Calarts is the cancer destroying western animation

Calarts is the cancer destroying western animation

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=vfTYn6NOK1M
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

youtube.com/watch?v=vfTYn6NOK1M

Yes

>image.gif

im waiting for the storm called flash to blow over

Its a great artstyle and you critics are tasteless trash!

What's the difference?

It's not the animation that makes those cartoons shitty. It's how they're written that's making a mockery of western animation.

I never got into SU because its color palette looks like something the queen of England would wear.

it's a parody of the original image cherrypicking newer cartoons and another parody cherrypicking the older ones

dear diary. it finally happened. today was the day i had to explain to Sup Forums what the difference between 'then' and 'now' is.

Yeah, also calart do anime now

On top, scenes that require a lot of frames to be properly animated

On the bottom, easy cut and past scenes that can be easily animated and shipped out

>inb4 people point out the Hanna Barbera shows on top to "prove" their point ignoring all the rest

But sure go on, the dying american animation is doing fine! I guess that's why they get BTFO by anime in every attempt and the only thing they are able to do is putting anime references in their show to try to capture some of that crowd

>calart is on the level of japanese media from 40 years ago

Kek, impressive

>inb4 I didn't know it was a manga too!

Many of the "now" examples in that picture are handdrawn you circlejerking ape.

That nice smell of freshly exhumated dead meme. You can still see the worms eating the corpse. Mh-mmmmh.

Top still looks better and has more organic drawings. Bottom ones try to have wacky faces without changing the shape of the skull to accommodate for it and don't utilize stretch and squash at all. They're basically trying to have the expressiveness as the top but in a "cost effective" way by not changing the actual model.

It's like the generic anime expression where only the face changes to ^_^ or O_O but the entire design is stayed the same.

The top ones are hand drawn cartoons made for cinema releases by big studios, except for those few HB cartoons in the bottom right corner.
The bottom ones are flash/toonboom cartoons made for television by children's networks and a few outsourced studios, and trust me, they don't have neither the resources or the ability to animate WDAS/Looney Tunes tier character designs. The simplified characters of newer cartoons actually help the animators concentrate on the actual animation.

this would work better if you showed some animation rather than stills. like that comparison webm of the old and new simpsons intro.

Except there were a LOT of cartoons before this current era that successfully aped hand drawn cartooniness on a TV budget.
>Ed Edd n Eddy
>Ren & Stimpy
>Cow & Chicken
>Any Disney Duck cartoon
>Animaniacs
>Tiny Toons
>Rocko's Modern Life

Even shows adapatations like Ace Ventura and The Mask managed to have good expressions. Courage the Cowardly Dog also had great faces, though they popped up sporadically as part of the joke, otherwise, they were very much on-model.

Wander Over Yonder is probably one of the few that actually has good stretch n' squash and the wild expressions are much more apparent in Lord Hater's crazy faces than Wander, since Hater they need to do entire new drawings while Wander is just a circle distorted with a transformation tool.

I'm not going to whine and complain why don't cartoons look like before, I know budgets are consistently cut because networks are losing ratings thanks to streaming services. But I'm also not going to pretend that this era has absolute shit visuals. Fortunately, the scripts are much funnier than stuff like Animaniacs, so I excuse it. I'm happy we still get stuff like Storks or Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs to satisfy my "cartoony urge".

Sorry, meant to say not going to pretend this era DOESN'T have shit visuals.

Lol fucking weeb

Is Cal arts really that bad? Like is it the school or the people the networks pick

That cherrypicks one scene though. The new Simpsons intro has very fluid animation outside 1 or two moments

Do the people who go to Cal Arts really strive to make things like Adventure Time and similar? Or are there people who look at things like Miyazaki films and such and strive to make those?

>People will still respond to this
Enjoy your (you)'s OP

And how is that Calarts? Most of the cartoons and characters listed aren't from Calarts. They have eyes that aren't just dots and I don't see any stick bodies/noodle limbs.

>this means they are good!

The point of that picture completely zoomed over your head didn't it.

>implying cartoons arent better now them they ever have been
You guys are fuckinn retarfed shitlords.

>"retarfed."
>calling other people shitlords while using a loud house image.
>image.jpg

>caring about my image files
Fucking computer poster bitch gtfo

you mean the meme picture people modified in a vain attempt to prove that "lol older cartoons portrayed similar facial expressions too! this totally proves that today cartoons are on the same level if not better!"

no, I get it.
it's the retards that think is an argument that missed the point of the original

Hey Sup Forums
Wanna get fucking mad

Even if this is true, pic related. This is old user, just bait with new shit for fuel for fuck sake.

Retard bitch, your the shittaste fuck that cant appreciate new cartoons. Your critical bitchiness needs purdging.

Complex designs are haaaaard.

Still better than getting 5 "stop right there gray skull!" animations for a twenty minute episode

Lol

dead mem
try facebook or Sup Forums next time

...

What?

you're so up your own ass and I love it

Every time...

Daily reminder that CalArts is considered one of the best art schools in the country

I would have punched that fucker in the face.. 20 bucks says it was the creators of teem titans go

> in the country
> Being Americuck
Shit. How far has Amerifats have fallen.

That's a pretty bogus comparison, whoever made this. First of all, those cartoons on the top are from a period as long as thirty years, sixty years if they're including the Simpsons and Ren & Stimpy. The lower half includes cartoons from 2010- 2016, a mere six years. Of course certain visual trends will dominate cartoons from decade to decade. So they're comparing the visual differences of sixty years to six.

Another thing is that they're comparing theatrical-level productions to TV shows that are on a tight timetable. Of the ones on top, four of those are TV related - one by a guy who never finished on time or on budget, a show that was the first animated sitcom, a show that provided a huge boost to the fledgling FOX channel and was a breakout hit, and one with animators who had decades of experience who could make the most of a mere 2,000 drawings.

Furthermore, while more visual variety is always desired, I'd find it hard to believe anyone but a more unacquainted viewer could mistake Craig McCracken's current, bold, flowing, lava-lamp like style for C.H. Greenblatt's early 70s looking sketchy visuals. Or Hartman's lame imitation of 1950s angular character design for Ben Bocquelet's melting pot of anime, graphic, and multimedia inspirations. Or Chris Savino's more raw, newspaper comic like designs for Alex Hirsch's more lush, but uninspired, geometrical characters.

...

If you look close enough, you'd realise the "then" picture has more characters with eylids or oval like eyes.
The "Now" pictures has less focus on eyelids and the eyes are more circular.
Also using FOP is cheating since it's lived through both eras

The change in Clarence and his teeth almost threw me off there a little

you know what's even worse?
whoever drew that had to draw it first with a pencil
they couldn't draw 3 ovals and strands of hair without sketching it out first
what a fucking hack

WHY DID THEY DRAW DIRECTLY OVER THE FUCKING DRAWING, WHO THE FUCK FUCKING DOES THAT? FUCK!

I'm not a weeb with this but I'm fucking getting piss off when it was drawn on someone elses work, especially with that fucking face.

>a few recent cartoons have the main characters drawn with the same general head shape
>this is bad because ???

"CUZ THE OLD=BETTER"

People shit on cal-arts because they think that it's fucking lazy. It's not.. If you saw old cartoons you would know that they reuse animations a lot. Mostly walking and face impressions.

This enrages me on several levels.
I have transended rage to that calm certainty that this is evidence of God's absence in our world.

>Reaction Image
Newfag

>guess that's why they get BTFO by anime

Ah yes the weeaboo once again speaking about the animation industry as if he knew how to draw or was part of it

I like how you faggots are still getting fucking triggered by this, it was a throwaway sketch done by the guy in 2 minutes on a wall that is literally every square inch covered in drawings.
It's not some piece of fine art that's been painted over, it's a living sketchbook that ran out of room.

Double bonus is that none of you would give a single shit if it was an Ub Iwerks or William Hanna sketch, you're just pissed that it's not still 2000 and people aren't obsessed with the children's shows you grew up with.

cheap repetitive Hanna Barbera cartoons in a nutshell.

There are just types of people in this world who ought to be hanged.

It's the principle of it. Drawing over someone else's art is just an asshole move nomatter how you slice it.

Now this obnoxious effect is amplified by which artist is being overwritten, the style and finesse and history of one of the better anime directors/creators being overwritten by this cheap shitty self absorbed kids doodle style that's being overused in media today.

It's almost poetically insufferable.

...

>what is symbolism

Remember how the lady in Back to the Future wanted to save a clock tower that didn't even work simply because it was historically important? The doodle might not have meant a lot to the artist because why fucking should it. But it sure as hell meant a lot to fans of his work where that was the closest they would ever get to an authentic drawing of his work.

If someone took an old Disney keyframe drawing and scribbled their grocery store list on top of it justifying it saying "There are tons of these in the archives", it'd still be egregious of them to do.