/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.2986636]

Is this guy full of shit, or is there any merit to what he says? For more context this is the thread it's from, he starts ranting near the bottom.

https://archive.is/UiNSg

[Anonymous No.2986642]

>>2986636
No, Gaylor Moon looks cheap because Jewei Animation already had their high budget cash cow season of Precure at the time so they cut corners. I believe the animation got better after GOpri ended but I haven't bothered to be assed to look at it. The studio can clearly do a much better job, they just don't care so it looks like shit intentionally because the moms today will buy the BDs anyway.

He could have used a better example.

[Anonymous No.2986644]

>>2986636
I honestly can't figure out what this autist is complaining about without more context.

But if he's bitching about the low quality in the Sailor Moon Crystal anime as it aired, this is common apparently in japanese animation for them to rush it out (Since often there an anime's goal is to push a light novel or a manga version) and then they clean it up for dvd/bluray release. There's many anime that have noticeably bad quality during air (Which sometimes hangs around as the fan-subbed version). I think Higurashi is one, Madoka Magica whatever the title is. Thre's a website for Sailor Moon Crystal in particular for comparing the two versions to one another, you can probably google for it easily.

Hope this is what you were looking for anon

[Anonymous No.2986645]

>>2986642
>>2986644
I put an archive link at the bottom with the whole thread in it,

essentially he goes on to rant about how people who study the foundation's (loomis and such) are shittier at drawing 2d art styles like anime because they're too used to following the rules of construction and the like (essentially constructing things with 3d objects) instead of just drawing in 2d. His view point is kind of hard to follow to be honest, so I thought I'd get a different viewpoint.

[Anonymous No.2986647]

>>2986645
Christ that thread has more autism than any /ic/ thread I've seen in months.

[Anonymous No.2986649]

>>2986645
Well that's just stupid. Anime is constructed via 3D objects. The only flat 2d elements in anime are the facial features and even those only partially. Anything you want to animate and turn around in space has to be based on 3 dimensional shapes. Otherwise you'll get south park style cardboard cutouts and I can't think of any anime that looks like that.

[Anonymous No.2986651]

>>2986645
He's just the usual fucktard failure making excuses to not study the fundies.

[Anonymous No.2986654]

>>2986647
ikr
>>2986649
That's what I thought, anyway if you have a spare 30 mins go ahead and read what that guy says, it's fucking autistic as fuck, but somewhat interesting, but seemingly just wrong to me, but I'm only a beginner so I'm super confidant whether or not he has a point or not.

[Anonymous No.2986657]

>>2986636
Yeah, let's just ignore 3d and draw everything as it if it was flat.

Pic related, an anime face seen from the side.

[Anonymous No.2986663]

I know what he's trying to say and he's semi right, because studying stylistic approaches and techniques of other artists is very important and many people overlook that, but the way he's wording it is all wrong. Asian cartoonists learn the fundamentals much more strongly than western cartoonists. They understand construction a lot better. The reason western cartoonists suck balls is because they have no grasp of fundamentals and for some ungodly reason believe the fundamentals are not important to learn when cartooning. It's not about "real life vs cartooning" that kind of mentality is why people never improve, it's learning how to apply fundamentals into working together with stylistic approaches. You learn both. Together. The most aesthetic artwork is created knowing both and your personal style derives from how far you go into manipulating the factors that you understand.

You must study "2d elements" in order to understand how to better manipulate it, but you can't manipulate shit if you don't understand the fundamentals. Look at very good anime artists, like Yoh Yoshinari, or Range Murata, and you'll see right away that they have a very good grasp of construction and a sense of perspective and lighting and colors, and all those things are only possible if you have a sense of viewing your 2D canvas as a 3D world. Dividing things to learn as 3D vs 2D and negating one or the other is stupid, you should be taking whatever information you can to better yourself as an artist and learning to apply it to the kind of work you wish to produce.

[Anonymous No.2986670]

>>2986636
I'm not going to read the archived thread because that post alone already gave me plenty of pain, and with no means of telling the retard off I'm just going to hurt myself.
I'm not going to address every one of his points, mainly because his post is nonsense at parts.
My take on what he's trying to say is that 2d > 3d. That is his stance. He is essentially trying to validate his status as an anime fan by loving 2d and hating 3d. The problem is those terms have their own very particular interpretations within the anime fandom, 2d being essentially a shorthand for saying "drawing", and him by taking it literally is showing he is a low IQ tryhard desperate for peer validation.

Also the guy doesn't really know anything about anything. Case in point:
>Once you understand fore shortening and shading of primitves, you're done with 3d shit.

This isn't the way someone who studied art speaks. This is a child trying to season his poor understanding of a subject with a couple of buzzwords he heard.

[Anonymous No.2986826]

>>2986636
Let me understand; is he saying that Loomis is useless on the basis that you can make a shitty 3d model and paste anime eyes on it and it looks exactly like shitty hand-drawn anime?

[Anonymous No.2986828]

>>2986636
I read it 4 times and i still don't understand what did this retard trying to said. Also did he use 3D as in CGI or real life? i'm fucking confused

[Anonymous No.2986829]

>>2986826
he's saying that there's no point in accurate 3dness because it just looks like a computer did it, so the important thing is good 2dness.

[Anonymous No.2986835]

>>2986829
>there's no point in accurate 3dness because it just looks like a computer did it

[Anonymous No.2986837]

>>2986829
>>2986829
>there's no point in accurate 3dness because it just looks like a computer did it

[Anonymous No.2986842]

>>2986828
I read this 4 times and:

>i still don't understand what did this retard trying to said.

[Anonymous No.2986847]

>>2986636
This nigga needs to read a book. Scott Robertson explains exactly why being able to draw correct 3d is important even when computers exist, see pic related. Drawing details is much faster than modelling them.

[Anonymous No.2986950]

>>2986636
>or is there any merit to what he says?
No.

The images he posted all look like complete shit.

[Anonymous No.2987015]

>>2986636

If he's posting other examples instead of his work, then you can conclude that he's not confident in practicing his own advice. Doesn't know about anime or art in general. Contrary to what he thinks, they do construct with 3D in mind. take character designers like Katsuhiro Otomo, Satoshi Kon, and Hiroyuki Okiura for instance.

[Anonymous No.2987068]

>>2986644
>this is common apparently in japanese animation for them to rush it out (Since often there an anime's goal is to push a light novel or a manga version) and then they clean it up for dvd/bluray release.
This. It's also worth noting that the people drawing anime these days are paid per page, so the faster they draw the more money they make. Obviously quality becomes an issue in this kind of system.
>>2986645
Loomis and such are fine for drawing anime. Drawing anime is about stabilization, which is it's own separate skill. Most of the better artists get to a place where they don't need to throw down every single construction line and can draw more directly, but they got there by doing the hard work first.

Here's a Disney model sheet for you.

[Anonymous No.2987117]

>>2987015
Can anime fans please stop bringing up the 0.0001% of it that is well drawn (and concidentally looks nothing like the rest of it)? We get it, Katsuhiro Otomo made Akira. It looks great. It also does not represent anime because anime looks almost unequivocally like OP or worse.

[Anonymous No.2987141]

>>2987117

There is always at least 2 or more animes that look like that each season.

[Anonymous No.2987304]

>>2987141
it's pretty sad that the only thing that keeps the studios from using more unique art styles is the fact that otakus want their waifus to be completely generic moeblobs. what was once a minority art style has become the standard.

[Anonymous No.2987306]

>>2987304
And who started the moe blob style?

[Anonymous No.2987317]

>>2987306
moe blob was used for children's shows, but sometime around 2000's it became more and more popular with otakus. both haruhi and clannad made it a standard for otaku shows, and since otaku shows are the majority nowadays, it has more or less dominated the industry. it has been over a decade now and moe is still riding strong. it's a dire situation for the industry, as it assures that it will not gain much popularity outside otaku/geek circles.

[Anonymous No.2987335]

>>2987304
>the only thing that keeps the studios from using more unique art styles is the fact that otakus want their waifus to be completely generic moeblobs.
>completely generic moeblobs
There's actually quite a bit more leeway than you think, especially when fanart gets involved and the literal ugly ducklings get translated into "generic moeblobs".
On the far end of the spectrum, good direction can carry a series with a terrible art style, like kemono friends.

[Anonymous No.2987344]

>>2987141
>animes
Animes is not a word, I am 110% certain you have little idea what is airing any given season.

[Anonymous No.2987355]

>>2987335
>good direction can carry a series with a terrible art style, like kemono friends.
I haven't watched that, but Welcome to NHK is a perfect example of this. Very generic art style, but very unique(atleast for anime) narrative. Another one is 5 cm per second. Awful character designs, but excellent direction and aesthetics(outside of character designs of course). In general good directors want their shows/movies to have their own identity, distinct from all others, and therefor provide unique(though sometimes ugly) art styles. This was more the case during the golden age(late 80's/early 90's) when the economy wasn't shit.

[Anonymous No.2987382]

>>2986636
>Is this guy full of shit, or is there any merit to what he says?
all of his good examples look like shit, go figure

but if you told him that he would probably go into that defensive weeb retard mode where you're not an anime fan if you don't like cheap garbage

[Anonymous No.2987402]

>>2987344

I did that on purpose you sperg. I know it's 'anime' that's an /a/ meme and maybe you need to go back there. I guaranteed have more locked in titles on my MAL than you do in your entire lifetime.

[Anonymous No.2987435]

>>2986636

I can't tell what any of this is talking about, but it seems like a good time to share this.

https://mega.nz/#F!sX4CjR4B!2Xf0mexGs-DdXqtPxISHmw

This is pretty much the same as most Japanese drawing instructional material, which are all the same as western books on technical drawing. But the young weebs don't seem to listen unless it comes directly from the Japanese, so there it is.

[Anonymous No.2987498]

>>2986649
by the way this shit is rotoscoped

[Anonymous No.2987502]

>>2987435
>It's not an elderly Japanese man with a hearing aid and the typical old master voice from anime
Honestly let down

[Anonymous No.2987513]

>>2987502
I wonder if there is a Japanese equivalent to Vilppu.

[Anonymous No.2987532]

>>2987513
>check Tokyo University's list of professors in visual arts
>it's all "modern art" shitsmears

I can't believe this garbage is institutionalized worldwide.

[Anonymous No.2987544]

>>2987532

It's a waste really. You'd think there would be a few old people in the anime industry passing on their wisdom to the next generation like Vilppu but they're either too busy complaining about the state of anime or too busy directing light novel trash.

[Anonymous No.2987558]

>>2987544
in japan things like this are usually trained on the job, they usually hire straight out of high school. you don't go to tokyo university to learn how to do smutty cartoons, how about a little perspective eh.

[Anonymous No.2987560]

>>2987544
I feel like the strictly hierarchical society of Japan has something to do with it. Maybe now that they're in a process of westernization there will be a change in mindset but for now I feel like there's a lot of respect for respect's sake and nobody's got anyone to learn from.

[Anonymous No.2987561]

>>2987558
>yfw can't go to a studio factory, look the boss in the eye, shake his hand firmly and say "I want a job"

[Anonymous No.2987563]

>>2986636
>its not bad you just dont understand muh style

Fuck off

[Anonymous No.2987565]

>>2987317
It's the furry effect. Kids grow up and tie sexual fantasies to cartoon characters and when they grow up it becomes a weird fetish for them. I remember the first time I saw an anime character and thought it looked like something suffering from a genetic defect.

[Anonymous No.2987566]

>>2986645
You can easily disregard anyone's opinion when they unironically say that Loomis is useless.

[Anonymous No.2987568]

>>2987561
>mfw a filthy gaijin wants to shake my hand

[Anonymous No.2987765]

I bet you this motherfuckers drawing looks like fucking garbage.

I also bet you that he doesn't full understand what a dimension is.

Someone find this man and physically assault him with those thick ass loomis books while softly screaming reeeeeeeeee until he learns it.

[Anonymous No.2987771]

>>2986657

[Anonymous No.2987888]

>>2987117
99% of all works of any medium is shit. Why bother bringing up the shitty ones? Or do you want to intentionally learn from the shitty ones?

[Anonymous No.2987920]

>>2987355
>excellent aesthetics
That movie looks like fucking Instagram inspirationals.

[Anonymous No.2987971]

>>2987513
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~zm5s-nkmr/
Have a Japanese Loomis instead.

[Anonymous No.2988051]

>>2987971
Japanese Loomis would imply it's good, Anon
That's shit

[Anonymous No.2988068]

I have a better solution, quit watching anime you fat fucking 30 year old virgins

[Anonymous No.2988099]

>>2987117
The quality of the art has little to do with the subject at hand because even the shittiest of anime still uses linear perspective extensively.
As a side note, the new sailor moon show is known for looking particularly bad, something TOEI is known for in general, so what you said about most anime looking like it or worse is actually absolutely false.
Do you hate anime? That's great. Hate it as much as you want, but if you let your personal opinion cloud your judgment of it then you are simply an idiot.

[Anonymous No.2989639]

>>2986828
>Also did he use 3D as in CGI or real life?

Good lord maybe he meant construction? There's no way of telling. How can someone fuck up their words this much? I can't believe someone typed that, looked it over, thought 'yep, nailed it' and hit post.

OP, that post is genuinely unparseable.

[Anonymous No.2989913]

>>2986649
>>2987498
why the fuck do they get interns to do the acting for rotoscoping? It looks so fucking unnatural and awkward to the point that it's unbearable to watch

[Anonymous No.2991378]

>>2989913
It's unnatural because they're Japanese