SpriteLamp

Figured folks here would probably find this quite useful, just found out about it today:

http://www.spritelamp.com/

That sounds like a pretty cool project. Simple idea, yet offered in a neat package that hasn't been available before. I might fund it depending on how much you have to pitch for the pro version...

Besides the use-cases he mentioned, it would be a pretty useful tool for anyone wanting to practice more about how to o good shading of sprites (myself included). Doubt the images it produces will be that applicable to NES graphics though, as the color limitations mean you have to do so many artistic compromises anyway.

I wonder though why it wouldn't offer the option of creating the normal maps from a single height map rather than from several differently lit "lighting profiles"? While the result might be a bit more crude, it should look good enough and has been a standard practice for generating normal map textures in 3d graphics (every standard bump-mapped earth tutorial does it). And finally, it should be a lot more simple to draw for people not so skilled in pixel shading... might be something I'm missing here though.

Edit: Found this really good article on the subject as well http://www.wholehog-games.com/devblog/2 ... a-2d-game/

I guess if you want height mapping, you could draw your diffuse map and then use a height map tool in a traditional 3D modeling program.

Are you talking about trying automatically generate a height map from the diffuse map itself? Diffuse maps make very poor height maps, unless they already have the shading sort of built-into them by using smooth shade of colours, in which case the heightmap would be wrong anyway. So I don't think you'd get the intended results...

To do 3d-lighting of a 2D image you have to somehow add the 3d information somehow. But I'm figuring drawing a height map for your sprites is simpler than drawing multiple versions of lighting.

No. I was thinking make a plane, tessellate it down to one vertex per texel, import the diffuse map, apply a height map as a displacement map, and draw on the height map to sculpt the character. On the other hand, one could use a tool to guess a first approximation of the height map from the diffuse map's skeleton and then edit that.

Meh, seen dynamic lighting like this in a shareware PC game years ago; it is generally not difficult to make, and has been made in countless demos (as in demoscene) during decades. So why it needs kickstarter?

Probably for two reasons: 1. normal map authoring tools created for internal use by demogroups may never have been released to the public, and 2. I don't think those tools guess height from individually lit illustrations.

I don't think it answers my question, but whatever.

I guess Kickstarter is so that the developers can pay the rent while adding polish to the tool.

I can only wonder what happened with many thousands developers of countless small tools that has been made before Kickstarter. Guess they all are homeless now.

Seriously, I just don't get it. It is one guy who wants to make a tool of his interest, that is relatively simple (not GIMP or Blender, not a C compiler), that no one really needed so far, otherwise there would be plenty of these. Things like this are usually done by people in their free time, without any investments from outside. When people want to get money off such work, they sell finished product, maybe a Pro version. The guy is going to do exactly this. But he also wants money before hand. To me it looks like misguined/unjustified crowdfunding use, to cover personal risks or something (as not many will buy this), I don't even know.

On the other hand, it'd be hard to count the tools that were never written because someone decided to do something else with his time. A lot of the free stuff we have nowadays was written by someone in college with a lot of free time, and this free time falls off a cliff once someone gets a full-time job.

Sure, I see your point here. But on the other hand, what is an justified or unjustified use for Kickstarters? I'd like to turn it around here and ask: if people have money they feel they can waste on funding this, then what's the problem with that?

In general, I can mostly see good outcomes here:

1) The project becomes a success because it raises interest and awareness of the possibilities his program does, and he's able to provide a polished tool that people are happy with and think is decently priced

2) The end goals of the project spawn a lot of interest, but the actual product does not live up to the expectations or is overly priced. In this case, I doubt it'll take long for competitive products (including Free Software ones) to appear once an interest and demand arises

3) The Kickstarter does not get enough funding because this is too much a niche product, or simply does not offer enough value-for-money or does not show enough credibility in bringing it out. In this case, a failed Kickstarter is always a good lesson for the person trying it. And maybe next time, he'll address whatever issues were present with his "business pitch" (some of which you are pointing out)

4) Least good outcome: He gets the money and does not deliver any end result, or just a crappier product than funders expected. Funding a kickstarter is always a gamble, and in this case it will make the people who funded it better at judging a Kickstarter pitch and knowing how to separate a good idea from a bad one

I guess I just prefer to see the positive side here... someone wanting to create a niche product and people willing to spend money on it is usually a good thing, even when I myself don't feel it's worthwhile

Cheers,
Michel

When someone has an idea that other people would really want to get done, but does not have resources to do that, that's a justified use, I think. Like, someone made a game that people want to have as a physical copy (cartridges), but the person just does not have that much money to get it done - it takes large quantifies to provide reasonable price, and that's a large investment not everyone could easily afford to make. Or, a real recent example, a guy making detailed high quality photos of old consoles to release them for free, and needs funds to buy the consoles.

Sure, people can ask whatever they want by whatever reason and spend their money any way they want. It just looks not cool to ask money to do a job done that no one really asked to do (a personal project), and that certainly could be done without the money (as proved by tons of our dev tools). It just happens more often lately.