| Not sure I'm posting this in the correct place, but I wanted to discuss why when I write a review on here, it asks me to rank the 'Art,' but when I look at my review it gives that score to 'Animation.' Animation is only a very small part of what goes into my score for art. I look things like art design, art direction, color palette, character designs, directing, angles, etc. when I'm deciding on a score for 'Art.' In fact, I don't think I've ever even mentioned animation or animation quality in any of my 33 reviews so far. I feel like MAL pulled the old switcheroo on me. Like, why does it do this change ONLY on Art? Does everyone see what I'm talking about or am I going crazy? Since this is a forum post, let's discuss: 1. What anime that have great animation, but terrible art (whatever that means to you)? I nominate Sword Art Online for this. The animation is good, but the directing makes me nauseous. 2. What anime have great art, but terrible animation? I wanna say something like Chobits. The character designs are adorable, but it's noticeably low budget. |
 |
| I think that animation is just a part of the art, really it should just be called visuals. 1. Occult nine, I didn't watch very far in, but the art seemed to be quite good. The animation on the other hand, wasn't. 2. Only one I can think of is Hetalia, sorta. |
╮ (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.) ╭ |
| I'd break it down as: Art: How good the pictures are. Animation: How smoothly and evocatively they move. Direction: How well it all works to convey the story things, includes camera angles etc. URAHARA this season has lovely art but very limited animation. |
| It doesn't matter, the thing that matter the most in depth. But beware, there are many meanings of "depth" in anime. |
 |
| Art's the character design. Animation is a combination of how fluid the animation is and the detail of animation. |
| I'm not a lolicon, you're just projecting your tendency to lewd 2D characters. If your favourite character is Tsutsukakushi Tsukiko, you are my soul mate. Been a long time since I've been here, I'll continue expressing myself freely and believe everyone should too. My MAL Interview |
Fuchsia said: I think that animation is just a part of the art, really it should just be called visuals. That would make a lot more sense Aslt said: Why does the directing fall into the category of art? Where else would it go? It has to do with visual presentation. Like Fuchsi said, that would be a better term for it. Swagernator said: It doesn't matter, the thing that matter the most in depth. But beware, there are many meanings of "depth" in anime. To you, maybe. A lot of people don't watch anime for depth whatsoever. |
|
Aslt said: Falco2424 said: Where else would it go? It has to do with visual presentation. Like Fuchsi said, that would be a better term for it. Director's role is to interpret the screenplay with the visuals and audio he's given (+other things blah blah). But, I guess that you meant the Animation Director, a person in charge of everything related to the animation. He didn't say anything like that, this is his reply: Fuchsia said: I think that animation is just a part of the art, really it should just be called visuals. Do you see the word "directing" here? Because I don't. I was referring to what I quoted, just the he said that it should be called visuals. And the director would most definitely be included in art/visuals. He's literally responsible for what is seen on screen. If that's not part of the visuals, nothing is. Saying what shots go where, at what speed, and at what cuts is an art in itself. |
|
| @Falco2424 While I agree that animation is the wrong term and doesn't encompass everything that has to do with visuals, I fail to see how directing should fall under the "visuals" aspect. It's so much broader, like use of the soundtrack, pacing, and generally doing things for more purposes than simply being pretty (because any use of a technique or design choice or whatever is more interesting when it's tied to the story or themes and relevant rather than just pretty) |
 |
| Most would say Ping Pong has bad art (I think It's fine) but the animation and direction were top notch. |
| It need to balance itself Most of KyoAni/ufotable anime had both aspect. A-1 mainly focus on art the animation are slight better to average. Ufotable have better animation than Kyoani though despite being equal. Great animation would go between Madhouse/ufotable tittle, Something like One Punch i guess? Still on animation something like Konosuba had good animation but terrible art though aestitically it based on comedy so its reasonable. Moving on Art like i mentioned A-1 Studio (Sword arts) Made In abyss (forgot the studio), Shaft (Undoubtly unique but also simplified). |
| >SAO Ohhh I just know how it'll end. May this thread go back to 2015. |
| Art is just basically how it looks in a still frame while animation is how it moves. Another difference is that judging art is subjective while judging animation can be objectively done. Since animation deals with more concrete stuff like the frame by frame movement, the fluidity of said movement etc. etc. That said to answer your questions: -I hated Ping Pong's art but it moves really well. You can just go frame by frame and ravel at the great movement. -Mahouka's art is pleasing to my eye but it has rigid animation. The art actually limited how it moves. |
| You're better off ignoring MAL's blanket parameters and just writing the review you wish to write. If the art-style is unappealing to due the director's decision is that a problem with the art, the direction, or neither? Is minimal movement and basic back-grounds always the result of a low budget? Or could it be a directorial choice? Is there a set standard a director should have to conform to? It always comes back to an individual's opinion on the matter. |
 |
| I feel like you're a bit confused as to when to use "direction"...... |
Clebardman said: @Falco2424 While I agree that animation is the wrong term and doesn't encompass everything that has to do with visuals, I fail to see how directing should fall under the "visuals" aspect. It's so much broader, like use of the soundtrack, pacing, and generally doing things for more purposes than simply being pretty (because any use of a technique or design choice or whatever is more interesting when it's tied to the story or themes and relevant rather than just pretty) Well, I'm not saying that everything the director does falls strictly and solely under visuals, but a big part of it does. Also, I have not seen basically any of the shows you guys have mentioned lol. I'll need to check out Ping Pong and what not. Since we started mentioning things that have both great artwork and great animation, my two top picks for that are Casshern Sins and Bakemonogatari. They're the only two shows I've seen that I've given a 10 in the visuals category. Also, no one really answered if they were bothered by MAL changing the category from the review writing side (art) to the review viewing side (animation). That really bothered me. |
|
| >casshern >great animation >... >mfw |
| Weebs when native isekai series with OP mc but female and not incel: :soyjackwow: weebs when native isekai series with OP mc but male and incel: :npcangry: |
| Konosuba 2 is an example of this. I still dont care much about the art or animation. Im more in the story or ost part. |
"When you made this thread, I cried and screamed" -Swagernator 2017 |
More topics from this board
» Is romance/slice of life the greatest anime genre? ( 1 2 )Semester1 - Yesterday |
55 |
by animeadept
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Opposite sex AND same sex characters you most relate toIpreferEcchi - 4 minutes ago |
0 |
by IpreferEcchi
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » How much do you love your favorite character?Shizuna - May 27 |
18 |
by Shizuna
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» Secondary charactersJoeChip - 54 minutes ago |
6 |
by kurayamiberkay
»»
22 minutes ago |
|
» What are considered 'the best anime clothes'?SgtBateMan - 1 hour ago |
5 |
by Spunkert
»»
46 minutes ago |