think I've gotten it. Only problem is probably colors but it's a bit hard to change it because of how linked they are.

[SassySnivy]

So I made a fakemon while trying to work with the no banding restriction (mostly because I read that cluster thread over at Pixelation holy cow they're scary) and I think I've gotten it. Only problem is probably colors but it's a bit hard to change it because of how linked they are.

I feel that that page is great for learning more about unintended banding; however, I believe that some banding is inevitable. For example, the "Spelunky" character's nose. Before it was "fixed", any "banding" that was apparently there must have been so faint that you really had to look to be able to notice. By removing that one red pixel in the fix, the poster just made it worse: he made the curve look less smooth. I think banding should be avoided at all costs, but simultaneously I feel that if it isn't semi-immediately noticeable and either doesn't harm the piece in any way or even benefits it, you should not pick at those split ends to "fix" it in risk of making it look worse. I also still see one or two cases of banding that the author missed. They're ones caused by anti-aliasing, and aren't too hard to notice.
Otherwise, I love that page.

But I digress! Let's take a looksee...really, my major complaint is that there needs to be a buffer color between the "black" and the cloak's darkest brown. It's a slight difference, but I think it's worth a shot to see how it looks. Also, if you're using a color limit, what is it? If anything if you need to make room for a color, you could try to combine the skin color and the second-lightest flame color.

[TheoreticalSelkie]

I feel that that page is great for learning more about unintended banding; however, I believe that some banding is inevitable. For example, the "Spelunky" character's nose. Before it was "fixed", any "banding" that was apparently there must have been so faint that you really had to look to be able to notice. By removing that one red pixel in the fix, the poster just made it worse: he made the curve look less smooth. I think banding should be avoided at all costs, but simultaneously I feel that if it isn't semi-immediately noticeable and either doesn't harm the piece in any way or even benefits it, you should not pick at those split ends to "fix" it in risk of making it look worse. I also still see one or two cases of banding that the author missed. They're ones caused by anti-aliasing, and aren't too hard to notice.
Otherwise, I love that page.

But I digress! Let's take a looksee...really, my major complaint is that there needs to be a buffer color between the "black" and the cloak's darkest brown. It's a slight difference, but I think it's worth a shot to see how it looks. Also, if you're using a color limit, what is it? If anything if you need to make room for a color, you could try to combine the skin color and the second-lightest flame color.

Went back to the drawing board and tweaked some colors. I don't have a particular color limit, but it's pretty low. Actually with the color changes, I think it looks better defined. So that's a plus to me.

[SassySnivy]

That does indeed look a LOT better. :> It definitely has better definition now...and actually, its a little more readable this way, too.

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is the concept behind this Fakémon?

[TheoreticalSelkie]

@Speed-X
The concept was something like lantern with wings. It's a bird, but it's kinda not that apparent until I get around to concepting the evolutions and stuff. I honestly don't know how I got there, most of my sprites start that way. In any case... MUAHAHAHAH.

[SassySnivy]

I see! For some reason it reminded me of a mix between a furnace and those antique owl clocks. Sooooooo...I guess I'm wayy off the mark, then, lol. Nonetheless I look forward to seeing its evolution(s). :D