/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>2248144
the tutorial doesn't (or shouldn't) define pixel art for the site, it's only intended to teach people the craft. the submission rules come the closest to a definition of pixel art for PJ, but even they are only intended to control what gets into the gallery, not tell people what is/isn't pixel art. It's necessary to set parameters when you have to moderate a site dedicated exclusively to pixel art.

as for digital photographs being pixel art.... nah. it's more about the approach than the medium, "pixel art" existed long before the home computer (cross-stitching, etc.)

shitty photo of some 19th century "pixel art" I saw in a museum

>>2084848
I agree that the process is definitely different (than regular digital painting, I assume). I disagree that it shares much with pointilism, I think this relationship is often overstated.

It has more in common with cross-stitching, certain types of beadwork (see: wampum belts),many paintings by Robert Delaunay, and one particular example of dyed wood inlays that is found on a music cabinet at the Detroit Institute of Art (pic related).

>>1992225