images like this are the best argument for new-calarts, because if you have any semblance of pattern recognition, you can look at it and see that it is, in fact, new-calarts... yet it doesn't have all the usual "markers" that detracted latch onto, there's no big cheeck or a big bean grin... so how can we tell that it still looks so much like most of what's on TV right now, which we colloquialy given a name to? because an artstyle is more than just two or three traits, it's more than just "how mouths are drawn in this exact manner", it's everything from body shapes and movement to colors and lineart, down to trends in how things are shaped
you just feeeeeeeeel it
Just another of the many similar bullshit branches of Bauhaus like CalArts or Corporate Memphis: Reduce everything to symbols, make sure nobody can mistake the meaning of the message, art comes secondary to quick symbology because the point isn't creativity or entertainment, it's pushing the 'right' thoughts out to people efficiently.
Why can't people on the internet just admit they find an artstyle bad instead of trying to give it labels and hidden meanings?
>i find this artstyle bad >why? >because it does X Y and Z >hmm, i noticed many shows look like this, perhaps it's a style >what style >the style that [cartoon] and also [cartoon] and [cartoon] and [cartoon] and also [cartoon] all use, which is characterized by X Y and Z >hmm, maybe we should name it for ease of conversation >no! stop trying to label your observations!
It'd make sense if people just called it beanmouth or something, rather than CalArts, because then people go schizo about Commiefornia San Fan Søyjews making kids gay through the power of drawing kind of lazily, rather than actually talking about the cartoon.
Most of the time the creators didn't even go to CalArts, but people still make it about one particular school because all they know is the name.
It's funny to see people keep bringing it up, too, because the traditional "CalArts Beanmouth 'style'" hasn't really been the go-to cartooning style for several years now.
So you don't know how words work, do you? Do you also say "THAT'S NOT A HAMBURGR BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CURRENTLY IN HAMBURG" or "DON'T SAY 'ROLL UP' THE WINDOW BECAUSE CAR WINDOWS DON'T HAVE ROLLERS ANYMORE, SHUT UP SHUT UP!" or does it only apply to things that personally upset you, and as you've shown, you have a political and ideological connection to which nobody mentioned.
People observed that people who go to Calarts draw a certain way, now when people who didn't go there draw a similiar way, it's easy to say "it's Calarts" and people will get it
Even you got it, you're lying if you say you didn't, you're lying if you say you didn't immediately understand what Calarts is, and that if you saw a buncha styles one next to another you wouldn't be able to pick out """Calarts""" out of a lineup even if none of the pictures happened to feature a bean mouth
You just made a connection between this style and your political beliefs, which no one else ITT made, and when someone says "I dislike the color blue" you hear "I hate democrat voters!" or something, because you think everyone shares the same thought process you do. Respond to this post saying you didn't read if you like to get fingered in the ass by big men. You just go through life hearing things you wanna get upset at and then create entire headcanons of what other people think, don't you?
>Why can't people on the internet just admit they find an artstyle bad instead of trying to give it labels and hidden meanings?
because they need to morally justify their hatred for something
it's the same logic antis use
they have a grudge against some artist or artwork, so they come up with some moral reason to hate it
It's just bad, like the creative direction for a lot of cartoons is allowing yourself to be detached and not give a shit about your skill level.
Steven Universe is very flawed, but early on it felt like they actually gave a shit about doing interesting or unique drawings, even if they weren't always good. It came from a place of passion which I think matters more than being objectively good. The later run of SU got very boring and ugly to look at unfortunately and more closely represents what people think of when you say "calarts", many such cases!
Just another of the many similar bullshit branches of Bauhaus like CalArts or Corporate Memphis: Reduce everything to symbols, make sure nobody can mistake the meaning of the message, art comes secondary to quick symbology because the point isn't creativity or entertainment, it's pushing the 'right' thoughts out to people efficiently.
It looks very odd even in the comic. The bodies can be silly, but the real issue for me is that so many of the facial drawings are just repulsive. The art used to look a bit strange, but largely tolerable early on. Now, though...
There's barely any women in this manga. Baki's mom looked normal but died and Baki's girlfriend looked normal but stopped showing up because the author realized no one cares about romance shit in a story about men beating the shit out of each other for fun.
It looks very odd even in the comic. The bodies can be silly, but the real issue for me is that so many of the facial drawings are just repulsive. The art used to look a bit strange, but largely tolerable early on. Now, though...
dude they characters look wonky as hell but the backgrounds actually have perspective an look like any standard 90's Anime. Unlike cartoons where backgrounds are just like sets to paste characters on top.
if you can tell with a glance that it's anime, that means it's not special or creative. most western cartoonists either have their own individual style, or create different individual styles for each thing they make. sometimes different styles in the same thing. your shitty animu isn't great just because it looks slightly disfigured.
>if you can tell with a glance that it's anime, that means it's not special or creative
If I can tell it's western then it's not special nor creative as well. moron.
>Dynamic camera angle angle >Appropriate use of curvelinear perspective >Expressive body posture and sense of action >Uniform but organic line work showing high degree of control, with simplified but thoughtful placement of folds >Motion, mass, and force expressed solely through shape design >Full body drawing that doesn't break down into components like flash rigs >Naturalistic color palette with no neons or oversaturation
I don't need or want western cartoons to look like anime. I just want them to give the same level of consideration to these qualities.
It's called >art school gave me a master's degree for showing up
Which is unfortunately the case. Most art schools are run by idiots who value vibes and identity over skill and fundamentals these days.
The kind of portfolios animation majors have these days are fricking abysmal for all the same reasons. Holding students to any sort of professional standard doesn't fly and all the people teaching the classes are people who have little to no actual animation experience and have done nothing to practice, let alone teach any of the techniques and skills pioneered by all the old white men who came before them.
Pretty excellent. Every kid in the show gives off a different flavor of "weird kid going through growing pains" without ruining the cohesion of the style as a whole. It's the perfect example of needing to understand the rules before you can break them.
Because Pop Team Epic is very explicitly a shitpost gag manga, but despite that, Popuko and Pipimi have very strong character design fundamentals. You should have used Crayon Shin-chan as an example. Lot of the simpler, less detailed popular character designs from anime work for obvious reasons.
japs tend to go simple as a choice, after proving they can understand realism and details.
americans just use cookie cutter big eyes stuff because they are lazy are refuse to learn anything
>japs tend to go simple as a choice, after proving they can understand realism and details.
Old japan animators maybe
New japan animators mostly does it because 'simple' is all they know, like modern burgers animators
Cartoony.
I don't know what's the problem when Clarence have mostly the same art style as Hey Arnold. Aside from the eyes being twice as large, it's the same simple shapes for body and weird looking heads from both shows.
these characters have like 3x as many details as the op. Even the background looks way better and you can barely see it
What detail? It's a random mix and match of simple shapes and clothes. The same thing with Clarence. >Even the background looks way better
Clarence background was great too.
They aren't as strikingly weird, but still pretty ugly-ish looking still, all 90's cartoons were quite ugly, but even if they weren't ugly it would have the same issue, it's simple symbol drawing (graphics design/UPA/Bauhaus) and lacks perspective and volume.
>the use of simple shapes for their body and head are the same.
c**t, the character in the Clarence shot in the OP have fricking flippers for hands, meanwhile at least SOME of the Hey Arnold characters actually have fricking knuckled joints in their hands.
Elementary Style. It's the exact type of really basic art you'd see on a kids book found in an elementary school library or those PSA pictures plastered on a school or even kids hospital wall
I do love how a lot of the arguments regarding a certain style being "ugly" more or less translate into not being able to jerk off to it. Something like picrel probably fits some of the criteria of "nu-calarts" and yet people in this very thread have probably enjoyed stuff of her before.
Thin even linework with flat colors. If you mean art style it's Clarence's cartoon art style. Only art used for laundering money has an official name because they have to sell it to the masses and create fake value. Generally those pieces of art would be dismissed while the author is alive but lauded when they're dead, funny how this never changes.
What do you consider indie? There are still big studios doing animation, webm top was made by Kecskemétfilm, Cinemon entertainment released a movie yesteryear and one comes out toyear, Ankama just released Wakfu season 4, etc.
>What do you consider indie?
Personally, stuff made by, at most, fairly small (in relatively comparison to the amounts used in more mainstream affairs nowadays) teams and not backed by any of the major corpos. I know there's a shitload of gray areas, even within what I said, but yeah. Anyways, I did bring up the "at least half" part because of that.
But what european studios are "backed by any of the major corpos"? Unless you mean stuff like Arcane where an european studio animated for a USA property.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>But what european studios are "backed by any of the major corpos"?
That's kinda where I'm getting at. At least a good portion of it isn't.
3 months ago
Anonymous
So if it's not Disney and such, it's indie?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Long as it's not backed by Disney and other mega corpos, yes.
Soul vs soulless basically comes down to the care put into it. Even with a simple style like this, you can tell the difference between original and reboot by the colors, the expressions, the poses, the less stiff and yet more solidly defined and careful designs.
Having better colors doesn't even cost anything, so it's the easiest indicator of whether they cared or just said "good enough".
not good
images like this are the best argument for new-calarts, because if you have any semblance of pattern recognition, you can look at it and see that it is, in fact, new-calarts... yet it doesn't have all the usual "markers" that detracted latch onto, there's no big cheeck or a big bean grin... so how can we tell that it still looks so much like most of what's on TV right now, which we colloquialy given a name to? because an artstyle is more than just two or three traits, it's more than just "how mouths are drawn in this exact manner", it's everything from body shapes and movement to colors and lineart, down to trends in how things are shaped
you just feeeeeeeeel it
This honestly doesn't look that bad.
Why can't people on the internet just admit they find an artstyle bad instead of trying to give it labels and hidden meanings?
>i find this artstyle bad
>why?
>because it does X Y and Z
>hmm, i noticed many shows look like this, perhaps it's a style
>what style
>the style that [cartoon] and also [cartoon] and [cartoon] and [cartoon] and also [cartoon] all use, which is characterized by X Y and Z
>hmm, maybe we should name it for ease of conversation
>no! stop trying to label your observations!
Being intentionally vague so you can conveniently label anything you find ugly as "calarts" is not an observation.
It'd make sense if people just called it beanmouth or something, rather than CalArts, because then people go schizo about Commiefornia San Fan Søyjews making kids gay through the power of drawing kind of lazily, rather than actually talking about the cartoon.
Most of the time the creators didn't even go to CalArts, but people still make it about one particular school because all they know is the name.
It's funny to see people keep bringing it up, too, because the traditional "CalArts Beanmouth 'style'" hasn't really been the go-to cartooning style for several years now.
>the traditional "CalArts Beanmouth 'style'" hasn't really been the go-to cartooning style for several years now.
and what is that?
So you don't know how words work, do you? Do you also say "THAT'S NOT A HAMBURGR BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CURRENTLY IN HAMBURG" or "DON'T SAY 'ROLL UP' THE WINDOW BECAUSE CAR WINDOWS DON'T HAVE ROLLERS ANYMORE, SHUT UP SHUT UP!" or does it only apply to things that personally upset you, and as you've shown, you have a political and ideological connection to which nobody mentioned.
People observed that people who go to Calarts draw a certain way, now when people who didn't go there draw a similiar way, it's easy to say "it's Calarts" and people will get it
Even you got it, you're lying if you say you didn't, you're lying if you say you didn't immediately understand what Calarts is, and that if you saw a buncha styles one next to another you wouldn't be able to pick out """Calarts""" out of a lineup even if none of the pictures happened to feature a bean mouth
You just made a connection between this style and your political beliefs, which no one else ITT made, and when someone says "I dislike the color blue" you hear "I hate democrat voters!" or something, because you think everyone shares the same thought process you do. Respond to this post saying you didn't read if you like to get fingered in the ass by big men. You just go through life hearing things you wanna get upset at and then create entire headcanons of what other people think, don't you?
So essentially,
>Calarts=any design I don't like personally
REALLY helpful...
Define the word "helpful"
>Why can't people on the internet just admit they find an artstyle bad instead of trying to give it labels and hidden meanings?
because they need to morally justify their hatred for something
it's the same logic antis use
they have a grudge against some artist or artwork, so they come up with some moral reason to hate it
>new-calarts,
show came out almost a decade ago
Steven Universe and its consequences.
It's just bad, like the creative direction for a lot of cartoons is allowing yourself to be detached and not give a shit about your skill level.
Steven Universe is very flawed, but early on it felt like they actually gave a shit about doing interesting or unique drawings, even if they weren't always good. It came from a place of passion which I think matters more than being objectively good. The later run of SU got very boring and ugly to look at unfortunately and more closely represents what people think of when you say "calarts", many such cases!
Just another of the many similar bullshit branches of Bauhaus like CalArts or Corporate Memphis: Reduce everything to symbols, make sure nobody can mistake the meaning of the message, art comes secondary to quick symbology because the point isn't creativity or entertainment, it's pushing the 'right' thoughts out to people efficiently.
Damn this post is so stupid
but it is, cartoons are mostly symbol drawing.
Nobody in modern cartoons drop shadows, they are too "2d" for have shadows in the ground
What do you call this level of "art"?
Baki has such a statuesque artstyle that it becomes impossible to animate the characters without most of them looking weird
It looks very odd even in the comic. The bodies can be silly, but the real issue for me is that so many of the facial drawings are just repulsive. The art used to look a bit strange, but largely tolerable early on. Now, though...
Is there a normal looking woman at all in this manga?
Yes there is, but sadly she only appeared in one episode.
Clarence is a great manga, apparently.
>one episode
>Receive the jcm2 treatment
I respect that.
>one episode
2. She was in a flashback episode.
You're asking that in a manga where the men look like they were mewing every muscle fiber in their bodies?
There's barely any women in this manga. Baki's mom looked normal but died and Baki's girlfriend looked normal but stopped showing up because the author realized no one cares about romance shit in a story about men beating the shit out of each other for fun.
There's a normal-looking news reporter.
She gets raped on live TV by a giant caveman.
I don’t know I still like it
man wearing a mask of himself
Kino
A "Strong" level of art
Genius autism
Entartete Kunst
What do you call this level of "art"?
swing and a miss
trash
Hungarian israelite
What do you call this level of "art"?
Crayon shin chan is a kino
dude they characters look wonky as hell but the backgrounds actually have perspective an look like any standard 90's Anime. Unlike cartoons where backgrounds are just like sets to paste characters on top.
Mexican detected
Shin Chan shows technical art skill through the use of great backgrounds which american cartoons with ugly styles don't do
You'd be surprised what they can do with a proper budget.
I fricking love Shin Chan's style but I can't help but chuckle when thinking of picrel
2005 was the peak
Agreed.
"generic cutesy animu style but with lines sometimes misplaced to pretend it's not"
moron
if you can tell with a glance that it's anime, that means it's not special or creative. most western cartoonists either have their own individual style, or create different individual styles for each thing they make. sometimes different styles in the same thing. your shitty animu isn't great just because it looks slightly disfigured.
>if you can tell with a glance that it's anime, that means it's not special or creative
If I can tell it's western then it's not special nor creative as well. moron.
The only reason you could tell something is western is because if it's not anime style it usually is.
Can you tell what country this movie is from?
>Dynamic camera angle angle
>Appropriate use of curvelinear perspective
>Expressive body posture and sense of action
>Uniform but organic line work showing high degree of control, with simplified but thoughtful placement of folds
>Motion, mass, and force expressed solely through shape design
>Full body drawing that doesn't break down into components like flash rigs
>Naturalistic color palette with no neons or oversaturation
I don't need or want western cartoons to look like anime. I just want them to give the same level of consideration to these qualities.
color palette with no neons or oversaturation
tbf most recent anime have a hard time with this as well.
beanmouth
Good show, but ugly. More people should've given it a chance, seriously.
Looks fine to me.
It's called
>art school gave me a master's degree for showing up
Which is unfortunately the case. Most art schools are run by idiots who value vibes and identity over skill and fundamentals these days.
thats in the realm of fine arts
not anything that is supposed to get someone a job
The kind of portfolios animation majors have these days are fricking abysmal for all the same reasons. Holding students to any sort of professional standard doesn't fly and all the people teaching the classes are people who have little to no actual animation experience and have done nothing to practice, let alone teach any of the techniques and skills pioneered by all the old white men who came before them.
Entartet
shit
Kids cartoon. If you want "higher level" art you need to graduate to something else. Or get over it.
Pretty excellent. Every kid in the show gives off a different flavor of "weird kid going through growing pains" without ruining the cohesion of the style as a whole. It's the perfect example of needing to understand the rules before you can break them.
why is that bad when pic related is considered great, popular even?
Bkub is cool and internetty and uses the few drawings and positions he does well.
Because Pop Team Epic is very explicitly a shitpost gag manga, but despite that, Popuko and Pipimi have very strong character design fundamentals. You should have used Crayon Shin-chan as an example. Lot of the simpler, less detailed popular character designs from anime work for obvious reasons.
japs tend to go simple as a choice, after proving they can understand realism and details.
americans just use cookie cutter big eyes stuff because they are lazy are refuse to learn anything
>japs tend to go simple as a choice, after proving they can understand realism and details.
Old japan animators maybe
New japan animators mostly does it because 'simple' is all they know, like modern burgers animators
Cartoony.
I don't know what's the problem when Clarence have mostly the same art style as Hey Arnold. Aside from the eyes being twice as large, it's the same simple shapes for body and weird looking heads from both shows.
most Hey Arnold characters don't look as offensively bad as Clarence characters.
It's a shame Clarence has such an unpleasant, lazy-looking art style, because it's genuinely a very good, funny show otherwise.
It's the same thing aside from the eyes.
What detail? It's a random mix and match of simple shapes and clothes. The same thing with Clarence.
>Even the background looks way better
Clarence background was great too.
But it's not ugly.
none of these characters have the same appeal as the main Hey Arnold kids
which is a bold faced lie
They aren't as strikingly weird, but still pretty ugly-ish looking still, all 90's cartoons were quite ugly, but even if they weren't ugly it would have the same issue, it's simple symbol drawing (graphics design/UPA/Bauhaus) and lacks perspective and volume.
You would probably hate most anime besides hyperdetailed old stuff like Golgo and picrel
these characters have like 3x as many details as the op. Even the background looks way better and you can barely see it
Cartoony ≠ blatantly ugly
hey arnold gets an advantage from being hand drawn, plus the gritty urban look is more appealing than the soft playhouse aesthetic clarence has
hand drawn went out of style because its garbage though
No, it's because it takes a grueling amount of time compared to cutout animation.
>more time for less quality
how far weve come
it was already digital by season 4
I'm sorry, but if you think this image is comparable to the OP image you might be fricking moronic.
the main notorious difference is that it's Hand drawn vs digital, lines are super thing in OP but the detail and abstraction level is similar.
You want something even more simplistic and flat? PPG or Dexter's Lab.
Again, you might be fricking moronic.
you dont even know the difference between digital and hand drawn
and neither do you. your point?
nah i do
>googles hand drawn art and thinks hes an aficionado
thats you though
>gets btfo so hard his only rebuttal is "no, you"
ahahahaha holy shit
that's literally you though
It's just digital (clarence) and hand drawn (hey arnold), the use of simple shapes for their body and head are the same.
>the use of simple shapes for their body and head are the same.
c**t, the character in the Clarence shot in the OP have fricking flippers for hands, meanwhile at least SOME of the Hey Arnold characters actually have fricking knuckled joints in their hands.
It's still a simple shape for hands. Stop pretending Hey Arnold have some form of anatomy.
What exactly is wrong with a cartoon looking cartoonish?
All cartoons look bad.
That's why they're for children.
Elementary Style. It's the exact type of really basic art you'd see on a kids book found in an elementary school library or those PSA pictures plastered on a school or even kids hospital wall
a kid in elementary school would be a lot more imaginative than Clarence
proof?
bump
>BlackRock
cartoons
I like both styles. I sincerely feel sorry for people who cant enjoy more stuff outside of their comfort zone.
Where are their noses?
I dunno but the girl on the left is pretty cute
cute?
>it's a stealth east vs. west thread
>it's a stealth /ic/ vs Cinemaphile thread.
>people are made of cubes
fricking knew it
I do love how a lot of the arguments regarding a certain style being "ugly" more or less translate into not being able to jerk off to it. Something like picrel probably fits some of the criteria of "nu-calarts" and yet people in this very thread have probably enjoyed stuff of her before.
Why are you thinking about other anons jerking off?
why are you interested in his fetish?
You're the first person I've seen bring up jerking off, sounds like projection. I completely agree that We Bare Bears is soulless slop.
Implied here
and here
The years when this board was dominated by CNslop were dark days.
Thin even linework with flat colors. If you mean art style it's Clarence's cartoon art style. Only art used for laundering money has an official name because they have to sell it to the masses and create fake value. Generally those pieces of art would be dismissed while the author is alive but lauded when they're dead, funny how this never changes.
>"All iterations of ///"
???
The only things the west really has going for it these days (in terms of media) are CGI and a grand majority of indie stuff.
And being better then anime
Not even into much anime these days (a lot more into their own indieshit vidya/music scene), but even then I'd say that REALLY depends.
>the west
The west destroys Japan everytime
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't at least half of the Euro animated film scene indie?
What do you consider indie? There are still big studios doing animation, webm top was made by Kecskemétfilm, Cinemon entertainment released a movie yesteryear and one comes out toyear, Ankama just released Wakfu season 4, etc.
>What do you consider indie?
Personally, stuff made by, at most, fairly small (in relatively comparison to the amounts used in more mainstream affairs nowadays) teams and not backed by any of the major corpos. I know there's a shitload of gray areas, even within what I said, but yeah. Anyways, I did bring up the "at least half" part because of that.
But what european studios are "backed by any of the major corpos"? Unless you mean stuff like Arcane where an european studio animated for a USA property.
>But what european studios are "backed by any of the major corpos"?
That's kinda where I'm getting at. At least a good portion of it isn't.
So if it's not Disney and such, it's indie?
Long as it's not backed by Disney and other mega corpos, yes.
Ah yes, because every animated series in the west looks like the one in the top, right?
Relevant thread:
Soul vs soulless basically comes down to the care put into it. Even with a simple style like this, you can tell the difference between original and reboot by the colors, the expressions, the poses, the less stiff and yet more solidly defined and careful designs.
Having better colors doesn't even cost anything, so it's the easiest indicator of whether they cared or just said "good enough".
>drops the lashes
look how they massacred my boy
The chud magnet
Girl on the left is actually cute imo.
kimby a cute
Both styles have their ups and downs.