Print Page | Close Window

Own Pixelart definition

Printed From: Pixel Joint
Category: The Lounge
Forum Name: Diversions
Forum Discription: Get to know your fellow pixel freaks. Chat about anything to do with video games, comic books, anime, movies, television, books, music, sports or any other off topic bs you can think of.
URL: http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11907
Printed Date: 16 November 2019 at 2:47pm


Topic: Own Pixelart definition
Posted By: Taijj
Subject: Own Pixelart definition
Date Posted: 30 March 2011 at 5:26am
Hi there Pixeljoint,

I am currently writeing an essay about pixelart. For this I collect information of course. I now want to ask you, how you woul define Pixelart as an Artstyle. What is Pixelart for you?

This is not an attempt to get you to make my work! I am interested in YOUR opinions about pixelart. What do YOU THINK Pixelart is. Please try not to use a wiki. Try to find definitions on your own.

Thanks!



Replies:
Posted By: tanuki
Date Posted: 30 March 2011 at 9:19am
Pixel
A very technical and very manual process of building an image with the smallest, most basic building blocks. Tools that alter pixels by the computer's decision and take control out of the hands of the artist shouldn't be used because when the artist is in complete control a level of detail and crispness is possible that would not be if left to the computer. Great amounts of attention are placed both on the usage of color and the placement of it. There is also usually attention placed on the conservation of space required to define details.


Art
This is communication that converts imagination, thoughts, emotions, events, stories, or perspectives from one person into an experienceable form that can then be transfered into the imagination of another person with specific attention given to the aesthetic quality of that transfer. It is a purposefully shared experience with the viewers and is not art until it is shared.


Pixel Art
Using finely controlled pixels as a medium to aesthetically express something, usually a story, to a viewer. It makes intentional use of pixels as the chosen medium as opposed to other forms of digital art that only just happen use pixels because it's what the technology for those tools is built around.


Posted By: cure
Date Posted: 30 March 2011 at 4:39pm
Hey Taijj. I don't want to write up a new response, but check out the http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11299&PID=139318#139318 - "what is pixel art?" section of the pixel art tutorial found here in the forums.


Posted By: Taijj
Date Posted: 04 April 2011 at 3:49am
Hey, thank you guys!^^


Posted By: cure
Date Posted: 04 April 2011 at 11:41am
As an aside, defining pixel art is a much smaller task than defining art. I'd disagree with tanuki's definition, in that I think art can function as personal expression and mustn't necessarily communicate with anyone (is it art when no one's looking at it?) Trapped on a desert island with a crate full of paint, no matter how hard I tried, I could never create art by that definition. An argument could be made for that definition of art, but any definition of art necessarily marginalizes it. Tough to put borders on such a broad and abstract concept, the entire field of aesthetics in philosophy is essentially an attempt to define art, so the best one could hope for is a functional definition for specific, practical purposes.

What makes pixel art different from other mediums is a much more attainable goal, though it occurs along a cline along with oekaki and digital painting, so the borders are still slightly hazy.


Posted By: tanuki
Date Posted: 04 April 2011 at 2:52pm
My basic idea is like this comparison-
Sounds on their own are meaningless, but when heard by another person who ascribes meaning to them and calls them words then communication can occur. Before those sounds are expressed and received by someone else they were only internal thought. If received by someone who ascribes no meaning to them they are only noise. Communication by nature requires more than one person, because communication by function is the bridging of the gap between people.

Art bridges that same gap in a variety of ways, including through the use of words. The difference between art and plain communication through purely informative language is that art, by nature, regards aesthetics with some degree of importance and gives it attention.

I would agree that defining art does tend to marginalize it. I remember when I was in college taking a class in art theory of the 20th century, which had a very thick textbook including the essays and manifestos of many artists and critics, and I thought that it was filled with pompous people whose own definitions of art always conveniently included their own work. It is of course possible that I do the same thing, but to me art that is not shared is essentially daydreaming.



Not to undermine myself, but there's a second approach to art that I think has some validity. The ancient Greeks considered art as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimesis - Memesis , the act of imitation through reproduction and representation. The idea of memesis isn't something I'm overly familiar with mainly because most of my college professors were very focused on the concept of art having to have meaning rather than be an exposition of aesthetics. That's not exactly what memesis is, but it is heavily focused on ideas of imitation of nature and perfection of beauty. My college professors were more interested in the role that art plays in culture, society, and politics and the use of art to affect change in those. So that's mostly what I learned about. Personally I was more interested in art as narrative.

Even so, art made through memesis is meant to be shared with others. For example, music doesn't sound good until it is heard and food doesn't taste good until it is eaten. Art doesn't look good, and therefor has no aesthetic, and therefor is not art, until it is seen. While possible for someone to admire their own art, thereby eliminating the function of bridging the gap between people, excessive self admiration leads to narcissism. I think it's healthier to be simply pleased with your our work while admiring more so the work of others, of nature, and of God.

By the way, my BFA thesis was on interactive and explorative art made possible with digital media. My final project was an illustrated website of a fantasy world people could explore by clicking on key locations. Some would take them to another part of that world and some would present a brief illustrated story that happens in that place.



Print Page | Close Window