| Good Animation is very subjective. If the movement feels natural and it looks good THEN IT IS WELL ANIMATED. Some studios Have good Animation but Fail in the Art and Viceversa making the Animation bad. I don't mean that bad art always equals bad animation. There are some really well animated Stick figure videos on YT. But When it comes to Anime you need to have both things down to make the Animation look good.. And the part Where yo talk about how "Every anime's animation is the same except for fight scenes" Well... What did you expect from the more slow or Dialogue heavy parts? To them be moving all over the place?? |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
TheHopefulOtaku said: Writing has everything to do with animation. Storyboarding is incredibly important with animating.Kittens-kun said: Every show you mentioned there IS well animated. Whether you can see that or not is your own problem. Plus, could you stop with the whole "you need to take a class to understand what I'm talking about" bs? Nobody needs to take a writing or animation class to tell you that you're wrong. And your arguments aren't better just because you do happen to take one. I never took animation class... And writing class has nothing to do with animation... @AzureDaora I don't care about that 1%, because the 99% is what I'll be looking at most of the time. Kyoanie manages to actually have characters move in more interesting ways, because they're not cranking up a million anime a year. You don't even know what you're talking about and yet you're this stubborn. Man. So you're just fanboying now? Come on. And you just managed to ignore the other 90% of my post that answers how some anime can have better walk cycles than others. Man, you are hopeless. |
 |
| Common character expressions can be good animation. The uniqueness of an expression or a motion doesn't make the animation better, fluidity, easing, conveyance and more, that's what makes animation good. One Punch Man's animation is good because it's dynamic, always has subtle movement, great choreography and even unique motion unlike most anime that are mostly still frames with 2 or 3 frames of having the mouth close and open. The quality of animation is mostly subjective (mostly) so I will leave it at that but yea, animation is mainly that. Even anime that don't have any sakuga scenes can still look great, even when double framed for the majority of the time, if the conveyance of the movement is proper and it's only double framed every so often, constant double or triple framing might lead to terrible animation like most low budget LN adaptations that are made for a quick buck. In Another World with a Smartphone for is an example. (Also, I am studying animation). |
Anime List|Manga List | Discord: Azureal#2963 |
| Right off the bat you have a problem because people define "animation" differently, since it can be interpreted as its technical definition, which is the movement and quality of the drawings, or as the artistic medium as a whole, which includes all of the visual elements that make up an animated work. To add to the problem, most people probably haven't clearly defined it in their heads themselves, and probably aren't even capable of assessing each aspect of animation that contributes to its overall appearance. Especially in the case of the latter, "animation" isn't properly assessed because other non-animation factors (like filters in post-processing) can become heavily prioritized by people when considering the "animation" quality. Ultimately, you can say that animation is subjective, but among professional animators, there are general standards and measurable skill levels. I doubt the layman shares the same perspective, so by that standard, no, I doubt most people are that proficient at assessing animation quality. |
| Actually, what is this thread about? About you that don't like most of still frame of an anime? About you that like Hyouka (and KyoAni stuff) and want people to considered it more? So what? Other animation is bad by your standard? Go on, it doesn't matter. Or maybe you want to be a smartass here? I hope not... Have you make a storyboard? Or a comic/manga? Try make one, just the raw concept for a couple of pages, like 16. There you will learn more, and appreciate more. Oh, and by doing that you will also realize that have knowledge in writing helps a lot in making good scenes... |
| Don't like it? Just stop watching/reading it. Why become a masochist that keep going through something you don't like and bitching in the end of it? |
| I think a show has good animation when the characters move a lot, and they move dynamically. If I notice that characters stand still a lot, stiff non-fluid motion, or they intentionally do stuff like point the camera at the back of their head or cover the mouth I'll know they are intentionally doing it to not animate it. cuttings corners can be done for comedic effect, like that scene from Kill la Kill. Just as an exercise, watch an episode of family guy. and whenever there's a dance number or group of characters doing the same thing, point out how many of them are doing the exact same motion in sync |
| I don't care. |
TheHopefulOtaku said: Which maximizes/uses more frames, Oregairu or Fate? Which places each frame better giving the sense of more fluid animation?Nobody has answered the question of the difference between a head tilt in Fate/Zero vs Oregairu, either. Whoever does wins. I fucking answered this 3 posts ago. There's your answer. Go crawl back to whichever hole you came from. Also I'm a GD, I study some form of animation, so no I have more say in this than you do. stop your bs |
|
TheHopefulOtaku said: Fluidity is how well each frame transitions to the other. It's hard to sense this difference with little movement. You'll get why as you read.AzureDaora said: Which maximizes/uses more frames, Oregairu or Fate? Which places each frame better giving the sense of more fluid animation? Whoever does wins. I fucking answered this 3 posts ago. There's your answer. Go crawl back to whichever hole you came from. Also I'm a GD, I study some form of animation, so no I have more say in this than you do. I'm...not sure how to figure that out. But I do remember both anime looked fluid whenever there was movement, just like in every other anime. And I think I did get what you meant by the transition between frames...but how can you tell how one frame transitions to the next when there are so many frames happening on screen? Wouldn't the only way to find out how many exact frames there are in a scene and how those frames transition into the next, be by watching a video showing how that animation scene was drawn? Again, you can't really compare "normal" scenes that much simply because there's not that much to animate in it at all. Most of the time there's only one or two things of actual movement happening on the screen; whereas in a fight scene where movement is much more apparent and therefore comparable. You said it yourself: You can't compare those two unless we know specific details like the actual production simply because there's too little to compare. In the head tilt, for example. You're technically only comparing one movement on the screen, which is the head. There's different frames, to be certain: but there's not much movement. Meanwhile in a fight scene (in a good one specifically) everything is moving. The arms, the feet, the body, the swords, the guns; This is part of what makes an animation feel more alive and fluid. Many ways of remedying this minimalistic movement is by adding stuff into a "normal" scene, giving it more "feel" and importance, essentially making it look better. Adding sweat drops, lighting, camera angles, etc. Of course, perhaps the frames used is the same between two anime, but the movement happening gives the illusion that one is better than the other. This is somewhat similar as to how blur lines are added to fight scenes. The only real way you can notice such small details on scenes with minimal movement without going too deep in the frames is if there's a very large gap between the two you're comparing. For example in such an anime as Berserk 2016 (the lower end) you can clearly see a difference. Again, it might be too large of a difference; but it HIGHLIGHTS how there is such a thing. Perhaps not as apparent in most anime, but it's definitely there even with such "normal" scenes as head tilts and talking. |
|
TheHopefulOtaku said: Kittens-kun said: Every show you mentioned there IS well animated. Whether you can see that or not is your own problem. Plus, could you stop with the whole "you need to take a class to understand what I'm talking about" bs? Nobody needs to take a writing or animation class to tell you that you're wrong. And your arguments aren't better just because you do happen to take one. I never took animation class... And writing class has nothing to do with animation... @AzureDaora I don't care about that 1%, because the 99% is what I'll be looking at most of the time. Kyoanie manages to actually have characters move in more interesting ways, because they're not cranking up a million anime a year. I know you weren't talking about writing. I was just pointing out that you really like to use this class bs in your arguments. |
 |
| Well, the word "good" is subjective. So yes, they know what it means. You just have a different interpretation of the word. |
  WORK IN PROGRESS ~The frog leapt forth to my lilypad memory.~ I was indoctrinated by an inamorata rabbit, Adenomata affronted. It was the verecund, dismissed creatures That I jubilated in most. This rabbit I would nurture, At the aiguille of esse, The anneal of noblesse. ❤️ Birdie ❤️ |
| You aren't even trying to hear other people's arguements. Why make a post if you are just going to dismiss 90% of the replies? |
| :) |
| a good example of people saying this show have bad animation is Aku No Hana when they just mean it does not have pretty character design when the actual animation or frame movements are good |
Wysteria_ said: As someone who's studying animation and aesthetics in media, I can safely say that the animation itself doesn't make up 100% of the "good and aesthetically pleasing" parts. Another important factor is the camera angle, which I've noticed not many anime series pay that much attention to (in the action genre, that is specifically) like in Fairy Tail, Naruto, the Gundam series etc. If you want to see some really aesthetically appealing action, you need to be aware of the camera angle and what perspective in what order you're seeing things. If the scene makes you feel like you need to focus on one character and in a dramatic setting, but instead shows you the character from a three-quarter angle, it's bad scripting. If it on the other hand shows you the character zoomed in directly in front, it's the right camera angle and won't confuse the story with feelings as much. If you want to watch appealing animation with spot on camera angles, watch Garo: Vanishing Line. I even used it as a template in an essay about dramaturgy. That's a nuance that most people don't really discuss. I think, with the camera angles, you're talking about the broader topic of cinematography. But it isn't just that, in a given scene there are numerous elements in the video you see. If I leave the non-graphical elements out (like sound), most scenes feature the following elements: animation, cinematography, art style, character design, etc. For studios, I think KyoAni is the best (in their average level) in the animation department. However, to me, Shaft is more successful at gripping my gaze. While their animation might not as strong as KyoAni, their art styles, character designs, and (especially) cinematography pushes them over KyoAni in the visual department. If this topic is still active in a few days, I'll try to provide specifics and examples to that point. Anyways, on to the OP's question. I actually have taken a few classes on animation and film. In terms of animation, I animated some short sequences like a 1 minute robot fight and a fist fight. In terms of film, I took a class that analyzed certain elements, particularly cinematography (framing, camera angle, camera movement, etc.), employed in films like Blade Runner, the Godfather, etc. They're not animated like anime, but they share attributes. With that background, I think "good animation" is animation that clearly portrays an idea. More specifically, good animation can convey the idea even if the sound, music, and subtitles are removed. I'll provide an example below and explain the idea clearly derived from the animation: (Action) Naruto Vs Sasuke In terms of bad animation, this video mirrors my thoughts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN4MkyfBNac). Also, it's pretty easy to miss animation errors. There are to additional gifs that I want to cover: (Outlaw Star) (Porco Rosso) On my two gripes above, I honestly wouldn't catch if I were watching the shows normally (as opposed to scrutinizing the gifs). The sequence is over in 2-3 seconds and those errors wouldn't have even registered. |
 |
| Uhmmm... animation lessons are for animators not for people trying to gauge how good an animation is. Animation lessons is designed to make you an animator. You don't really need to take a class to gauge how animation is good. You just have to know the general stuff and a set of eyes. As @Clebardman and @Pullman already have mentioned. |
TheHopefulOtaku said: You can tell whether or not something is well animated easily; you can't tell if one head tilt is better than the other as easily especially in "normal" cases. There's a difference there you're not seeing.AzureDaora said: Fluidity is how well each frame transitions to the other. It's hard to sense this difference with little movement. You'll get why as you read. Again, you can't really compare "normal" scenes that much simply because there's not that much to animate in it at all. Most of the time there's only one or two things of actual movement happening on the screen; whereas in a fight scene where movement is much more apparent and therefore comparable. You said it yourself: You can't compare those two unless we know specific details like the actual production simply because there's too little to compare. In the head tilt, for example. You're technically only comparing one movement on the screen, which is the head. There's different frames, to be certain: but there's not much movement. Meanwhile in a fight scene (in a good one specifically) everything is moving. The arms, the feet, the body, the swords, the guns; This is part of what makes an animation feel more alive and fluid. Many ways of remedying this minimalistic movement is by adding stuff into a "normal" scene, giving it more "feel" and importance, essentially making it look better. Adding sweat drops, lighting, camera angles, etc. Of course, perhaps the frames used is the same between two anime, but the movement happening gives the illusion that one is better than the other. This is somewhat similar as to how blur lines are added to fight scenes. The only real way you can notice such small details on scenes with minimal movement without going too deep in the frames is if there's a very large gap between the two you're comparing. For example in such an anime as Berserk 2016 (the lower end) you can clearly see a difference. Again, it might be too large of a difference; but it HIGHLIGHTS how there is such a thing. Perhaps not as apparent in most anime, but it's definitely there even with such "normal" scenes as head tilts and talking. Then for the most part, you can't say whether an anime is animated well or not.(during the non-sakuga moments), because there's barely any movement to properly judge. I mean, How can you fuck up a minimal movement like a head tilt? Okay, so in a lot of anime, there's a difference in head tilt. Could you give an example between two anime where the head tilt, or some minimal movement like that, is different? There's a difference but it's minimal merely because there's so little movement that it barely matters at all. Learn to understand what you're reading. You can fuck up a headtilt as easily as Berserk 2016 fucked up everything in terms of animation. If you want an actual example of a difference:   If you have a working eye and a brain you can easily tell the second one is better animated even though both have technically small movements. |
AzureDaoraDec 3, 2017 11:19 PM
|
| I barely ever heard people saying there are good animations at dialogue scenes. Whenever people praises an animation, it's due to the more important and engaging parts such as action. I think having characters standing around and flapping their mouths is enough to convey the story, even though I agree it can get quite boring and more akin to slideshows. Like I said before, animation should focus on more significant things like action, emotional scenes and even comedy. And for me, animations are good when they are fluid. You can't see any weird and awkward movements. That's enough for me. Of course I'll respect the studio more if they try to give more details. It's definitely more enjoyable but in the end, my point still stands that it all comes down to fluidity. The definition of animation is a series of frames drawn in order to give the illusion of motion. So basically, a smooth and flowing animation is more important to me. If you give more details but the animation came out looking all wonky at the end, then that ignores the purpose of what good animation is. You need fluidity to make the details work out so that's why I think that factor is in the root of good animation. This also ties in with art because it's harder to make good animations if the art sucks. Probably why there are a lot of people who are confused between those two things. |
OVERPOWERED99Dec 3, 2017 11:43 PM
My Anime List < Have a good day! > My Manga List |
| Tbh we all know that Anime has a lot of shortcuts due to the lack of rescources. And when we judge a show's animation, we judge it by its max output, not the talking where almost no movement and low framerate happens. If these scenes also have to have fluid and many animations then the industry will crash for sure. This is especially apparent when they do full CG, The CG tries to look like anime with its limitations and all making it only look worse. And to think that we need an animation class is just stupid, all we need is to watch Disney movies to understand good animation. Anime (Japanese animation) however has to deal with more limitations than western animation does. |
| M8, do yo know limited animation ? Disney ? Why do wee need to know is that animation is good or not ? We just need to enjoy and critic it based on what we think. not based on the fact is the animation is good or bad. do yo want to become an animator m8 ? well if you wanted to then it make sense XD i aint gonna explain limited animation to youu because it's wasting my time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_animation Disney, America and Japanese animation has something in common during 90s even at the wartime. it's not necessary for the watcher to know whether the animation looks good or bad based on fact. because what the animator need is only the watcher opinion. even if yo critic them using some facts that are related to animation, it aint gonna changed what the animator will do except if you are an animator and you are either giving advice or critics towards that animator itself wheter in real life or in inet. About the blink and other thing that you just said, it's their style, japanese style of animation. that's how they make their animation. if you want a realistic one it would looked like disney animation which is realism and for suure i would hate it a lot. |
 |
| It means they have been properly driving their experienced animators like slaves, to draw it frame by frame (digitally, of course), to match a complete and properly constructed storyboard and script, and don't keep reusing fucktons of stock animation crap. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
AzureDaora said: TheHopefulOtaku said: You can tell whether or not something is well animated easily; you can't tell if one head tilt is better than the other as easily especially in "normal" cases. There's a difference there you're not seeing.Then for the most part, you can't say whether an anime is animated well or not.(during the non-sakuga moments), because there's barely any movement to properly judge. I mean, How can you fuck up a minimal movement like a head tilt? Okay, so in a lot of anime, there's a difference in head tilt. Could you give an example between two anime where the head tilt, or some minimal movement like that, is different? There's a difference but it's minimal merely because there's so little movement that it barely matters at all. Learn to understand what you're reading. You can fuck up a headtilt as easily as Berserk 2016 fucked up everything in terms of animation. If you want an actual example of a difference: If you have a working eye and a brain you can easily tell the second one is better animated even though both have technically small movements. I don't really see how one is better animated than the other. The first seems like it's trying to convey a sense of hurry. While the second one seems to be going for a, "We gonna do this shit" feel. |
TheHopefulOtaku said: I don't really see how one is better animated than the other. The first seems like it's trying to convey a sense of hurry. While the second one seems to be going for a, "We gonna do this shit" feel. The first is a simple movement and the background looks like it's the one moving, plus it lacks detail and an organic transition. It's serviceable, you get the info that the character is walking, probably in a hurry. The second is way more detailed, it makes use of shading to further emphasize the idea of movement, it has several "objects" moving at the same time in a choreographied way, and the movements themselves are more organic and less like a cheap gif done with reused animation frames. The background, as well, is far from generic which adds to the aesthetic presentation and credibility of this motion. In addition to it, the visuals tell you a lot about the characters, how close they are to each other and what their intentions are. Try to build a proper character narrative from the first gif and now try with this. Which one offers more to consider? In the spatial position of the characters, their visual quirks and in the way they move through the scenario, it's infinitely more detailed and gives a lot more information to the viewer. |
| Good animation is a concept that I can't judge as a normal person. However, after watching many anime, you are able to tell some differences. For example, Nichijou which is the ultimate comedy anime, has many still sequences when they talk and make jokes, but there are some scenes really nicely animated. If we take an action anime into consideration, mostly the fight scenes have the best animation and the rest are for storytelling only. Besides that, you can't expect an anime to have a top notch animation all over an episode. 3-gatsu no Lion is one of the best anime of the season. They want to convey feelings, so they pay attention to the detail of every scene, but it has it's brief comedic moments when it gets more "goofy" (and that's still a compliment for 3-gatsu). Good animation and art exist, but the standards differ from anime to anime. Hyouka has to dazzle you with sparkle in Chitanda's eyes and beautiful landscapes. Mecha anime must make you believe that robots move better that humans. Akira had to show the ugliness of someone who thought power was everything amd gave us a deformed mass of flesh. So they throw the focus there. In the end, people that know about animation and how it works can tell how good is what they see. The rest of us just compare various scenes from anime. |
| ***roaming the vast anime universe*** |
TheHopefulOtaku said: Walking is the most common movement in fucking anything, what are you talking about. It's the same logic applies to all of them, whatever example it may be.jal90 said: The first is a simple movement and the background looks like it's the one moving, plus it lacks detail and an organic transition. It's serviceable, you get the info that the character is walking, probably in a hurry. The second is way more detailed, it makes use of shading to further emphasize the idea of movement, it has several "objects" moving at the same time in a choreographied way, and the movements themselves are more organic and less like a cheap gif done with reused animation frames. The background, as well, is far from generic which adds to the aesthetic presentation and credibility of this motion. In addition to it, the visuals tell you a lot about the characters, how close they are to each other and what their intentions are. Try to build a proper character narrative from the first gif and now try with this. Which one offers more to consider? In the spatial position of the characters, their visual quirks and in the way they move through the scenario, it's infinitely more detailed and gives a lot more information to the viewer. I kind of get what you mean, but I still somewhat disagree. Because for the 1st gif, what other possible way is there to convey a sense of hurry? The lower amount of frames makes each step feel more rushed. The 2nd gif has an unfair advantage in that it focuses more on the upper body of the characters, allowing for other things to move. I do agree the 2nd is far more interesting, but yeah, of course it will be. When I was talking about movement in anime looking the same, I was talking about much more common movements, like head tilts, picking up a folder, posing. You can also easily make a better "sense of hurry" feel to that thing if it didn't look a 5 frame walk cycle. Maybe make it so that the feet moves slowly at first then slowly becomes faster. You see that done in not just anime but in other forms of media as well. It also gives a lot more emphasis this way to that "sense of hurry", in more ways than one. |
|
| Every person is different. Therefore, every animator is different, as they are people. Therefore every animation is different. There are better and worse people out there. I think that kind of tells everything. |
 |
| Making a thread to disagree with everyone. Ah MAL never change.. Also has OP explained what "good animation" truly is? Or I'm the only one who missed it. |
 |
| Did you. Know that, you can't, even write well, yourself? |
TheHopefulOtaku said: AzureDaora said: Walking is the most common movement in fucking anything, what are you talking about. It's the same logic applies to all of them, whatever example it may be. You can also easily make a better "sense of hurry" feel to that thing if it didn't look a 5 frame walk cycle. Maybe make it so that the feet moves slowly at first then slowly becomes faster. You see that done in not just anime but in other forms of media as well. It also gives a lot more emphasis this way to that "sense of hurry", in more ways than one. Huh. You're right, actually. I'm not using my imagination enough. But I was talking about much more common movements, like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zytaBpGDJjY What's "good" or "different" about the way Ed sighs, moves his head, hands, etc? "It looks realistic and fluid", yeah, so does the 1st gif with the generic walking animation. Wait a minute, how could you tell that 1st gif was 5 frames? How do you tell how many frames there are? The animation on those parts doesn't need to look "different". Those types of movements don't need to look like that all. If it conveys what its trying to convey properly, than that's good animation. If it looks as if the movement isn't jittery or too "sudden", then it's good animation. Again, fluidity is the term. How Edward moves looks natural that it actually seems like he's moving like a real person, even though it's frame-by-frame 2D animation. How the animators place the frame and how many frames they add per movement is a large factor. The 1st gif is far too jittery to seem "realistic" in my eyes. It's properly conveying movement, aka it has fluidity, but it's not that good as the second one. It's 5 frames per foot step. I work with walk cycles so it helps, but I'm 100% certain even if you don't formally study anything animation related you can make it out just by eyeing it. Let me slow down the gif just for you.  That's 5 frames per foot, at least if you discount the part where the foot is grounded "dragging" across the screen. |
AzureDaoraDec 4, 2017 2:09 PM
|
| Good animation is one that draws a scene's full strength, maximizing the potential emotional impact one could experience from the scene. Bad animation is one that hinders a scene's strength, ruining the potential emotional impact one could experience from the scene. |
HyperLDec 4, 2017 3:03 PM
| You are not your body, you are your brain, the "self" that emerges from within it. |
AzureDaora said: TheHopefulOtaku said: Huh. You're right, actually. I'm not using my imagination enough. But I was talking about much more common movements, like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zytaBpGDJjY What's "good" or "different" about the way Ed sighs, moves his head, hands, etc? "It looks realistic and fluid", yeah, so does the 1st gif with the generic walking animation. Wait a minute, how could you tell that 1st gif was 5 frames? How do you tell how many frames there are? The animation on those parts doesn't need to look "different". Those types of movements don't need to look like that all. If it conveys what its trying to convey properly, than that's good animation. If it looks as if the movement isn't jittery or too "sudden", then it's good animation. Again, fluidity is the term. How Edward moves looks natural that it actually seems like he's moving like a real person, even though it's frame-by-frame 2D animation. How the animators place the frame and how many frames they add per movement is a large factor. The 1st gif is far too jittery to seem "realistic" in my eyes. It's properly conveying movement, aka it has fluidity, but it's not that good as the second one. It's 5 frames per foot step. I work with walk cycles so it helps, but I'm 100% certain even if you don't formally study anything animation related you can make it out just by eyeing it. Let me slow down the gif just for you. That's 5 frames per foot, at least if you discount the part where the foot is grounded "dragging" across the screen. Well...then most of the anime I've seen have good animation! Because aside from the Sakuga scenes, all of them use minimal movement to convey minimal stuff, like Edward moving his arm, or someone picking up a letter... It's good, but it's...boring... This looks good:        I can't tell the difference in quality in any of them. They're all meant to move in a, "natural, realistic" manner...so they do. So they're "good". But I don't see how they look bad, or great... The only difference I can possibly tell is how much more different movement one gif has compared to the other... The natural, realistic movements, like the gif of Hiro...you could make them into live action, and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Does my frustration make any sense? Art, I can go on hours about, because you can look at any anime, and immediately tell the difference in how it looks compared to other anime. You can easily get a critical mind of some sort on which anime looks good/bad/terrible/great... Fuck it, once I get into college, I'm going to try taking animation class, so I can tell the difference between all these... I'm sorry I didn't learn much from talking to you, and for wasting your time. |
Lordwen said: Making a thread to disagree with everyone. Ah MAL never change.. Also has OP explained what "good animation" truly is? Or I'm the only one who missed it. He didn't Expalin Shit really. He just wants to look diferent than everyone and look like he has more Knowledge about animation but... [ S P O I L E R A L E R T ] |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
TheHopefulOtaku said: AzureDaora said: The animation on those parts doesn't need to look "different". Those types of movements don't need to look like that all. If it conveys what its trying to convey properly, than that's good animation. If it looks as if the movement isn't jittery or too "sudden", then it's good animation. Again, fluidity is the term. How Edward moves looks natural that it actually seems like he's moving like a real person, even though it's frame-by-frame 2D animation. How the animators place the frame and how many frames they add per movement is a large factor. The 1st gif is far too jittery to seem "realistic" in my eyes. It's properly conveying movement, aka it has fluidity, but it's not that good as the second one. It's 5 frames per foot step. I work with walk cycles so it helps, but I'm 100% certain even if you don't formally study anything animation related you can make it out just by eyeing it. Let me slow down the gif just for you. That's 5 frames per foot, at least if you discount the part where the foot is grounded "dragging" across the screen. Well...then most of the anime I've seen have good animation! Because aside from the Sakuga scenes, all of them use minimal movement to convey minimal stuff, like Edward moving his arm, or someone picking up a letter... It's good, but it's...boring... This looks good: I can't tell the difference in quality in any of them. They're all meant to move in a, "natural, realistic" manner...so they do. So they're "good". But I don't see how they look bad, or great... The only difference I can possibly tell is how much more different movement one gif has compared to the other... The natural, realistic movements, like the gif of Hiro...you could make them into live action, and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Does my frustration make any sense? Art, I can go on hours about, because you can look at any anime, and immediately tell the difference in how it looks compared to other anime. You can easily get a critical mind of some sort on which anime looks good/bad/terrible/great... Fuck it, once I get into college, I'm going to try taking animation class, so I can tell the difference between all these... I'm sorry I didn't learn much from talking to you, and for wasting your time. Summarizing all he said. If it looks Natural or Fluid then It is good Animation |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
-KaneKo- said: Lordwen said: Making a thread to disagree with everyone. Ah MAL never change.. Also has OP explained what "good animation" truly is? Or I'm the only one who missed it. He didn't Expalin Shit really. He just wants to look diferent than everyone and look like he has more Knowledge about animation but... [ S P O I L E R A L E R T ]  Over three pages and people are starting to realize OP never gave his two cents on what good animations is and just fights everyone who tries explain it to him. |
LordLagann said: -KaneKo- said: He didn't Expalin Shit really. He just wants to look diferent than everyone and look like he has more Knowledge about animation but... [ S P O I L E R A L E R T ] Over three pages and people are starting to realize OP never gave his two cents on what good animations is and just fights everyone who tries explain it to him. In the original post, I said: How can people tell whether a scene is "animated well or not" when they, including me, haven't taken animation class? Meaning that I'm also saying that I too, don't know jack about what good animation is. I have agreed a bit with some of the things that AzureDaora has said. |
| People confuse it with other terms. You can totally tell the difference in animation when you compare Evil or Live's animation to something like FMA:B. |
 Three things cannot be long hidden.. ...the s u n, the m oo n, and the tr u th. |
| OP if it doesn't look like Toei did it, then you may have series with somewhat quality animation bearable to watch. Saint_Nepunepu said: Clebardman said: Edit: another good indicator of animation quality, is anything that isn't a female highschooler with a generic body type. Pay attention to horses or handdrawn cars when possible. (that is to say, in older anime, because a lot of studios nowadays simply can't afford or draw that.) Animation quality doesn't have anything to do with whether the character is male or female or in high school or out of high school, or what their body type is. Humans, animals and cars are all different aspects of animation that can all be animated well or poorly. Isterio said: Car movement or realistic walking cycles are a novelty most Anime and animation in general either don´t do well or don´t do at all. During most driving scenes in Anime it´s the backround that gets moved and most walking animation consists of around 4-5 unique moves. No, there is nothing rare or special about walk animations. Mechanical animation may have largely gone 3D, but 2D mechanical animation has barely even existed outside anime. For someone who claims to know his animation you don't seem to have turn on TV ever to watch cartoons. Cars, motorcycles, airplanes etc. are easiest to include in any series and create toys. Biker mice from mars, M.A.S.K, Bots master for starters do have 2D animation of vehicles and episodes mostly consist of those (how well they were animated is another thing). And if you watch a cartoon like let say Police academy you sure will see a police car or motorcycle. |
 |
| People dont actually care about it though. Most of them watch because they got nothing to do. |
"When you made this thread, I cried and screamed" -Swagernator 2017 |
| It comes down to the amount of movement, its consistency, how it's framed (camera-wise), how much detail is in the moving elements, and the overall aesthetic value of of it. |
 Click the banner for anime lists, discussions, reviews, and let's plays! |
| i would like to give my opinion but holy shit my defination of good animation dosnt go this deep as you guys are for me it is how it looks ,the movements,attention to small details and how well its blends with each other and the lighting effects etc and the camara angels thats it but nowadays most anime have good animation for me atleast. |
xxXHARSHXxxDec 10, 2017 3:08 AM
| They just mean the "art" of suddenly pressing pause in the video player. Probably. |
 |
TheHopefulOtaku said: Menzo- said: You've watched over 300 anime and you can't notice the subtleties in animation that sets different shows apart, I don't know what to tell you. "Subtleteys" Like what? I'm not talking about sakuga. I'll give a few examples. Just simple things such as, hair movement, hand gestures, walking, background movement (trees, other people etc), and all other basic interactions that people do everyday. When detail is put into those different areas it makes a world of difference imo. Edit: Also adding camera movement to this list. |
when ur about to have a refreshing sip of earl grey tea and someone says "traps are gay" |
TheHopefulOtaku said: Menzo- said: I'll give a few examples. Just simple things such as, hair movement, hand gestures, walking, background movement (trees, other people etc), and all other basic interactions that people do everyday. When detail is put into those different areas it makes a world of difference imo. Edit: Also adding camera movement to this list. None of those generic realistic movements look any different/better/worse than each other. I just edited my original post, where I proved this using examples, I suggest you check it out. Well it's probably more just the case that you don't have an eye for detail if that is what you genuinely think. You just keep on thinking everything looks the same fam, good for you. |
when ur about to have a refreshing sip of earl grey tea and someone says "traps are gay" |
More topics from this board
» angry sub only usersYorda_trico - 4 hours ago |
38 |
by Zettaiken
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» thoughts on Chinese anime? ( 1 2 3 4 )ryo-san - Mar 6, 2022 |
171 |
by sodaJar
»»
26 minutes ago |
|
» What percentage of anime that you've seen did you pirate? ( 1 2 3 )Ejrodiew - Apr 13 |
122 |
by neolucaman
»»
36 minutes ago |
|
» Reason versus emotion in the perception of animeRobertBobert - Apr 14 |
5 |
by TRC_Randy
»»
52 minutes ago |
|
» What anime can be considered "the Evangelion of x"?Eternal-Destiny - Dec 9, 2023 |
43 |
by AzafuseKingTora
»»
55 minutes ago |