Strange rejection of work
Printed From: Pixel Joint
Category: The Lounge
Forum Name: Resources and Support
Forum Discription: Help your fellow pixel artists out with links to good tutorials, other forums, software, fonts, etc. Bugs and support issues should go here as well.
URL: https://pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21685
Printed Date: 12 September 2025 at 2:12am
Topic: Strange rejection of work
Posted By: aturbidflow
Subject: Strange rejection of work
Date Posted: 04 March 2015 at 2:01am
|
Cordially hello there.
I have a problem with rejection of my work: http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92716.htm#c507883 - http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92716.htm#c507883 I can't get the idea why it was rejected. It managed to get 3 favs & 2 good comments. In system message was said that "submission does not meet our quality standards or the art needs revision for some miscellaneous reason". I guess that some moderator thought that it is WIP, but it's terrible mistake. It's fully completed art and not need any changes at all. It's finished. Correct me, if I wrong. Thank you in advance, sorry for my english. |
Replies:
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 04 March 2015 at 4:54am
|
It is so rough and dirty on the pixel level that it does seem unfinished :/ ------------- |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 04 March 2015 at 5:41am
| Raw and dirty? Sorry, I don't understand what do you mean =) It is so styled. Solid colors, a bit of noise. Could you please explain? |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 05 March 2015 at 5:33am
|
You are still a new member and its entirely possible that you are submitting pixels out of order when they were created. I never (I really do try) consider style, theme, subject matter, look and feel and anything else when reviewing submissions. I only focus on pixel technique and patterns and habits of pixels judged on the artists other work. I find your work confusing and hard to review. You currently have the top spot on the WS and this pixel shows some degree of uncontrolled pixelling. http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92985.htm">  These 2 pixels are very dirty and frankly do not match the skill of the pixel above and I would likely never think the same person made them. Especially the face one :/ http://www.pixeljoint.com/files/icons/full/bluebird.png">  http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92987.htm"> This portrait shows much more control than the 3 above and on the pixel level its real hard to consolidate with the above. The 1st (WS) shows no where near the skill level this does. http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/93140.htm">  All the animal pixels with the look below use great technique and are super clean and great work. I don't understand why this level of skill is missing in the above pixels unless these are your latest work and the above is older work. http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92808.htm">  Same applies to your blue series of pixels http://www.pixeljoint.com/files/icons/poseidon__r1455542081.png">  The band scene is decent but these 2 have sloppy and dirty work that is also hard to see the same person pixelling because there are pixel placement decisions that just seem odd when other pixels show good decisions. http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92715.htm">  http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92716.htm"> I find this to be a 'mess' when judging against all your other pixels  Here the banding and almost NPA coloring is crazy and I am honestly surprise another Mod chose to add to the gallery. http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/92714.htm">  I am in no way making any accusations or anything negative about you or your work. Your gallery is just really hard to review. ------------- |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 05 March 2015 at 5:59am
|
Oh, wow, thank you for spending so much time on me. Sorry for distrurbing, but I'm very happy that you answered me.
I can describe everything you can't understand. It's just depends on that every work was made in extremely different ways. For example, "bird" and "face" - it's "redraw" of original hand-drawed images and I had to made this arts most similar to the originals. Another way: "Magic forest", or "Wintertale". It was made a little bit "grungy" cuz I love this style. I draw the same way in digital paintings. Such way adds some... hmmm... I can't get right word, let it be "liveliness". And the last way is #pixeltattoo series, wich was cleared ten times per image, cuz it have to be clean & simple in case it will be made as tattoo on skin. I am very grateful to you for your great answer, but I still have one question: can I return "Wintertale" as is to gallery? Despite the answer, I'm really really impressed by your answer and thank you very much indeed! |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 05 March 2015 at 2:50pm
|
While I asked no question directly I did make comments that merited some feedback in order to get a better understanding of what pixels you submit that meet your own standard.
I honestly would reject half of your work as of now for failing your own demonstrated skills but don't want to be unfair either :/ ------------- |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 06 March 2015 at 3:53am
|
So, if I understood right, I was wrong that made profile here. Cuz I guess I originally get the idea of the site wrong. I thought it's just a community of pixelart artists with each own galleries.
I'm sorry, thank you for your patient explanation, sorry for my misunderstanding. Best wishes. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 06 March 2015 at 5:07am
|
No. THIS IS a community of pixelartists each with their own gallery to showcase their pixels. 'Community' implies that members are more savvy and into the medium of pixelart than a gallery where multiple artforms are showcased therefore it has higher standards or rather a more purist take. ------------- |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 06 March 2015 at 8:24am
|
Yeah, right. I got it. So, anyway there is "standards" of pixelart that some of my arts doesn't fit. Cause they were made in other way and with other... purposes? goals? Sorry, my english is ne ochen. I got it.
And sorry for angered you, if I understood your emotions correctly. Thats all my questions. Thank you very much. |
Posted By: StoneStephenT
Date Posted: 06 March 2015 at 3:13pm
|
The people here at Pixeljoint do have a rather strict set of standards, but they hold such standards to ensure that the gallery doesn’t get overrun with non-pixel art or low-quality pixel art. If your work receives a rejection notice, you should take that as a sign that your work needs…well, work. The WIP part of this forum exists for you to receive feedback on your work as you make progress on it. We also have a sizeable amount of resources thanks to the stickied threads on the Resources part of this forum. Your work shows a huge amount of promise, and I hope you take what jalonso has told you to heart. You can do better, I want you to do better, and I believe you will do better.  |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 07 March 2015 at 1:16am
| Yes! Thank you, of course I will do better and better further. I just was upset for rejecting work I don't want to redraw, cuz it finished. But new arts will be cooler and more complicated. I get the idea of the community. Thanks eveyone in this thread. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 08 March 2015 at 8:47am
|
Originally posted by aturbidflow ...I just was upset for rejecting work I don't want to redraw, cuz it finished. But new arts will be cooler and more complicated... Its not about cooler or even complicated or anything like that. I have only mentioned the technique on certain pieces that do not match the skill level you show in other pieces. I understand your feeling that a piece is finished but any art is really only finished when viewers see it. Because PJ is a community of people into pixels on the pixel level then some pieces are not likely to be received as complete. I'm going to make a visual for you using the original pixel you asked about, k. ------------- |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 09 March 2015 at 6:18am
|
I really dislike it when new members get upset, confused or hurt in any
way because we only try to help and encourage while maintaining a
certain level of quality standard for the gallery and to preserve the
pixelart artform in as pure a way as possible. I understand when any artist 'feel' they are done with a piece but this is not always the case. This pixel is just unacceptable for the gallery (the car has similar issues and the tree is likely to have even more problems when I inspect later today.) The image below shows in red areas and pixels where you used semi transparencies or have artifacts that 'on the pixel level' are wrong and by themselves invalidate this pixel as pixelart (incomplete). Perhaps in another gallery these few pixels don't really matter because you have to get into the pixel level to even see what's going on. The PJ gallery however is all about the technical and the precision of pixels and not about the art or subject matter. PJers enjoy the work but learn and truly admire when zooming and inspecting. The white arrows point to stray pixels that show lack of control and care and while not exactly wrong or bad it is poor form and in this case because the overall technique is simplistic they stand out as poor work or just lazy pixelling. The big white circle really is about the dithering/texture/blend you were going for. Its random and not the prettiest and really does show lazy behaviour. This is not that terrible a thing and I don't mind it on certain pixels but do in yours because your other work shows you are far more skilled than this represents. We never judge any pixel against any other person's pixels but we do judge against your own work and this sloppiness is uncool from you. Lastly, the right side shows nothing more than my edit of your work where hopefully (me not being you) illustrates how there is no difference in the pixel overall but is clean, deliberate and controlled. Even if the argument where to be that its fur and jaggy rocks would not change the point (on the pixel level).  ------------- |
Posted By: aturbidflow
Date Posted: 10 March 2015 at 12:34am
|
Oh my, thanks a lot for such presentation of idea of dirty pixels. Yeah, mostly I agree with you and you are right. Except the monster. Its contour should not be such smooth - this is the idea of sharp & creepy skin.
But with "semitransparent" you are absolutely right - that was laziness as now I remember. Thank you a lot. |