Draike


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Draike
artulo wrote:¡Muy importante!

I put a new sombrero on this guy.


Nice! That was just what it needed.

fablefire


quality posts: 24 Private Messages fablefire

Here's the final. Thanks for the input.

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon
kritterbush wrote:Next week's theme should be "Anything" so that the only possible theme-breaking entry would be a blank shirt.

Then we wouldn't have to worry about whether we're matching the theme well enough or be angry that others are blatantly ignoring it. Of course, it would also be complete chaos, but personally, I like chaos.



Derbylympics part 3 was Freestyle, so that theme has technically been done already.

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

kritterbush


quality posts: 0 Private Messages kritterbush
eHalcyon wrote:Derbylympics part 3 was Freestyle, so that theme has technically been done already.



Ah, that figures.

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon

OK, so I was wondering about the sizing issue so I created a 16"x20" document at 300 dpi. I set the pencil to 10 px and clicked with the mouse, so no pressure sensitivity to mess it up. Then I incremented the brush size by 10 px up to 100 px for 10 dots total. The image below is the result after scaling the entire canvas down from the original size of 4800x6000 px to 480x600 px, or 10% of the original.



The 10px dot is almost invisible, and notice how small the 20px and 30px dots are. Given that the shirt comp images are 580px, the dots should be even smaller in the submission comps if the artists stuck to the smallest possible dots. I can imagine that all the seemingly fine-detailed designs are within the given guidelines.

So did I misinterpret something? Because a lot of experienced designers seem to think that the dots are supposed to be much bigger. ProfHotPants did say 20 or 30 px, as in pixels, and not 20-30 pts.

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

Zenne


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Zenne

I made a sketching brush for pointillism - here's an example of what it can do (re-sized for the forums):



- There are 4 brushes - two are for light t-shirts, and two are sized for dark t-shirts, so you don't have to experiment with the brush controls.

- One is for scattered sketching like the example above, and the other is a dotted line.

- They have variable sized dots - one from 20 to 30 pixels, and one from 30 to 40 pixels, for tablet users.

Please send me a message if I forgot anything or if it doesn't work. :p Or if you don't know how to use the brush controls and would like a variation. I made these in CS4.

Draike


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Draike

THANK THE MAKER. IT IS COMPLETE!
http://shirt.woot.com/Derby/Entry.aspx?id=31379



...I'm so done with this. It's bedtime, and my wrist needs a vacation.

snarkygal


quality posts: 5 Private Messages snarkygal
artulo wrote:¡Muy importante!

I put a new sombrero on this guy.




Mucho mejor

Drakxxx


quality posts: 16 Private Messages Drakxxx

Hey again guys,

It looks like I'll be sitting this week out after all as some other things came up that I need to work on.

Best of luck to everyone competing, and I'll see you next week.

Thanks as always.


HeartlineTwist


quality posts: 1 Private Messages HeartlineTwist
Drakxxx wrote:Hey again guys,

It looks like I'll be sitting this week out after all as some other things came up that I need to work on.

Best of luck to everyone competing, and I'll see you next week.

Thanks as always.



ARGH! I really wanted to see that sketch/design you posted in pointillism...argh.

Xenora


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Xenora
fablefire wrote:Here's the final. Thanks for the input.



*applauds* Whatcha gonna put for its title?

My woot! purchases: The Original Blue Hedgehog; To The Top in the Style of Da Vinci; Deforestation; The Owliminator; Yeti & Robot; Electronica (The holy grail of all shirts... THE SYNTH SHIRT! Wahoo! ^.^)
...and 1 Random. (I hope Woot! doesn't pull another Random Roulette on me for a long time; I need to hang on to my money!)

If there are any repeat posts, blame my stupid computer!

Decker2pure


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Decker2pure

All these shirts are HEINOUS!!! I dont like this point thing. Sorry!

artulo


quality posts: 13 Private Messages artulo

two?

disintegration. thanks for looking, skulls are so overdone.

fireatwill25


quality posts: 0 Private Messages fireatwill25
ReflectiveRobot wrote:

It seems like a Star Trek transporter in "mid-beam" lends itself to pointillism. I planned on making the reference a bit more vague or subtle, but now I'm wondering if I'm stepping into copyright infringement territory..?



I like it, maybe make the one on the left with a red shirt. I just laugh at the red-shirted ensign that typically dies on the planet/mission.

Good luck!

kritterbush


quality posts: 0 Private Messages kritterbush

So... I did this today, and I had fun making it and submitted it...

and my mom looks at it and asks, "I see a person... what's the rest of it?"

Anyone else having trouble telling what's going on? I'll rework it if really isn't obvious:

Stormink


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Stormink

I think this theme is evidence of Woot being just plain dumb in running the derbies.

First... choosing a theme that depends on using minuscule dots when you have horrible printing capabilities is not smart. Its no secret Woot's printing is not the most advanced. They don't go gradients or small halftones for god's sake. And here they are giving a theme that forces everyone to use tiny dots. And then on top of that, they don't even bother to specify the minimum dot small appropriately from the start.

Second... pointillism lends itself to a very particular type of design that I'd be willing to bet money is not very profitable. So why choose it for the derby when they are all about the money? People will use this as evidence of non-Ramy designs selling poorly when its completely due to the theme.

Third... by choosing such a distinct theme, it makes it really obvious when someone does not follow the theme. You'd think they'd learn from all of the uproar lately about rejecting designs, but then they choose a topic that is so restricting that it forces them to make decisions. And of course, then they don't enforce the strict theme they selected and people get even more angry.

Come on Woot... I appreciate that you are choosing artistic movements to at least challenge people to venture out of their set style, but you could have made a more responsible choice IMO.

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon
Stormink wrote:They don't go gradients or small halftones for god's sake.



They've actually done gradients in daily designs, though it's still generally not allowed in the derbies.

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

Xenora


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Xenora

*continues munching on fable's popcorn*

Now playing in Rejection Theature...

"Salt and Pepper" Gets the Axe!

I was predicting that one would get the cut. Awesome execution, but I was definitley stippling instead of pointilism. It's a pity when great shirts don't follow the rules.

My woot! purchases: The Original Blue Hedgehog; To The Top in the Style of Da Vinci; Deforestation; The Owliminator; Yeti & Robot; Electronica (The holy grail of all shirts... THE SYNTH SHIRT! Wahoo! ^.^)
...and 1 Random. (I hope Woot! doesn't pull another Random Roulette on me for a long time; I need to hang on to my money!)

If there are any repeat posts, blame my stupid computer!

Mavyn


quality posts: 23 Private Messages Mavyn
Xenora wrote:*continues munching on fable's popcorn*

Now playing in Rejection Theature...

"Salt and Pepper" Gets the Axe!

I was predicting that one would get the cut. Awesome execution, but I was definitely stippling instead of pointillism. It's a pity when great shirts don't follow the rules.



It was rejected because the salt and pepper shakers were not on theme, not the rest of the design. It was resubmitted with everything done in style, and is climbing back up. All of the designs that used not pointillist elements were rejected.

My speech is not parsing. I am speaking in ellipsis.

noisdois


quality posts: 1 Private Messages noisdois

So... does anybody else get the same feeling as they did when looking at the pixel derby entries a while back? It's total dejavu for me...

shan24


quality posts: 3 Private Messages shan24

artulo


quality posts: 13 Private Messages artulo
noisdois wrote:So... does anybody else get the same feeling as they did when looking at the pixel derby entries a while back? It's total dejavu for me...



Cmon....this isn't nearly as bad as the pixel derby.

noisdois


quality posts: 1 Private Messages noisdois
artulo wrote:Cmon....this isn't nearly as bad as the pixel derby.



True, but I still see a bunch of dots on the thumbnails like I did in the pixel derby. Does it not give off the same vibe to you?

eHalcyon


quality posts: 66 Private Messages eHalcyon
noisdois wrote:True, but I still see a bunch of dots on the thumbnails like I did in the pixel derby. Does it not give off the same vibe to you?



I thought that it would, but I'm actually liking a lot more of the entries in this derby than I do in most regular derbies.

(Unofficial) Derby Rules (outdated?)
Designing for the Derby (definitely outdated)
Tips for New Designers (always useful)

noisdois


quality posts: 1 Private Messages noisdois
eHalcyon wrote:I thought that it would, but I'm actually liking a lot more of the entries in this derby than I do in most regular derbies.



Oh yeah, I'll agree with you there. I'm not saying they're not good, I'm just saying that this derby has the same feel as the pixel derby to me. I guess it's hard to describe what I'm thinking... :/

fablefire


quality posts: 24 Private Messages fablefire
Mavyn wrote:It was rejected because the salt and pepper shakers were not on theme, not the rest of the design. It was resubmitted with everything done in style, and is climbing back up. All of the designs that used not pointillist elements were rejected.



Yeah... for better or worse, there's still a lot of stippling entries. Oh well.

Josephus


quality posts: 25 Private Messages Josephus
Mavyn wrote:It was rejected because the salt and pepper shakers were not on theme, not the rest of the design. It was resubmitted with everything done in style, and is climbing back up. All of the designs that used not pointillist elements were rejected.



...most. most of the designs...
;^)

jasneko


quality posts: 30 Private Messages jasneko

Just submitted this. Thanks for looking, and more thanks for voting!


Xenora


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Xenora
Josephus wrote:...most. most of the designs...
;^)



Referring to Octocool and Firefox?

My woot! purchases: The Original Blue Hedgehog; To The Top in the Style of Da Vinci; Deforestation; The Owliminator; Yeti & Robot; Electronica (The holy grail of all shirts... THE SYNTH SHIRT! Wahoo! ^.^)
...and 1 Random. (I hope Woot! doesn't pull another Random Roulette on me for a long time; I need to hang on to my money!)

If there are any repeat posts, blame my stupid computer!

Mavyn


quality posts: 23 Private Messages Mavyn
Josephus wrote:...most. most of the designs...
;^)



Sorry. I was referring to those designs that had definitely sketched elements, such as the S&P shakers, and Seurat's Dream, rather than commenting on the difference between pointillism and stippling.


My speech is not parsing. I am speaking in ellipsis.

dogfaceminer


quality posts: 0 Private Messages dogfaceminer

Ja I'm not a huge fan of pointillism, but I'm sure some of the artists here can come up with something cool. We'll have to see. Just please don't let the next derby be Jackson Pollack.

Xenora


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Xenora
dogfaceminer wrote:*snip* Just please don't let the next derby be Jackson Pollack.



I'd like that derby it we only had to include a Pollack element.

It'd hate it if we have to create nothing but messy faux paint drop patterns. >.< Voting would be a nightmare.

My woot! purchases: The Original Blue Hedgehog; To The Top in the Style of Da Vinci; Deforestation; The Owliminator; Yeti & Robot; Electronica (The holy grail of all shirts... THE SYNTH SHIRT! Wahoo! ^.^)
...and 1 Random. (I hope Woot! doesn't pull another Random Roulette on me for a long time; I need to hang on to my money!)

If there are any repeat posts, blame my stupid computer!

snarkygal


quality posts: 5 Private Messages snarkygal
Mavyn wrote:It was rejected because the salt and pepper shakers were not on theme, not the rest of the design. It was resubmitted with everything done in style, and is climbing back up. All of the designs that used not pointillist elements were rejected.



Seki ADMITTED she used a solid backdrop...so your statement is definitely false. The firefox has not been rejected even though she admits she cut corners and if you look at it, those are lines, not dashes, or dots.

sekiyoku


quality posts: 18 Private Messages sekiyoku
snarkygal wrote:Seki ADMITTED she used a solid backdrop...so your statement is definitely false. The firefox has not been rejected even though she admits she cut corners and if you look at it, those are lines, not dashes, or dots.



As I said in the thread, I did the solid backdrop to make printing easier. I had enough time to do dots instead of the solid color if I had wanted to. This was not about cutting corners.

If it has not been rejected it is because woot decided it was OK for there to be a solid backdrop likely for the same reasons that I did ( which is that shirts using the shirt color as a back color use the same technique).

Mavyn


quality posts: 23 Private Messages Mavyn
snarkygal wrote:Seki ADMITTED she used a solid backdrop...so your statement is definitely false. The firefox has not been rejected even though she admits she cut corners and if you look at it, those are lines, not dashes, or dots.



Context much? Good heavens. That statement was specific to designs that included elements that were not supposed to be in the pointillist style, like the design I referenced via quoting. A point which I clarified later, and which still stands.




My speech is not parsing. I am speaking in ellipsis.

Josephus


quality posts: 25 Private Messages Josephus

Hey, I wonder if anyone could help me understand this, and to decide how to go about this in the future.
Below are 3 images of my entry this week. The only difference between them is that the first one has once copy of the design on top of a black background, the second has two copoies of the design on top of each other over a black background, and the third has 3 copies of the design on top of each other layered over a black background.
We know in real life that the ink has no transparency, and so there should be no visibility through the design, yet clearly the software allows it to show through. It is not clear to me how multiple copies of the design one over the next can alter the view; they are not moved relative to one another. So, how do I approach this on future designs? Clearly this week, showing my design the way I did made it appear to be darker than the reality is (I think). I believe that this most likely hurt the vote totals, since there were several comments about how it wasn't as bright as the commenter preferred.
Obviously woot is only going to print one copy of the deign, but I don't believe that the software gives a realistic view of how it will look unless I copy the design over itself.

Can anyone give me some perspective on the best way to approach this issue? (Besides buying Illustrator, I'm stuck with Corel Draw)

and is this also an issue with Illustrator?
1x
2x
3x

no1


quality posts: 7 Private Messages no1
Josephus wrote:Hey, I wonder if anyone could help me understand this, and to decide how to go about this in the future.
Below are 3 images of my entry this week. The only difference between them is that the first one has once copy of the design on top of a black background, the second has two copoies of the design on top of each other over a black background, and the third has 3 copies of the design on top of each other layered over a black background.
We know in real life that the ink has no transparency, and so there should be no visibility through the design, yet clearly the software allows it to show through. It is not clear to me how multiple copies of the design one over the next can alter the view; they are not moved relative to one another. So, how do I approach this on future designs? Clearly this week, showing my design the way I did made it appear to be darker than the reality is (I think). I believe that this most likely hurt the vote totals, since there were several comments about how it wasn't as bright as the commenter preferred.
Obviously woot is only going to print one copy of the deign, but I don't believe that the software gives a realistic view of how it will look unless I copy the design over itself.

Can anyone give me some perspective on the best way to approach this issue? (Besides buying Illustrator, I'm stuck with Corel Draw)

and is this also an issue with Illustrator?
1x
2x
3x



out of curiosity, did you add the duplicate layers to a larger pic, then shrink it, or is this the size at which you added the duplicates? mabe there's something about the resizing algorithm that messes with the transparency.

Josephus


quality posts: 25 Private Messages Josephus
no1 wrote:out of curiosity, did you add the duplicate layers to a larger pic, then shrink it, or is this the size at which you added the duplicates? mabe there's something about the resizing algorithm that messes with the transparency.


hmm. I added them large, and then exported at a smaller size. It allows me to export a jpg and specify the size.

I'll try it the other way.

Hold on.

wait, though. I can see the difference before I export, so it can't be that.

The most frustrating thing is that the third image there is clearly a lot more like the original image than the first one, and I think that the third one is probably most like the actual shirt would be.

bluchez


quality posts: 2 Private Messages bluchez

When a large image is made small, it blends multiple colors of multiple pixels into one color for one pixel. This is done for translucency of pixels in addition to color of pixels.

When you have a transparent edge around something, and then shrink it, it blends multiple pixels together, some transparent and some opaque, and produces a translucent pixel with some color. That means, around the edge, you end up with some, for the sake of argument, very translucent cyan pixels. If you layer multiple translucent cyan pixels on top of each other, it makes the result less translucent cyan. If you were to put these over a black background, and had a 10% opacity on each cyan pixel, the number of times you copy a layer onto itself will determine how bright the cyan on the edge looks.

Josephus


quality posts: 25 Private Messages Josephus
bluchez wrote:When a large image is made small, it blends multiple colors of multiple pixels into one color for one pixel. This is done for translucency of pixels in addition to color of pixels.

When you have a transparent edge around something, and then shrink it, it blends multiple pixels together, some transparent and some opaque, and produces a translucent pixel with some color. That means, around the edge, you end up with some, for the sake of argument, very translucent cyan pixels. If you layer multiple translucent cyan pixels on top of each other, it makes the result less translucent cyan. If you were to put these over a black background, and had a 10% opacity on each cyan pixel, the number of times you copy a layer onto itself will determine how bright the cyan on the edge looks.



Ah. Then this amounts to an antialiasing error. So, because my images start out as a bunch of individual blobs of color, layered over one another, the result has some transparency because it isn't displayed onscreen at 300 dpi, but rather at 72 or 96- 96 I think, for my monitor. Accordingly, I'm stuck with this deceptively darker image unless I make multiple copies of the image layered over each other. I will in effect be lessening the antialiasing transparency effect. or increasing the gradient of transparency.

Thank you for giving me a mechanism I can understand.