|
Post by Incog Neato on Jul 26, 2008 9:37:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 26, 2008 11:50:43 GMT -5
I totally agree with what the guy is saying, you can even see a big difference between Gundam Wing and Gundam Seed. They stopped using animation cells for Seed, and it looks to synthetic.
I love old Japanese anime especially for its hard drawn look, and its too bad the animation has taken this turn.
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 26, 2008 13:08:55 GMT -5
I think old 90s and 80s anime can often look very nice. Especially forest envoriments and stuff.
New anime, from the 2000s, always 100% of the time looks like crap! Crap!!!
CRAP!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 26, 2008 13:58:00 GMT -5
It's the clean and polished stuff that I don't like. Old anime LOOKS old - older than it really is, and that's so charming. It's why I like it. Not sure why, but that's it.
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 26, 2008 14:10:17 GMT -5
Games and cartoons are completely different. I've realized that I like unusual aspects of things... like the most important thing in a game for me is how the controls feel. Not whether or not the controls are good, but how it feels to control the game. Hard to explain, because this is some crazy shit.
|
|
|
Post by Yakra on Jul 26, 2008 15:32:11 GMT -5
I kind of really, really disagree with this theory of five shades. More shades do not necessarily mean better quality. X( Minimalism be good at times too!
Odd that I'm actually saying this here though, considering how much I bash my co-animator-workers on their lack of shading. :'D No, but what I think really matters is the quality of drawing. If the animation/show is well animated and drawn, it can still look gorgeous.
I actually like both old and new animes and... they're just different styles. (Styles are bound to develop, change and evolve with time!) I guess if I had to choose, I might pick the newer one though. Because of their cleaner, glossier, softer looks. (And experimenting with different styles! [Gankutsuou!]) I'm not saying its better though or that the old ones were bad. Just my personal preference and what appeals to me.
Its somehow a bit offending though that this mister in the first link is declaring anime quality is declining simply because it is starting to resemble old Disney works. Old Disney stuff was gorgeous!
|
|
|
Post by michaelchaoslord on Jul 26, 2008 15:43:38 GMT -5
Wow I haven't noticed till now, but I still like new and old animes cause new has more stuff in it and old gives me nostalgia. Not all the new animes are bad either and most of the shading was in the old anime movies(I think).
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 26, 2008 17:08:11 GMT -5
Seldane has it nailed perfectly, its the old "quality" that drags me in. I just think it looks better overall, but its personal preference. I am not a big fan of very many new anime series anyways, except for Macross and Gundam. The rest is recycled, or I am getting too old mentally to appreciate some of the humor or stores presented. I don't care if it looks "smoother" and "way Kawaii" I am old school, hear me roar he he.
|
|
|
Post by Incog Neato on Jul 27, 2008 8:16:05 GMT -5
Observations: FM-77 is exaggerating as always and wyrdwad is still easy to impress. :P
Indeed, it all boils down to preference and appreciation of the style chosen for whatever series you watch. I ... just don't like the fact that 99% of the people commenting on the dA piece is going, "OMG I NEVER NOTICED THAT! UR SO WRITE! ALL NEW ANIEMS ARE SOOOOoooOOo HORIBLE BARF BARF BARF!!"
:/
You know, I think the last new anime that I watched (all 1 episode of it) was Library War, which was released this year, I believe, and it looked pretty sweet.
And yes, old Disney is sweeeeeeeeeet. Newer stuff CAN be sweeeeeeeeeeet (like The Lion King. That was amazing. *____*!) but I really have a dislike for the facial animations. :\
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 27, 2008 9:05:10 GMT -5
Exaggerate? Me? I HAVE NEVER EXAGGERATED IN MY ENTIRE LIVES!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 27, 2008 16:41:56 GMT -5
True, there is more variation, but you cant sit there and say the style has not evolved or changed dude. I prefer 80's and 90's anime because it looks like 80's and 90's anime. A current anime can be drawn, and produced in a style from that time, but you can still tell its current. The guy posted a perfect example with Bubble Gum Crisis, and while there isn't anything wrong with current anime (its anime after all) I can still have my preference, even if someone doesn't agree.
Toriyama did a special on Dragon Ball and made a feature film about 1.5 hrs long. He did it in the GT/Late DBZ art style, and its good, but it felt a little out of place, because I like the old 80's Dragonball art, and thats what I am used to.
In short, there is nothing wrong with ether overall, but I just prefer my anime with a little age to it.
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 27, 2008 23:43:24 GMT -5
Ill mention the only way to possibly argue your comment Star Wars The "new revised and digitally enhanced" versions were crap, took from the movie, and should never have been done. I am so glad Mr. Lucas finally released the original versions on dvd without touching them up. ET Who the hell said it was a good idea to take out the guns and put in stupid walkie talkies? Its that ugly, rugged, unfinished (by todays standards) look that appeals to me sometimes. Final Fantasy 4 The original will always have a soft spot in my heart, and the remakes are great. The DS one is the same game, with the same story, and the same music and its all been done "better" technically. I love old games, so no matter how well they remake the game, I will always prefer the old style. I get what you are saying totally, but really its like you said its just an art style. I appreciate both for what they are, but I do have my preferences.
|
|
|
Post by michaelchaoslord on Jul 28, 2008 2:43:57 GMT -5
Just because an anime doesn't have shading doesn't make it bad, cause some animes that are old or new weren't that great either. Whats good/old Gundam, good/new Code geass. I would make some examples of what are bad but don't want to offend anyone cause I think I pissed off a bunch of people a long time ago when I made that WTF Evangalion thread.Sorry !
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 28, 2008 12:53:04 GMT -5
Hey, let's take Mona Lisa and edit it so that it will look like an actual photograph!
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 28, 2008 13:33:05 GMT -5
Yeah they changed things in Star Wars but they also cleaned up the film big time, as it almost looks brand new, and that is what I am referring to my friend. Yes, its that shitty grainy look that I like, even its its not as "advanced" as it could be. I get what you are saying, but to take it seriously makes no sense. "But to say that you prefer old anime because of its technical flaws is just kind of ludicrous. It makes no sense to prefer something that's blurrier, shakier, and full of artifacts to something that ISN'T. " The same could be said about video games my friend. They are so advanced now, and look so great, and you need thirty buttons to operate half of them, but nothing, and I mean NOTHING, beats a good old 2d video game. You are just going to have to face the fact that some people like "ludicrous" anime more than the cutting edge stuff. Honestly if it was that good I would like it more, wouldn't I?
|
|
|
Post by Kimimi on Jul 28, 2008 13:51:34 GMT -5
I think youzre confusing what Wyrd means Justinzero. (Forgive me for putting words in your mouth, Wyrdwad) I believe the improvement Wyrd is describing is not the difference between playing Wolfenstein and Crysis, but more the difference between playing a Dreamcast through RF on your Grans 30 year old TV or playing it through VGA on an LCD monitor - exactly the same image, just displayed much clearer.
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Jul 28, 2008 15:20:26 GMT -5
LCD monitors (except maybe very old and specific, ancient models) are not designed for the Dreamcast's native resolution, therefore it will get blurry.
|
|
|
Post by Yakra on Jul 28, 2008 15:23:16 GMT -5
Em... just wondering... what exactly are 'artifacts' that you all are referring too? (Sorry... stupid ignorant question question). Eitherway, I think I can kind of understand Justinzero's point on liking the oldiness of old animes. Aside from that nostalgic value, there was something incredibly charming that the newer ones can sometimes lose out on in their 'wow' quality. Personally, it doesn't really affect me much, but reading wyrdwad's comment on how one could possibly like a blurrier, shakier version of something that has gotten smoother made me think of books? I love old original versions, first prints and if I got the chance to pick a brand new glossy copy over a ratty hundred year old ancient one, I would pick the ratty one. Without hesitation. :'D So perhaps, in a way, its like that with movies and animes too? Er... for me, with old animes, I don't think its the blurry shakiness that is so very attractive. Aside from the animation style, its the way the story is told? Like the way certain characters would react? (Almost like... style of acting, which is kind of wrong to say since no one is really acting :'D ) Certain cliched situations which were very typically old style and all. Even if some one was to try to emulate/copy the same style, the mentality/humor would not quite be the same...? (I'm probably making no sense at all to anybody. I'm probably not even qualified enough to be declaring all this! I've always preferred mangas to animes!) (AND I like new animes better! :'D )But still anyways, I don't think that qualifies as enough to declare 'all modern animes be bad'. I mean... there are different genres, subjects, styles, everything which make up one series/movie/whatever and to declare them all to be the same thing just based off one's ideas off popular series is just... not right. Its kind of like saying 'all modern games are bad because they're not like the oldies' after having played just one er... say a rpg or something! (Oh wait... some people declare that too... >___>' ) I believe its all up to personal taste and well... nobody is really wrong! (except for the DA mister. Don't tell people that if they don't agree with you that their tastes suck! )
|
|
|
Post by Haven on Jul 28, 2008 19:45:30 GMT -5
Okay, this thread caught my eye, being a supporter of old-school anime and all.
I've favorited that deviation of MightyOtaking since it obviously is an attention-grabbing thing that obviously grabbed my attention. But I do disagree with his 5 shades theory especially because of the examples he used (high budget OVAs/Movies vs. TV series). Thing is, I don't really think it should be taken seriously and just enjoy it at face value.
That aside, I believe Anime today have more fluid animation overall - with the use of more advanced production technology, and higher budgets as opposed to the tediousness and expensive hand-drawn route.
The main problems with today's anime are the more subtle things that's well.... not very subtle:
> storyboarding and scene compositions - it's not really easy to explain this one, especially its significance without actually having a long full-blown lecture, but the only people remaining in this world who I notice know how to use this is Makoto Shinkai, Gainax, and Studio Ghibli. The rest are just are too proud of being able to draw in 3 point perspective thinking it's "awesome composition".
> Hands - I've noticed that after year 2000, studios started hiring anime artists who can't draw hands - using the same "come to me" gesture over and over and being too proud of it like it's the best thing since sliced bread. Thank god for Nobuteru Yuuki and that Guilty Gear artist.
> Shaky Cam - how do you make a crappy scene look "cool"? Shake the camera. GOOD FUCKING GOD! I can do that in Adobe After Effects in a few seconds using the Motion Sketch tool! Shaky cam enhances the scene when used right, but in the end, it is nothing more than an extra tool. And if the shot being shaked looks boring, it will still look boring no matter how much you shake your camera. I'm gonna go watch FLCL, Gurren Lagann and Evangelion to remind me of how to use shaky cams right.
> The anime face - there's a science to this one that was invented by Osamu Tezuka, and explained a bit by Scott McCloud in his book Understanding Comics. I won't go into detail but the basics of it is that you need to convince the audience that the simple lines you use to represent a face is realistic - yes that takes skill. And because it takes skill, most artists who don't know better just resort to symbolisms like the bulging veins, chibis, big sweat, etc. They obviously haven't heard of Hayao Miyazaki and Isao Takahata.
> And finally, resorting to the emo archetype to be able to make a character with depth......self explanatory.
Going back to the artwork, which is the main issue here (I apologize for ranting a bit), it really has more to do with the designs than the colors. With generic designs relying solely at being a chibi, a loli, a bishie , a maid, a catgirl, or a whore to sell, no amount of coloring or shading can save something from being uninteresting.
And for God's sake learn to draw hands in other poses!
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jul 28, 2008 23:12:32 GMT -5
I think youzre confusing what Wyrd means Justinzero. (Forgive me for putting words in your mouth, Wyrdwad) I believe the improvement Wyrd is describing is not the difference between playing Wolfenstein and Crysis, but more the difference between playing a Dreamcast through RF on your Grans 30 year old TV or playing it through VGA on an LCD monitor - exactly the same image, just displayed much clearer. No I am not confusing what he is saying, I get where he is coming from perfectly, but thanks for the input. I've made my opinion known, and I am standing firm. I understand both sides of the spectrum, and what I like is really my choice, regardless of how old or new the quality is.
|
|