Holy shit it's beautiful.

File: Screen Shot 2017-06-28 at 9.25.23 PM.png (750KB, 1278x536px) Image search: [Google]

750KB, 1278x536px

And adorable

>>30413452
>hascuck shills are already in full force
Summer can't end soon enough

>>30413703
>Muh shills
>Muh summer
Why are you here?

File: 1443890605117.png (127KB, 334x343px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 334x343px

>>30413703
>mattel intern makes hasbro shill meme for the googeelinth time hoping someone will fall for it

File: shill.jpg (26KB, 600x335px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x335px

>>30413703
Well meme'd kiddo

>>30413483
God damn, the longer you stare at them the stranger they look.

>>30413483
it really bothers me they added an iris shine and then kept the hard flash shine.

>>30413483
Whats with all the fucking gradients? It makes it look like low quality 3d models.

File: trump vaporwave.jpg (276KB, 1035x1035px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1035x1035px

>>30413703
>disney shill trying to kill hype for the biggest movie of the year so their shitty star wars sequel does better
SAD!

>>30413452
It looks like a gian toilet bowl.

Just saying.

>>30416353
They are low quality 3D models anon, that's why the animation looks so fucking off, it's 3D trying to imitate 2D

>>30416394
>>30416353

Isnt it made in harmony? then its 2d with a bumpmap over it so simulate 3d light and shadows.

>>30416366
>star wars
Nothing past episode 6 is canon.

File: download.jpg (7KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 225x225px

>>30413452
I've seen this before.

File: IMG_4855.gif (613KB, 498x498px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 498x498px

>>30413703
>people are excited for my little pony on the my little pony board
>must be shills

>>30416694
>Why are people claiming mediocre scenes are 'beautiful' on a board known to care about quality
>must be real fans

File: pink giggle.gif (334KB, 524x524px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 524x524px

>>30416745
>on a board known to care about quality
JUST ZOOM MY WORDS UP FAMPAI

>>30413452
>>30413483
Love the style. Don't know how I feel about 2D characters + 3D backgrounds, it was done with Gumball so maybe it will fare the same. Colors are gorgeous. Shading looks like the emboss filter in some scenes. Buildings are beautiful.

>>30413452
>Ugly CG-styled 2D pasting.
>Good looking.

>>30413452
I liked the bit where one firework shot off a line that exploded into another firework.

File: wew.png (737KB, 1142x615px) Image search: [Google]

737KB, 1142x615px

>a little lower and full Canterlot get wiped off

>>30416638
There are more than 3 star wars movies?

File: I wanna pinch those cheeks.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

I wanna pinch those cheeks.

>>30413483
They look like pigs.

>>30417660
You should be able to relate to the movie better then.

>>30417665
I don't go to the movies to see myself though.

>>30413452
I don't know. The whole trailer just gave me massive uncanny valley vibes, the 3D cgi parts like they came straight out of the 90's, and the shading looked just as fucked up as it did in the teaser.

>>30416394
t. Knows nothing about animation. They're 2D imitating 3D, not the other way round.

File: BeveledShading.png (103KB, 450x193px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 450x193px

>>30416353
>>30416524
What this anon said. I don't know what to make of this movie. I'm familiar with the software, so it's kind of obvious they're using Toon Boom's built in lighting software, but in my opinion the software leaves something to be desired. The way the light works is that you paint a normal map over your characters to simulate 3D, and then the program will shine a light over beveled edges. In some of the earlier promo material, they apparently messed up some settings and the beveling was REALLY obvious.

There are complex ways of mapping out a rig to make the lighting system work, but even when you do it correctly, it's still the computer trying to estimate where the light should go. The computer doesn't necessarily understand what material the light's reflecting from and it doesn't handle any complex lighting. The software's inability to handle complex lighting is why in this shot
>>30413483
You're seeing the shine in the eye on screen right even though the lighting is clearly coming from screen left. The eye glint should be on screen left where the light is.

It's maybe a very high budget kind of cheap? Another thing they've done is use CGI to make their backgrounds, and here's the thing: a CGI background is more expensive to use for a single shot, but cheaper for multiple shots. If you're going to do lots of different angles on a single set, then all you need to do is build the set in 3D one time. Problem is, the Canterlot set looks kinda... I don't know, but it's not really up to the standards audiences are used to from most movies that use 3D today.

I actually don't know why people are excited for the movie based on what we've been show so far. Knowing some things about how the sausage is made, I might argue there's reason to go in with firmly lowered expectations.

On the bright side, at least the animation looks nice and fluid. If Toon Boom is good for anything, it's better than Flash at making dynamic and exciting animation.

>>30417709
I'm definitely going with low expectations. Unlike a bunch of the faggots on this board I actually still enjoy the show. You know why? I don't freak the fuck out over imperfections.

So yeah, I'm going in with low expectations. The animation will never sit quite right with me, but I'll enjoy the good scenes and not worry about the bad parts.

>>30413483
>>30417653
It took me way too long to notice Twilight actually has a gap in her hair for her horn now.

File: 1492442100074.jpg (13KB, 297x405px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 297x405px

>>30417760
Fug, can't unsee

>>30417709
>a very high budget kind of cheap
best description of the movie yet

>>30417783
>>30417760
also check her ears and horn

File: here we go.gif (270KB, 594x594px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 594x594px

>>30417709
I honestly quite liked the backgrounds, but do think the character shading needs a little more work.

The backgrounds didn't seem glaringly CG and the way that character models sat on the backgrounds reminded me a lot of the old Disney 2d animated films. That is, a detailed rich vibrant background with very simple and smooth characters on top of them. Granted, for those films the backgrounds were all painted by hand and the characters had simple designs in order to make it easier to draw each of their frames. In this film, the backgrounds are digitally designed and animation is done within the software, but that contrast between background and characters still gives me that nostalgic feeling. Maybe I just can't see past my rose tinted glasses, though.

Also, hi Greg

File: MLPMov4.png (418KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 1920x1080px

>>30417899
Some of the background elements look fine, but here's a really glaring example of Pinkie and Dash standing in the Matrix waiting for the guns to be loaded in. It's just a flat white plane.

File: MLPMov1.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>30417899
>>30417953
And I'd infer they're not actually standing on a flat white plane. They're probably standing on the Canterlot set, but on a portion of it where there isn't a lot of texture. Again, there's some nice stuff here, but also plenty of spaces that don't have detail or texture, which is unfortunately pretty noticable.

File: MLPMov3.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>30417899
>>30417953
>>30417961
Here's a shot of two statues of the sisters, but it's anyone's guess what they're made out of because they seem to be nothing more than flat-colored 3D models. Shading has been applied, but otherwise there's no detail on them. This sometimes gets a pass in 2D animation, but 3D approaches the uncanny valley more easily because you can't get away with as many idealizations.

File: MLPMov5.png (638KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 1920x1080px

>>30417899
>>30417953
>>30417961
>>30417971
In this shot, you can see that it is definitely an issue of there not being texture where Dash and Pinkie are standing. They have some cobblestones strewn about, but not in that specific place, so doing a close up there makes it look like the ponies are standing in a white void.

>>30417971
>>30417961
>>30417953
Fair enough, after a rewatch of the trailer I can see these issues most obvious within the Canterlot set as you've said. The only one that bothers me personally is the one of Pinkie and Dash in the Matrix, but I can see where you're coming from.

File: MLPMov2.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>30417953
>>30417899
>>30417961
>>30417971
>>30417982
And finally the shot with Trixie, where again, you can see some cobblestones, but they're only in a few places.

It's kind of interesting because it seems like they're applying the background design of the original show to the 3D models. In the actual show, they tend to make a lot of stuff flat color, but they make it visually interesting with gradients and the occasional cobblestone or spiral pattern thrown about. That's great in a situation where the background artist knows exactly what the camera will be focused on, but when you give the camera the ability to go anywhere or look at anything, you can't use that technique anymore because you don't know if the camera will be focused on a spot with random cobblestones or on an empty area.

File: 835685.gif (324KB, 500x278px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 500x278px

>>30416745
/mlp/ used to give things a fair assessment, then it was flooded with annoying hispter faggots that think theyre so fucking patrician for shitting indiscriminately on everything.

How canon is the movie going to be with the series? Would I need to catch up on episodes? I have watched only a handful of episodes from Season 6 and nothing from Season 7.

I haven't had much interest in MLP for years now, but this movie has gotten my interest back.

The only thing I absolutely hate is the 2D characters walking in 3D worlds, it works in Gumball but it was very distracting here, I had to watch the trailer twice because I was too distracted by that CG. ugh

>>30418022
Movie seems to have been designed in such a way that you can go in without having watched much of the show. You'll probably be alright.

>>30417990
There are things in the background that are pretty nice. I really like that mountain back there with the waterfalls, the greenery is pretty nice, and the houses are alright.

That's why I say it's awkward and I don't know what to make of it, and why I called it "high budget cheap". It doesn't look low effort. I don't know why the mountains and waterfalls in the background look great but there's so little going on when you get close up to the set. You'd think you'd want it to be the opposite, but then the drawback of a 3D set is you have to design the whole thing, so the designer can't know what places are going to need the most detail for sure and it's expensive to go crazy on everything.

Maybe they'll flesh it out and add more detail before the film releases? It makes me a bit nervous for the film to see stuff like this in their trailer, though. I've seen other trailers that were missing some crucial stuff that get in before the film got into theaters, but it implies that maybe there's some hardcore last-minute crunch going on.

File: 1492606558891.png (419KB, 889x1024px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 889x1024px

>>30418051
My hope is that, because FiM has always been "last minute crunch: the show", they've got it under some kind of control.

>>30418051
I suspect that they probably have things under control since they were able to reduce the release date by an entire month. But, someone did post this video in another thread which means that if they are pushed for time, there could still be a vast number of changes made between now and release. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDnL8GTkWOM

We'll just have to wait and see I guess

>>30418051
Also, if they have budgeted for enough time, then it shouldn't be a difficult task to add further detail to the sets. Once the 2D animation is implemented such that the background artists know exactly where each scene takes place, they can add detail as necessary. If they're pressed for time though, it may be less feasible.

>>30418070
Let's hope this can be successfully applied to the show.

>>30418106
Movie, I mean.

I've warmed up to the new character style after watching it a few times. It works for me in some scenes, but others, not so much. One that seems bad to me was the trixie scene in >>30417995
I liked >>30413483 and >>30417653 though.

The movie will never feel like the show to me, but I don't think it will be bad.

File: images.jpg (4KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 259x194px

See CG airship riped from PS1 or sega saturn.
>good animation.

>>30413452
Huh. So THIS is what the show looks like when actual care and attention is put into the animation.

File: Frame_of_empty_Ponyville_street_S1E20.png (538KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 1280x720px

>>30417995
>Little detail in the background
>Few textures
>Everything is a solid color
I could argue that this is extremely show-accurate.

>>30413483
Cute

>>30418449
Well no, it's not really show accurate. That's like saying that the SFM animations are show accurate because they get the colors right. 3D is a different medium, and the SFM ponies are way less cute than the 2D poners.

Hey did /co/ have anything to say about this film?

>>30419447
Similar things to us here really. Many people were optimistic, some were not, there was discussion about the 3D models being shit. Then their threads got derailed by Barneyfag posting the Tails comic and the threads finally got deleted by mods.

>>30419583
Thank goodness for GR15, we nearly had a discussion about an actual fucking cartoon instead of politics or live action movies.

>>30419583
>the Tails comic
Is that the baby horror comic?

>>30418000
Mind if I screencap this? Thanks.
Most truth on this board I've seen in years, but whenever I say it, people can only discredit me by shouting "Shill", rather than defending.

>>30418429
> Shilling

>>30418000
Sounds like /tv/ to be quite honest family

>>30419694
Yeah, and people who say that the Simpsons, Spongebob, and Fairly Odd parents aren't good anymore are all just too cynical to know good cartoons when they watch them.

Be careful about using people who agree with you to determine whether you're right about something. Bear in mind that most people who get tired of the show do quit talking about it and move on, so they're not here to contradict you.

i'm glad someone else started a thread about it. the backgrounds throughout the trailer are fucking incredible.

>>30419682
Yeah that's the one

File: 11112519.png (40KB, 1040x829px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1040x829px

>>30419744
>Yeah, and people who say that the Simpsons, Spongebob, and Fairly Odd parents aren't good anymore are all just too cynical to know good cartoons when they watch them
So your setup was to piss me off, then to get your point across. Nice.

>Be careful about using people who agree with you to determine whether you're right about something
There's so much wrong with this statement...

A, this is not my opinion, this is how the situation appears, and I don't give half a shit if somebody agrees with me, I'm just glad I'm not the only one who notices this. I'm sure there are a fair bit of people that have actual reasons as to why they stopped watching, and are for some reason still on a fan website for something they're no longer a fan of, but the vast majority of the people that stopped watching only appear to to be that way because they can only find the dumbest shit to complain about. B, this would imply that the conclusion I came to only relied on how many people agreed with me, rather than years of interacting with people that can only bitch, and only bitch about the most trivial shit, like the show not adopting their headcannon, which I've seen countless times.

>THE PONY MOVIE

>>30420187
>I'm just glad somebody else agrees with me
Well big whoop, you're basically a yutz, and when you post that screen cap to show there's at least one other person who agrees that the entire internet became too cynical for MLP in the face of "no changes just take your nostalgia goggles off it's exactly the same show season 6 is better than season 1 even", you'll look like a yutz.

File: neat.gif (3MB, 513x513px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 513x513px

>>30420467
>no changes just take your nostalgia goggles off it's exactly the same show season 6 is better than season 1 even

Just noticed what this is, and I'm deciding whether or not to keep going...

Eh, why not.

Okay, you've explained twice now that modern MLP is akin to modern Simpsons, Spongebob, FoB, etc., but instead of explaining how, you're proving my point by doing exactly as I explained in >>30419694. You're only not calling me a shill because you know it'd be redundant and I'm fully aware that this would be /mlp/'s definition of shilling, so instead I'm a "yutz". Interesting, never heard that one before so I'll at least give you points for that.

I'll give you another chance. Instead of crying "It's shit", insulting, and not explaining why, this is your opportunity to explain on behalf of all the people that hate the show, but are still here, why. So, why is it shit?

yutz goes in most fields