Shipbucket

Well, your posting at this date is not the only instance Ro-Po and his work has been brought up in discussions both here in the forum, but more so in our Discord. Naturally, when I address the subject, i will talk about its bigger picture, so Im sorry if you have missed out
sections of this entire depate. There indeed has been and continues to be dissident undertone against SB style rules, and against the staff of SB as supervising those rules.
Psilander used to post in the normal channels, But his work was later removed, nor is uploaded in the mainsite. Main idea of the subforum structure is to support the mainsite and its uploading, and secondary role is to tie the AU/imaginary work to the same style standard as the uploaded work. Indeed there is no drama in Psilanders work, nor does random outsiders come to our discord to troll about "how great champion he is against the pharisees of the SB staff". Naturally such behavior products softer approach from the staff, but same rules applies to him as anyone else.
No, its official statement, that Shipbucket is about our style and scale and working against is not going to be included in our platforms. If someone doesn't like our style and rules, there is plenty of other platforms to go to. Also, Shipbucket in general terms includes our set scales where same style rules applies, they are SB scale, FD scale, Gunbucket & Weaponbucket scales and the new Soldierbucket scales. Work that does not apply to the style or scale rules goes to the non-shipbucket section or other platforms all together.
I've not said Ro-po being a snowflake, my quote and point is actually well and clearly understandable, and i don't need to repeat it here. The issue of bending or breaking the style rules are not limited to Ro-Po's work so to give any administrator input of the matter, i naturally need to address the issue, which unfortunately have given us quite solid case of certain generalizations.
Everyone can draw what ever they want, naturally. The forum and discord has specific and clear structure of what goes where, Non-SB sections in both platforms allow people to work outside the style already, there is no need to anything else, but to artist who make their threads to know the right place to post them.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

Well, the way this thread has been going is not what I'd intended. Sorry about that.

But I have to admit that I find it difficult to reconcile even what goes into the official archives with the degree of severity with which I now see I'm supposed to interpret the rules.

This might sound dumb, but it appears to me I'll only be able to follow this discussion if something I did is used as an example. (Owing to me knowing my thought process, that is.)

So far I've only uploaded one drawing in the non-AU section, namely this:



It's a redrawing of darth_panda's original Fennek reconnaissance vehicle with the additions of the upgraded version and a look as it would've appeared in Afghanistan.

I use an eight-piece colour palette. Aside from places where several black lines would inevitably meet, I use coloured lines to indicate objects that are completely circular (like the retractable mast up there) or to portray shapes (like the antenna) that would have to be smaller than 1 pixel but need including because they're a prominent part of the vehicle/aircraft…

So, is this too much deviation? Is it okay? Is it just okay?

Oh my... where to start...

First of all, it seems to me beyond doubt, that Ro-Po Max's style IS somewhat outside the mainstream SB/FD standard, so Armoured Man is IMHO right to the extent that direct comparison between them and "mainstream" works is bit pointless.

And going further, in chronological order...

No idea what is an "acceptable amount of shades", but from experience I'd say that in SB practical number is 5:
-lighter (-1),
-basic (0),
-shaded ("aft-or-downward-facing", +1),
-double shaded ("aft-or-downward-facing with overhang", +2),
-less than right angle (in original SB rules black should be used only to depict a right angle or some other kind of break in surface, such as doors, hatches etc., +3/4)

Earliest FD works seemed to work reasonably fine with merely 4 shades, but for majority of Authors that evolved into larger numbers. Personally I use 6, though 5 could suffice as well (although for some vehicles with complicated shapes, like Sd.Kfz.251 or BA-64, an extra intermediate shade might be occasionaly useful):
--lighter (-1),
-basic (0),
-shaded ("aft-or-downward-facing/panel lines on basic", +1),
-double shaded ("aft-or-downward-facing with overhang/panel lines on shaded/extra-strong panel-or-hatch lines on basic", +2),
-triple shaded ("panel lines on double shaded/extra-strong panel-or-hatch lines on shaded", +3),
-less than black contour (++4 - double ++ here means that in my personal practice difference between this shade and previous one is typically much larger than between any other two shades).
(for 5-shade style, application of ++4 shade would be split between +3 and black)

Here's an oversized sample of my understanding of shading (top-left FD, top-right SB, in blue frame on bottom-left is sample of "old-style" 4-shade FD shading):
(and light green is, of course, a stand-in for black)



Anyway, it's fairly easy to notice, that on average majority of drawing's surface is filled with just 3 shades (-1/0/+1).

Recently Little Bird's works indeed seem to travel in bit similar direction, but as far as I could notice, for the most part they still fit within 3 "major" shades.

FD rules (as well as Gunbucket, Weaponbucket, Soldierbucket or Carbucket, which are all sort of "official Shipbucket scales") were never codified to an extent equal to SB, and over time certain slight differences developed (for example - IMHO most prominent one - that black is used also at angles that aren't strictly right/90-deg. ones - not least because aircraft - majority of FD-scale content - tend to have very few of them). What is certain, though, that they must conform to the spirit of SB-scale rules.
As The_Sprinklez pointed out, "the primary point of Shipbucket as a community is a conformal and universal style" - and that means that the essence of the style should not be made overcomplicated.

As mentioned above, originally that "shadow meets shadow" thing was not included in early FD, but that has somewhat changed (I think I was one of earliest FD creators that took it into account). On the other hand, I haven't noticed a need for an "illuminated/lighter" equivalent of it (with partial exception of showing the texture of linen-covered elements like wings on top-views only).

That's a sensitive matter. Some minor (but often "not-very-big-but-not-quite-so-minor" too) elements are routinely depicted by a number of top-tier Authors without black outlines when otherwise it would be inconvenient (tank tracks are most common example). Though I fully agree, that generally that should be only a minor exception to the rule and should be otherwise avoided.

(and of course some things like sails, tarpaulin coverings, as well as antenna wires or even 1px-thin pipes need not to have outline by default, and personally some time ago I begun to replace black outline on rubber tires with very dark shade, because, after all, their shape usually IS NOT equally solid as metal, wood etc.)

It's "not-a-Shipbucket" in the sense that "Shipbucket" means both the website/community and the scale of 15,24 centimeters to pixel, so it's "not 15,24/px scale", but still "an established SB-community scale".

To me, Gollevainen words: when read in entirety do not call specifically Ro-Po Max all these things, but that such "stretching of boundaries" beyond certain level easily can IN GENERAL create such impression.

Oh my... since I'm doing the uploading, who's going to actually oversee me, and tell me if something actually does follow "strict SB rules"? Any volunteers? And what actually are these "strict SB rules", especially when we talk about scales other than 15,24cm/px?

OOOOPS!!!...

http://shipbucket.com/drawings/search?c ... =&drawing=

Shall I delete them all?
(To my excuse: perhaps I'm wrong, but they might have been - at least majority of them - originally uploaded before Psilander was relegated to Non-SB section)

And all these as well, btw?

http://shipbucket.com/vehicles/search?c ... =&drawing=

http://shipbucket.com/vehicles/search?c ... =&drawing=

Back in the day I raised doubts about conformity of Ro-Po Max's SB-scale works and was told that they are not to be uploaded (per his own decision), but in regards to conformity of FD-scale drawings (not specifically his, but it was more about how wide latitude regarding style should be applied), the replies from the Admins I got were more in the spirit of "let's not be too strict about people's styles, besides, it can be deleted in the future, if we change our mind".

lest not delete anything untill we get statisfactory solution to this whole issue. Ive been pushing the other staff at discord to start working on some sort of actuall shading rule/guideline (a tutorial style) to once and all determin what the shading in SB&co style is about, why its important that it is consistent cross the drawings and artists and why SB is not actually intended as a style to produce maxium flashy pixel art, but spesific type of art dictated by a cohesive style that everyone can jump in and draw with. All opinions and ideas of what would be best styleset for the shading are naturally welcome

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

Perhaps instead of a formalized shading style in such strict terms we lay down boundaries and define what's allowed and not allowed, that way there is still room for personal styles and variation. It might be a good compromise so that members can still feel free to create their own sub-style but also clearly defines what is and isn't in the spirit of Shipbucket.

_________________
Projects:
Panelbucket - Aircraft Avionics and Instrument Panels in 15px=1cm: http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10389
Clyde's Eagles - Cessna Aircraft since 1945: http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic. ... 7&p=204669
Im Schatten des Adlers - An Alternate History Timeline: http://shipbucket.com/wiki/index.php/Ca ... des_Adlers

My 2 cents here.....

In the past the forums and main site have always been kept very separate. You could almost do whatever you wanted stylisticly when doing AU work or when you just posted on the forums, and no issues arose from that. However, drawing styles that went too far from the standards were not uploaded to the main site. (and, in more recent days, not welcome on the shipbucket wiki for the same reason)
Moving artists to non-shipbucket because they choose to not follow the standards in such a way that it still matches existing work, is not a punishment but a way of making things clear about the shipbucket standards.

Take, for example, this case: a new artist sees Ro-Po's drawings and decided he like the way they look and he wants to emulate that style. Then that new artist gets told that style does not match the shipbucket standards and is not welcome on the main site or wiki. Ro-po has consciously decided that he wants to make his art in that way, to make it look better then the standards allow. That's great, and he is free to do so. However, the new artist has not made this choice, he just saw art on the forums in the shipbucket or FD sections that he decided to model his own drawings after.

Personally, I would like for this battle to end. As gollevainen states, there are works from Ro-Po (and possibly other artists) that are so close to our standards that they might as well be. These are welcome in the main FD and SB sections. Other drawings might be a lot further from our standards, and those I would prefer not to be in these sections of the forums, as these sections align with the main site and wiki for clarity of communication.

If that was the case, a drawing that does not follow the standards at all can get all the credit it is due for being amazing art, and the discussion can start in a civil manner over art that might be not entirely within the scale or might be within. Ro-Po, and Psilander, and in the past Rurik-2 and quite a few other artists are still very welcome in the community, they can post their artwork in non-shipbucket in both the discord and the forums. This signifies nothing but the fact that they choose to deviate from the existing guidelines to create art that is in their eyes better, or more lifelike, or maybe better fitting their own artstyles.
Ro-Po has chosen to not limit himself to the existing standards. Most others choose to work within said standards. Each makes their own choice, and the only thing we need to agree on is to make this a clear choice for everyone: there is not any right way or wrong way, there is just the way people like to work on this hobby. The section of the forum we post in just signifies what choice we made: within or outside of the standards.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Amazing thread - looking forward to the next ten pages

Regarding Psilander's work: my question about deleting it was somewhat sarcastic (failed to add the emoticon). Because, you see, there's an issue here: if his work were to be removed from the Archive, then something like half of the "Sweden" folder goes out of the window.
(Personally I'd keep them, but add the comment along the lines that they no longer represent acceptable standard and are kept for the sake of good ol' times - differently worded, of course)

@Dtn
Perhaps your wish will be fulfilled. Have any other constructive thoughts to offer?

Personally, for the FD scale, I use a base color, plus three dark shades, and two light shades. Changing colors on my drawings with GIMP is really easy, if you have your own color palette ready.

However I understand that the community needs a standard, but, if I can advise, maybe it's the right time to evolve this standard, I don't pretend that mine is the best or the most suitable, but probably a compromise would be right.