Portraits Discussion

[xpace]

Personally, I really enjoy seeing the interesting character portraits and the numerous color combinations of the palette-swapping. It's why I stick with it when creating my own character portraits, despite the many hours involved. (See my Cyclops created in SPORE thread and My GH Portraits thread for details.)

But are there specific guidelines on how to submit new character portraits for consideration? And is it enough to post them on this forum? Or must we email them to Joseph Hewitt for that?

I was surprised, for example, to find this decent replacement for "por_f_strength" (uploaded by fmunoz.geo) in the "Files > Graphics" area of the old gearhead_dev Yahoo group:





I was surprised because, despite being uploaded in January of 2005, it was never incorporated into either GearHead 1 or GearHead 2. Granted, for all I know it may have been rejected from GH2 for not quite meeting a quality standard or some other criteria. However, I think it was clearly superior to the original "por_f_strength" in GH1!:



Yet... I see that the last version of GH1 (ver. 1.1) was released on Feb. 10, 2007 and it still uses the original, inferior version of "por_f_strength". What's more puzzling is that I also find a decent replacement for "por_f_cp1", also found in the "Files > Graphics" area of the old gearhead_dev Yahoo group,  which was also uploaded by fmunoz.geo and on the same date: Jan 10, 2005 (it's even found side-by-side):



Again, it's clearly superior to the old, original version in GH1:



But despite the fact that the last version of GH1 was released in 2007, it stuck with the old, inferior version of "por_f_cp1". That said, the new and improved version was included in GH2. From this, I might assume that it was simply overlooked or forgotten in GH1, but that it was rediscovered and put into GH2. However, I'd be curious to know if the remake of "por_f_strength" was intentionally left out of GH2, or was it just overlooked again?

[xpace]

On a related matter, I see that there are already at least 19 new, high quality portraits in GH2 that were not available in GH1. Very cool! I also see that many of the old, low quality, portraits from GH1 are missing in GH2. Personally, I will not miss these as they seemed an eyesore anyway. (No offense, but they really clashed with the high quality ones!)

Question: Would it be permissible to compile these 19 new images into a .zip and upload it so others can use them in GH1 without having to download GH2 and sort through all the files? (Personally, I'm divided over using them in a new GH1 game... or waiting until GH2 is finished and being pleasantly surprised by the new portraits.)

What puzzles me, however, is that there are still a few portraits left that I think look quite sub-standard. For example, don't you think that "por_m_jate" and "por_m_thin" look out of place when compared with the rest? (Again, no offense intended.) Or, perhaps these are placeholders until someone does a remake?

Also, I had this idea: Perhaps we could set up a poll where we could give a rating on how well we like each portrait? Or maybe just have a vote to determine our favorite portraits?

[xpace]

While carefully examining each portrait in-game, I noticed some unsightly pixels and slight palette-swap flaws in a couple of them. In particular, the pixels out of place in "por_m_guy5" and "por_m_guy6" were rather noticeable to me. (Though some might have to squint their eyes to see it.)

Here's the original "por_m_guy5" with arrows pointing out the flaws:



And here's the same after a bit of image editing:



Here's the game file download, for those interested:



Here's the original "por_m_guy6" with arrows pointing out the flaws:



And here's "por_m_guy6" after a bit of image editing:



Here's the fixed "por_m_guy6" file, for those interested:

[xpace]

Recently, I tried to look up the licensing terms under which GearHead 1 and 2 is distributed. Strangely, the license was not stated either on the main website (no mention on the About page where one would expect), the Sourceforge project pages, or - as far as I can tell - even in the GearHead wiki. (Certainly, the license is not mentioned on the wiki main page, like one would expect...)

Finally, in the "readme.txt" I found this:

GearHead: Arena is distributed under the terms of the LGPL. See "license.txt"
for more details.

But, despite this statement, you guys completely forgot to include the license.txt file in either GearHead: Arena version 1.0 or version 1.1! Thankfully, you did remember to include license.txt in GearHead 2.

Anyway, I see both GearHead 1 and 2 are distributed under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License. Question: Does this mean that the individual game components, including the images, are also distributed under LGPL? And how compatible is LGPL with GNU General Public License?

The reason I'm asking is because I found these cool character portraits on the content submission site for The Battle for Wesnoth (formerly known as "Heir to the Throne"), which is another open-source PC game project. As clearly stated by their Copylefts notice, all contributions submitted are licensed under GNU General Public License.

So, I'm wondering if we could ask for permission to incorporate a few of these in GearHead?

It took a bit of work with shifting around the palette and manipulating colors. And some editing was called for, like removing the elven ears from Kalenz. But I think I was able to get good results in my test in GearHead:

















What do you think?

[Ladi]

I rather like the way that the portraits from Battle For Wesnoth look. The fantasy look doesn't much clash with the current portraits, other than perhaps the sword in the last one.  However, it's honestly not as though we are hurting for higher quality portraits.  Whether it's a good idea at all to use graphics from another game is up to Mr. Hewitt really.

As for how to get your portraits in game, mine were posted in the forums and later put in the game.  I think there might have been a few that I later emailed to him, but for the most part, that's the way my portraits ended up in game.  He does have a son to take care of now, so I imagine that could be a reason for how those portraits got overlooked.  I sent Mr. Hewitt a set of wallpapers for one of his comics quite a while ago, and I haven't seen any evidence of it ever getting shared online either...

[Joseph Hewitt]

Quoting: xpace

But are there specific guidelines on how to submit new character portraits for consideration? And is it enough to post them on this forum? Or must we email them to Joseph Hewitt for that?

No specific guidelines, just as Ladi said I'm scatterbrained at the best of times and am now dealing with an almost one year old child on top of everything else. Speaking of which, I believe I promised to make a new release of GH1 with the updated portraits and several other changes a few months ago... let's see if I can do that this week.

I seem to recall that there was some reason why the CP1 portrait was included but the Strength portrait wasn't... can't remember why, now. Maybe Francisco was planning to rework it?

The Jate and Thin portraits were just below the allowable level of ugliness to make the cut. I think Businessman should also be removed. On the female side, Fashion also should be removed. I'm working on a replacement portrait for Artemis which will hopefully look less cross eyed and empty headed.

As for your portrait, sorry that I didn't get back to you on that. I decided against including it because it doesn't match the style I'm aiming for (which is kind of a 1980s Sunrise giant robot cartoons look). However, if you wanted to send me a portrait pack I could make this available at SourceForge as optional content. The same applies for the other custom packs people have put together. For this, you should probably email me.

Quoting: xpace

Question: Does this mean that the individual game components, including the images, are also distributed under LGPL?

We've discussed the content licensing before, but didn't come to a final answer. For now it's all "freely redistributable" but not explicitly covered under the LGPL. Now that we're going to need meshes this is something that really ought to be worked out.

The idea we were tossing around was a license whereby submitted works would have shared copyright. I would be free to use these things within the GearHead universe, while the creator would retain the right to use them anywhere else. The reason why we need to work out such a license is that the game may be LGPL, but there are derivative works (such as the GearHead comics) which aren't. I believe some variation of the Creative Commons license could do this.

Quoting: xpace

So, I'm wondering if we could ask for permission to incorporate a few of these in GearHead?

Yes, I think some of those would fit in nicely. I especially like the first one and the third one.

Quoting: Ladi

However, it's honestly not as though we are hurting for higher quality portraits. Whether it's a good idea at all to use graphics from another game is up to Mr. Hewitt really.

Portraits are one thing we can never really have enough of, IMO. As for using graphics from another game, as long as we get permission from the artist I think that's a good thing. Maybe we can meet some new people who will want to contribute to GearHead, or maybe we can contribute something to them. In some ways being an open source developer is a lot like being a hippie, except we bathe more often and get invited to different parties.

Quoting: Ladi

I sent Mr. Hewitt a set of wallpapers for one of his comics quite a while ago, and I haven't seen any evidence of it ever getting shared online either...

Argh! I was going to post those at the GearHead blog when Mischa's Story started up again! I'll do that this week. Sorry.

...

One last thing: I've done two new portraits myself. The shading on the woman's face is messed up, but I'm fairly happy with the guy.

[Phil Munoz]

Joseph Hewitt:

Those portraits are looking really good!  The shadow on the face of the woman may look like a scar or a burn.

xspace:

Thanks for noticing the flaws on my portraits.  I was being really sloppy there, probably because I was going for quantity rather than quality.

I am quite surprised those wesnoth portraits fit in with the other gearhead portraits.  I think it would be better if Joseph Hewitt or someone in behalf of him would make a formal request for permission to use those in gearhead.  The internet is serious business, if you get my meaning.

[Francisco Munoz]

Ohhh those old things... I really forgot about them. They were a try to improve the old ones but without much success. I should try to create some new ones.

  I could try to ask Jethrel, Kitty and other main contributors of the BfW portraits to use some of the portraits. Maybe even they could re-license some of them as LGPL. Those examples posted were destined to be updated, current BfW portrait set has higher quality.

PS: I used to be the 1st Wesnoth art coordinator (until we got someone better :-) )

[Vair]

Just my little two cents I've wrote in the past and which would fit this topic, even if no one cares:

As much as most of portraits look fine on their own, I must that so many greatly different styles makes rather bad impression in my case. Not everyone may share my taste, but I would rather have option to choose whose portraits I want to see in game (although unless artist wouldn't make more of them, it would lead to armies of clones). And it doesn't mean that completely every portrait needs to be done by one person - one artist can take portraits of people, another of animals and we can bring that drooling guy from the asylum to show us how his cthulhu visions looks like as well.

Yes, it would need quite some work and I do know that for now there's not enough material to make several graphic sets but it does pain me when so many good graphics look bad just because they don't fit each other.

Edit: I've stumbled upon my post.. damn, writing those around midnight surely makes lot of typos show up.

[Joseph Hewitt]

Quoting: Francisco Munoz

I could try to ask Jethrel, Kitty and other main contributors of the BfW portraits to use some of the portraits.

Could you do that? I think it would be good if they were contacted by someone they know, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a lazy bum. Okay, that's the main reason, but it's not the entire reason.

Quoting: Vair

I must that so many greatly different styles makes rather bad impression in my case.

I agree. I think Ladi's and Phil's portraits go well together, though- the main outlier is me, and I've been trying to move myself closer to their style. Maybe I should make a collage of portraits and post it as the style canon?

[Vair]

Quoting: Joseph Hewitt

Maybe I should make a collage of portraits and post it as the style canon?

Well, I think it could prove quite nice if you would find some time to do that.

Although I would still suggest at least leaving possibility of several graphic sets open - that way if someone wants to contribute but the style by no way can fit the canon, nothing will go to waste - maybe it'll be just used in different set which may fit some group's taste more.

For that we don't really need any code change, I think - people should be able to exchange images themselves.

[Snakebit STI]

I say go with the more modern anime style for the character portraits (por_f_gogglegirl, por_f_music, por_m_coolerthanthou, etc.) and 80s style mecha. Why? Modern anime looks a lot better, but the old style mecha are much smoother and therefore should be easier to model and look better low-poly.
[edit] ninja'd. I don't know who made which portraits, so I don't know if I just agreed with you or not...

[Phil Munoz]

Quoting: Joseph Hewitt

I agree. I think Ladi's and Phil's portraits go well together, though- the main outlier is me, and I've been trying to move myself closer to their style. Maybe I should make a collage of portraits and post it as the style canon?

Rather than you trying to move closer to the contributors' style, I think it would be better if you do set a style canon, and contributors would then try to match your style.  The collage need not be too comprehensive, just give a basic idea of the look you like, and the standard for quality (such as shading style, line width variation, cleanliness...).

Or, we can have contributors give concept sketches of portrait designs and have a single artist re-interpret it for consistency.

*edit: on the second suggestion, i think it would be better if joseph hewitt would not be the one to re-interpret every portrait, so he could spend less time with the graphics and focus on the gameplay

[SharkD]

The edited versions do look better. The Battle for Wesnoth images look good too.

-Mike

[Joseph Hewitt]

Quoting: Vair

Although I would still suggest at least leaving possibility of several graphic sets open - that way if someone wants to contribute but the style by no way can fit the canon, nothing will go to waste - maybe it'll be just used in different set which may fit some group's taste more.

Definitely, that's no problem. All you need to do to add new portraits is to drop them into the image directory- we could release as many alternate portrait sets as people want to make.

Quoting: Snakebit STI

I say go with the more modern anime style for the character portraits (por_f_gogglegirl, por_f_music, por_m_coolerthanthou, etc.)

I just took a look through some character galleries, and I think you're probably right about that.

Quoting: Phil Munoz

Rather than you trying to move closer to the contributors' style, I think it would be better if you do set a style canon, and contributors would then try to match your style.

Trying to adjust the style I use for GearHead is a learning experience for me. I try not to stick to a single style in my own work, anyhow.

I'll try to get something put together this afternoon.