Potraits

[Keyrock]

IWD1 & 2 > BG1 > BG2 >>> PST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anything Anime/Manga Inspired

Edited August 30, 2013 by Keyrock

[cdx]

I liked the portraits in IE games but I so far the P:E images to me look a lot better.

 

More detail and life than IWD, perfect proportions, no distortion a la BG2, nice painterly feel. I wouldn't ask for anything other than just getting more of these.

 

Actually: custom portrait support for the PC, as already mentioned.

[Gromnir]

*Sighs*

 

• It amused me, just because BGI Imoen portrait was fairly pretty, and then the second one made it look like she'd swallowed a wasp.
• The whole anime thing was just the style of the cartoonist who did the comic, rather than my personal preference.
• It was just an attempt at injecting some comedy, rather than making a particular point...
• ...but if there is one, it's that the BGII portrait styles seemed less forgiving to the females than other IE portraits...
• ...which is not necessarily a bad thing, since females should be more than just eye-candy...
• ...which makes the above cartoon a bit offensive, since we should be rescuing Imoen regardless of what she looks like...
• ...but it was just a joke and probably shouldn't be taken too seriously.

 

I knew I should've brought my anime/jrpg disclaimer.

 

am not sure what "less forgiving to females" means in the present context.

 

is worth noting that before bg2 were released, bioware made available the new bg2 npc portraits as done by mike sass.  am thinking it were sass, but we might be wrong. initial reaction from boardies were not kind. original minsc, in particular, were drawing ire. portrait of minsc had this big open-mouthed smile that were making him looks far too similar to a special olympics winner for some posters. too much with the pastel and bright color palette. too Not jason manley (iwd had recently been released). too cartoony and not "dark" and/or "gritty."

 

am thinking that perhaps as a bit o' gentle mockery o' the board critics, sass re-tools most o' the bg2 potraits in very minor ways-- give'em scars, piercings and and additional stuff in their hair. minsc were only portrait that got a significant alteration. kinda reminded us o' josh's revised iwd2 kit suggestions in that instead o' boardies getting the joke, most seemed to like the improvements. regardless, if "less forgiving" is in reference to bg2 portraits looking as if characters had seen hard times, then that were a specific change as result o' board input. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[rjshae]

I'd like to see the same illustration techniques used with the game area be applied to the portraits. I.e. start with a 3D model, convert it to 2.5D, have an artist touch it up and make it more lifelike, then apply the current in-game lighting effects to the illustration. If they use the same hi-res mesh that was employed to make the character skins, then they'd have a realistic 1-to-1 match with the in-game figures. Plus the technique may be more efficient than a pure oil painting approach, allowing the artists to produce a wider range of portraits to choose from.

Edited August 30, 2013 by rjshae

[FlintlockJazz]

Let's compare:

 

Baldur's Gate 1 Portraits

 

 

 

Baldur's Gate 2 Portraits

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but no offense to the artist who did them but the second lot just do not match up with the first lot.  First off, WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO JAHEIRA'S FACE???!!!  It's not that she looks different from the first game, it's that she looks like she had her face driven into by a truck and then had her facial reconstruction seriously messed up by a stoned back street surgeon.  I played BG2 first by the way, and even without knowing what her first incarnation was like, I felt that there was something really wrong with her face, her eyes don't line up for a start.  In fact, all the facial expressions seem off on them all, the eyes misplaced, necks extremely wrong etc.  They also all look like they are having mug shots taken of themselves, whereas the first ones seem more natural, the first ones seem more interesting whereas the latter are just staring lifelessly at you, zombies have more character.  And as Mr. Magniloquent said, what's with the dreadlocks dude?

 

The first ones have a greater degree of detail I find, and they just seem better quality, like they were done by a more skilled artist, more professional.  The world they paint also seems better and more cohesive. 

 

So, in short, what we've learnt here today folks is that I think the BG2 portraits suck compared to BG1 portraits.  Does this help the thread?  Probably not, but it's been a while since I could get on these forums on an actual computer instead of my phone and stick pics up. 

Edited August 30, 2013 by FlintlockJazz

[Keyrock]

Let's compare:

 

Baldur's Gate 1 Portraits

 

 

 

Baldur's Gate 2 Portraits

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but no offense to the artist who did them but the second lot just do not match up with the first lot.  First off, WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO JAHEIRA'S FACE???!!!  It's not that she looks different from the first game, it's that she looks like she had her face driven into by a truck and then had her facial reconstruction seriously messed up by a stoned back street surgeon.  I played BG2 first by the way, and even without knowing what her first incarnation was like, I felt that there was something really wrong with her face, her eyes don't line up for a start.  In fact, all the facial expressions seem off on them all, the eyes misplaced, necks extremely wrong etc.  They also all look like they are having mug shots taken of themselves, whereas the first ones seem more natural, the first ones seem more interesting whereas the latter are just staring lifelessly at you, zombies have more character.  And as Mr. Magniloquent said, what's with the dreadlocks dude?

 

The first ones have a greater degree of detail I find, and they just seem better quality, like they were done by a more skilled artist, more professional.  The world they paint also seems better and more cohesive. 

 

So, in short, what we've learnt here today folks is that I think the BG2 portraits suck compared to BG1 portraits.  Does this help the thread?  Probably not, but it's been a while since I could get on these forums on an actual computer instead of my phone and stick pics up. 

Whoever did the BG2 portraits had some strange fascination with putting scars around people's eyes.

[Larkaloke]

I prefer the Icewind Dale default portraits to the Baldur's Gate ones, and the Baldur's Gate ones to those for Baldur's Gate II. However, from what we've seen so far, I think the portraits for Project Eternity are shaping up to look really good, and somewhat similar yet distinct from the others. I like that.

 

I'll probably mostly use custom portraits anyhow, but that's partly because I replay games often enough and make enough characters in them I'd run out of portraits if I didn't.

 

I'd like to see the same illustration techniques used with the game area be applied to the portraits. I.e. start with a 3D model, convert it to 2.5D, have an artist touch it up and make it more lifelike, then apply the current in-game lighting effects to the illustration. If they use the same hi-res mesh that was employed to make the character skins, then they'd have a realistic 1-to-1 match with the in-game figures. Plus the technique may be more efficient than a pure oil painting approach, allowing the artists to produce a wider range of portraits to choose from.

That would be interesting, but personally I don't think I'd like the end result as much as a fully painted portrait. I also have some doubt that it would be more efficient, but that would depend upon how long it takes the particular artist to paint them. My guess is that it would actually take more time.

[rjshae]

Whoever did the BG2 portraits had some strange fascination with putting scars around people's eyes.

 

Presumably the characters in BG2 had been through more combat than in BG1. More combat = more scars.

[rjshae]

 

I'd like to see the same illustration techniques used with the game area be applied to the portraits. I.e. start with a 3D model, convert it to 2.5D, have an artist touch it up and make it more lifelike, then apply the current in-game lighting effects to the illustration. If they use the same hi-res mesh that was employed to make the character skins, then they'd have a realistic 1-to-1 match with the in-game figures. Plus the technique may be more efficient than a pure oil painting approach, allowing the artists to produce a wider range of portraits to choose from.

That would be interesting, but personally I don't think I'd like the end result as much as a fully painted portrait. I also have some doubt that it would be more efficient, but that would depend upon how long it takes the particular artist to paint them. My guess is that it would actually take more time.

 

Really? Well thanks for the wild guesses. You've saved us the trouble of finding out whether touching up a digital image takes longer than painting it from scratch, or whether the results will be visually appealing. We can scratch off that technique from the P.E. production methods.

Edited August 30, 2013 by rjshae

[TrashMan]

IWD1 & 2 > BG1 > BG2 >>> PST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anything Anime/Manga Inspired

 

It's a matter of preference and chosen style and atmosphere.

 

 

Also BG2 Imone >>> BG1 Imoen.

BG2 Jaheria does look distorted, I'll give you that.

[Gromnir]

already noted: the scars were added after boardies complained that bg2 portraits should be more "dark" and "gritty." simply adding scars, piercings and peculiar hair accessories struck Gromnir as mockery of board request, but the interplay fora populace seemed to like sass' improvements.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

[Karranthain]

already noted: the scars were added after boardies complained that bg2 portraits should be more "dark" and "gritty." simply adding scars, piercings and peculiar hair accessories struck Gromnir as mockery of board request, but the interplay fora populace seemed to like sass' improvements.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

 

 

[Messier-31]

It amused me, just because BGI Imoen portrait was fairly pretty, and then the second one made it look like she'd swallowed a wasp.

 

 

 

IWD1 & 2 > BG1 > BG2 >>> PST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anything Anime/Manga Inspired

 

It's a matter of preference and chosen style and atmosphere.

 

 

Also BG2 Imone >>> BG1 Imoen.

BG2 Jaheria does look distorted, I'll give you that.

 

Okay, there is this saying that there's no accounting for taste. For me BG1 Imoen will always be a redneck and BG2 Imoen will be an adventurer. And yes, BG2 Jaheira probably was to be drawn more bad-ass, yet someone went over the top and overdid it. But, as many people, so as many different opinions.

[Sannom]

And yes, BG2 Jaheira probably was to be drawn more bad-ass, yet someone went over the top and overdid it.

More bad-ass? Seriously? If anything, Jaheira's new portrait makes her more feminine in both appearance and expression, and tends to focus on her elven ascendance rather than her human's. Her expression and the staff she's wearing in BG1 signal the fighter. She's posing in BG2

[Lephys]

^ She's simply lulling you into a false sense of security. "Looook, I'm totally a fragile, feminine posing flower, and not at all a threatening Fighter... yesssss, that's it... become distracted by my puzzlingly askance facial proportions... ANNNNND you're dead. *dusts off hands*"

 

[Osvir]

I am not asking for this or requesting it but it would be freaking awesome:



I would love it if, not this detailed as above, if Obsidian could at least allow for 3-4 "states" of portraits depending on how much Health you have.

In essence: If they write the code for "4 portrait states", modding it would be so much easier. But in the vanilla experience it would suffice still if it is just 1 Picture in all 4 states, less resources to be spent on the artistic work by Obsidian (unless they themselves think it's an interesting idea and want to do some artistic wolfenstein-esque health-damage work).

1. 100% Health

2. Same thing, 80% Health
3. Same thing, 50% Health
4. Same thing, 20% Health

What it allows for is me, as the Player, to customize 2, 3, 4~

1. ^Picture above (Full Health)
2. I go into Photoshop and add some amateur detail signifying that the character has taken damage.
3. See 2.
4. See 2.

But as I first said, it's not anything I'm requesting, but simply throwing it out there because I personally think it would be awesome, effective and semi-"innovative". Obsidian wouldn't need to make the "damaged states" portraits themselves, but simply having the "4 states" in the code would open so many doors for Portrait enthusiasts and "modders" and "amateur" artists to fill in the gaps.

EDIT: Switched the IWD portrait to something smaller.

EDIT EDIT:
In practice~

Concept, what Obsidian only needs to do (but with proper coding ofc):
1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]
2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]
3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]
4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

Because with this, I could easily just open [Portrait#1JAH] in Photoshop or whatever, modify it a little bit and rename it to [Portrait#1JAHMOD2] (or whatever I wish to name it) and then add it into the states as such:

Concept, what I could then do with it:
1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]
2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD2]
3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD3]
4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD4]

I'm not too savvy with programming, but it looks logically like something that could be fairly simple to implement.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Osvir

[motorizer]

Some of the BG1 portraits always gave me the impression that the characters head was too big for their body...Imoen and Jaheira from the example in this thread..

however I do like the way they caught their characters, BG1 Jaheira especially is way better than BG2 Jaheira

Personally I prefer both baldurs gate's to Icewind dale's or torment's

[FlintlockJazz]

already noted: the scars were added after boardies complained that bg2 portraits should be more "dark" and "gritty." simply adding scars, piercings and peculiar hair accessories struck Gromnir as mockery of board request, but the interplay fora populace seemed to like sass' improvements.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

 

Really?  That's kinda depressing.  I wonder if the original 'pre-scarred' versions can still be found on the interwebz, be interesting to see if some of the facial deformation was a result of these changes.

 

 

It amused me, just because BGI Imoen portrait was fairly pretty, and then the second one made it look like she'd swallowed a wasp.

 

 

 

IWD1 & 2 > BG1 > BG2 >>> PST >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anything Anime/Manga Inspired

 

It's a matter of preference and chosen style and atmosphere.

 

 

Also BG2 Imone >>> BG1 Imoen.

BG2 Jaheria does look distorted, I'll give you that.

 

Okay, there is this saying that there's no accounting for taste. For me BG1 Imoen will always be a redneck and BG2 Imoen will be an adventurer. And yes, BG2 Jaheira probably was to be drawn more bad-ass, yet someone went over the top and overdid it. But, as many people, so as many different opinions.

 

 

No accounting for taste indeed, for instance I really can't see where people get the redneck thing from, she looks like a cheeky but confident bar maid (which she is, she worked for Winthrop after all) and BG2 looks like an adventurer?  Nah, ignoring the fact that her head doesn't seem to go with the rest of her neck and body she looks like a gaunt 14 year old with a bland expressionless face who doesn't look like she could handle adventuring.

 

But regardless, whether they are a 'best fit' or not for a specific character is not the point, the point was that the portraits for BG1 were just done better quality, whereas BG2 looked like they were done by an amateur.  I know someone will try and claim it was the 'style' or somesuch, that it's an artistic thing, well I'm sorry but the 'style' looks ****.  Sure, subjective opinion and all with art, but would you consider any subjective opinion that my drawing of a stick figure is better than the Mona Lisa?  And I can tell you, my drawing sucks so bad that my stick figures are bad.

[Lephys]

Yeah, I mean... an RPG character portrait reaches for a definite goal, and that is to portray the visage of the character one would see if face-to-face with them. It's kind of a detailed zoom-in of their tiny model-self in the bird's-eye gameplay area. So, excellent style or not, a Picasso portrait would be achieving that goal nowhere near as well as an accurately-rendered, "realistic" portrait. I mean, you can play with things like lighting and color and stroke type (painterly versus smooth with crisp edges, etc.), but you've gotta maintain things like proportion and general shapes and sizes, or you start venturing into caricature territory.

 

There's nothing wrong with caricatures, but if you say "Which is a better portrait: this caricature, or this portrait?", the answer you're going to get is the portrait. You can make an extremely lovely anchor that weighs 5 lbs, but it's not going to do its job, no matter how lovely it is, half as well as even a hideous anchor that weighs 50 lbs.

 

Again, not that the BG2 portraits in question are somehow at 0% effectiveness, and the BG1 ones are at 100%. But, I'd have to agree that they seem to be a bit more effective in portraying an actual character's visage that seems to be engaging others, as in the context of the dialogue interface.

[Messier-31]

she looks like a cheeky but confident bar maid (which she is, she worked for Winthrop after all) and BG2 looks like an adventurer?  Nah, ignoring the fact that her head doesn't seem to go with the rest of her neck and body she looks like a gaunt 14 year old with a bland expressionless face who doesn't look like she could handle adventuring.

 

Yeah, why not. As I said earlier - many people have many different opinions. I just like the second portrait a little more.

 

But regardless, whether they are a 'best fit' or not for a specific character is not the point, the point was that the portraits for BG1 were just done better quality, whereas BG2 looked like they were done by an amateur.  I know someone will try and claim it was the 'style' or somesuch, that it's an artistic thing, well I'm sorry but the 'style' looks ****.  Sure, subjective opinion and all with art, but would you consider any subjective opinion that my drawing of a stick figure is better than the Mona Lisa?  And I can tell you, my drawing sucks so bad that my stick figures are bad.

 

BG1 pix are far more better (IMO again) then BG2 pix. The style, the art, the quality, they are superior in everything. I am not denying that, but surely *some* portraits, and most notably Imoen, really could have been drawn a lot better. Just the face, or her expression. The style is good, great even. I'm not sure my explanation is fairly understandable, but that's just the way I feel about it. Yeah, that's the way I roll, what's up wit' that, brah?

 

PS. That last sentence is for the lulz.

[Gromnir]

I am not asking for this or requesting it but it would be freaking awesome:

 

 

I would love it if, not this detailed as above, if Obsidian could at least allow for 3-4 "states" of portraits depending on how much Health you have.

 

In essence: If they write the code for "4 portrait states", modding it would be so much easier. But in the vanilla experience it would suffice still if it is just 1 Picture in all 4 states, less resources to be spent on the artistic work by Obsidian (unless they themselves think it's an interesting idea and want to do some artistic wolfenstein-esque health-damage work).

 

1. 100% Health

 

 

2. Same thing, 80% Health

3. Same thing, 50% Health

4. Same thing, 20% Health

 

What it allows for is me, as the Player, to customize 2, 3, 4~

 

1. ^Picture above (Full Health)

2. I go into Photoshop and add some amateur detail signifying that the character has taken damage.

3. See 2.

4. See 2.

 

But as I first said, it's not anything I'm requesting, but simply throwing it out there because I personally think it would be awesome, effective and semi-"innovative". Obsidian wouldn't need to make the "damaged states" portraits themselves, but simply having the "4 states" in the code would open so many doors for Portrait enthusiasts and "modders" and "amateur" artists to fill in the gaps.

 

EDIT: Switched the IWD portrait to something smaller.

 

EDIT EDIT:

In practice~

 

Concept, what Obsidian only needs to do (but with proper coding ofc):

1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

 

Because with this, I could easily just open [Portrait#1JAH] in Photoshop or whatever, modify it a little bit and rename it to [Portrait#1JAHMOD2] (or whatever I wish to name it) and then add it into the states as such:

 

Concept, what I could then do with it:

1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH]

2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD2]

3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD3]

4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD4]

 

I'm not too savvy with programming, but it looks logically like something that could be fairly simple to implement.

or you coulda' just said, do portraits like ps:t. saves on digital trees or something.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[teknoman2]

what i disliked in BG/SoA portraits, was that those meant for the various companions, were among those that the player could choose at character creation. they should have had a series of unused portraits for the main character and keep the companion portraits out

[TrashMan]

Let's compare:

 

Baldur's Gate 1 Portraits

 

 

 

Baldur's Gate 2 Portraits

 

 

 

Saying that BG1 portraits are all objectively better is silly.

By what metric are they "better"?

 

They loo kvery similar in fact, with BG1 being somehwat darker.

 

The most messed up BG2 portraits are the elves, as they tried to give all of them slanted eyes and puckered lips and they messed up with the perspective a bit there.

[FlintlockJazz]

Yeah, I mean... an RPG character portrait reaches for a definite goal, and that is to portray the visage of the character one would see if face-to-face with them. It's kind of a detailed zoom-in of their tiny model-self in the bird's-eye gameplay area. So, excellent style or not, a Picasso portrait would be achieving that goal nowhere near as well as an accurately-rendered, "realistic" portrait. I mean, you can play with things like lighting and color and stroke type (painterly versus smooth with crisp edges, etc.), but you've gotta maintain things like proportion and general shapes and sizes, or you start venturing into caricature territory.

 

There's nothing wrong with caricatures, but if you say "Which is a better portrait: this caricature, or this portrait?", the answer you're going to get is the portrait. You can make an extremely lovely anchor that weighs 5 lbs, but it's not going to do its job, no matter how lovely it is, half as well as even a hideous anchor that weighs 50 lbs.

 

Again, not that the BG2 portraits in question are somehow at 0% effectiveness, and the BG1 ones are at 100%. But, I'd have to agree that they seem to be a bit more effective in portraying an actual character's visage that seems to be engaging others, as in the context of the dialogue interface.

 

Thank you, I couldn't think of the best way to describe it but caricature is basically what I was thinking off. 

 

 

 

Saying that BG1 portraits are all objectively better is silly.

By what metric are they "better"?

 

They loo kvery similar in fact, with BG1 being somehwat darker.

 

The most messed up BG2 portraits are the elves, as they tried to give all of them slanted eyes and puckered lips and they messed up with the perspective a bit there.

 

 

I'd say BG1 is better because the proportions are not out of whack like they are in BG2, and it doesn't look deliberate but rather like they were just drawn badly.  Style is subjective, but if you paid me to draw a portrait of yourself and I gave you a badly drawn stick man picture you wouldn't accept that it's badness is subjective you'd ask for your money back. 

 

Anyway, we all know my opinion is the important one here, because I'm right and everything should be done according to my whims!

Edited September 1, 2013 by FlintlockJazz

[centurionofprix]

Yeah, I mean... an RPG character portrait reaches for a definite goal, and that is to portray the visage of the character one would see if face-to-face with them. It's kind of a detailed zoom-in of their tiny model-self in the bird's-eye gameplay area. So, excellent style or not, a Picasso portrait would be achieving that goal nowhere near as well as an accurately-rendered, "realistic" portrait. I mean, you can play with things like lighting and color and stroke type (painterly versus smooth with crisp edges, etc.), but you've gotta maintain things like proportion and general shapes and sizes, or you start venturing into caricature territory.

 

There's nothing wrong with caricatures, but if you say "Which is a better portrait: this caricature, or this portrait?", the answer you're going to get is the portrait. You can make an extremely lovely anchor that weighs 5 lbs, but it's not going to do its job, no matter how lovely it is, half as well as even a hideous anchor that weighs 50 lbs.

 

Again, not that the BG2 portraits in question are somehow at 0% effectiveness, and the BG1 ones are at 100%. But, I'd have to agree that they seem to be a bit more effective in portraying an actual character's visage that seems to be engaging others, as in the context of the dialogue interface.

 

I'm not sure if I agree with the notion that abstract pieces or caricatures are worse as RPG portraits, but in any case the BG2 portraits were trying to be realistic rather than expressing something through abstraction, and a few of them didn't do this very well. Overall I do prefer the BG2 style, especially given its appropriateness to the change in atmosphere between the games.

Edited September 1, 2013 by centurionofprix