/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Even these from Animaniacs' worst studio (Freelance) animate better than these.

And no it's not the fact that the lineart is clean either. At this quality you can't really make out the changing grain of the cel ink.

>>5046504
>Why does the soulless cash-grab not animate as well as the original?"

>>5046504
I don't know if what you posted is cherrypicked because I've never watched nu-animaniacs. But going by the clips you posted- it's in the little things:

In the first comparison: notice how in the old clip, Pinky (I think that was his name?) moves his entire head and body when he talks. His center of gravity changes during his dialog, resulting in wider, exaggerated motions to properly convey his cartoon mouse emotions.
In the new one, Brain barely barely moves at all-half the time his head tilts to a stop and only his mouth is animated. When he moves his body backwards or forward, it barely budges. The result is choppy and looks like it was made in Flash even though it wasn't.

The second comparison, everything seems well animated, but the camera movement are different. In the old clip, the camera pans up in a long motion, keeping the characters at the center except when they're leavin the frame. It's important: we can have a good look on the action and get a sense of where they're going. In nu-animaniacs, the camera randomly fucks off after they jump out the window so we can't tell what's going on.

>>5046504
Because artists got worse

>>5046553
intereting
slightly off-topic, but what is your diagnosis for why scenes 2 and 3 flow better than 1 and 4?

>>5046796
In that case the differences can mainly be attributed to camera movements. In 1 and 4 it simply pans into a direction while in 2 and 3 it zooms to focus on something.
Zooming closer is a good way way to make a scene more dynamic, but prone to being overused (viewer will notice it if you hamfistedly put a bunch of zooms in the same sequence). Which is why I think the animators didn't, for example, put 2 zooms in what I assume to be the same bar sequence, and decided to make one scene less dynamic so that the sequence as a whole feels more coherent.

>>5046887
It's not just the camera movements
The same kind of missing element shows up here, not even counting the nicely done scene where Adorabat crosses her arms; it's there even in the first scene, mostly on Mao Mao's little reactions than Adorabat's flapping, but it's there.
Is it just the arcs and easing?

it's because the nu-animaniacs have animators have dunnning kruger. they don't understand what made the original charming. Yotta sucks, just put muh gainax xDD reference in there and call it a day

Soulless as FUCK

>>5046504
we dont have animators that good anymore, flash and the move to digital lowered the bar a lot so the skill that could make animations as close as the early 2000s is old and dying now

>>5046553
>looks like it was made in Flash even though it wasn't.
It actually was animated in Flash (or Adobe Animate as it's called now)

>>5046504
this is not /ic/ related

>>5046504
I don't animate so I don't know what this is called, but even though they're the same frame rate they aren't changing the drawing every time. Watch the arms closely in the newer scenes, you'll see that even though they're being moved at the same rate they only change the drawing a few times so it doesn't look as smooth.

>>5046796
Same thing here, some things are tweened smoothly every frame and some things aren't.

>>5046504
Because they gave the reboot to people who hate the original.
They were more concerned on shoving annoying politics up our asses than actually making a quality show.

>>5046504
I think its a few things. The backgrounds had more detail in the old one, now they look very simple. The old had a shadow but the new is all one flat color. They both may be hand drawn but the old was cleaned up by hand and the new im pretty sure was cleaned up using a method of manipulating vector control points and bezier curves which can give a sterile stiff look. Also it doesnt have any blurry compression artifacts the original has adding to the cold sterile look.
I see people saying the animation is worse and i agree some could be better but overall its near the same as the original it all fell apart in the clean up and coloring process imo

>>5046504
Digital animation sucks.

>>5046504
The animation itself is actually way better, the process just looks cheap because digital. There is much more overlap/follow through and solid posing and staging in the new animaniacs.

>>5046504
Wanna talk about shit animation? Watch the new ducktales. Holy shit i had no idea the animation was this bad. I couldnt get past the first 5 minutes. The visual style looks cool, but as an animator it is completely unwatcheable.

Imagine watching cartoons on television these days and caring about the animation. The best cartoons are behind us, looney tunes was the best. Chuck Jones and I Freleng were the best at tv animation. (and tom and jerry)

This is a new image dump for keyposes i found. Looney tunes has some of the best keyposes, as well as disney movies.

>>5046504
are you sure is the animation and not the ugly artstyle?

>>5046504
It's just plainly less expressive. Mouth movements look as if they're selected from a pool of template mouths matching each phoneme, like the South Park cutout mouths. I'm not saying that is in fact the case, but it feels that way. Brain's jaw moves robotically open and close, up and down, with no apparent organic action in it. They don't fit the specific expressive needs of any given scene. "Good enough" not "good."

>>5046504
2d animation could only ever be done how it was done because extra money could be made back from limited competition of other channels, toy advertising, and the home video market.
theres no way money can be spent on 2d animation like that any more.

>>5046504
Apply a VHS filter and it looks the same

>>5047775
>There is much more overlap/follow through and solid posing and staging in the new animaniacs.
Animaniacs
I'd love to just regularly prove you wrong, so instead I'll bring a different observation.
I'm genuinely surprised how much better TMS got with their posing in Pinky & The Brain versus the P&TB shorts in Animaniacs

>>5046504
Aside from the timing and gestural qualities others have mentioned, the animation of the new one feels more locked into one plane, while the old one moves in and out of space more. In the first clip when Pinky's head tilts, it isn't just rolling on the X-Y axis, it's pivoting on the Z axis as well. When the two run into their vehicle, their path is curved and they change scale properly as they move. Also look at how Brain's center of gravity shifts at the end of that sequence when he turns, just like you'd see from a turning motorcycle.
In short, a lot of spacial awareness and physics that are quite subtle in the drawings, but you feel it. This isn't to say the new version is bad, but the old one is more sophisticated.

Theory:
Cleanups having a thin line work that makes everything look sterile that you easily overlook the actual timing and proportioning of everything. I haven't seen the new series, but many animators have posted their parts online and I see a big difference from the trailers and finished scenes

>>5049412

>>5049413
Didn't know 4chan's file limit was gonna murder that, go here for it fully
https://www.sakugabooru.com/post/show/138129
and in case this one also gets destroyed
https://www.sakugabooru.com/post/show/138283

>>5049415
This looks incredible!

>>5049412
>>5049413
>>5049415
cool

i feel like alot of it has to do with line weight.
sure, it's "hand drawn" but the lack of variation in line thickness in nu-animaniacs compared to the natural strokes in the old one that emphasized flow and gesture, makes the new one feel overly digital and artificial in comparison

higher resolution and perfectly crisp lines probably have something to do with it, too. our brain fills in a lot of the information, same reason why 90s anime looks a lot more detailed than modern anime, trad. media just does that.

>>5046796
What is this from? It is really cute

>>5046796
>why do the scenes with smear frames flow better than the ones without smear frames
smear frames

>>5050044
mao mao
start with episode 6 if you want to see the peak

tryhard cancer politics got in the way, op

>>5054083
>He didn't watch the howard stern episode
>Or Gadafi being thrown into Hell
>"Sounds like rush limbaugh"

>>5046504
>>5047775
You picked some very specific examples, but from other clips i have seen from the new animaniacs, yes, the animation is better, yes the solid drawing is better, yes the weight balance i better, and yes the arcs, overlaps, followthroughs, and keyposing, are all better.

>>5056593
and the dick in my pants tases better
you need to explain HOW it's better, not just name drop some animation terms

>>5046504
Original was on paper, the new one is digital

>>5046504
because the key animators are shit and they just cycle through a few takes they copied 1:1 from somewhere else

>>5046504
I don't even see it. I liked the new ones animation a lot and it looked "cleaner" to me.

>>5054083
I am also a zoomer that misses the old apolitical show before SJW took over the world.

>>5046504
Animator here, been doing this shit for about 20 years now. When you have this much experience in the industry, you learn a few things about what goes right and wrong and how to articulate it. The problem here is that the first clips have "soul" while the second are "soulless". I hope that clears things up thanks.

>>5050035
Yeah it's basically just line weight and vector art cleanup making it look sterile. Everything being the same line weight is week 1 beg mistakes that teachers point out. No idea why it has become an animation style recently.

>>5060070
maybe for TMS, but the missing element is even there in the horrendously off-model held-up-by-John-Ewing Freelance animation.

>>5046504
Notice how the facial features float around as if they exist on a vague dimensional plane slightly above the head- not necessarily apart of it. That's what shitty puppet animation looks like (animation done with multiple assets and then strung together in order to economize the animation pipeline). If someone animated like that on pencil back before computer animation, they would immediately be fired because it's physically wrong. In the original clip, Pinky's features and details wrap around his skull and body because the artist was competent and understood basic construction (which should be a prerequisite for being in the industry, but it unfortunately isn't anymore). Now, the reason people are able to get away with shittier animation nowadays is because I think the "cleanliness" distracts from everything that's wrong about them. They're done with very clean vectorized lines in HD with clear & crisp colors... if this animation was done on paper, the analogue-ness of it would magnify everything that's wrong about it. It's just another example of bad art leaning on good technology.

>>5046504
As an autistic person I'll answer this in the most specific way possible.

Short answer is vector lines.

Long answer is how animators abuse vector lines in frame by frame animation.
A vector line is mathematically defined as a bezier curve.
Animate a bouncing ball using a light pencil tool.
Then ink it using a pen tool (anything with handles as it's probably bezier.)
Notice how unwieldy bezier curves are when fitting them on your drawing.
A bezier curve is very inflexible and should never be used to start a keyframe.
Animators do it all the time though.
Personally this is why I love Clip Studio so much.
Adjusting lines means pinching them rather than moving handles.
It's more in line with how our cognition works and produces smoother animation.

>>5046504
There's a difference between a line and a contour.
A line is purely flat while a contour subtly shows physical form.
To save money studios will use puppet rigs made of vector lines.
A vectorized drawing looks clean, but loses spacial information.
Pinky moves like a piece of rubber in a 3d scenes while brain moves like a bunch of bendy wires glued together on a piece of paper.
That's because effectively this is what a puppet rig is in computer animation.

>>5046504
no shading on the new clip