How much value do you put into visual direction?

How much value do you put into visual direction?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Jo9BUKyTeK8
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>those were the best frames OP could nitpick from a Kyoani show

What piece of that anime was.

Well it's a visual medium, so it's more than a little important.

it reminds me of flip flappers

fuck off already

Phantom sales have much better scenes to be honest.

webm unrelated

A lot. That's why I'm a fan of KyoAni, the clear industry leaders in visual direction, animation quality and single frame art quality.

...

I think it's as important as the story or music direction. Aesthetics matter more than lot of people even realize.

...

I agree, but presentation can't hold up a show alone (e.g. Phantom World)

Phantom World's presentation isn't anything to write home about.

...

None. I'm blind.

a lot, which is why i don't care much for Kyoani's shows.
they need to be more than just pretty, there's a reason why shots of Kyonani shows are generally unmemorable

I wonder what it feels like to kiss a giant. You're basically just stuffing your face in a soft meaty pillow.

that's because there's more to their scenes that can't be captured in a single shot

>OP cherry picking

I can do that too for shit shows.

>498KB
How did you get your webm that small?

...

Enough to know that kyoani sucks

...

...

shots are what stay in your mind, posting WEBMs is useless

...

the most stupid post I've seen today

...

...

...

>complaining about artificial blooming/blurring in animation
Bruv that's a fundamental and one of the key technical differences between film and animation's cinematographer.

>150187007
For a pic babbling about 'muh direction' it sure has a horrid design

...

...

...

A lot, but only if its supporting the story and plot. Otherwise its useless as fuck in an anime or movie. Might as well just watch an animation expo short.

part of the reason why I've been enjoying flip flappers is because of the sheer inventiveness of its visual design. There is a very human, organic quality to the motion, expressions and characters that really sticks to you.

The thing is that is not having good visual direction. This is just putting in more effort to look fluid or more digitally enhanced. It serves no prupose, there is no underlying message, its just looking flashy without any depth or worth to it. Like any transfromers movie. It might be pleasing to the eye but the visual direction is all over the place and it looks quite shitty.

kyoani invented visual direction, they can do whatever the want.

I invented Kyoani so they do what I say

directing visually involves actually having a direction to take. It's all visual masturbation for kyoani, nothing is achieved.

this
fucking why post phantom world? even hibike does visual direction better and it's yamada's weakest by far
tho it improved a bit in s2

What shows do you guys think had good vidual direction? The first to pop in my mind were Steins;Gate and Hyouka.

Its visually pleasing but it serves no purpose. Its just bland bombast, but not in the same way that space dandy managed to put in some value into its episodic narrative. If you want to give transformers an oscar every year for looking flashy pls do so. I and the majority of other people on the other hand think its quite mediocre and bad, just like most of what kyoani puts out. The new movie with the deaf girl does look really promising and I cant wait to see it.

Anything from yuasa for example. This year Mob Psycho had nice visual direction for most of its run. Flip Flappers looks amazing too, but I dont know if its just fluff(didnt watch more than 2 episodes yet).

Yes

as much as I put into cinematic timing

sounds like a load of nonsense to me

As much you into OP's.

That's not even a word

...

...

>How much
And what are the units of measurement used to measure how much value it has?

Belladonna and the Keion movie. Nothing else compares honestly in this medium.

KyoAni units. 2 Yamadas = One Visual Direction

I want to watch this now. Should I?

...

You either didn't watch Hyouka or were too stupid to follow it.

>digital coloring and effects
Not even once.

...

So you don't watch post 90's anime?

Why would I?

Always secondary to the story. Everyone who watches a series because of visuals is a pleb.

Someone post that one autistic image about water, earth or some shit from hibike threads.

I feel like Hibike, more than Hyouka, has issues with characters that take up little screen space lacking detail and having lines that are way too thick. I guess it's probably just that it has far more crowd shots due to its nature as a show about an orchestra, but thanks to that I just can't help but think it looks disappointing as a whole, despite having some really nice looking scenes.

Stories in non-written media are for shallow people. Or rather, it is shallow to come to these and only/primarily appreciate something like a 'story' when there are so many different forms of expression being used and exploited that can create a unique experience.

People raged at this shot even though it's a masterful manipulation of artificial/artistic temporality, especially in addition to the balance economy.

KyoAni's usually pretty good, their shots are nice and way above average anime, but it's overall too sophisticated (nothing stands out in the crowd of all this goodness), yet it rarely have truly outstanding shots (like yours, but Anno is something else entirely). It's the irony of being too perfect.

Sure, you can reproach things to them like there is no real risk (although it's related to what I just said), but overall it's still pretty great. Haruhi is from what I can remember the most daring KyoAni.

Not him. I don't think so. Shallow stories in non-written media are for shallow people. Stories are abstracted and sequenced from staging, lighting, scripts/screenplay, music, etc., and thus, with a good arrangement of such elements, it would be impossible to not produce an equally good story.

>Haruhi is from what I can remember the most daring KyoAni.
This. LN adaptations are very daring.

KyoAni also usually lacks cinematographic meaning, or at least it's too removed/subtle for me. But that's also related to their themes, I've seen people analyzing the colors and all in Tamako (some nice things) but it's really quite random, nothing stunning like in Oshii's works. It's nice to be subtle, but it's also nice to be memorable.

That's a load of bullshit, do you even read books? The written word isn't purely story in the same way film isn't.

Meaning is drawn from interpretation, it's not something to have or lack.

I guess this is sarcasm, but they seem to only have made great choices, adaptation-wise. This is not the usual 1:1 adaptation that autistic people are asking for, shit like FMA:B, but this doesn't stray out too much and enhance everything with rarely mastered factors like the rhythm (Endless 8, a pain but it's daring and totally justified, but again maybe the lack of real goal/themes kills it or I don't know), direction gimmicks like removing the OP, putting the credits while the episode is playing, the way wall of text is delivered is pretty well done for once I think, and a lot of little details like that. That's a common thing in the KyoAni's adaptations that make it stand out. But when they adapt shit it's vain of course.

Sure

Are you relatively new to anime?

Not enough value to make me sit through this pile of garbage.

No but why would you think that?

I'm relatively new to the artist's vision of cinematography and I'm not always sure though since there's a lot of subjectivity in all of this. I mean like the guy said before, I said their shots lacked strong meaning, but is there a real need for it to be "its own painting" rather than just to be a piece of an ensemble, I'll never know, I guess both are a comprehensible way to tell a story visually.

What I meant is that you can screenshot a KyoAni anime it makes nice artworks like what you can find on the booru, but to me rarely anything that I would put on the level of a classical painting, in term of research of the composition (whether it is lighting, meaning of it, the spacing, placement of the elements, things like that).

While in a Mamoru Oshii's work (again, another level entirely) a lot of the shots seems very symbolic, but it's not surreal symbolism like Shinbo's, it's grounded in reality but it has multiple layer of interpretation by ingeniously using all of the composition elements at their best (idea is key here).

So what I mean is that I think, while I think Kyoani's doing nice thing, it's formulaic and a bit bland, even if nice to watch. But I'm saying that, I'm not sure it's that important to do things like Mamoru Oshii, I mean it's just different ways to do things and slice of life stories rarely call for such sophisticated composition, even if it can do wonders sometimes.

...

Oh so these threads are the new way Kyoanus samefag(s) start Kyoani general threads. Was wondering why there's always one of these bait threads with the exact same OP.

Is this a joke?

...

It was a guess since a lot of what you considered daring is pretty widely used among LN adaptations or other "non-art" shows.

...

I don't watch much LN adaptations, but yeah good ones like Baccano!, S&W, Kino no Tabi, etc might be as good, what I meant is that KyoAni does it nicely too, and maybe have a smarter approach for some things.

How much experience do you have with actual cinema, by the way?

>In Madoka Magica, Madoka's color is pink, representing how she would love to have her pretty pink vagina rammed by massive black cocks. Homura's color is black, further strengthening their romantic connection and highlighting the underlying sexual tension in their friendship.

Look, I can do it too!

Not much, and I'm way more accepting of anime. I can appreciate a mediocre fun anime while I have a hard time liking mediocre movies.

Since I've been interested in cinematography I haven't watched much movies, I've never watched Ozu's but I've always liked the pillow shots in some anime, Anno's, Nichijou use a variation of it too youtube.com/watch?v=Jo9BUKyTeK8

I'm blogging but I hope this is not for naught and that it will lead to an evolution of the discussion, if not, sorry.

Magical girls pairing. It's always either pinkie with blackie, or orange/brunette with blackie. Bonus point if yuri.

That's my suggestion then, to explore the classics of world cinema. From the way you talk it seems like you really badly wanna have this discussion but are fumbling uncollected, stream of consciousness thoughts. It's a more mature art and you'll come out with a much clearer sense of what's good or bad, what you like and dislike in cinematography.

Not him, but cinema is a strange world. I have some experiences with theater, and people there said that cinema is totally different than drama, in contrast to what people commonly assumed. The artificial cuts and takes sounded horrible to me, almost like the eerie feeling when I read philosophical works dealing with subjects such as postmodernism, artificial society, consumerism, etc. Doesn't help that the camera gaze is frightening. It's like you get sucked into the picture, leaving you as an empty floating ghost whenever you see yourself in the picture. The same with social media except anonymous imageboards.

What do you think?

Thanks, true that I'm interested in the subject.

I'll need to watch a lot of it.

I've only ever seen crappy student plays so I can't speak to theatre. Definitely totally different, but not necessarily in the way you describe. I think good art assumes phenomenological involvement; I've been just as absorbed by a good book or song as I have a movie. I dunno what you mean by artificial cuts and takes.

Watched 1 episode a few years ago. Its pretty bad. Has nice visuals though. But also bland narrative, characters and direction.

>Its pretty bad
>But also bland narrative, characters and direction.
Elaborate.

>I've only ever seen crappy student plays so I can't speak to theatre.
Well uh, I only did it during my uni days, though but it wasn't shit as far as I know, as it was in the liberal arts faculty. Maybe it's actually shit, but whatever.
>I dunno what you mean by artificial cuts and takes.
I mean, in contrast to plays in which if there are more rooms for improvisations and covering up errors, cinema instead can get around there with cuts and takes. The difference is that the director is absolutely more 'authoritarian' and stricter than in plays. I even read something like Ingmar Bergman deciding everything up to the smallest details of blocking and timing in acting. That sounds like a horrible job to me, acting like that. Is one of the reasons for this is because of the camera gaze? It's not a live, non-stop performance like in plays. Instead of the eye of the spectator, it reveals something different regarding the illusions of movements captured by the gaze of the eye (camera), made up of cuts and takes. Which means that is it more personal than the spectator? I guess that's what I'm looking for, for you to comment at. Probably basic stuff for you that needs no mentioning. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word artificial because it's redundant and confusing (all art is artificial, after all).

Also, does Sup Forums think there should be a fundamental difference between animation and film techniques, regarding how a director should envision time and space? Like, should anime retain realistic perspective like cinema or not, etc.? I've seen this thrown like crazy on Sup Forums sometimes, and I feel like it's a pseudo-debate (like most things on the internet), but I might be wrong too. From my own limited knowledge of anime, it seems that animation is like the bastard child of cinema or something. I remember watching a famous but old Russian short animated film composed of crazy shapes, about an alien trying to make sense of the human world by imitating an average Ivan. The uploader claiming it's the best animation ever. While I don't know if it's the best ever, I wonder if it's still translatable to live action cinema without butchering its inherent values, because the weird shapes are substantial to the themes it has brought. However, I also remember film shots that have surrealistic influences, weird shapes and composition in it, but still retains conventional perspective, judging from its staging and placements. So, I wonder if it's true after all that it's still the same fundamentally?

do you really expect me to read all that shit

>1 ep.
Judging the quality of the whole show. The visual direction is pretty great and everyone except chitanda gets great character development which is pretty realistic as well. It's honestly really famtastic

I'm sorry but I have no fucking clue what you're trying to say and I don't care to puzzle it out. The way you write is absurd. Go to the library and pick up a text on aesthetics, you'll learn more through that than through the apparently difficult task of conversation.

And neither is the oldest form of storytelling, speaking. But I think spoken and prose are the two simplest forms of conveying/consuming a story, so people who only look at the story in those cases are eh.

But looking into film, animation especially, and saying "only the story matters, everything else is for fags" reeks of having no real engagement with it.