Onion Skins and Scratch

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS

Block_Point_Studios wrote:
Support!

Please say why you support

akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to ANIMATE, AND when you go to about on scratch it says, AND I QUOTE “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there

Did I say something that is against that?

-Tanntllool-

Support, this would probably TRIPLE the “production rate” of new animations!

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.

Well what about MEMES they require coding and art, we don't have to focus on games, why is censor projects with no code rejected, in short the program in ‘Imaging, Program, Share’ isn't capitalised, some projects with no code are art, that shows that art is considered an aspect of Scratch and that just because Scratch's main focus is on programming, adding features that help with art, which you require to animate is a good thing, like I keep saying, Just because on piece of the Community is satisfied, does that mean Scratch shouldn't reach to satisfying the rest, Onion Skins aren't going to hurt the game community, so I don't see why this shouldn't be added just because games don't need it.

Yeetoburro1

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.
Well what about MEMES they require coding and art, we don't have to focus on games, why is censor projects with no code rejected, in short the program in ‘Imaging, Program, Share’ isn't capitalised, some projects with no code are art, that shows that art is considered an aspect of Scratch and that just because Scratch's main focus is on programming, adding features that help with art, which you require to animate is a good thing, like I keep saying, Just because on piece of the Community is satisfied, does that mean Scratch shouldn't reach to satisfying the rest, Onion Skins aren't going to hurt the game community, so I don't see why this shouldn't be added just because games don't need it.

Where did I say to censor projects with no code? I think not adding this would reduce the amount of art+animations, which in turn, would increase the amount of actual coding, which I think is good. If we are not supposed to focus on one thing, why are close to 0 games featured?
Edit: I'm not sure what you mean by “memes”, whether it's actual memes, like the youtube channel Memenade, or “memes” (animation memes). Either one takes none to very little coding.

Last edited by Yeetoburro1 (Sept. 30, 2020 15:59:32)

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.
Well what about MEMES they require coding and art, we don't have to focus on games, why is censor projects with no code rejected, in short the program in ‘Imaging, Program, Share’ isn't capitalised, some projects with no code are art, that shows that art is considered an aspect of Scratch and that just because Scratch's main focus is on programming, adding features that help with art, which you require to animate is a good thing, like I keep saying, Just because on piece of the Community is satisfied, does that mean Scratch shouldn't reach to satisfying the rest, Onion Skins aren't going to hurt the game community, so I don't see why this shouldn't be added just because games don't need it.
Where did I say to censor projects with no code? I think not adding this would reduce the amount of art+animations, which in turn, would increase the amount of actual coding, which I think is good. If we are not supposed to focus on one thing, why are close to 0 games featured?
Edit: I'm not sure what you mean by “memes”, whether it's actual memes, like the youtube channel Memenade, or “memes” (animation memes). Either one takes none to very little coding.

I never said you said that, I'm just referring to it, because the reason it's rejected is partially related to this. Why Why would you want to reduce animations and art, people ENJOY making and watching art and animations, are you saying it's better to try to strip away a core part of the community, they literally have their own tabs in Explore. Animations have coding, MEMES and some other art have coding, just in a different way than games, games isn't the main focus, it's not like there is some billboard saying ‘GAMES ONLY, NO ANIMATIONS OR ART, THEY DON’T HAVE PROPER CODING, EVERYONE MUST MAKE GAMES'
It's the choice of the proposers, if hardly any games get featured, it's because few get proposed - Which would mean it isn't a main focus in the community's eyes (Games have gotten featured) or the curators of the propose project to be featured studio just overlook every game proposal by accident the first one is more likely

bywok

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.

People, just stop arguing with this guy. He's not listening to anything we're saying, he's just looking for any replies that disagree with him, and replies the same thing over and over and over. There's no convincing him at this point

Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently

Yeetoburro1

bywok wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.
People, just stop arguing with this guy. He's not listening to anything we're saying, he's just looking for any replies that disagree with him, and replies the same thing over and over and over. There's no convincing him at this point

Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently

1: Not true, I said no support and everyone is after me, I'm debating
2: I do, actually read the posts, and I reply accordingly, I think that you (note no caps

) are not reading my (again, no caps) posts.

bywok

Agh, the quote chain be getting too long. Lemme cut it for ya…

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
Where did I say to censor projects with no code? I think not adding this would reduce the amount of art+animations, which in turn, would increase the amount of actual coding, which I think is good. If we are not supposed to focus on one thing, why are close to 0 games featured?
Edit: I'm not sure what you mean by “memes”, whether it's actual memes, like the youtube channel Memenade, or “memes” (animation memes). Either one takes none to very little coding.

Okay, what? So basically you're saying that a whole genre of projects the Scratch Team supports and encourages should be reduced to fit your perspective of what “scratch is supposed to be”?

Like I said for around 4 times now, the Scratch Team made the costumes and the art editor for a reason. They made it to encourage creating art. We aren't trying to say that 0 games are featured and we should change that. All we want to ask is one simple feature, but you can't allow that. The art editor is simple enough, why can't we add one feature, that has been discussed since 2013, unlike your vision of ‘we already have to many art ideas!!1’ or something. We are asking one. Simple. Feature. We were talking about animations the whole time on this thread but apparently you want animations to be cut in half.

We have been arguing and arguing and arguing with you for around 2 and a half pages at least, but apparently you can't agree with anything on this thread. Listen, if you're just gonna argue with people but don't have anything really helpful to say, and are just gonna keep clogging the topic with your ‘reasons’, get off this thread.

bywok

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently
1: Not true, I said no support and everyone is after me, I'm debating
2: I do, actually read the posts, and I reply accordingly, I think that you (note no caps ) are not reading my (again, no caps) posts.

Well, since you think that animations don't matter, and that you just keep saying you're better than us because you aren't using caps, I think you seem to only be reading the capitalized parts.

Sure, you're debating, we're debating back. But the problem is, you're not accepting it

bywok

Also, yeetoburro1, I looked at your profile, and… you had an intro made for you? That involves animation?

SolarKnight

guys can you please snip your quotes

bigbigbigeeveefan

Support! I've needed one of these for AGES since I started learning how to animate!!

bywok

SolarKnight wrote:
guys can you please snip your quotes

Yes please people. Its takin up half all of the page

ittybitmap

no support, we can just use a vector art program, but idc if it gets added

ittybitmap

ittybitmap wrote:
no support, we can just use a vector art program, but idc if it gets added

it doesnt need to be vector oops

Yeetoburro1

bywok wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently
1: Not true, I said no support and everyone is after me, I'm debating
2: I do, actually read the posts, and I reply accordingly, I think that you (note no caps ) are not reading my (again, no caps) posts.

Well, since you think that animations don't matter

not true

bywok wrote:
Also, yeetoburro1, I looked at your profile, and… you had an intro made for you? That involves animation?

An intro is not the point of the whole project.

akitathecat

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
bywok wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
akitathecat wrote:
JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Ihatr wrote:
SolarKnight wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.
people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement
Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.
how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all
It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.
I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites
what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to ANIMATE when you go to about on scratch it says AND I QUOTE “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there
Honestly people, stop saying things in caps like I'm a 3 year old.
I never said animations did'nt exist- I'm just saying scrach is a programming website, not an art website. We already have enough graphics tools for coding. You can't really say “art uses coding”, as the “coding” is usually just a 5 block transition. Just use onion skin sites, it's not that hard. And it says interactive, which pretty much never is true with art+animations, other than a click or two.
People, just stop arguing with this guy. He's not listening to anything we're saying, he's just looking for any replies that disagree with him, and replies the same thing over and over and over. There's no convincing him at this point

Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently
1: Not true, I said no support and everyone is after me, I'm debating
2: I do, actually read the posts, and I reply accordingly, I think that you (note no caps ) are not reading my (again, no caps) posts.

you are CLEARLY just arguing for no reason now, plus why do you care if you arent even going to use it if its added its only for ANIMATORS, plus alot of people on scratch actually LIKE animating and dont want to go and upload a bunch of costumes! also i dont care about if bloch out my caps i will just un bloch them

Last edited by akitathecat (Sept. 30, 2020 23:47:37)

Yeetoburro1

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:
if hardly any games get featured, it's because few get proposed

Now thats just not true! I see SO MANY GAMES get proposed.

bywok

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
bywok wrote:
Yeetoburro1 wrote:
Also, we're using caps because you're not listening to anything without caps apparently
1: Not true, I said no support and everyone is after me, I'm debating
2: I do, actually read the posts, and I reply accordingly, I think that you (note no caps ) are not reading my (again, no caps) posts.

Well, since you think that animations don't matter
not true
bywok wrote:
Also, yeetoburro1, I looked at your profile, and… you had an intro made for you? That involves animation?
An intro is not the point of the whole project.

Okay. But it is still animation in general. It does have some purpose to the project.

And you just cut off my quote, i bet you didn't even read the whole thing. But the point is that you want animations to be cut in half and reduced, which is not the point of this topic. Please, please, please stick to the topic… or the forum moderators are gonna come after you

akitathecat

Yeetoburro1 wrote:
JPOWEUFFGIRLS wrote:
if hardly any games get featured, it's because few get proposed
Now thats just not true! I see ( caps annoying ) HA HA also not true i dont see any

Last edited by akitathecat (Oct. 1, 2020 00:02:56)

Discuss Scratch