Spriting is the worst thing in the world. I've abandoned projects with fully functional engines I coded myself from scratch because I got to the spriting stage and was like "fuck this, I hate it". As ugly as I find almost all 2.5d games, I fully understand why that became the norm as soon as consoles could handle it.
I'm part of that probably large segment of programmers who can only draw stick figures and finger paint and if anything I make looks beautiful it was because I was rendering a fractal or using someone else's visualization library
Spriting is the worst thing in the world. I've abandoned projects with fully functional engines I coded myself from scratch because I got to the spriting stage and was like "fuck this, I hate it". As ugly as I find almost all 2.5d games, I fully understand why that became the norm as soon as consoles could handle it.
I'm part of that probably large segment of programmers who can only draw stick figures and finger paint and if anything I make looks beautiful it was because I was rendering a fractal or using someone else's visualization library
Drawing is a technical skill that can be practiced like any other; it's not like you were a 1337 h4x0r when you fell out of the womb either. Pick up paper, pencil and a book ("Fun With a Pencil" by Andrew Loomis is a popular suggestion, but I'm sure KF has threads you can ask), and go ahead.
Drawing is a technical skill that can be practiced like any other; it's not like you were a 1337 h4x0r when you fell out of the womb either. Pick up paper, pencil and a book ("Fun With a Pencil" by Andrew Loomis is a popular suggestion, but I'm sure KF has threads you can ask), and go ahead.
I have a bit of a tremor which has already gotten in the way of me learning how to solder. The nice thing about computers is that you can almost always hit the Backspace key.
Drawing is a technical skill that can be practiced like any other; it's not like you were a 1337 h4x0r when you fell out of the womb either. Pick up paper, pencil and a book ("Fun With a Pencil" by Andrew Loomis is a popular suggestion, but I'm sure KF has threads you can ask), and go ahead.
No, but I know how I would feel if I didn't eat breakfast or lunch. This is the programming thread, it selects for potential programmers. Some people are not fit for programming and never will be, and it's the same with drawing.
Drawing is first and foremost a physical/mental skill. It doesn't give enough feedback in the process and limited feedback in the end ("it's ugly"), and specifically pencil and paper have few undos and limited opportunity to act on feedback afterward. Code on the other hand can be endlessly and losslessly improved on.
Yes, you only need motor skills to complete a "drawing for affluent liberal women" step-by-step tutorial, but it's worse than copypasting code. A complete beginner would get a working development environment and a modifiable program out of copypasting a tutorial. "hello world" can be modified to say "behead journos". An innocent python telegram bot can be set to spam, no need to know what async is (I still don't, lol). But nothing can be learned or achieved from adding a few brush strokes to a Pronkstilleven painting, this isn't how drawing works.
Built SDL3 (!!!), now working through 10-year-old SDL2 tutorials. No troons in sight except the master branch is called "main", no CoC (on github). Coding like it's 1996.
Drawing is first and foremost a physical/mental skill. It doesn't give enough feedback in the process and limited feedback in the end ("it's ugly"), and specifically pencil and paper have few undos and limited opportunity to act on feedback afterward. Code on the other hand can be endlessly and losslessly improved on.
You're fundamentally approaching reviews the wrong way if "it's bad" is all that comes out at the end. This isn't even art-specific. Do you program that way, too? Write code, test once, "doesn't work", throw up hands, "woe is me for I'm not born a programmer"? Of course not, and you've probably groaned about people who do exactly that. You look at what doesn't work, why it doesn't work, and how your reference that does work did it differently. Nothing stops you from applying that to drawing or any other subject.
So you can't perfectly undo actions without limit; that's physical reality. But what of it? Your first drawing won't be refined into a perfect masterpiece over ten years anyway, and neither will your hundredth. Just take the lessons from your first attempt, draw your subject better a second time, and throw away the first drawing the same way you have thrown away old code and entire projects in the past.
Which is why nobody learns how to draw this way. You're clearly aware of the way people do learn it, but offhandedly dismiss it as "worse than copypasting code", despite the fact that the guy who actually wrote a basic chatbot following a step-by-step tutorial will clearly learn much more in the process than the guy who just copypasted a chatbot and changed two lines. Hell, you yourself are currently following such a tutorial. Why, if it's worse?
>Made it so if one of my methods isnt working properly my script prints, "Kill yourself you fucking retarded nigger." To the terminal.
>Forget about it
>Fast forward 2 days later
>I test run my project after adding new stuff
>The output on my terminal says "Kill yourself you fucking retarded nigger."
>MFW
Which is why nobody learns how to draw this way. You're clearly aware of the way people do learn it, but offhandedly dismiss it as "worse than copypasting code",
Standalone "experiences" that are guaranteed to produce a nice picture to show off on the filipina slave market are not how people learn to draw. I dismiss them because I did about two dozen of them and painted nice pictures but (predictably) learned fuck all. They aren't designed to teach, they're designed to entertain penthouse trophy wives.
They go like this:
I pay $10. The instructor in the video says, "we'll be drawing this piece of cake, it's a piece of cake, tee hee", and shows a photo.
She takes a sheet of paper and draws a line. I draw a line. She draws another line. I draw another line, check the angle, take a soft scratch-safe ruler to the screen. She draws a circle. I draw a circle. I check if what I have on my paper matches what she has on hers. She adds a few bubbles to the circle to form a raspberry. I try to copy her bubbles, fail, erase, succeed. Two bubbles, one bubble, three bubbles, about 60 degrees. Nice.
She mixes white and yellow paint. I do the same and try to match her color. She paints the sponge layers. I paint the sponge layers, carefully. Then she takes mauve paint and paints the jam. I paint the-- aw nooooo fuuuuukckck stop staaaahp *dab* *dab* *dab* ok *pause video* now let's repaint the sponge over this mess.
Critically, during all this, I don't look at the photo, there's no use, I barely see the similarity between the photo and my drawing, I copy what the woman does.
Then she's done! And I'm done, too. I love her picture. I don't like my picture, even though I copied her every move and patched over the leak. What did I do wrong? I don't know.
Then I take a photo to poast it on the tutorial site, and whoa, I LOVE the thumbnail! All those cunts on instagram are going to seethe and dilate! And IRL, my picture looks fantastic from a distance. So lifelike! It belongs in a museum! Best $10 I ever spent!
And the instructor herself says, in a reply, oh wow, what a great picture, MaetelFan999, you really nailed it!
But, can I draw another piece of cake from a photo, even from the same photo (not to mention from life)? Lmao no.
You look at what doesn't work, why it doesn't work, and how your reference that does work did it differently. Nothing stops you from applying that to drawing or any other subject.
-- IF they can understand "what doesn't work, why it doesn't work, and how your reference that does work did it differently". If they CAN'T understand that, then they can't learn.
I had drawing/painting in public school, four years of weekly classes, didn't improve at all.
(Incidentally, how's your poetry? Do you know there wer poetry classes in 19th century schools? Can you whip up a sonnet about a rose in an hour, no plagiarism, no chatgpt, no rhyming dictionary?)
I don't know why a site that overwhelmingly believes there are people who can't be taught to not rape, or to not steal, or to return shopping carts, or to not reuse usernames, doesn't believe there are people who can't learn to draw.
despite the fact that the guy who actually wrote a basic chatbot following a step-by-step tutorial will clearly learn much more in the process than the guy who just copypasted a chatbot and changed two lines. Hell, you yourself are currently following such a tutorial. Why, if it's worse?
1. Because programming is different and can be incrementally improved on.
2. Because I am evidently better suited for programming, I see myself progress and enjoy it.
3. Because there's no existing engine that does what I want with slight modifications.
I didn't independently invent the C++ SDL runner, I copypasted it from Sam Lantinga. I won't be independently inventing other parts either.
Let's say I want to make the river sparkle in a static picture. The easiest way is to redraw the whole picture. A better way (probably) is to redraw the part that sparkles. How? I don't know yet, I haven't reached that part, but I'm sure it's a solved problem. Maybe, when* I get to it, their example will be "rustling leaves" or "lightning flashes". Maybe they'll have two frames and I'll have three. But only as an absolutely last resort will I be going through the SDL3 functions trying to invent something completely from scratch. I am trying to learn to write good C++/SDL code, and I don't know what constitutes good C++/SDL code.
*I did get to it while writing the post. Mostly easy but the tutorial says to designate a faux-transparent color, ok for sparkles but I don't like being one color short of a full palette, perhaps there's a way to load images with transparency directly.
There should be an entire movement to make things more like this. master had about as much to do with slavery as "master's in African-American studies" and most likely came from the idea of mastering in AV production but really, now that I think about it, master should actually be called slave_plantation. Also error messages like this one are wrong:
Python:
In [1]: import sys
In [2]: sys.stdout << 'Hello world' << '\n'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TypeError Traceback (most recent call last)
Cell In[2], line 1
----> 1 sys.stdout << 'Hello world' << '\n'
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for <<: '_io.TextIOWrapper' and 'str'
It should be more like NiggerliciousError: go back to the CIA you fucking monkey nigger.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this but does anybody have more of those Esolang Programming games like SIC-1 and A=B? They're fun timewaster games.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this but does anybody have more of those Esolang Programming games like SIC-1 and A=B? They're fun timewaster games.
This is how people learn to draw --
-- IF they can understand "what doesn't work, why it doesn't work, and how your reference that does work did it differently". If they CAN'T understand that, then they can't learn.
I had drawing/painting in public school, four years of weekly classes, didn't improve at all.
(Incidentally, how's your poetry? Do you know there wer poetry classes in 19th century schools? Can you whip up a sonnet about a rose in an hour, no plagiarism, no chatgpt, no rhyming dictionary?)
I don't know why a site that overwhelmingly believes there are people who can't be taught to not rape, or to not steal, or to return shopping carts, or to not reuse usernames, doesn't believe there are people who can't learn to draw.
So grab a book and learn those things first, Christ. Do you think nobody covers fundamentals because anybody who'd use them was already divinely enlightened at birth or what? Your public school experience doesn't matter because public school sucks. A single decent intro book will beat years of public school classes: math, physics, programming, art, any subject. I predictably suck at poetry because I don't know its basics and have no practice in it. But it's pretty clear how to change that: Grab something that goes over the basics, practice, check what others do.
I can believe there are people who can't learn how to draw; this site chronicles some good candidates. But you look, swim and quack like learned helplessness, not congenital retardation.
The only one I tried so far has been Human Resource Machine but the lack of labeled subroutines and visual programming flow control that literally looks like spaghetti got really tiresome around year 20
This one lost points with me because a few of the harder puzzles don't have general-purpose solutions within the constraints (as far as I could tell) and you have to tailor it to the specific test cases they actually give you. Whenever you see "best solutions" that are vastly smaller than a typical solution, those are also "cheats" where they just implemented a lookup table based on the test case data. Lame.
This one lost points with me because a few of the harder puzzles don't have general-purpose solutions within the constraints (as far as I could tell) and you have to tailor it to the specific test cases they actually give you. Whenever you see "best solutions" that are vastly smaller than a typical solution, those are also "cheats" where they just implemented a lookup table based on the test case data. Lame.
You might enjoy "games" that are closer to the pure programming / hacking end of the game spectrum and less towards the pure game spectrum, like Codingame and the various CTF sites that are out there
I've ruined this discussion for myself by reminding myself that these arguments are decades old, so I'll answer this but afterwards am no longer interested in this back-and-forth. An array is defined by its length as much as its address, really moreso, and bounds checking is obvious. Every hardware realization of arrays implements bounds checking, and generally doesn't allow anyone to turn it off, because that's a bad fucking idea. The C language array as just a pointer is, to use someone else's words, almost a negative abstraction, because it doesn't allow any alternative realization of the concept, which is something an abstraction is supposed to do.
Computer hardware used to be designed according to the principle that common operations should be promoted to hardware, and that things which should always happen should be mandated to always happen. Neither of these principles are still in use for anything meaningful.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this but does anybody have more of those Esolang Programming games like SIC-1 and A=B? They're fun timewaster games.
