God I love concept art. The line width of these drawings, the strong silhouettes

God I love concept art. The line width of these drawings, the strong silhouettes.

Other urls found in this thread:

livlily.blogspot.com
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Look at all these expressions. They managed to make a skeletor woman still be well drawn and not weird or gangly to look at.

Look at how much more subtle they are with her stretch and squash but how it's still "there". Principles stay the same but the amount changes depending on what they want from the character, perfection.

And then comes the part where you shit on the 3D models

Look how stylized he draws the hands. It's such a loose way of drawing but still has structure.

kys 2d fag

Damn, look how much control they have in understanding this skull shape.

I love 3D too, I think Zootopia has amazing models and love the felt aesthetic of Trolls. But it's easy to make a 3D figure look 3D, because it is. Whereas in 2D, it's completely made-up bullshit but your brain still tells you, "Wow, look at that 3D form!" which is what I find so interesting.

Look at this, it's all just flat brush work with no shading but damn, he feels like he's got a skeleton underneath and a proper form. I love it.

Look at this acting pose that just wouldn't be possible in live-action. And it's so much fun to look at.

...

The legs and arms are basically sticks, doesn't stop me from reading them as arms and legs.

What fucking cat is just the shape of a pillow case? None, doesn't stop cartoons from drawing a cat as one!

Look how much personality this hair has!
Look at the fact that giving the hair personality is something you can consider with animation/illustration designs.

Figuring out the muscle anatomy of an anthro water buffalo, cause why not? Knowledge of anatomy and muscles still apply even in cartoons, even if they're simplified and applied to animals that it wouldn't match.

These arms don't even connect to the body, but doesn't fucking matter, cause it's still a strong pose and funny looking. Not everything in a cartoon pose has to make sense, so long as it makes for the joke.

LOOK AT HIS FUCKING MOUTH.
How much stretch and squash is too much?
THE ANSWER IS THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS TOO MUCH.

"In this scene, the character gets eaten by a giant cooked chicken and spends the rest of the movie in the body of one. We need you to design that."

Yeah in cartoons, that's just a usual request. Suspension of disblief is infinite in animation if you can make it work.

...

This monkey is 40% looking at an actual monkey, 60% what a guy thinks a money looks like. Not everything has to be a "realistic, accurate" species or atone to something that exists. As long as it just reads "monkey".

None of these even conform to the idea of a fish, cat, or bunny, but as long as you tell me that's what they are, I'll believe you.

Take the features of an animal and just exaggerate them. Bulldogs have GIANT TORSOS, tiny butts. Maybe not to this degree, but in animation, it's more fun this way.

Animation is just plain fun.

Look how stylized this Cap is! I would have never thought it until you told me it was him, but now, "Oh yeah, I can see it". Even though he's basically the shape of a jackhammer, I can still recognize the character.

Would you even believe these are the same character? The power of design and illustration. You're able to draw one dude a thousand different ways. Just keep in key elements, like the shield.

That's the beauty of drawing, you can throw in as little details as you want or just pack it balls to the walls with detail and there is no better way. It's just a different way of presenting a character and a different way of drawing.

They're sitting on black white space, yet I can feel them on a proper sense of perspective. Amazing what gaps the brain fills in if something just "looks" right.

The dorky Clark is so much more effective to pull off when you can exaggerate silhouettes and stances with the character. I'd be one of those idiots who thinks the guy on the left just happens to look like the guy on the right, but would never think they're the same person.

God, look how simplified the creases on Vanellope are. Literally just a bunch of U's scribbled, but it fucking works.

If a real guy looked like this, he'd be in the fucking hospital.

BUT FOR DRAWINGS, IT'S GREAT!

Look how fucking far they push this pose of just a guy standing. His hips are shooting out of his skeleton!

Holy shit.

Smears and multiples! The beauty of animation techniques.

God it feels so bouncy. Like looking at a fresh bowl of Jell-O.

Form, anatomy, perspective, timing, structure, movement, line width, confident linework, foreshortening.

So much shit to master just for a 2 second animation.

i like you, user. here's a website

livlily.blogspot.com

This doesn't need to capture the utter realism of water, just needs to capture the "feeling" of it. Even though water isn't a solid color, it still works!

I love this shit. The amount of amazing work these people produce in a year is enough to make you feel depressed about your entire life of just doing a desk job.

yeah because 3d animation doesn't have concept art and they also never animate some scenes in 2d beforehand, nope never happened

Not all animation needs to be flat pencil work. You can incorporate any type of technique to it, because that's the beauty of it being 2D work, all 2D techniques can be applied! Oil painting, watercoloring, fucking South Park construction paper.

And digital is just making those options even more viable.

OP keep going, i love how enthusiastic you are it's very wholesome

LITERALLY JUST A STICK FIGURE. Gorgeous.

The forms aren't consistent, it's kind of all over the place and scratchy, but damn me, if that isn't charming in its own way. No amount of scribble art is too unpresentable to an audience.

Look how primitive animation starts out as! Baby steps, not everything is perfect its first rendition.

Look at what a difference just having thick vs thin can do to a drawing.

Even the pros have to scribble out their ideas to get a feel of what they want. Animation rarely has just a single draft of work before it makes it to the final.

Dude probably had to spend weeks on this. And it's not even fully cleaned and colored yet!

LIGHTEN THE LOOADD.
You can hear it, the poses and mouth shapes are so strong.

This is just shit fans do cause they're so goddamn passionate about animation and liking stuff. This workload is "fun" for people. Shit!

Look how far we've come with digital animation! God, it's like looking at a clean scan of handdrawn work.

This is just pure stylization, from the concept of the character, to her shape, to what she's doing and at the camera angle, to using smears to accomplish it. You couldn't do a pure translation of this in live-action.

I love looking at loose keyframe drawings. I love being able to see what the artist was thinking during their process of animation.

It's a bunch of scribbles. But together, those scribbles form a scene. Because your brain inputs most of the information you need, "that's a couch", "that's the Professor", "those are the girls", "that's a lamp in the back". How wonderful that you can be so loose with illustrating an idea and it still reads as what you want it to.

Lines aren't closed off, it's just black and white, sketchy lines overlap, it's a bit of a mess. And yet, kind of more charming than if it were cleaned up.

Choosing only to use color to help sell and idea better. Because when you're an artist, you get to pick and choose what you want to incorporate based on how you want the audience to see the piece. The fire needs to read as fire, so color it. The rest of the picture is in black and white? Doesn't matter! It doesn't need to be in color, we know it's Star without it!

They have to draw model sheets for hands and arms because it's so important for Gaston.

So many studies for cartoon accuracy.

Just a bunch of flat colors on a white background that when arranged and composed correctly together, you see it as a cupcake, cause we're just that smart that we can read shapes as the real thing they're suppose to be.

Action scenes in animation are so bouncy and fun.

"Why did you color him blue?"
Is not a question you have to give a shit in art because you can color characters literally anything if it looks appealing enough.

Yellow light, black shadows. Sure, two colors is all you need.

No hands have sharp angles like this. But fuck you, looks good, so feel free to draw angular hands all you want.

Even the fucking dude who made the characters still uses a reference because no amount of mastery will ever let you ditch the basics.

He fucking loves his job!

He drew this goddamn pose out of his imagination, FUCK.

I have to say, OP, your love and enthusiasm is really nice to see c:

great thread OP, do post more

signed: your singular fanbase :)

nah that's just ripping off anime

...

You're an idiot. I guess every martial arts movie is also ripping off anime and not the other way around.

why do you do this ;_;

I recognize you OP.

I even saved the giffs and some what you said on a previous thread.

Keep up the good work, fellow animation lover!

What's wrong about an elderly couple making sure they're prepared for disasters?

I heard there were rough sketches/animations of Mulan naked without any covering

>3d waifu fur life

Keep posting OP this is nice

Scribbles as a form of texture can still make an illustration look completed. Messy doesn't always mean unfinished!

Some of the characters are basically just circles in the back. The only defined characters are the tigers and squirrel. But it's still an acceptable concept piece. Capturing the idea and feeling and atmosphere is more important than perfect line work and non-stop details. That's why concept art is so neat, it can be done in a vast array of ways: hyper detail or basically just color blobs if necessary.

Anthony Holden is a great artist and might be a mormon but I don't hold that against him to harshly when his art is so good.

Picking and choosing what you wanna animate. Even if it doesn't make sense the top of the water isn't moving, doesn't stop the picture from being pretty and appealing to look at!

OP, you're a person after my own heart

These are basically just watercolor blobs pressed down on the paper, but done correctly, and suddenly it's the illusion of a stone corridor. So much of this shit is just stuff that is tricking your brain and demanding that your brain fill in the information for you and it works!

There is literally no background. It's a horizon line and a couple of blades of grass to give you a hint of where they are. But that's all you need. Without those few blades of grass, you would have no idea they were in a Savannah-esque environment. Sometimes a couple of blades of grass on top of a horizon line is all you need.

There's so much color splashed onto the page, and yet, it's all properly controlled so my eye is never lost. All thanks to those big sections of gray that serve as a backdrop. They literally form a wave to wrap around the main characters and give them negative space so you go to them first, and in case that wasn't enough, the artist puts the brightest yellows right above their head as basically lightbulbs to help draw the eye. It's only then afterwards does your eye wander.

Branch's dark black also helps! They saved the darkest color for him, not for the background, even though it's night.

And then the reverse, all in monochromatic sepia tone, but despite there so many shades and blobs of form to look at, the girl is the focus because of the huge black white space that draws your eye first.

And the fucking bike isn't even done, but who cares, no one is gonna take points away from the piece because a part isn't colored in. And that's what's so great about illustrations, not everything needs to have the same level of completion in the same picture to be completed. I don't care that the foreground isn't as filled in as the middleground, I understand the piece and the scene, and I see the setting the artist wanted to paint, and that's all I need to know to appreciate it. Sometimes illustrations are just a little insight on an idea the artist had, not all about completing them.

This was done in FLASH with the PENCIL TOOL and basic gray shading. The colors don't even stay within the lines. You don't need fancy Photoshop brushes or expensive oils to make a nice picture. All you need is a good sense of composition and basic lines to make them possible.

Or on the flipside, you could fill the picture up its ass with detail and just create a masterpiece. Look at the fact that there's tons of black shading and very little color to help break apart the shapes, and yet, you can tell Bat's cape apart from the glove that is pulling him. That's mastery of tone!

This drawing doesn't even follow the rules of perspective, but it follows it enough that it can spatially arrange all the shapes together that it helps give you a sense of space, where things go, what they are. It's all about capturing the rough idea of a floorplan and the rough idea of the design of the room to help you make later concepts that are more finessed.

And here's capturing a feeling using only a pen and scribbles. There's so much detail packed into it, you wouldn't even realize that not every piano key is drawn or that the papers on the floor and some of the books on the shelves are basically see-through. You barely notice that plate on the chair is just a plate of scribbles with no legible food or that the ribbon on the photo frame looks like it was drawn in 2 seconds. You don't notice it because Pongo and Roger, along with their key props (the piano, the chair) are so defined, you just accept everything else must be, too.

Even this, which looks super completed, actually has rough, less-defined painted buildings in the back compared to everything else. Because they aren't important and just necessary to make the city feel like a city. But you aren't staring at them, so you probably didn't notice right away that they were blobs in comparison, and since you've accepted the story this shot is telling, whether or not certain details are "filled in" is no longer needed.

Hell, Nick still has a couple of his guidelines in. Not everything's gotta be perfect, people.

And you know, sometimes lighting a picture doesn't need to be more complicated than gradients on the overlay/hard light layer mode with a couple of gradient blends on solid object fills to make it feel like it's lit up properly. You don't need tons of painted blending, in fact, most of these are just basic 1 - 2 - 3 color blocks, but the slightest gradients put in the appropriate areas to make it not look like pillow shading can make all the difference.

I mean fuck, the Badger's shadow is literally just his silhouette changed to black, stretched, blurred, and has a low opacity. These Disney artists basically color their pictures in ways you could too with the most basic Photoshop knowledge. The only reason it looks complicated is because you're absorbing so much information at once. If you look at every object individually, which is how they drew it, you'd realize how amazingly simple it is to do this, too.

And then here's taking basic Photoshop knowledge, using some fancy brush that gives solid colors more texture, and applying overlay textures carefully to make this look really full of life. But really, otherwise, they're again, just solid colors. But adding a bit of texture adds so much. The color is basically just a gradient with a texture, it's not realistic, complicated, pretty easy actually if you just look at it one block at a time.

Song of the Sea. Look at those boulders at the bottom. Stylized as FUCK. It's capturing this style of tapestry and applying it to a landscape that creates a fresh looking style that still feels familiar to art you've seen before.

And then here's Steven Universe doing similar shapes but coloring them completely different, creating a different aesthetic entirely.

Look at this! What waterfall in real life have you ever seen that is just a bunch of ovals and lines? None, but you KNOW this is a waterfall. This is the power of observation and knowing what elements are important to capture and stylized and which can be omitted.

The only major defined thing in this picture is the store front, everything else is rather neglected, and you know what? That's fine, if you want the focus of the picture to be the store front, not everything needs the same level of detail. You don't even need to draw individual bricks on the buildings or road, you can just let the texture of the paper and watercolor brush be enough to make the side of the empty wall not feel weirdly empty and clean.

oh so this is what they meant when they said Sup Forums is love

Look how much the forest bleeds into each other. It's not a mistake, it's a style! At least when the artist is skilled enough to make it look like it was purposefully done. Hell, some of these trees aren't even defined, it's literally just bleeding color, but because it gives the vaguest shape of what you know a tree to look like, you accept it as a forest. Really, there's only a single defined tree and even that is pretty messy looking.

Messy isn't bad!

Fuck the rest of the buildings. You just need to define the candy store and have two things on its side with less definition so it doesn't feel isolated for it to work. You don't even need to finish the piece, they can fade on the sides. The landscape can disappear into a void of emptiness because we accept it's capturing the look and feel of a certain type of art and that the characters live in this world. Despite the style constantly reminding us that these are drawings and paintings, we still feel they're real characters when they walk around on screen.

THESE TREES ARE JUST TRIANGLES.

BUT THEY'RE TREES.

How advanced is our brain that I can present a green triangle and tell you it's a tree and you say, "Of course". Fucking great, man.

>OP is completely baffled by simple artistic techniques, stylization, and the brain's ability to know what pictures are: the thread

So much of the picture is engulfed in black darkness. You can BARELY see the tree, but you're given enough detail to see the root in the foreground and can "tell" it's part of a tree, and a big part of what makes that work are the leaves right above it, which are also just one big black shape. Without that part, the sticking out root would actually look a bit odd and the illusion of it being in the foreground would be a little less effective. Hell, the spacing of this entire picture would be totally destroyed without this foreground tree.

DAMN look at this. Just pure shapes and color with the only perspective being the ground. The trees don't have a 3D shape, the building doesn't have a 3D shape, but the ground does, and the arrangement of these flat objects on a 3D shape is enough to create a landscape that has depth to it.