Will we ever go back? CAN we go back?
Er I like AT's art. It's interesting.
Just because it's a different style doesn't mean it's bad. Actually that kind of means it's good.
If you want fugly art look at latest Spongebob, Family Guy etc.
Reminder of what other shows would have looked like with Adventure time art....
>implying Adventure Time isn't full of exaggerated expressions
Holy shit, what. Have you ever seen even a single episode of the show?
I don't see how this is a fair comparison, adventure time characters seldom ever stick to that same face. besides it's not like every show in 92 had Ren and Stimpy style facial expressions, it came out at the same time as Rugrats and Doug, and those shows didn't get that out there with the faces.
I'd love to answer this better but I'm lit.
I remember reading an expose in an animation magazine on R&S and the environment in which it created and existed before John K. was shit canned.
Apparently John K. was very difficult to work with also very interested in pushing the envelope with the censors whenever possible. Nickelodeon hated the gross-out humor, the extreme violence of Ren toward Stimpy in the early episodes, and any references to Ren and Stimpy being homosexual that John K. and the rest of the Spumco! team loved to insert into Ren and Stimpy while it was still under their control.
Nickelodeon fired John K. from the company he helped build and the show he created, hiring R&S director Bob Camp to be showrunner. The show ran for several more seasons under the watchful eyes of executives who ensured the most marketable product. The John K. episodes were eventually brought out of syndication, so there are plenty of kids who never even got to watch the show as intended.
Honestly the biggest thing to me is that R&S was hand drawn well most modern stuff just doesn't need to be, it should allow for easier creation of more complex facial expressions as you can modify and change assets more easily.
But the change over from hand drawn to digital takes time, I honestly don't know if AT is done Digitally or hand drawn.
>I'd love to answer this better but I'm lit.
>DUDE WEED 420 BLAZE IT LOL XD
Was it your intention to get people to disregard everything you say as made up bullshit? Because you succeeded.
Ren & Stimpy was at least animate din North America. All the garbage on nowadays (Adventure Time, Regular Show, Clarence, etc.) are all animated overseas in 3rd world shitholes for minimum wage.
I get enough of this kind of crap on /a/.
Honestly, this is like a console user bragging about graphics and then getting butt hurt when a PC guy shows them up. If you want top notch animation, watch anime. Anything America makes pales in comparison.
America doesn't make shit. There are literally ZERO cartoons that are animated in the US. It's all outsourced overseas.
If you can replicate the style in MS Paint in under a minute, it's bad.
A little bit of polish and this fucker I whipped up would be right at home in Adventure Time. I mean, I like the show well enough, but the art is shit.
Overdrawing =/= Good.
We were duped by John K for years because he made good art but couldn't write and never was funny.
Modern cartoons have decent writing at the expense of shitty art.
We'll get the middle ground and enjoy cartoons we deserve.
>If you want top notch animation
Depends on the anime, while they put a lot of effort in detail they usually do a shit job on the actual animation itself, you usually get scenes where the weight of the movement is completely wrong or they're just kind of stiff. Usually the expressiveness comes from the chibi look. But again that's not true for all anime just the majority.
Old school American animation is more free form and as a result as allowed for a lot more expressive scenes that don't deal with characters causing my ears to bleed like in your favorite anime. There's a lot of humor in the exaggeration of movement. It's a shame that cartoons in general have kind of lost this trait, but every once in a while something comes around that kind of brings it back, western or eastern.
Though honestly everything is animated in Korea these days.
>cartoons we deserve
"Deserve"? Oh wow.
Yeah titmouse is a western studio. The quality is a mix bag, you either get a lot of tweening (Metalocalypse) or very low quailty drawings but high quality motion (Super Jail).
Though apparently they worked on Venture Bros which is surprising because I thought that was done in a Korean shop.
what about rick and morty and all the shows made with toonboom
this is a pic of the animation crew
are all of them storyboard artists?
What if I never liked the style of ren and stimpy though?
R&S always looked really ugly to me, I dont know why or how to described it but a lot of it was just a little too off for my tastes
Honestly though, style is not any indicator of quality of the overall product
plus theres this >>79148561
the OP image isnt really fair in that regard people should use similar stills before making a judgement on which they think is better.
The animation has pretty much nothing to do with what OP is complaining about considering that American storyboard artists draw the faces and expressions before it its shipped off to Korea.
The good old "it's just his style" excuse
The reason modern animators/storyboarders can't draw worth a damn
Who cares about technical competence, any diarrhea you draw is just your style!
The John K. you knew is DEAD!
His current work is a mess! Have you seen his treehouse of horror intro?!
What am I looking at!?
I know it's just a meme bait thread, but
There is nothing objectivly better in the left image, it's just a style. It wasn't done because that's how all cartoons should be, it was done because the author wanted his cartoon to be this way. It would be awful if all cartoons at all times looked the same
>Ren & Stimpy was at least animate din North America.
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Most episodes were animated in Korea, while John K's favorites were shipped to Carbunkle in Canada. After John left, the show became exclusively animated in Korea.
>If you want top notch animation, watch anime.
Art, maybe. But not animation. Japanese TV animation is notoriously shit. There's a reason why a lot of American animators and cartoonists hate anime and think it's detrimental to the art form. The animation is very basic, there are tons of stills, and the scenes that are animated decently are often drawn more basically than the rest of the show. The actually well-animated "Sakuga" bits last for maybe five seconds tops, but anime fans cum all over them because they're the closest that anime comes to classic western animation.
The only thing they do somewhat better is depicting weight and physical properties in action scenes, and that's only on some occasions.
2D animation has seen better days in the west but it would be foolish to ignore the past achievements of the great western animators. These days anime is the only way for me to get a regular fix of good animation though. Sure, there's a lot of "downtime" in the animation but the payoff is worthwhile when resources are saved up for special scenes. On the other hand, contemporary western cartoons are more "animated", but the animation is merely functional at best save for the rare outlier. There's very little impressive 2D animation in modern western cartoons, which is a shame.
It's actually closer to thirty seconds on average, and it's worth having some animation downtime if that means allowing for some great scenes later. I'd take that over consistent mediocrity with no room for animator freedom.
Do.... Do you think that Dragonball Super is the typical animation in Japanese TV anime?
Because it definitely is not. Even other Japanese animators have shat on that.
Well you see, expressive ugly faces from a guy who missed every deadline is better for the industry than a show that consistently delivers on time and is enjoyed by a wider audience.
Bud it's simply a different art style. The issue is when it becomes the norm to have dot eyes. I think for adventure time, the art was fitting. Obviously it wouldn't for for ren and stimpy as they are different shows.
Deadlines have nothing to do with this bud. More expressive doesn't always been better, and I believe the art worked well for adventure time.
You misunderstand me. I'm criticizing people who hold up Adventure Time as the death of animation based solely on the character designs.
The gag behind Ren & Stimpy was the ugliness and everything about the humor served to show intricate close ups. Anything longer than a 5 minute gag was drawn out endlessly and no amount of Ren making goofy faces could save those low points.
Adventure Time isn't that. The characters are simplistic stick figures but there's more detail and imagination in a random background or side character than most shows.
I also wish people would stop bringing anime into the argument. You want anime quality? Then push for armies of artists paid less than minimum wage working 16 hour days.
OP, dumb people like you are the reason they make video games that suck but look amazing.
This is why I like anime studios like GAINAX. They tend to go more over-the-top with their animation than most other anime studios (FLCL, Panty and Stocking, Gurren Lagann, Eva, etc.)
GAINAX even visited Pixar Studios at one point. Here's a sketch Bobby Rubio of Pixar did for Gainax's charity book.
>If you can replicate the style in MS Paint in under a minute, it's bad.
I'd be tempted to say the opposite, actually. That if the visual aspects of your character design & style are so prevalent that they can be reproduced by memory, you're probably doing something right.
It's how good flag design is generally judged, isn't it? That a good flag should be easy to draw for a child.
Sure, maybe cartoons and flags shouldn't be held to the same design standards, but still. My biggest qualm about Adventure Time and the likes isn't the artstyle as much as it is the animation itself.
Problem with those is, they generally are just two of three frames expressions and that's it. Sure, the faces themselves are funny, but I've never seen Adventure Time do a detailed transition between one expression to another, actually - which is one thing that particular sequence in OP's pic of Ren & Stimpy did wonderfully.
It's just kind of like anime - stand still, talk, move to other position, stand still in new position and talk, move to new position, stand still in new position, etc. There's a real lack of real "liveliness" in the way characters move, and how their positions shift from one to another.
Then again, budget constraints.
>that disgusting CGI
>Y'know... John K. was paid $25,000+ per episode of R&S after he was fired, as part of a settlement. Which was still more than what Camp or West made actually working on the show. I mean, just saying! :-)
Wow, I didn't knew that...
No, just like you cant say goerge lucas was a genious with starwars 4-6 you simply realize john k was always shit, he simply had people above him slapping him on the head going "No thats fucking retarded, here, add this."
if i recall correctly, Avengers Earth's Mightiest Heroes, Avengers Assemble, Ultimate Spiderman, Hulk and the agents of SMASH are the only true cartoons to be animated entirely in the USofA. And the Ben10 series and Generator Rex
You're not looking at the right anime then, because there's a bunch of obsessive gun nuts in the industry.
Seriously, check out Gunsmith Cats sometime, the team literally went so far as to record their own library of appropriate gunshots for each model of gun portrayed.
>Literally any Japanese animator can.
That's a big fucking lie right there /a/
I was 3 years younger than Scott Pilgrim when the last book and movie came out. I am now 3 years older, and only 3 years from being the same age as BLOM's character from Leftovers.
Aging's a bitch.
I should have said for the most part because that shit is my fucking jam, they did a fantastic job of drawing Chicago too.
>tfw the last gunstore was driven out months ago
It was kind of shit but damn it, it was all I had until I graduate.
Face it. Even Dukey is a better Brain
Do you know what Adventure Time taught me?
Visuals mean almost nothing
Yes, never forget the shitty 90's trends in animation and writing in cartoons so that it never happens again. Also behead john k and put his head on a spike as a warning to others.
Edd Ed n Eddy is actually and exceptional example of good animation
That courage still is dumb though. He is just same face with his mouth widely opened showing shit on his teeth. Why is that good animation? The show wasn't bad but it was hardly exemplary animation
And although the animation was more fluid than modern times Cow and Chicken and Ren and Stempy are both ugly as hell holy shit.
Gravity falls is probably one of the worst animated shows in modern ties desu. Adventure time and Steven Universe although have a simplistic style are both actually pretty well and interestingly boarded and I'm not sure the right picture is fair.
>thread about animation devolves into shitposting about whether anime has good animation or not
Every time. Every fucking time.
Weeeeel you see the Ren & Stimpy faces are all from a single scene where Ren is showing a range of emotion and not just "anger".
Your pics show a range of emotion, but they're spaced out throughout an entire season, so it's very watered down compared to R&S.
People misunderstand R&S. They think LOTS OF FACS = FUNNY. But that's not the point. The point is to create expressive characters. Not random weird faces. Genuine expressions that represent the characters' complex emotional state.
By the way "lots of frames" does not equal good animation.
Here's a sequence with tons of frames, but it's jerky as all-hell in its pose-to-pose hard shifts and the general meaninglessness of the girl's facial expression (which is mostly blank) and her hand movements (which are mostly nonsense flailing)
>animate all these movements
>mouth is still a flapping shit that doesn't cause the jaw to move
No, because that's a myth/meme/lie. An average dialogue scene uses a mixture of different techniques (including animation) to make the scene look dynamic without having to do too much animation. The basic philosophy of anime animation is also cinematic realism, not the cartoony exaggeration usually found in American animation. So there is relatively little movement just as there would be in a live action movie.
>they usually do a shit job on the actual animation itself
As opposed to what? Anime has the best hand-drawn animation in the world. If that's not good enough for you then I guess you're out of options.
>Old school American animation is more free form.
American animation is actually very limited because it's designed for cartoons. That is, designed for only one kind of animation. It's also designed with a high budget in mind, and doesn't scale well.
>Though honestly everything is animated in Korea these days.
No. As I keep telling people over, over, over and over again: anime production is only partially outsourced to Korea. Don't try to project the problems of American animation onto anime.
>Japanese TV animation is notoriously shit.
>The animation is very basic.
>There's a reason why a lot of American animators and cartoonists hate anime and think it's detrimental to the art form.
They most likely have the very narrow-minded, retrograde view that animation == cartoons. It would be a bit like if people were still making early silent movies and looking down on someone like Kubrick for being detrimental to cinema.
>The actually well-animated "Sakuga" bits last for maybe five seconds tops, but anime fans cum all over them because they're the closest that anime comes to classic western animation.
They exceed Western animation.
Animation is a series of drawings. You can't separate the animation from the drawings. The more detailed and high quality the drawings are, the more difficult and time-consuming they are to animate. There are also lots of little details to animation that apologists of Western/American animation are always ignoring or unaware of, like lighting, physical realism and camera work. It's not just about how smooth you can make something look.
Anime also very different goals than American animation. It's not about cartoons and musicals, it's about cinematism. It demands a completely different approach to animation production.
Disney was a particularly big influence after the war. During the war and the years leading up to it, few people were able to see Disney's works due to the political situation. Before that, I'm not sure how important Disney was.
Television anime became the dominant form of animation in Japan during the 70s or so, and there was no room for Disney's extravagances there.
It does save some effort, but it's also a stylistic choice. What you usually see when a character is shot from the side is that the jaw does move.
I don't know why Westerners have such a huge obsession with moving jaws.
Either you're trolling, baiting, or genuinely believe what you typed. I'd go with the latter, in that case:
Adventure Time's artstyle is flat and banal, of course there is an artstyle known for being simple and percise, yet compare to that Adventure Time look like a hackenedeye style of that. It's not interesting. It's a cheap, quick-and-dirty, time saving method of sorts that anybody can imitate. It seeped through in shows like We Bare Bears, Steven Universe, Bravest Warriors. Although the creators of those are likely Adventure Time alumni.
Natasha Allegri CAN draw see Bee and Puppycat, however, Ward perfer this uninteresting style.
>he simply had people above him slapping him on the head going "No thats fucking retarded, here, add this."
N O P E .
You are so unbelievably and incrediably stupid, it's great.
John K., didn't listen to anybody at Nickelodeon; he did what he wanted.
With Ren and Stimpy he deliberately held back and stalled production and went passed the deadline because it were easier for him to insert jokes that did made it pass the radar and all. The reason is, Nick didn't have time to watch the finished episodes prior they aired to tell John K. to remove that or remove this, tone down the humour, etc cetera.
And that, if you want to believe the rumours caused John K. to get fired and Ren and Stimpy canned.
This show aired 15 years ago and still looks better than anything on TV right now.
Most Madhouse productions are good though.
There have been tons of shows that have looked better than that.
Time can just go ahead and stop anytime.
I can't be doing with this future business.
Yes yes, great meme. Well done.
It's a drama about a disorganized music club coming together to compete in a national tournament. Not really any different from some live action Japanese movies and TV dramas.
You make an interesting point about anime being more cinematic. Often times good direction and editing can compensate for average animation. Like the recent Jojo anime for example, the actual animation isn't that great but the editing is fantastic and the way color changes depending on the tone of the scene gives it a distinctive visual flair.
I wonder when Disney and the like started to transition from their theatre style productions and incorporate more elements of film direction.
AT takes 8-9 month per episode. Can't be cheap.
Madhouse did two of the segments in The Animatrix, and maybe the animated segment in Kill Bill. I think they've done other stuff too.
Even when they do commission from japanese they NEVER, EVER, let them maintaining their proper character designs, like how Minoru Maeda draws, how Shingo Araki used to draw, like how Michi Himeno actually draws, like how Ikuhara draws, etc.
They Always forced them to draw like americans told them, with their Stylistic Bruce i can draw human brings that dont look like they are not cilinders and tweeks with polygons timm, or worse.
And whayever they got anime directors, its Always the ones who Dont draw like your typical anime aesthethics, like that guy who Drew the only good looking episodes from EVER WB cartoony from the 90s or dweebs who have grotesque artstyle s like that guy who Drew for Adventure Time once who drew the most "abstract" episodes of shin chan, or the choppy shit of gainax and trigger.
Its NEVER the guys who Drew the Cardcaptor Sakura anime, or the 80s magical girl shows, or your sexy 80s waifus or Cream Lemon, etc.
Or the Descendents of Ozamu Dezaki, or Fujiko F., or the guys who Drew the Saint Tail anime, or the guys behind candy candy, or any of the World Masterpiece Theathre.......
Its NEVER those guys......
That scene was part of a joke. The girl was complaining that because their series was a gag comedy the animation was going to be very limited and those poor animators working in the anime wouldn't be able to show off their talent in order to get a better salary and then would be poor forever. Cue exaggerated animation.
Regular show has some very nice designs and animations.
Aside from the insanity of Gumball it's my favourite designed kid's show.
Was waiting for someone to mention Ed Edd n Eddy.
Regardless of any other opinion you may have of the show, aimed for a very high standard of craftsmanship which Danny Antonucci has a clear dedication to.
You guys probably know this already, but CN is not as good as they were 20 years ago - but not as bad as they were 10 years ago (aka 2006):
>Crossover bumpers in the CGI city were gone
>Shows such as Cow and Chicken, Time Squad, Looney Tunes were removed.
>Jim Samples went senile.
>CN aired the Re-animated movie.
>Saved by the Bell ran on Adult swim for April Fools'.
>Commercials with terrible characters like Fred Fred Burger and Cheese were spammed to appeal to middle schoolers.
>Inuyasha, Teen titans, Justice league unlimited, and other comfy shows ended, severing all ties with the early 00s.
>Last DBZ movie until 2014 aired on television.
>CN really pushed that Ben 10 shit, even though nobody liked it.
>Adult Swim stopped the chill Japan bumpers and replaced them with clips of their characters doing wacky/lolrandom things.
Isn't it sad that 20somethings get nostalgic for the 90s and early 2000s, whereas teens find the mid-late 00s nostalgic? Poor kids.
The point was that "smooth" does not equal "good". I see too many people post "wow that animation is so smooth" as if it's a great compliment, so this is here to show that smoothness is one of the least important factors in animation. Timing is the crucial part.
apparently a lot of those faces (the ones in this pic that he worked on, including the ones from seasons 3 and 4, so the ones from Ocean of Fear aren't his) are by Storyboard Artist Bert Youn, and the staff called them "Bert Youn Specials"
Do you guys remember back when we used to have this discussion daily? It got posted in Adventure Time generals constantly back when the show was still super popular on /co/
Fuck, I thought the ATfags were gone from /co/ once SU became the more powerful cancer.
You know guys, We should make a image about this kind of bait threads.
-----WARNING DO NOT REPLY---------------
Bad Comcic threads
Good old days threads
All of the korra threads
SJW bullshit thread.
And yo mama threads.
Saying Ren and Stimpy is a good show because of its animation is like saying Avatar was a good movie because of its budget and effects. That show was actually pretty shitty, if you get take off the nostalgia goggles and hop off John K's cock you'll clearly see that.
People complain a lot about the simplistic designs of AT, and then talk about animation as if theyre the same thing. Fact of the matter is that most of the time, AT moves very well and the animation itself is quite good.
The designs are what get animated. The simpler the designs, the simpler the animation. Even if you do something like three-dimensional camera movement, you're still working with very simple designs that are easy to animate and will never look impressive. But as far as I know AT doesn't even do things like that. It's just "smooth."
i'm reminded of this episode of Tiny Toons where Buster, Babs, and Plucky decided to ditch comedy and realize they really suck at it.
Thats what it feel most cartoons are doing now a days: Everything is so out-of-its-element that it's just jarring to see and not just that, alot of the people involve horseshoe these aspects in for the sake of it. Hack writing 101. All under the guise of it being "pretty and colorful"
That's why they make up the majority of quality threads right?
You know, despite the show's fanbase. I do very well believe it is the best ANIMATED show on right now in America, the animation seems pretty top quality and doesn't seem to have that whole CalArts look. Which kind of makes sense, that gif right there reminds of Ed Edd n Eddy, which Rebeca Sugar worked on.
yeah, but some of that too has to do with DVD transfers and how badly Hasbro and their partners kept masters and only had use Pre-Masters tapes to restore, as a result, LOL Quality http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Rhino_Entertainment
Huh, interesting stuff there. Did not know that!
What the fuck do you care? Adventure time has simple but visually appealing designs and animation, it's perfectly good. I know you're offended by the art for some reason, but you and your types should just bugger off.
you people keep falling for it
fuck you all guys
AT supposed to have rules you nimrod. Anybody can make wacky deformed silly cartoon designs. AT even proved it in the first season. Ward set out to make something vast, vibrant, and colorful in tone with actual limitations.
American/Western audiences have been fed shit for so long that they're not only used to it but insist it's a meal worthy of a five star restaurant. Their standards are at rock bottom and their sense of aesthetics has dulled to almost nothing.
>Thinking John K. is the only responsible for Ren & Stimpy quality
>Thinking deranged faces is signal of good animation
>Thinking is not way easier to animate that way than actually making it a still image
>Thinking 90% of flash animator on Youtube don't make LOL FACES as a selling point
>Thinking Adventure Time is somehow a example of "ruined" animation, when actually is also deranged and wacky
>Thinking this is anything but bait
Fuck it. This is now a easy b8 chart thread
IMO Adventure Time's art style suits the show.
Ren and Stimpy relies on being gross and shocking; thus, incredibly expressive faces and exaggerated proportions make it a great, concise product.
Adventure Time tries to tackle more plot depth and comparatively realistic emotion and world building. So, having a simplistic, easy-to-swallow art style creates a nice irony. Now, I'm not saying AT is flawless. I definitely have qualms with JUST how simplistic the art style and movement can be, but I definitely wouldn't want to make it as dynamic and expressive as something like R&S.
>Using APC for shitting on AT.
w0w, this is some high level bait m80.
Holy fuck no.
Kyoani embodies a problem that I have with a LOT of anime. It focuses too much on trying to make the characters conventionally attractive/cute 24/7 instead of going for exaggerated and expressive movement/faces. If they actually do any nice, detailed animation, it's usually for something 'cutesy' that the girl is doing, like twiddling her fingers or eating.
Why the transition from drawn anime/cartoon to CGI? Is it cheaper? But I always thought CGI was fucking expensive and took longer. Is it because they think it looks better?
WHY THE TREND
Price fluctuates, and working digitally cuts way, way down on resources after a while.
Spending 5k on a tablet and software pays off when you don't have to worry about replenishing different pencils, markers, and other supplies. It also helps eliminate time wasted for mistakes; if you fuck up a line while inking, you don't have to trash the whole thing.
It also allows for more specialized labor. Especially with 3D. You don't necessarily need to be a phenomenal artist to work on rigging, lighting, movement, etc.
Basically, it's not always necessarily cheaper, but it allows for more labor and faster production.
>another thread hijacked by anime funposters straight from /a/
What a surprise.
This is like saying CoD Ghosts is better than LoZ Wind Waker because of the graphics. Judging a show on its looks rather than its narrative quality and emotional impact is absurd and backwards. Cow and Chicken may have had a more detailed style (although visually unappealing in my opinion), but it never hit or made an attempt to hit some of the emotional notes that Adventure Time goes for. Whether AT succeeded in hitting those marks is subjective, but the narrative quality is levels above the 90's cartoons you're lauding.
thats beyond cherry-picking
>Animation is about the illusion of movement
Not even him and not a huge fan of AT's style myself, but simpler doesn't automatically mean worse. An argument can be made that cartoons in general benefit from a simpler style.
You could draw a show with stick figures and I'd enjoy it if I found the storytelling to be of a high enough quality. But you can also bore me with painstaking art if you can't tie it together with a story that is engaging. Those are two extremes, of course, but the way I watch shows, I value the story over visuals.
But then again, I read Alex Ross' Justice, so grains of salt and all that.
It's not a problem, it's a feature. Anime is not cartoonish, it's cinematic. It's not about exaggerated, Disney-style movement and expressions (those do exist, including in Kyoani's shows, but they aren't the focus).
Some Kyoani sakuga:
So yeah, it's not all about "cutesy" things.
I think the answer boils down to the fact that 3DCG is really easy compared to hand-drawn animation.
>An argument can be made that cartoons in general benefit from a simpler style.
For budget reasons sure, and I'd even argue for an artistic sense, but it'll never be as good as stuff that tries to break away from that.
I'm not saying simpler styles aren't good, I watch my fair share of both that kind of stuff with my anime.
You're watching melodramatic Chinese cartoons.
>It's not about being cutesy!
Literally every one of those is meant to make the viewer see how cute the girl is. Their faces barely undergo any sort of change, lest it make them ugly for half a frame. It lacks dramatic, force-based movement, and is pretty much shit.
It's really amazing how you know what I enjoy better than I do. MSPA Problem Sleuth had simplistic art for such a long narrative, but I found it engaging and funny, so I enjoyed reading it. The quality of visuals in early South Park episodes wasn't near as detailed as even Adventure Time, but it was still enjoyable. To say that even I might as well go read a novel implies that simple art is more or less pointless. But South Park probably wouldn't work so well as a radio drama.
I watch all kinds of anime.
>Literally every one of those is meant to make the viewer see how cute the girl is.
Oh, now I see. You're moephobic. That is, you react hysterically to seeing bishoujo characters. Then you rationalize it by just making up any kind of shit you can think of, even if it's objectively nonsense.
But it is cinematic. Look at those sakuga clips I posted for example.
I'm pretty sure Simpsons is still done traditionally.
As for Family Guy, I couldn't really tell you. It's done in seasons, and episodes are worked on in chunks through different stages of production instead of one by one, straight through.
I could be wrong, though. I think the speed is a case-to-case basis
>Using this falseflag bait with Milky Holmes
The irony is that unlike >>79164295 implies
They're supposed to be cute, but also retarded, poor, moronic even for the retarded, and constantly worthless without their superpowers.
Which they don't have for 99.99% of the show.
Your self-awareness is probably so low you didn't even realize you're moephobic. You just instinctively react with disgust when you see bishoujo characters, and then try to rationalize it.
ren and stimpy was a rare exception to the static faces in animation dude. yes it was really cool but it's not like most shows did that in 1992. if people can get away with spending less money they're gonna do it, get used to it
I hold the quality of the narrative above all else when I'm consuming narrative content. If the art quality is attractive, that's a plus. Adventure Time's visuals are simple, but they're still visually appealing to me. The art in Cow and Chicken and Ren and Stimpy were well detailed and clearly took more time and effort than Adventure Time's or Gravity Fall's, but neither of the former has the narrative strength of the latter. Maybe you don't like the stories in Adventure Time or Gravity Falls - that's subjective - and maybe you prefer the art to the story - that's subjective too - but from where I stand, the story comes first and the art ties with voicing at second.
Animation is a visual medium, but I still hold the storytelling as chiefly important when someone's telling a story.
This. I think of AT like vector art.
It lacks the complexity and detail of an oil painting, sure, but that doesn't mean it's bad art.
Art should reflect the narrative - this can apply in both straightforward and ironic ways.
>Anime is not cartoonish, it's cinematic.
>I watch all kinds of anime.
Whatever you say nigga
Consider the video posted here, for example: >>79161518
Do you think the visuals are just a bonus, and that the scene would have more or less the same impact if the characters were MSPaint doodles and the animation was Flash-tier? And if you care so much about narrative, why are you even watching American shows?
>Animation is a visual medium, but I still hold the storytelling as chiefly important when someone's telling a story.
Visuals--and audio--are used to tell stories too.
>Anime is not cartoonish, it's cinematic.
Yes, that's what I said. And it's true. Do you have some kind of counter-argument to that?
>I watch all kinds of anime.
I do. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
>Everything made by Kyoani is moeshit
This is a meme created by people who've never seen Kyoani shows, and based on rumors, guesswork and misconceptions. Moeshit isn't even a real thing, and even if something is "moeshit" how exactly is that mutually exclusive with having good animation? Kyoani is rightfully famous for their animation quality. But I guess to you "moeshit" is some satanic bogeyman that ruins literally everything.
Also we were specifically talking about Kyoani, so of course I'm going to link to clips of Kyoani shows. How exactly that's supposed to prove I don't watch all kinds of anime is a mystery to me.
>that walk at :36
Source is Crusher Joe; a 1983 animu film based on a series of novels by Haruka Takachiho and directed by Yoshikazu Yasuhiko (both still alive afaik). Personally I found it a pretty fun Buck Rogers-esque flick.
Kyoani's animation isn't necessarily bad. They capture motion and movement better than most shit does, but they neglect truly dynamic and dramatic movement.
Moeshit would describe something like >>79163568 said. It focuses on constantly keeping the characters aesthetically appealing and tries to shove how CUTE the characters are down the audience's throat.
>Prolonged sequences involving girls doing normal things in "cute" ways, with fidgety, frantic movements and expressions that involve incredibly static changes in eyebrows and mouth
>Ornately animated sequence involving a cute girl having some sort of emotional breakdown/through
>Never shows characters with unattractive or exaggerated faces; they have to be cute in every single frame
You can have attractive characters without being moeshit.
TTGL, FLCL, and LWA do a great job with this. Hell, One Punch Man does, too. The difference is that they actually put effort into making everything expressive, rather than trying to ensure that the characters remain cute and appealing to the audience.
>but they neglect truly dynamic and dramatic movement.
Yeah yeah yeah. This is just more moephobic rationalization.
>Moeshit would describe something like >>79163568 said.
Except he is also moephobic, has no idea what Kyoani's shows are like, and generally has no idea what he's talking about.
If you are moephobic you can just watch American shows instead. There should be little if any traumatizing material there.
What is autistic about it? It's a legitimate term.
>10 year old girl
Another fine meme. The reality is that "moe" shows almost invariably star characters who are 13-18 years old (probably an average of 15 or 16).
It's also a meme that "moe" shows are about nothing more than "look how cute this girl is." What would that even entail? How would it work? I don't know.
Meme. Moe is first and foremost a romantic feeling, and only secondarily sexual.
>give them money
Meme. You just are projecting your own hatred of moe onto Japanese creators ("They hate it too, and they're just taking advantage of otaku manchildren!").
You have absolutely not even the slightest idea of what you're talking about, and it's just sad to watch. Go see a therapist.
If you think animation is just a series of individual drawings, that's fucking stupid.
I'm an ani student. Good animation involves having a comprehensive understanding of force, anatomy, design elements, physics, and timing, along with many other factors.
It's not just two drawings that you put together. Those drawings each contain implications that blend into the next frame and allow the audience to "predict" movement.
Reducing it to just "two pictures next to each other" is bastardizing the entire process.
Not to mention the division of labor and collaboration. And I'm not even going to bother going into 3D.
Furthermore, you don't need good art to have good animation. You can have a simple circle, and still find a way to make it dynamic and engaging with knowledge of the above.
Uh... I never said animation doesn't involve those things. I just stated the fact that animation is a series of drawings. That's what it is. It is individual drawings that are played back quickly in succession to create the illusion of movement. How is this even supposed to be controversial?
>Furthermore, you don't need good art to have good animation.
Stick figures and MSPaint doodles don't make for good animation no matter how much effort you put into them.
Can we discuss backgrounds?
I like backgrounds.
>Stick figures and MSPaint doodles don't make for good animation no matter how much effort you put into them.
Yet you seem to believe in the reverse: static movement and expressions look good as long as you can fap to the characters.
There is nothing even remotely compelling about that animation.
>Yet you seem to believe in the reverse: static movement and expressions
What I believe is that animation should be cinematic and should use all the means of cinema, and not focus solely on character movement. Movement also shouldn't be just one type, because you need different kinds of movement for different purposes.
>as long as you can fap to the characters.
Again, this is a meme. Why embarass yourself like this?
To clarify a little, I do believe the art needs to fit the work it's attached to. That scene required a certain level of detail to properly tell the story in the show. But if something fits a less-detailed style, it doesn't need to be done up. I've been using Adventure Time because it's the example given in the OP, but you can look at other works besides it. What you showed wouldn't work in the style of Ren and Stimpy. Adventure Time would have a tough time seeming conceptually coherent if it were done in the style in your clip. As would Rick and Morty or Gravity Falls or Regular Show or South Park. But the important thing is that the simplicity or complexity of the art is not what makes an animated work good or bad. What is bad is if the art cannot convey the story being told.
And I watch American shows because I'm not into characters waxing poetic about their honor or duty or what-have-you. Lengthy, dramatic monologues don't do it for me. Avatar: The Last Airbender was done in an Eastern art style and had - in my opinion - a truly engaging story. And it was American. So that's why.
Checked. Also I just found it in an older /co/ thread.
Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise
Although the responding comment said this about its animation:
>Although it's not what your looking for since that's the only scene like that
and many more for both sides
Animation became more expensive, less people were buying into it, digital animation techniques made it cheaper but less human and unique, and newer cartoonists are literally "I have a webcomic"
I just want to say that the hate on AT style is inherently subjective. It wouldn't be nearly as aggrieving if it didn't pervade every inch of the CN block in some way shape or form.
If every show today had the Clasky Csupo style, it'd honestly be much worse than AT. The thing is we keep seeing it copied everywhere, and it's just annoying at this point.
If you really cared so much about narrative in animation you would be watching anime instead. There's some weird cognitive dissonance going on here. And where did you get the idea that all anime is about "waxing poetic about honor or duty" or "lengthy, dramatic monologues"?
yeah but the entire film is worth it for the art alone
I wonder if any anon is a animator? Or they like brag about stupid Japanese shit.
American animation is pretty much where narrative goes to die, and while there are characters in anime "waxing poetic" or engaging in dramatic monologues, there are also many other things (and it's not like all monologues are somehow the same thing). So it makes no sense to be very concerned with narrative and then choose American shows over anime.
Yes, but how is that relevant? Was I talking about the quality of any of those shows? No. Is their quality relevant to the subject at hand? No. Then why bring it up?
>all of those we're from episodes throughout all season 1
>ren makes all of those faces in one scene
You AT fans are fucking delusional if you actually think this show didn't play a part in ruining western animation.
>that lower picture
Don't be gentle /co/:
Does Symbionic Titan have a prayer of ever finishing?
I mean, he got Samurai Jack back on Toonami...
If one show is enough to ruin American animation then I think American animation has bigger problems than one show.
Yes, but as I already said: moe is primarily a romantic feeling. It is an imaginary romance. People masturbating to characters they like is essentially equivalent to people having sex with their girlfriends.
Well meme'd. Since you don't know anything at all about anime, why are you attempting to argue about it?
>People masturbating to characters they like is essentially equivalent to people having sex with their girlfriends.
this was actually sad to read
WHO FUCKING CARES
WESTERN "CARTOON" GARBAGE
IS AND FOREVER WILL BE
John K is an overrated hack btw, good riddance he will never ever get to produce any other show because he is practically banned by every major children network and will forever be doing menial shit for people like Miley Cyrus
Oh /co/ you guys make me laugh when you drag anime into these arguments.
>You AT fans are fucking delusional if you actually think this show didn't play a part in ruining western animation.
>think this show didn't play a part in ruining western animation.
>play a part
Read next time, faggot.
Why are you trying to act like anime isn't just as expressive?
But you're still talking about one show playing a part in it, meaning that American animation is easily destroyed by a couple of shows. Which is to say that American animation has bigger problems than a couple of shows.
I feel ashamed for having argued with him now. I can't argue with anyone who thinks masturbating to cartoons is emotionally equivalent to having sex with an actual romantic partner. I pity them too much.
I actually hated R&S while growing up. It was the very first show that I felt was for idiots. And it was pretty disturbing when I was kid.
I heard the newer series was better and more adult-oriented so things make more sense. Never got around to watching it, though.
I never said it's emotionally equivalent.
Masturbating to a character (or creating pornographic illustrations and manga of the character) fulfills the same role as having sex with one's girlfriend. I shouldn't have to spell this out.
And again, I am simply stating how things are. Why are you trying to make this about me? Do you think the universe revolves around me?
I like both, I just hate it when /a/ tries to come to /co/ badgering about how anime is far more superior than western animation. Both parties got their lazy pile and their superb pile. But some weebs get anal about 'what's good'.
First of all, a part could either mean a small part or a big part, personally I think, because of how popular it got, it pretty much set the medium for the standard of quality, not all, but other shows followed suit and made their shows have the same blandy bland art style thinking story alone could win the audience over, but even their shallow hipster characters mixed in with constant ukulele soundtracks pretty much ruined any traces of a good show. Second, I never said "a couple shows easily destroy american animation", there's way more shit that could ruin the western animation industry (or at least the quality of it) than "a couple shows". Like I said, read next time, faggot.
>because of how popular it got, it pretty much set the medium for the standard of quality, not all, but other shows followed suit
So it was responsible for ruining American animation, is what you're saying.
One would be hard-pressed to find character acting in anime that's as expressive as a top Disney animator's work, but on the other hand you won't find anything as radical as Yoshinori Kanada or Shinya Ohira's animation in western cartoons. Both approaches have their own strengths an weaknesses.
Well, you got me there, but you can't argue that it was all AT's fault, it was the laziness of the industry wanting to stay in it's safe space Pendelton had unintentionally made for them.
It actually is superior.
This is starting to seem like some buzzword. The objectives of Disney and anime are complete opposites, and one style doesn't have any place in the other. Disney's style has mainly weaknesses though, because it's good for little more than making Disney movies.
One show shouldn't have that kind of effect on the industry, which is why I said the industry has bigger problems than one show.
The only weakness to disney's style is it takes a big budget, talented animators, and without the two, it's pretty limp. Anyway, fuck off weeaboo. We all know the schtick, good anime are better than bad western cartoons. We all know, now go away.
Well, there's also the fact that the animation industry in the USA is geared almost entirely towards children, so we don't get nearly as much funding or freedom. The latter also means that less animators are likely to go into the 2d industry.
>It actually is superior.
Sorry, can't hear you over my 24 roaring fps.
Disney had a very specific, limited style of animation and filmmaking that would be wildly inappropriate and ineffectual for almost all anime. It was based on stage and threatre, not cinema (which is what anime is based on).
>Anyway, fuck off weeaboo.
You are using that word incorrectly.
>We all know the schtick, good anime are better than bad western cartoons.
Anime in general is superior to Western animation.
Framerate doesn't determine animation quality, and there is also more to animation than just animation.
Disney doesn't have a monopoly on animation.
It's why anime is better than Western animation. You are thinking of animation as being just cartoons, and that's the problem Western animation has.
>characters yelling or laughing but can't be fucked to animate the mouth to time it right
lol jesus christ
this is all much funnier because I used to read John K's blog because I liked the analysis of old cartoons and he was always going on about how well something like Looney Tunes would do musical timing
what gets me about all of John K's modern work is that it's pretty half assed and gets by entirely on "WELL, IT'S HIS STYLE" truly the abyss stared back
2dgif person here, I can understand preferences and all- there's more western cartoons than Disney. But anyways, I'm done giving my two cents; I got a favorite eastern animation and a western animation, some 19 year old weeb will prolly come give me a fucking 20 page essay of how Gurren is life and American is shit with pencils one day. Then I'll punch them in the nose and push them down a hill.
>You are thinking of animation as being just cartoons, and that's the problem Western animation has.
The west does not have the problem. The problem is you. Watch more western animation, you will find plenty of unique, interesting or good films like Persoplis, My Dog Tulip and Watership Down.
No, I'm pretty sure it isn't my problem how the West chooses to approach animation.
>Watch more western animation, you will find plenty of unique, interesting or good films like Persoplis, My Dog Tulip and Watership Down.
"Plenty" is quite an overstatement especially when compared to anime.
>Disney doesn't have a monopoly on animation.
I wouldn't say they do, but one problem with animation is that the only studios that any non-obsessed can name is Disney, Dreamworks, Pixar or Illumination
Classic animators already had that figured out. Just look at cartoons from 40s, how well they balance detail with simplification needed for easy animating.
Now cartoons basically reversed to 20s style which was invented just for learning how animation works in the first place.
No, it's literally short for the Japanese spelling/pronunciation of animation. It's also completely distinct from cartoons and has nothing to do with soap operas.
If you really have no comprehension of the topic then don't try to argue about it.
Why would that mean cartoons aren't animated?