Scottfro's Treehouse
Printed From: Pixel Joint
Category: Pixel Art
Forum Name: WIP (Work In Progress)
Forum Discription: Get crits and comments on your pixel WIPs and other art too!
URL: https://pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3369
Printed Date: 06 September 2025 at 6:32pm
Topic: Scottfro's Treehouse
Posted By: jalonso
Subject: Scottfro's Treehouse
Date Posted: 17 November 2006 at 9:27pm
|
One big tree (with supports) or several trees (hanging)? Which leaf cluster looks better to you?  ------------- |
Replies:
Posted By: Rodder
Date Posted: 17 November 2006 at 9:51pm
|
One big tree is sexy! The composition is much stronger, with the tree as the focal point and the details leading your eye around. Having several trees is distracting, plus it covers up a lot.
Also if possible, id leave out the leaves. I love the contrast of the sharp/dark lines of the tree, with the warm/soft textures of the houses. If you need leaves, id go with the bottom (lighter green). It looks more natural which i think would fit in with the textures you have already. Nice work BTW. What's this for? |
Posted By: brianna
Date Posted: 17 November 2006 at 9:56pm
|
I like the branches of the first one better. The second seems more uniform, less organic -- like the overall composition becomes too square. Maybe with leaves it would look more natural again -- but it's hard to say. As for the leaves, I like the shading of the first one better but I'm drawn to the colors of the second. Maybe I vote for the first one with slightly less saturated and yellower highlights? Overall, though, looking like this will be very, very nice. :) |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 17 November 2006 at 10:36pm
|
So one tree it shall be. @Rodder, This is for Pixeldam for a hood called Evergreen that's forest themed so I thought leaves were needed/appropriate. I will explore using as few leaves as possible since you are always right. @Brianna, thx. I do plan to add a rocky cavern with a 'hot spring', waterfall, lillies etc. ------------- |
Posted By: fil_razorback
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 1:34am
| You'll never cease to amaze me jal' ^^ |
Posted By: ceddo
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 4:36am
|
Just beautiful. Colors are great. And I prefer the big tree in the center, for the same things that Rodder said.
As for the branches, I prefer the lowest sample (with the least saturated green). What would be even nicer in my opinion would be red/orange leaves. |
Posted By: Aleiav
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 3:12pm
|
For the tree leaves? I like the top one. good grief, you're too good with iso, I say. ------------- |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 4:10pm
|
I suggest you go with multiple trees. The single tree just looks wimpy, and the poles don't look like they'd even come close to supporting that much weight. One strange bit I see in the multi-tree one is that there are these poles with roots that go up to and join with limbs. Is there any explanation? I'm puzzled by them. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com"> 
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:37pm
|
@ MoD, I went with one tree before reading your comment. I see what you mean. I was just laying out a rough so it was not iso grid accurate. @ceddo, I would have loved a red tree but this is for a neighborhood called 'evergreen' I have added a few leaves as possible while still making it look like a live tree :/ I will remove support poles as I add stuff like a swing and a hammock and stuff.  ------------- |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:41pm
|
Wow that's really good. The rock heap looks like one of those art gum erasers however. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/"> 
|
Posted By: brianna
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:44pm
|
Oh, that's purty. The support poles are a bit distracting and busy -- maybe cover them with vines or make them out of a less colorful material? I rather liked the original floor textures, too. May I ask why you removed them? |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:46pm
|
Yeah take the poles and make the light more broken more like bark. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/">
|
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:50pm
|
@Brianna, I removed the texture on the floor because I found when I started to drop the shadows from the tree branches it bacame to messy and dirty looking. I will add some texture once all the main elements are in. @P_O, yup, it does look like a kneaded eraser, will redraw more angular, thx. ------------- |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 7:59pm
|
Well and the uport poles look too pristine, almost like candy orange painted metal. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/">
|
Posted By: Aleiav
Date Posted: 18 November 2006 at 9:53pm
|
The mud/dirt seems a bit odd to me... but you're probably working on it.
------------- |
Posted By: ceddo
Date Posted: 19 November 2006 at 1:51am
|
Looks awesome! I was about to comment on the rocks too :P
I don't like the dirt's saturation.. I think tiw ould look better if it had a lower saturation, and some purple in it... because I love purple :) |
Posted By: EyeCraft
Date Posted: 19 November 2006 at 2:27am
|
Wow, this is sexy! Reminds me a little of AOE2. You've put too deep shadow in the highlighted areas and too bright highlights in the shaded areas of the rocks. Also I'd try different tints for the rocks, rather than just grey like that. I think the image could really benefit from some shading on the supports. The grass, mud, and transition between them all need much more attention. They lack texture. I think you can make better use of the highlight tone on the tree trunk. The water is looking fantastic, but the waterfall could maybe use a little bit of shadow...I dunno, it's a bit tricky. The cobbled stone (that's what it is, right? Not mushrooms?  ), seems detached from the ground, as if its floating above it. I think reduce the shadow tones of the gaps in between the stones, and maybe have some tufts of grass sticking up through, or something.On the right-most footpath, theres a dark strip that make it look like there's actually a drop between the footpath and the grass&dirt. What's happening with that? I'd say remove that dark strip. If not, fix up the rocks right near it so they don't look like theyre floating. That's all from me, keep up the great work!  |
Posted By: Equinoxx
Date Posted: 19 November 2006 at 12:37pm
|
totally hot mate ...
few things. the small boulders in the bottom could be smaller if they are what I think they are. they appear to be rather large anywhich way the rocks do indeed appear to have a molten lead look to them, but you're aware of that so it's cool not entirely sure what's going on with the ground at all. it looks as if it's mud beneath the tree that goes to water then to a path with stones ? love the housing support but would prefer the strutbindings to appear more ropey instead of metalish ------------- http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3306 - Zombies  |
Posted By: PixelSnader
Date Posted: 19 November 2006 at 1:43pm
|
hey. um. sex me. ------------- ▄▄█ ▄▄█ ▄█▄ ▄█▄ |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 19 November 2006 at 10:57pm
|
@EyeCraft, thanks for taking the time to be so detailed. The color greys used on the rocks are from the Pixeldam base so I'm stuck with those greys, same goes for some of the greens :( I will make color corrections in the next update. This is still in the scrappy, whatever color phase. @Eq, Yes I have been hating the rope ties. Those were cobblestones before XD @snader ;) BTW, this piece was inspired by an IRC convo with Scottfro about trees and being pixelippies  Does tree big tree have enough leaves? I will be putting leaves all over the ground to kinda explain the tree a bit. I'd hate to cover the house a lot :/ Should the balcomy be left bare to rest the eye? Does the 'shiva' sculpture look wrong/bad/stupid?  ------------- |
Posted By: Equinoxx
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 12:42am
|
oh HELL YES !!! that's gorgeous sh*t man much better on all fronts then the previous one. your rocks to the left still look like molten lead though .... May I suggest havinh 1pixel highlight edges and highlight 'planes' to square it out. It looks so organic right now. I would indeed leave the balcony empty. The whole is rather crowded as is and it doesn't need more detail. btw, love the new avatar ------------- http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3306 - Zombies |
Posted By: fil_razorback
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 4:52am
|
I hate you jal' :D Future fav =) |
Posted By: brianna
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 7:00am
|
Is that white thing on the right the Shiva sculpture? It looks... confusing. I couldn't tell what it was until I read the "Does the 'shiva' sculpture look wrong/bad/stupid?" question, and I'm still not sure. |
Posted By: scottfro
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 8:09am
|
hahahhaha glad i could be of inspiration to you :P some ref images here www.scottfro.net hahaha ------------- http://www.scottfro.net - http://www.scottfro.net |
Posted By: Mykola
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 9:31am
| saved the wips to my hard drive for extensive study :D |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 12:45pm
Mykola is a Thief  I finally understood what you were all talking about as it related to the rocks. Is this better? Removed the Shiva sculpture, fixed a color ramp or two. Added the Pixeldam street base so that it can be seen in its environment.  ------------- |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 12:59pm
|
The rocks look a lot better now, but they seem to have too much of a constistent flat top; give 'em some variation.
This's come a long way and it looks absolutely amazing. Great work! ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 1:14pm
|
I'm just glad there are no monkeys in that tree....ohh how I loath monkeys. Nothing personal MoD.Came out pretty well(the picture). ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/">
|
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 7:30pm
|
Changed a few more little things and feel OK with the project. On to the animations :) For some reason it seems fast on Firefox.  ------------- |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 7:47pm
|
Hmm it looks lik the swing chains have been eyeballed. The swing doesn't look centered. It will be hard as hell but you ahould animate the swinging to do an arc or it looks like the chains are stretching. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/">
|
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 7:48pm
|
Looks too fast in IE and FF to me. Also, the way the colors behind the hammock go from dark to light in consecutive frames. This, though logical, looks bad. Maybe take some artistic liberty here? ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 7:59pm
|
MoD, yes I noticed that too. I was more concerned about the frame rate atm. Its 0.2 now. P_O, It is precisely on the iso grid and is not 'eyeballed'. I understand what you mean but isos have their 'thing' Maybe animations won't work for this piece. ------------- |
Posted By: Doppleganger
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 8:29pm
|
Whoa! That's hardcore. This piece is/has turning/turned out really well. I dig that animation, if only for the admirable skills it takes to animate swinging in iso. The only crit I have is the copy pasted tree foliage. Although it took me a second to notice it. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 20 November 2006 at 10:27pm
|
Originally posted by Doppleganger ...The only crit I have is the copy pasted tree foliage... Thank you. off-topic: Do you say that because it seems lazy to copy and paste? or some other reason? I'd really like to know. My attraction to isometric pixelart, besides the pixelly look of it is the copy/paste aspect which is such a part of the style. I do think it should be broken up somewhat but I actually do that on purpose. That is why the 5 foliage pots are front and center (I did make two ferns however). I've never heard anyone crit the copy/paste in an iso, interesting. ------------- |
Posted By: Mykola
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 5:09am
|
Watching your work in pogress is amazing :)!
Just as I think you made something awesome, you already come up with new coolness..
I can't really crit anything here. And by the way, I support copy&paste in iso as well :))
I think in iso, it's totally fair game. I think it's a good part of the style.. that began from game art, where tiles and such are a necessity :), and it's been proven that repetitive images can look good :D
Besides if I were to crit copy&paste, I'd have to give eboy a hard time about like 85% of their gallery :D
|
Posted By: buloght
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 5:25am
|
I am not worthy to crit this/you. Just making a wow post
|
Posted By: Doppleganger
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 10:40am
|
Oh, I have no problem with the pots and ferns. The only realy copy/paste that bothered me was the leaves on the tree. And I only noticed that because almost all of them have a single leaf angling down and to the left near the top. Not necessarily an avid crit but something that struck me none-the-less. I think removing that leaf from a few of the bunches of leaves would make it seem less redundant. However, I don't want to go in too deep here because I love the piece and any more work isn't necessary. |
Posted By: The B.O.B.
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 11:53am
|
Damn Jalonso. I'm not into iso, or anything, but this thing is beginning to look gorgeous. Seems like you're getting better at texturing these things. The rock piles, and additional foliage goes well in terms of composition. And in my opinion, I wouldn't place this thing in the middle of a four-way street intersection( viewed a couple posts ago...)
As far as the Hammock animation, I think maybe you should try experimenting a little bit by shortening the distance of how far apart the swings are from each other. Also, I noticed that as soon as he gets to the end of each swinging motion, he immediately goes back in the opposite direction a little too quickly. I always thought that when any object tries to change direction after going the exact opposite, it must slow down a bit, in an almost prolonged state, and then speed up reaching it's highest point of momentum halfway-3/4 of the way, kinda like a pendulum(don't be afraid to correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not the most brightest students of motion, and physics). Maybe thats whats kinda' causing the choppiness.
But again, I think this is looking Ass'ome.
|
Posted By: Ensellitis
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 12:47pm
|
trying to outdo yourself? :P i would keep the animation, but make the swing less "swingy"... maybe jus a few pixels... right now it seems a little unrealistic... if you cut the frames and maybe set it to .3 or leave it at .2 giving it just a nice gentle swing. things i would like to see (and i know you like to make your iso busy :P): tiki tourches, fish in the pond, and maybe some shadows moving inside the cloth windows. keep it up! ------------- There's a pubic hair on my keyboard. What the f**k?? I "mow the lawn" so it's not mine. Gross. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 1:41pm
|
@Dopple, Good point! I started to mess with them here but will do more. @B.O.B., Pixeldam is set up so that everything is on an intersection so I am unable to do much about that. It is for that reason the the rocks are boxy. I fugured it was a transitional blend to the grid. I have done pretty much what you mention about the swing on this with the exception of the impulse. Pixeldam has a 50k file size limit and I can't really add 2 more frames to make that happen so its a bit of a compromise. As Dopple mentioned a 'swing action' in iso is a true challenge that may only be achieved with an 8 frame minimum. I will inspect closer tho. @Ens, shadows, fish added, many thanks. The fish may not work out, not only are they choppy with 4 frames it detracts from the water, I think. The shadow looks great but may need slower movements, looks a bit 'wanky' (ask Lar, what that means). I had already thought of tiki torches. That would add colors and the file size is already reaching the limit so lets just say Pixeldam has a city ordinance about open flames @Mykola, Buloght and the Monkey, thank you. e:typos  ------------- |
Posted By: Pieface
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 2:00pm
| A few Tiki Torches might look coll around the place |
Posted By: Ensellitis
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 2:30pm
|
awsome, i think the fish give it more action... maybe have them move less... even just move their tales, that would make them more of a hidden easter egg. as always, you are doing great :) ------------- There's a pubic hair on my keyboard. What the f**k?? I "mow the lawn" so it's not mine. Gross. |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 2:38pm
|
I love the subtle animations, but they seem centered on the bottom/left. If you could animate the leaves it would look great, but that might be really hard depending on how you've managed the layers. You can expect a 9/9 from me. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Akira
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 2:51pm
|
love it man. this has to be one of the best isos i've seen in a while. all of the animations need a little more work, the hammock should 'hang' a little more at the extremes of its swing. the fish could use some still frames so they don't just look hyperactive.
i reread your post and it looks like you're going to work on everything i mentioned anyway. nvm... |
Posted By: Indigo
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 7:46pm
|
I swear to you, jal, if you use AA it will immediately look 100 times better. AA is a necessity of pixelart.
------------- |
Posted By: leel
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 7:48pm
|
Originally posted by Indigo
I swear to you, jal, if you use AA it will immediately look 100 times better. AA is a necessity of pixelart. I second that.
I <3 the hammock!
|
Posted By: brianna
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 8:49pm
|
IMO, AA ruins the coolness of pixel art and should be used sparingly in isometric especially. I agree with the slowing down the ends of the swing animation though. |
Posted By: Ensellitis
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 10:14pm
|
NEVER use aa with iso... i am about sick of the continuos "aa must be used", that is not always the case and can ruin an otherwise perfect piece
------------- There's a pubic hair on my keyboard. What the f**k?? I "mow the lawn" so it's not mine. Gross. |
Posted By: Mykola
Date Posted: 21 November 2006 at 10:21pm
|
As much as I respect Indigo, I have to absolutely disagree.
AA is not a necessity. Neither technique is a necessity, for that matter. Good artistic value, that's a necessity, but it isn't defined by any technique or combinations of them.
And I'm quite sure the last pixelart in the world that needs more AA is Jalonso's.
|
Posted By: Feron
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 9:21am
|
nah im with indigo, some of the best isometric stuff i have seen all uses AA.
otherwise AWesomE ------------- hmmmm. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 10:13am
|
If there is one person in the world that could ever get me to change my view on the AA in iso question its indigo, I still respectfully disagree. I do agree with the monkey's assesment that the animations were to bottom left heavy. I toned them down to a minimum. I tried an 8 frame animation for the swing and while it does look good the file size passed 100k which is more than allowed so instead I minimized the movement on this update. edit: The swing looks awful now. I think the previous one is about as good as it can be with the given restrictions, right?  ------------- |
Posted By: Larwick
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 10:24am
|
Firstly: beautiful work.
I think your problem with the swing is that you won't make frames halfway between each pixel-long movement, which is okay i guess, seeing as you would dislike the slight blurryness it would give.
Definetely use the one before, but i'd suggest having the frames at each end of the swing be timed longer, like in a real-life swingage. Probably OTT'd though, but that's okay.
With the waterfall, i suggest moving more than the highlights of the water so it looks more alive. If there are splashes, show that they rise and fall (perhaps also lighten and fade), not just appear. This will probably be tough with frame restrictions, but it still could be improved from what it is now.
And again, excellent stuff. -------------  http://larw-ck.deviantart.com">
|
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 10:37am
|
Originally posted by Larwick ...i'd suggest having the frames at each end of the swing be timed longer, like in a real-life swingage... The problem I have with that is that the waterfall will then also 'pause' every 3 frames (that's partly what took me to the 8 frames to iron out). I will redo the waterfall correctly now that it looks like I'm limited to the 4 frame swing animation. Or else no animations at all, urghhh.... ------------- |
Posted By: Pieface
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 11:37am
|
On the hut closest to the eye, one of the thatched strips on it has a slight animation which looks slightly out of place moving up and down. But amazing work |
Posted By: Doppleganger
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 3:46pm
 Tikitorch with your colors...it's possible. Forgive the crappy, rushed quality. And....any imposition. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 4:50pm
|
I simplyfied some of the greens to allow me to have an extra 6k to play with. This allowed for one more frame. This makes the swing pause at the ends now, w00t. The waterfall is looking crazy at .01, I better make a move every 2 frames? @dopple, sadly I don't think I can add much more due to file size issues. I will accept your tiki and try to see if it works out, cuz its awesome.  ------------- |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 5:10pm
|
I still think the animation overall is a bit fast; I wouldn't be very relaxed if my hammock was swinging that fast. That would also cure the hyperactive waterfall problem maybe. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 7:44pm
@Dopple, its not that it wasn't possible to add tikis it was the file size that was a problem. I have added yours here just to show. Not many places to place any and I think it looks too busy, OTT? Slowed down animation some. Waterfall needs some work but the swing has that 'pause' mentioned so thats cool.  ------------- |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 22 November 2006 at 8:46pm
|
*claps*
Why am I doing this myself? This is a civilized server, we have emotes for that.
 There. The anim looks loads better now. Keep up the good work. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Doppleganger
Date Posted: 23 November 2006 at 6:47am
| Oh sure, I couldn't find a place to put tiki torches either. I was just doing them to show ya that you didn't need more colors for them. Thanks for appeasing me anyways. ;) |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 23 November 2006 at 2:03pm
Update on the waterfall before sitting down to feast on turkey and football   ------------- |
Posted By: Akira
Date Posted: 23 November 2006 at 4:37pm
| you kick ass. everything looks mighty. three thumbs up. |
Posted By: Videl
Date Posted: 24 November 2006 at 12:01am
| That is lovely! i just love the detail! |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 24 November 2006 at 1:31pm
On to the next pixel. Thank you to all who contributed on this and made it better than it would have been. ------------- |
Posted By: buloght
Date Posted: 24 November 2006 at 4:36pm
| All in a day's work :). talented freak. |
Posted By: MiDiaN
Date Posted: 24 November 2006 at 5:18pm
| My eyes... this is just perfect, I love it! |