partially transparent colors
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=6010
Printed Date: 10 September 2025 at 5:18am
Topic: partially transparent colors
Posted By: funcravers
Subject: partially transparent colors
Date Posted: 09 February 2008 at 4:53pm
|
So i'm using gimp, and I was wondering... Can we use partially transparent colors for anti-aliasing? If not, why not? |
Replies:
Posted By: Larwick
Date Posted: 09 February 2008 at 6:01pm
|
Well you shouldn't really need to. It may be easier, but you should learn how to properly choose the right AA colour for the job. Usually it isn't just simply halfway between the 2 colours, which is what the transparency would create. :) -------------  http://larw-ck.deviantart.com">
|
Posted By: funcravers
Date Posted: 09 February 2008 at 8:33pm
| well, in GIMP I aa'd to a white background with a black image but it looks kinda nasty so if I made it partially transparent would it be against any un-written rule? |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 10 February 2008 at 6:14am
|
I think concensus is that it's not permissible for gallery-bound images to have semitransparency. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com"> 
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Metaru
Date Posted: 11 February 2008 at 6:24pm
|
JAL wrote a huge thread about the no-no of the partial transparencies in this forum. go ahead and search it. ------------- I ate leel's babies |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 11 February 2008 at 7:43pm
|
The gist of that was 'don't be lazy'
------------- |
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 11 February 2008 at 8:07pm
|
I still don't understand the argument you made way back when. In the case that the BG will be dynamic and can't be predicted or compensated for by hand, it's not laziness, but rather versatility, that drives one to use semitransparency. Now, using semitransparency when you're merging separate pixel art pieces (or multiple layers in a PSD) that won't move over each other dynamically is just f'ed up and definitely lazy. But why is it unacceptable for a piece that will be moving over a lot of other images and could use some antialiasing? Inflating final color count IS a consequence, yes, so is that it?
...no?
(Edited for clarity, context.) ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Metaru
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 7:46am
|
these are not allowed simply because we are focusing in the art part of pixel art.as you said, it depends on the context. we all know that commercial works are based on the rule of time=money. but as far as I know, here on Pixeljoint and these are not allowed either for outer and inner AA(outer to AA with the background, and inner to AA with inner colors) since it kinda defeats the purpose of "control over each pixel both colors and position". so, in resume, you can use alpha channels to make an image AA with dinamic backgrounds, wich may be a common in other places or situations(web desing for example). but it would not really belong to PJ. ------------- I ate leel's babies |
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 11:59am
|
I agree with MoD. Limiting transparency is like saying you can't use a component of color. It is like saying that you can't use red. The image background changes with your forum theme. I would think the artist would like their art to look good in all contexts.
You have 4 components to color. Transparency is demanded already for gallery-bound images. The cow is already out of the barn here.
Red,Green,Blue and Alpha. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/"> 
|
Posted By: Larwick
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 12:13pm
|
We should just call it translucency! Whenever you guys say transparency i think you're arguing about whether people can actually plainly use transparency or not. Anyway. It does depend on the context but i admit i do hate to generally say translucency isn't allowed. When doing it for AA, i think that's unnecissary. But when doing it for something like http://www.pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6020 - this (fourth image) i'd say it was fine (but again, as long as it didn't increase the colour count unecissarily, and therefore would need some aftercare involved ... but that's obvious right?). Lalalala. ------------- http://larw-ck.deviantart.com">
|
Posted By: Pixel_Outlaw
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 1:03pm
|
A simple wine glass could be well done if you just wanted it as a subject with no background. Just as an example. ------------- http://www.shmup-dev.com/forum/">
|
Posted By: Monkey 'o Doom
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 1:38pm
|
Actually, Larwick, I'd say the fourth image is NPA if he used translucency within the image. Pixel art is all aobut selecting colors yourself, and if you use translucency with layers that way, it increases color count really quickly without user control, when the image itself is going to be non-translucent. Why is it unnecessary for outer AA if you want to have a transparent background?
EDIT: Punctuation wups. ------------- http://pixelmonkey.ensellitis.com">
RPG is numberwang. |
Posted By: Larwick
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 2:16pm
|
Sorry i was talking about generall inner AA, outer PNG translucent AA
is definetely a different beast. I would say it was ok though. It would
obviously have to be stated, perhaps even what colour was used and what
level of opacity. Simply because they had full control over what they
were doing and the results expected, on a pixel by pixel level. Simply
they'd know a 50% opacity black on a white background would become 50%
gray, etc, just as they'd know a pure gray would look greener next to a
bright red or whatever. The problem with the link i gave and the fourth image in that thread is that with good planning you'd never notice a difference and it would look fine and pixel-by-pixel placed. Although that is same with inner AA, and so all we can say is that they should learn how to do it 'normally' as it would improve their skills, but we can't really stop them unless they state they have done it or if they have done it really badly. If they do do it really badly and don't state they have done translucency, then i would take action against them if that was made clear in the rules. But if they do it well and do state they have done it and what they have done, then that should be fine imo. As long as other rules aren't effected, such as high colour counts etc. Right? I rambled a bit there so i may have contradicted myself then... but i don't think so. ------------- http://larw-ck.deviantart.com">
|
Posted By: Metaru
Date Posted: 17 February 2008 at 6:21pm
|
Like when people do a trace or used someone else's work as a base/reference, for example. ------------- I ate leel's babies |
Posted By: DeProgrammer
Date Posted: 22 February 2008 at 9:31am
I made the alpha transparency channel by hand for the glow on this avatar.  I think transparency is just another part of pixel art. After all, I use sprites with handmade alpha transparency in all the games I make now. Also, I would say that every combination of one color with one alpha level would count as another color; what's behind the pixel art shouldn't be taken into thought when judging that sort of thing. The fire on my space ship would look horrible if it faded to black when halfway covering a shiny light gray flying saucer... Same deal with my bullets. Here's an old screenshot that also shows the bullet sprite and alpha mask at the top:  |
Posted By: Metaru
Date Posted: 23 February 2008 at 6:59am
|
as we said above, it depends on the context where the Translucency is going to be used.. you know that you can use tese alpha channels in your game and they surely help the cidual aspect of your game. but in pixel joint context, such thig are not necesary. geez, why is everyone so obsesed with having smooth pixels? ------------- I ate leel's babies |