Shipbucket

While I do understand your sentiments, Golly, I don't quite agree with you. The fact that SB during my association with it has risen well above and beyond the crude and simple to be an instrument in accurate rendering of historic ships - I don't think you should resent that, but rather applaud and embrace it!
So many wonderful artists today reside here, who are responsible for some of the most outstanding artwork I've seen in nautica! I don't need to recite names, Everyone know who they are!

However, Golly, you're right about the tendency of "style- and rules Nazism" rather spreading its murky shadow across our board. I may have been guilty of it myself, and apologize hereby if it is so. We could have far friendlier discussions about our differences, instead of sniping at each other or handing out crude, rude comments - and we could reach compromises about what style(-s) is/are appropriate for a certain time-frame, ship-type etc. It's, in the end, all about being civil on the board, something we do tend to forget - everyone of us, from time to time!

I personally cherish the strive for absolute accuracy. For instance, I found so many errors and inaccuracies on the published line drawings of the Pennsylvania-class, so that I had to rely heavily on side elevation photos to get the scale correct! SB can, by the various artists' ambitions, correct such errors and present to the world concisely correct drawings!
And Golly, you, as the owner of the site, will have a great legacy to the world already!

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Yea, I'm not say that its a bad thing in sense. I think my point was to remark that the attitude with the old buckets "loose" days was bit more relaxing than the attitude of todays perfectionism. Then again, the past was always golden and modern day rotten
Yes this is basicly the core of my concerns. Mostly its down to us members rather than the issue itself, but the entire idea of this style revisiting thing is to get clarity on some issues, and make the rules so that it leaves out the interuptions that causes the damage.

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

Part of the fun (most of it actually) is researching the ship in question and learning everything possible about it. The drawing by extension becomes extremely accurate. Regarding parts, I try to draw mine from original plans using dimensions provided by government documents wherever possible. I spent too much time having to redraw stuff because it was inaccurate because I had been lazy at the time.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

Got to agree with the research being a lot of the fun. Researching the Type 056 has been very interesting and as I learn more about it I want to make the drawing as accurate as I possibly can. Another fun thing is that the modern Chinese Navy isn't as prolific as other's so I'm having to draw a lot of things from scratch which makes it feel more like it's mine.

Yes the research is fun!

On drawing, for me it's trying to coax the pixels for detail, elevating the damned things to suggest and simulate as much detail as possible for such small scale drawings. The drawings for me are more than just a picture, they can become a means of conveying information and maybe a bit of emotion, life, and a snapshot in time.

As I'm vector based, it's also a challenge to make pixel based illustrations appear smooth, crisp, and to my eye, looking the way they should. That's satisfying when I achieve that.

CraigH

_________________
In active progress
More Ships with Sails
Early Torpedo Boats in SB and FD Scales
Some railroad stuff
More random stuff that strikes me!

After discussing things with few members, i've decided to give this thread sort of Bumb to see if anyone else has anything to add to it, and if Not I will start draftin a new set of rules for public acceptance.
To recap the summary of this threads discussion; the new rules should be:
1) clear and simple
2) not restrictive other in issues that borderlines the pixel art (and clear set of what can be done and what not)
3) some words over gentlemens protocol over redoing existing drawings by other members.

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

The basic things!

- that people doesn't use thousand of colors for shading. as few diferent color as posible (just like the old system. the same thing for the hull... but there you have an main color, shading for 45 degree, and a color for sharp corners, etc.

- Window color to a more realistic color. except if the ship use a specific color.
- glass railing color standard, except if the ship use a specific color.

- Illustrations in 2D and 3D* for how shading work.

heaven forbid we are not to change the window colors!
But possibility to give some range where people can work could be possible.

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

Those below are more or less the ruels I'm currently using on my drawings (Parenthesis show some similar styles used by other Shipbucketers). I've posted them before but I'll gladly share them again.

-If superstructure shading for forward and aft facing surfaces is implemented, light should always come from the bow. (A variant of this is implemented in Colosseum's drawings, and shows the shades on the back of curved surfaces only.)

-Superstructure breaks or bends are drawn in black for 90-degree breaks, dark grey for angular breaks, no darker bends on curved objects. (Gollevainen variant omits the dark grey line on breaks)

-Curved/Cylindrical objects are shaded with a small stripe of lighter shade, wider stripe of basic shade and another narrow stripe of darker shade. Both lighter and darker shades are relative to the object shape, but usually the basic shade section should be bigger than the other two. (Another technique is that used by Gollevainen and Heuhen, with the lighter curved surface represented by using two single-pixel stripes of lighter shade to give the "illusion" of reflected light.)

-All platforms supposed to be walkable should be three-pixel thick (with maybe a few borderline exceptions in order to avoid the two-black-lines issues and pixel blobs).

-Standard railings and Standard window color as it has been always done.

-Underwater hull in standard shipbucket red unless it is known to be in some other color.

-Proper hull shading (darker shade were the hull angles downward more than 45°) used if the general shape is known, can be discerned from pictures or, even better, if the artist has body plans to work with. Otherwise old standard u/w shading to b used.

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation

I have already expressed my opinions on the issue earlier in this thread:
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =3#p119198
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =3#p119441
http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =3#p120525
and I happen to still hold these views.

Now I'd like to relate to some issues raised by other Members.

1) Fair Use doctrine and "asking" to be allowed to use someone else's work.
As has been already mentioned, formally speaking, asking for it is not needed. That said, IMHO when it comes to personal designs (be it parts or whole ships) - and I mean wholly (or "in majority") personal designs (AU) then asking for permission should be a must.

2) Use of "official parts" and related issues (in relation to point 4. here: http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =3#p119324 )
It has been always my belief, that Shipbucket is supposed to have works made in common style (even though for all practical purposes it actually somewhat evolved over time) and that use of common parts is one of the main elements that constitute that common style which in large part actually IS built on large degree of uniformity.
Of course, it doesn't mean that parts ought to be applied without any thinking on part of the "end-user". In fact, for example my shading habits are bit different from Gollevainen's, so when I'm using parts from His Soviet Sheets they are - besides slightly different color used - bit different in that regard, but they remain in principle the same parts (black contours are in the same places, so are other elements).
(and if it means that I'm a "style- and rules Nazi"... then... )