And thank you for being so humble as to oblige by the rules. We don't have many users with a nice mindset such as yours, and we definitely appreciate the generous users who are kind enough to follow rules, without being so defensive.

P.s., love your style(your first submitted piece reminds me of a style similar to another user on the site named "Wolverine"), and hope to see more of your stuff in the future. : )

Ok, thanks, I didnt know about that (color reducing/diffusion = not acceptable). What I meant about the size was, that if I shrunk it down to about 50%, then I would be in control of the placement of every pixel *for sure*, whereas, with a larger piece, you may be more inclined to use shortcuts, like I did, and it would be obvious. Thanks again for feedback, it's good to know the site is stringent on requirements like this.

   No, size of a piece doesn't make it pixelart. It's the means that usually determine it. From you recent comment, you've claimed to use several "dirty" tools not associated with the site's belief in what Pixel art is. ie, any automatic tool that loses control of the pixel, isn't what is desired, or considered pixel art. Now that doesn't mean you're restricted to just the pencil tool. Just feel that the other tools aren't necessary for pixelart. Also, color reducing, diffusion is definitely not acceptable here. Will be sending back for revision.

I definitely didn't place every pixel one-by-one, but I did go over the whole thing with a fine-tooth comb making it sharper and refined at 2x/4x by hand. Initially, I did the outlines and shading with a tablet, and then I colorized it, and then converted it multiple times with diffusion, tweaking the settings, and posterized also to reduce the colors. Maybe it's too converted looking to be considered pixel-art? I hope not. I always thought most larger-sized pixel-art were done this way. I suppose if I shrunk it to 50% and worked on it that way, it would have turned out more "true" pixel-art. Well, I will take this into consideration in future work, ...still learning.

Interesting colors. It looks good, but got a feel of conversion on it. If its pixeled from the scratch then you got my respect.

Yeah, he does look rather flat... like a sticker o_O I think it's because there's no highlight in the legs around the thigh area, like you mentioned about the parts without folds, Quake. Thanks for the comment on the shirt color, Lollige, I think I will keep it that way then... As for the arms, should I extend the elbow down, or bring the wrist down? Keep in mind the gauntlets on the gloves might be making them look short... If I could get some additional critique on them, that'd be great. I played a little of the first Fable and maybe he was inspired a little from that character, subconsciously.

Looks amazingly like the protagonist off fable..

I really like this :]

I think it looks flat because, although you've focused on the lighting with folds that's it.. You haven't made the light source on the parts without folds. And even if you have, they're not too clear since the folds take your eyes away because they look soo cool xD

Amazing stuff! Somehow he looks a bit flat, but I really love the colors you have chosen, especially on the shirt!
I however believe also that his arms are a bit short.