Do you agree?

Do you agree?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=vCoQBUMV2J8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

With them?

how many times are we going to have this thread

I love Ian, but goddamn that’s stupid.

ian should spend more time working on his craft instead of spamming social media to approve of his laziness.

How many times do I gotta tell that ass to come over.

>twitter screencap

Young creators aren't a very good source for advice.

...

If Ian could get away with this I'm sure he would do it.

>twitter screencap

>MOMMIE COME LOOK I POSTED TWEETS TO Sup Forums AGAIN I'M NOT A SHITPOSTER HONEST

>autismal overload

...

>Young creators aren't-a very good
There we go, Mario.

I HAVE AN OPINION

It's painfully obvious that they are right.
"""animation school""" rejects, that slave away in their classes trying to stay on model, and are taught that more sweat = always better are just envious because they are learning how to become Korean slave labor and can't accept that creativity gets effortless recognition and nobody gives a SHIT about their meme hard work and discipline.
They literally value more the effort than the result. Slave mentality.

Did you not get what you wanted out of the last thread? What can we offer you that can satiate your hunger to continue repeating this exact thread?

He is lazy.

it is not hard work to repeatedly draw a character the exact same way every single time you see them. That is called copy/paste. It is not in any way more skillful than what is being suggested by the post in OP. You just prefer it.

This unironically looks better than nuPPG
>his worst album

youtube.com/watch?v=vCoQBUMV2J8

The absolute generalizations he made ensured that he'd be wrong.

>No animation production is lazy
>Animators n Boarders work super hard

Stupidly naive at best

I agree with the sentiment but in practice that shit is so far removed from accurate it ain't funny.

I'd imagine the original context is that the character not looking like a xerox copy of the model sheet to be considered on model. However the way people are using it, it would be impossible to be off-model regardless of how distorted and mishapen you made the character as long as it's recognisable as that character.

HEY HEY WE'RE THE JOHN-Ks
PEOPLE SAY WE JOHN-K AROUND

>nobody gives a SHIT about their meme hard work and discipline
Staying on model doesn't require hard work or discipline. Just a limitation that doesn't improve the show in 90% of cases

Fucking John K brags about bringing back garbage shit like Pic Related.

But Sup Forums will shit on Loud House for being "waifushit" but at least the characters don't change their shape every 5 seconds.

Pics like these are really stupid attempts to disprove his belief. Even if the characters' relative heights and proportions may change, all the features of their established designs are always drawn in their entirety, thus maintaining their recognizability .

But.. you can clearly recognize it considering you know he was intending to parody the sentiment.

>all the features of their established designs are always drawn in their entirety
This is a straight up lie

No. They're both objectively wrong.

>art is subjective!!!!

The last refuge for a person who wants to be held to the same level of regard as the old masters while never actually putting in the same level of effort.

literally from the same episode

>life is chaos, be kind
Don't you fucking dare try and take the """high ground""" by claiming that criticism = being mean and that a creator should only ever receive praise for every shitty thing they do.

No it's not. For instance, KO's always drawn as a short little boy with his clothes, headband, wristbands, hairstyle, and leg warmers. That's his basic design that's followed throughout.

That they like the work of fanartists that all looks very different suggests they do when they're having their natural opinions.

ian you dont have to feel obilgated to defend your staff its ok man
>work super hard

Loud House looks more like a powerpoint presentation than a cartoon

>How dare a cartoon be silly and expressive!

So just his outfit, not his actual physical appearance

John K would say those drawings suck because they lack construction and good design

>if you put these 2 in the same clothes they'd be the same
Sure fag
>He doesn't know

I mentioned him being a small little boy and his hairstyle. Learn to read.

So, again, just very superficial or vague characteristics

In what way is it vague? KO has an established design and boarders work off it their own ways. How hard is that to comprehend?

those are pretty specific

"Short" is not a specific height
Clothes are not a distinguishing feature.
Hair is not a distinguishing feature
Both of those last 2 even change in some episodes.
Character's facial structure changes constantly, their entire body shape changes constantly.

Literally all the characteristics you defined are the same in this image.

that uploaded wrong

k

Is that Peter Dinklage?

>"Short" is not a specific height
They've addressed that they don't exact heights aren't conistent, just relative heights.
>Clothes/hair are not a distinguishing feature
You can't be serious.
>Both of those last 2 even change in some episodes.
Being drawn slightly different is barely a change.
>Literally all the characteristics you defined are the same in this image.
Except that's clearly Stewie, an already established character, dressed like KO, not meant to be KO himself. So unless there was some gag in the show that had KO look like Stewie, anyone would tell that isn't KO.

I do know, John K criticizes his own work a lot.

Yeah but the point is there's a difference between a stylized drawing of a cartoon or a stylistic art-shift, and a cartoon going horribly off-model constantly throughout the same episode for no narrative or artistic reason beyond laziness.

Yes I do obviously

It's not even that bad most of the time.

daily reminder that it's not the problem that they they're expressive, but how they are expressive.

Tracing a model sheet is the laziest thing to do.

I started drawing a webcomic recently and I carefully think about how to draw a character "off-model" for a certain mood.

For example, I added a normal detail yesterday and decided they went against the mood of the drawing and deleted the detail, which is the opposite of laziness.

Do you draw? I'm guessing not. I suppose the experience of making decisions like that is foreign to you.

do people really criticize smears?

Meanwhile, a cartoon like Rick and Morty has the same cruddy model sheet drawings. I briefly scrolled down in Google and I saw about a dozen images of the "Rick Expression," an enlarged open tube mouth with individual semicircle teeth and a sticking up tongue. But this show is not criticized for its laziness or, at the very least, cheapness?

Either people like you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on or you get all your talking points from other people without thinking about them. "Laziness." The mere fact that you can identify new drawings in cartoons like OK KO proves that it is not lazy relative to crap like this.

I don't see too much wrong with this pictu......
>Looks at the bottom left

The absolute state of Sup Forums apologist
>They've addressed that they don't exact heights aren't conistent, just relative heights.
Addressing it doesn't mean it isn't bad
>Being drawn slightly different is barely a change.
Besides the complete change in episodes like Let's watch the Pilot, yes, being drawn wrong is a change.

>Except that's clearly Stewie
So you're saying actual facial features/structure and body shape are what actually defines the character not
>short little boy with his clothes, headband, wristbands, hairstyle, and leg warmers.

They're not entirely wrong, but they're not entirely right either.

Sup Forums does, but they also think shit animated on 3s looks good so they're not the brightest.

>Addressing it doesn't mean it isn't bad
Neither does it necessarily make it bad. You're just letting something so minor bother you.
>Besides the complete change in episodes like Let's watch the Pilot, yes, being drawn wrong is a change.
It's never looked a way that could be considered "wrong."
>So you're saying actual facial features/structure and body shape are what actually defines the character not
>short little boy with his clothes, headband, wristbands, hairstyle, and leg warmers.
They're all a significant part. The characters have certain body shapes and facial features designated to each character in conjunction with their designs and the show's general art style.

This constantly shifting goalpost is ridiculous. Have your (you)

Why do we even have a Sup Forums board if all we want to do is discuss the newest OPINION!!! on Twitter?

Nothing was shifted. You just made a bunch of ridiculous counterarguments to how one chooses to run their wacky cartoon and I pointed out how they ultimately didn't matter.

Posting twitter screencaps should be a bannable offense

We've had this thread before

Bedankt arts

I guess Sanic is on model as well since the character is still possible to recognize.

Does it mean that if I mistake one character for another that mistaken character becomes that character? Like the same way I mistake Ian for a Neanderthal with his fucked up mongoloid face?

>99130892

Is Sanic on-model Sonic, or is Sonic on-model Sanic

OK KO
>Can't make characters recognizable through wardrobe change
>Can't make Characters recognizable through short art style change
Billy and Mandy
>Did both
>Even as the art style of the show shifted over the years

How aren't they recognizable?

Whatever, you keep your ears in your hands and complain about the inconsequential.

>99132563
Keep it up dude. Eventually someone will pay you

>How hard is that to comprehend?

We have no issue comprehending what they're doing. It's that it looks fucking terrible.

Interestingly, this subject also doubles as a litmus test for autism spectrum disorders.

Your opinion.

>Tracing a model sheet is the laziest thing to do.


This is literally a feature in digital animation programs called "onion skin". It shows you a transparent copy of other frames so you can keep consistency and not have your animation look terrible. Using a guideline to reference scale, and proportions isn't any different.

>But this show is not criticized for its laziness or, at the very least, cheapness?

Because the animation actually looks good.

Going off-model implies you go back to being on model.

...

thanks for the bump

>not liking Sweatpants
>not liking 3005
Nigga I will fight you.

>Dubbed version uses the catchy Right Back At Ya intro instead of the original Japanese intro
>They took out the altered Dedede Japanese intro and put in an altered Dedede Comin For Ya! intro for the sake of the gag
Truly kino

That would be the overseas animator's fault, not the american crew

Ian can't draw worth a shit so of course he thinks this.

Not even John K had this philosophy. He let his artists having their own styles for the characters but he would never accept Stimpy changing proportions and volume for no reason throughout a single episode. Hell he was well known for making people redraw a scene several times until it looked as good as possible. He took his name off of episode he thought looked shitty.

on model

>NAveryW

Holy shit I haven't heard from Walrus Guy in years.

Nah man, you were destroyed. Just eat your defeat and suck it up. You can't argue for shit

Oh ok I understand

>any finnish meme would be good enogh

Thank you Doctor.

No, not at all. This philosophy can be used effectively, with exaggerated features or squash & stretch to emphasize something, but on the whole, the project looks sloppy if you can't even have consistent heights from shot to shot.

Thanks Doc

>I’m automatically right just because I say I am!
Sure glad I don’t think like you.

They should've been the ones to dub Pop Team Epic. Funimation don't know what the fuck they're doing.

Krunk