File: file.png (598 KB, 704x530)

598 KB PNG

Fuck me, look at this. Maybe you think Yogi Bear is a terribly boring cartoon. Perhaps the original show had crappy, limited animation.

But good God, this is a nice fucking drawing. Gorgeous colors, wonderful brushwork on the backgrounds, strong poses, clear composition, appealing designs.

File: 5d54c4fb04cd2fe53bbd3717a(...).jpg (52 KB, 1024x576)

52 KB JPG

Fuck me, it's all so fucking ugly now. Even when they're TRYING to be pretty, they just shit it up with bad designs, even lineart, stiff posing, generic color choices, and boring compositions. So many of these designs could even work if they just used some line variation and didn't use perfectly circular eyeballs. Why are they always posed like those tiny artist mannequins?

File: 658548761.jpg (1.2 MB, 1700x2044)

1.2 MB JPG

It just sucks so fucking much. And it's not as if they CAN'T have these things in modern cartoons. I've seen glimpses where it's great. I think Wander Over Yonder was a fantastic-looking cartoon.

But like, 90% of the time, it's the same "I drag and dropped the model from the model sheet onto an existing background with too many colors and too many details" ass looking shit. Also, let's make sure to have 20 characters on screen, cause why fucking not.

File: 4353F3.jpg (736 KB, 1520x1532)

736 KB JPG

ASS ASS ASS IT'S ALL ASS

MORE CHARACTERS DOESN'T = BETTER ILLUSTRATION

YOU GOTTA ACTUALLY COMPOSE THEM AND DRAW THE EYE TO A CENTRAL POINT THE SAME AS ANY OTHER ILLUSTRATION

File: file.png (398 KB, 512x384)

398 KB PNG

So many cartoons have the same aesthetic as a fucking Cartoon Orbit page. Trash.

>>147830416 (OP)
based anon caring about cartoons. shame this thread will be killed by waifushitters

>>147830563
>Cherry picking specific scenes showing all of the characters
What

>>147830525
>>147830547
>>147830563
late 2000s was the low point of tv animation. The modern stuff isn't great but it is better than Johnny Test or Total Drama Island imo

File: 1716610026489.jpg (343 KB, 1080x596)

343 KB JPG

>>147830563
Some people put way more love into their shows than others

>>147831525
i dislike millennials but they do have a genuine passion for animation

File: 1731800556858.png (394 KB, 1080x564)

394 KB PNG

>>147831525
Total Drama had a message. It was Canada holding a mirror up to Hollywood and saying
"THIS IS WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"

File: Untitled.png (1.62 MB, 1012x762)

1.62 MB PNG

>>147831497
It's to put an emphasis that so much of what happens in modern cartoons is just clutter and noise. For half of these shows, these crowd shots are supposed to be emotional pay-offs, and they're fucking rancid, flat, stiff, boring shots. For the other half, the whole gimmick is, "WE HAVE A GIANT CAST! LOOK HOW MANY CHARACTERS ARE ON-SCREEN AT ANY GIVEN TIME!!! NONE OF THEM MOVE VERY WELL, BUT LOOK HOW MANY THERE ARE!!!"..

How cancerous. Just being able to draw well feels like a fucking commodity at this point. Look at these two Arnold covers. The left is a bit more crude, but has a strong perspective, composition, good shape language, readable poses, and a lot of personality to it. There are just enough colors to create a scene, but they're not using every color in the rainbow to clutter the fuck out of the scene.

Look at the right. Flat. Boring. Stiff. Ugly fucking expressions. All the characters are in their default color palettes despite it being fucking night time. Characters are in a generic "one arm out" pose. Fucking awful. Like they just dragged characters over from the model sheets and changed the arm and called it a day. Even the choice of characters is random and has no merit to it. The left is "all of the kids". The left is most of the kids, but a couple are missing and also here are random parental figures and here are random adults from the town and also the bully character. The fuck? This is the industry. Unskilled people trying to hit a deadline making random decisions and submitting shit with a "good enough" mentality.

Trash.

File: 1720113906877.jpg (257 KB, 806x992)

257 KB JPG

>>147831722
We need to go bakc to simpler time

File: 563563654.png (574 KB, 1469x544)

574 KB PNG

>>147831722
God, I didn't mention how even the logo became flat and boring. God forbid the fucking text allow to be skewed.

Even when the artists have a chance to draw something interesting, they choose not to. Alright, maybe the showrunner or shitty art director demanded that you guys can't use subtle stretch n' squash for your expressions. Maybe you're not allowed to change the skull shape very much even if you want to. Fine. But Jesus Christ, does that mean you HAVE to rely on the :T face forty times a fucking episode? ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU COULD JUST DRAW ANYTHING ELSE.

Modern cartoons are slightly more ambitious than Hanna Barbera in subject matter, plot, character and framecount (puppet rig cheats but whatever).
They’ve regressed in terms of character design, and color harmony (despite more colors available).
Compared to HB, flat direction is the same (unlike 90s), character acting ranges from the same to slightly better (unlike 90s) and backgrounds are still good.

File: 132117.png (524 KB, 663x366)

524 KB PNG

>>147830547
>>147830563
I have no idea how anybody can find these modern cartoons aesthetically pleasing. There's an art to crafting a simple yet elegant art style that has been totally lost. I'll give credit to that Moon Girl show but the art style is the only good thing about it from what I've seen.

>>147831768
Dear god that fucking )- expression triggers my autism. Bonus points if the pupils are going in opposite directions.

15 years ago we thought every cartoon on TV was going to be 3D-CGI but it turns out pretty much every cartoon on TV is 2D-CGI and looks like Family Guy.

>>147831850
Ugly rigshit on the left

>>147831547
What generation are you anon?

You'll get 10 threads shilling grubhub animation and you're gonna like it

>>147831722
>>147831768
>>147830563
>>147830547
>>147830525
Fucking this. I'd rather watch hardcore interracial porn than modern cartoons. Cartoon didn't exactly die with the switch to digital since there was still some effort back in the early 2000s but by the end of 00s there was no hope left.

File: 4535345342.png (1.09 MB, 1652x498)

1.09 MB PNG

>>147831817
Despite HB (And UPA) following sitcom camera angles out of limitation and necessity, they still focused on a strong art direction and aesthetic in order not to make it boring. These two pictures have characters with similar design aspects, but one is a good drawing and the other sucks. The left side probably has LESS frames of animation than 7D does, but still manages to look better despite that. They knew that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

You wanna utilize that $300k per half hour? Cut the character count, which means limiting the cast from the get-go. Simplify backgrounds. Allow for looser character designs instead of perfectly rigid tubes for arms and legs so the Korean slaves can actually make mistakes in their animation and it DOESN'T call for an error retake. Having an art style where characters are allowed to morph a little from time to time makes it easier to animate characters, not harder. Having to be perfectly on-model is torture and boring to look at.

>>147831951
>Having to be perfectly on-model is torture and boring to look at
I’m glad someone finally fucking said it.

Early Hanna-Barbera was visually appealing, I’m willing to overlook the limited animation for that.

>>147831907
The art style reminds me of pop-up books so it makes sense for the characters to move like rigs. I think it's one of the few, if only, rig cartoons that would actually look worse if it was hand-drawn.

File: wp7693173.jpg (635 KB, 2400x1280)

635 KB JPG

>>147831525
Beyond the Canadian imports you mentioned, there was Camp Lazlo and Gym Partner's a Monkey which were mostly ok-mediocre, but they looked fine enough visually. Flapjack, Chowder, Mighty B, and Secret Saturdays were pretty good and looked unique too.

File: 1718900458463.jpg (85 KB, 512x512)

85 KB JPG

>>147831907
A decade ago /co/ blamed Flapjack for the downfall of Western animation. I'm glad that over the course of 10 years they've shifted blame onto Foster's.

File: file.png (1.78 MB, 1390x762)

1.78 MB PNG

Look at this. The Beavers living room constantly changes little details between episodes, sometimes in the same episode. There are many consistent elements, but the background artists clearly used a shared layout as a guideline more than a strict instruction manual. As a result, they're allowed to tweak sets and layouts as needed to make shots work. Raise the ceiling really high for a giant character, or move furniture out of the way for composition's sake, or even just relocate some props and move doorways over just to avoid cluttering shots. Does it matter? No. Nobody notices it, because the JOB it's doing (presenting a readable layout for the audience and creating a spacious set for the characters) is WORKING.

Compare this to something like the Mystery Shack or the Owl House that has such rigid rules and layouts that MUST BE FOLLOWED TO THE T. And as a result, they have to re-use a fuck ton of backgrounds (often just flat shots) because they can't AFFORD to have the background artist draw more since each individual background is more time consuming to do vs. the Beavers home.

I know modern productions are hamstrung by certain elements. The layout department is gone. Background artists must now clean their own backgrounds, whereas before, that was a separate person. I understand that.

This is why I propose using this method of being looser with sets and allowing board artists to focus more on perspective rather than having to make sure existing backgrounds assets can be plugged into the file. The less work you have to do on each background, the MORE you get to put out. The less board artists have to worry about the background artist's job, the MORE they get to focus on excelling at their own job.

>>147831951
It would be a dramatic improvement to at least give us more aesthetic variety, and looser drawings. OK KO tried to play it loose but 99% of /co/ was out from day 1 because of how it looked.
>>147831983
I see what you’re saying but fuck I’ve always thought it was ugly in motion. First cartoon I saw on CN that offended me growing up with how it looked.

>>147832055
Flapjack won an Emmy for its artstyle

>>147831555
Yes. And visually TDI looked like dogshit. The writing was a cut above the standard canadian flash schlock of the era but the visuals sucked ass.

>>147831555
TDI's message was "please give us government money".

>>147832055
I like Flapjack’s more muted colors.
>>147832084
Modern productions have simpsons autism and treat everything like they’re shooting on a real life set with real actors with rules and shit.
And then when Steven Universe allows the artists a little freedom to tweak the characters all they do is make them stumpy/ugly and easier to draw.

File: A610A12C-A104-4398-A270-7(...).jpg (208 KB, 1280x720)

208 KB JPG

>>147830479
I like the episode where he kicks a lion's ass.

>>147831555
It was just a parody of reality TV anon. A fun one that clearly had some thought and care put into it, but that's about it.

>>147830416 (OP)
That’s what happens when you worship greed. You kill cartoons.

File: 123456.png (299 KB, 1110x627)

299 KB PNG

>>147832085
I admire Ian more than I admire OK KO. I know he wanted to do something special, but I think he either lacked the vision or the skill for it. To me, OK KO feels like it's copying the WORST aspects of AoSTH's art direction.

I mean, just look at the background. Why are they even following strict perspective rules? Why must it be cleaned up so statically with the line tool? Why are shapes symmetrical and rigid? The horns on the demon should be asymmetrical. All the eyes shouldn't be perfect circles. Enid's bun shouldn't look like the circle tool that was half erased. Rad's lower body should going outward more instead of being a tube.

It's those little things that make it look like people are drawing and designing with rigid digital tools rather than nice, loose handwork.

>>147831722
It's genuinely fucking jarring that an amateur drawing on the left that was probably mocked up in half an hour for a promotional release looks more visually interesting than the image on the right, which was clearly done professionally but doesn't even fucking attempt anything like perspective and half of the crowd has a stare that isn't even looking at anything.

>>147832073

It technically is (Pendleton and Alex's first true jobs in the industry)

File: Gg4ZwFUaUAAhye8.jpg (212 KB, 1920x1080)

212 KB JPG

>>147832073
Man, what did Foster's do? Wasn't even the first Flash cartoon on TV.
It's probably the first appealing looking show done in Flash, everything before looks either ugly or rough as fuck

File: 123424242.png (3.38 MB, 2498x962)

3.38 MB PNG

>>147832130
Steven Universe failed at the individual artist style because of a couple of reasons:
1. It wanted to be a more serious show. Crazy off-model drawings like that are best for comedies.
2. It would change art direction between SHOTS, even if draw by the same person. Things like Flapjack would look different between EPISODES, but not between camera cuts UNLESS it was trying to be funny for an expression or something (again, see 1).
3. Many of the drawings in later SU were just plain bad drawings. Even if Sailor Moon or DBZ looks different throughout their runs, all the drawings are still solid drawings. Same for most of Tom & Jerry, not including the later cheap Flash crap. There are many times in SU where characters just looked like shit even though two camera cuts ago, they looked decent. So it was always super jarring.

>>147832073
A decade ago was 2015 where all people were doing was bitching about Steven Universe and Rebecca Sugar being the downfall of animation.

>>147830416 (OP)
Gertie the Dinosaur, a cartoon from WWI, has better linework than pretty much any cartoon today. The problem is artists.

Wow someone who can articulate good takes who isn’t a fucking schizo it’s like Christmas.

>>147832333
Yeah nobody on earth hated Flapjack when it came out. They just hated that it led to a show that led to another show that led to an obnoxious fandom. You follow the chain backwards enough and you're at the early seasons of SpongeBob, and blaming that is sacrilege.

File: 1715634453556.webm (3.5 MB, 600x404)

3.5 MB WEBM

>>147832382
A single Winsor McCay drawing is better 100000x better than anything by HB or UPA.

>>147830416 (OP)
>We're living in an era where shitty HB cartoons made on shoestring budgets are more aesthetically pleasing than cartoons with a $300k/ep budget.

Hmm. Yeah. I can't argue with that at all, OP. I used to use Hanna-Barbera cartoons as the barometer for cheap, shitty cartoons. But looking at them now, they actually look a lot better than the stuff coming out now. And that's more depressing than anything.

>>147832459
People want something to blame for the corporate minimalist (formally known as “calarts”) style of modern cartooning and for a little bit that was Adventure Time but quickly that was revised as Flapjack because of production lineages. It’s not a knock against Flapjack per se but an attempt to conceptualize the moment of transition.

>>147832382
The problem is artist training, but this is a poor comparison. Winsor McCay was a star with a meticulous animation obsession. His contemporaries made crude cartoons that are nowhere near the level of art we take for granted. The equivalent would be like saying Kobe and Glen Keane’s Dear Basketball is representative of today’s cartoons.

While the artists aren’t blameless I think it’s far more likely that the executives are the bulk of the problem. They are aiming for the minimum viable product and that’s why they pick up series designed to be done as cheaply as possible.

>>147832852
The actual TRVTHNVKE is that unions have bumped up the cost of production so much that it’s no longer worth splurging, too risky. (And they want to be paid EVEN MORE).

File: ian-worrel-forest-concept-01.jpg (463 KB, 1920x823)

463 KB JPG

>>147830525
what the hell are you on about

>>147832073
It was the combination of SU and Adventure Time actually.

File: 1733481574635.jpg (632 KB, 780x1318)

632 KB JPG

I JUST WANT MORE WATERCOLOR SHOWS.

>>147832891
>Concept

File: dax.png (269 KB, 490x350)

269 KB PNG

Uh huh. Yeah, okay, OP. Uh huh. Sure. Yes, sure, OP.

>>147832130
First they made sitcom writers into cartoon writers
Then cartoons became sitcoms. With the same design philosophy.

File: bb2.jpg (740 KB, 3840x2160)

740 KB JPG

>>147832891
there's a lot of cherry picking in this thread. this background from the new Beavis and Butthead series looks better than any limited Hannah Barberra bullshit

File: Untitled-3.png (502 KB, 2860x626)

502 KB PNG

>>147832891
Nice background. Good first draft. I think most of the colors work, not a fan of the big cabin light on the right. And then there's our fucking character who looks like a sticker someone put on top of a lunchbox cover.

But if I were to tweak it using the existing layout, I would tweak it and have it really lean into Dipper. I would have the big tree root or log behind him be lowered so the dark grey bush behind is up against the white of his hat and makes it pop. I MIGHT relocate some of the mushrooms to put a bit more focus on him-- don't know about that one. I think the blacks in the background trees should be changed to dark greys, though.

If I were to change it with total freedom, I'm gonna assume Dipper is glum and push for a lower angle. I'd want to remove the sky entirely. A warm sky doesn't really invite the feeling of glumness. We can still get a light source and a spotlight on Dipper, but allow for more dark colors to surround him as well as making him feel small and isolated. But I don't know which exact ep this is from, so this could also be a bored Dipper, in which case, I would just make the small revisions from the first.

But either way, the character sticking out like a tomato stain on white is a fucking problem. At LEAST they should tweak his fucking color palette to match the mood of the background.

>>147830416 (OP)
Just go watch old cartoons or learn from the masters and make your own. Modernshit is smug and lame anyways.

>>147830416 (OP)
Here's the truth, anon. People don't care about animation, they care about "good writing."

File: file.png (1.1 MB, 570x848)

1.1 MB PNG

>>147833257
Also another edit. It's not perfect, but I wish they would at least TRY to play with the colors if they're gonna put so much focus on this forest with great lighting. I don't care if, "The sun wouldn't REALLY lighten up blues that much!" or whatever. Take some artistic liberty. Looking good is priority over realism. Tweak his skin tone so it feels like the sun is really hitting him. Just something. They're doing this digitally. It costs nothing to tweak this shit.

File: file.png (1.91 MB, 1200x900)

1.91 MB PNG

>>147833089
I like Beavis and Butthead, but are you kidding?

>>147833395
>>147833257
holy dunning kruger

>>147833344
They can get “good writing” from television, movies, books, comics, radiodramas, etc. Writing matters but the only source of the aesthetic pleasure of drawings moving is animation—which does, in fact, matter.

>>147833066
Cope
>>147833431
Cope

Keep spitting facts OP.

File: 1694875473638.png (808 KB, 1000x1103)

808 KB PNG

Why can’t modern animators draw?

File: 1715341796451.jpg (160 KB, 450x450)

160 KB JPG

>>147833395
>See guys, this episode is going to be a metaphor for alcoholism, so we're going to give Dipper jaundice
>Alex....why does your garbage can smell like poo?

File: 54354353635.png (306 KB, 992x380)

306 KB PNG

>>147832870
It's a top down problem where they no longer want to splurge, but also, if these artists were part of proper pipelines and learned from veterans, they wouldn't have to splurge. The ability to draw well would just be intuitive to modern artists if they actually learned from pros. Look at the difference between Glen Keane scribbling and the Thundercats Roar scribbling. These are both doodles by each other's standards. Glen Keane isn't TRYING very hard to do this. This is low-effort for him.

>>147833480
I don’t want to jump to conclusions as to ability but the output is definitely lacking. I think model sheet autism and ctrl-z ocd is a contributing factor.

>>147833492
left is a movie right is a tv show

So just to understand:
>Amphibia Sucks
>Owl House sucks
>Ducktale Sucks
And all the other modern Disney shit excluding Wander? Don’t blame ya, I can say though ducktales gets a spare for story, but art is a bit of a “eh”.

File: Untitled.png (368 KB, 752x492)

368 KB PNG

>>147833520
It doesn't matter. Artists in the TV industry should be able to SCRIBBLE at the same level as the Tarzan scribble. You really want to use the excuse that it being a TV or movie is why a fucking doodle can't look nice?

>>147833488
Stop being afraid of colors. Sometimes it's night time and sometimes a character's skin might be changed to grey or even outright blue at times. It's good. It's healthy. It's nice to look at.

i don't get the point of threads like this
they're pretty much the same as east vs west threads
is it just a hope that nothing will ever get better and that you have no desire to improve it?
like if you are an artist yourself you are basically saying you will never be good because you're not old, same as weeaboo artists saying they will always be shit because they don't have asian genes

File: file.png (1.78 MB, 1280x720)

1.78 MB PNG

>>147833535
Wander is one of the few cartoons that looks good 90% of the time. Gravity Falls, Amphibia, TOH, etc. might have good looking moments or designs, but it's sparse. Yeah, some backgrounds here might look okay, that monster design is neat, there's some nice colors there. But it's kind of embarrassing that they play a shot like thing during the credits as if, "HEY, NICE BACKGROUND, RIGHT? MUST BE A REAL TREAT TO SEE IT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HOLDING ON IT FOR THE WHOLE CREDIT SEQUENCE. YOU LIKE IT, RIGHT?". They're fucking TREATING me to good art as if it shouldn't be expected.

Compare that to Wander where the whole show is a visual treat.

File: theillusionofchoice.jpg (1.05 MB, 912x1903)

1.05 MB JPG

>>147833548

>>147833540
they're not scribbles they're storyboards. barely even storyboards. more like the storyboard of the storyboard. they have a name actually but i forget

either way, the point of either is to get an idea out of there. a movie has a higher production cycle, and yes they are venting better artists
tv shows however have tighter productions and more boards to be drawn. not to say you can't also have great boarders for cartoons

>>147833583
the top three aren't even art by the artists you're showing
the bottom is actually his art but you're also comparing animations so he also feels out of place

whatever you're trying to say here you're doing it bad

File: file.png (980 KB, 1600x1131)

980 KB PNG

>>147833588
>they're not scribbles they're storyboards.
They're scribbly storyboards. Clearly done by Glen who was at Disney for awhile and probably discussing with other artists some ideas for scenes they were all working and didn't have to be as clear as the other board artists working on Tarzan because only a handful of people would have to reference is vs. the whole production.

But that's the point. For Glen Keane, these are effortless scribbles that he can just do because he's experienced enough at drawing that he doesn't have to THINK about strong poses and anatomy. It just comes to him. The fact that these scribbles are considered "splurging and cost extra" speaks more volumes to the embarrassing pool of artists we currently have in the industry than anything else.

Like, really? We gotta pay extra for a cartoon showrunner who can draw?

>>147833548
>What is the point of aesthetic critique of a visual medium
Lol

>>147833548
Arguments drive engagement I guess

You actually went into effort explaining what makes something good and even SHOWING what makes something good >>147833257 speaking from experience, which makes this one of the better threads I've seen on this Hellsite.

Meanwhile anons are trying to say Asians inherently can draw better >>147833583

Please actually say something in these threads instead of telling us to hate things

>>147833548
>>147833670
You genuinely can’t conceptualize that hardcore fans of cartoons (illustrations in sequence) would have aesthetic opinions and want to discuss them?

>>147833646
glen keane is one of the best boarders disney ever had so obviously he's a cut above most artists
your issue is your lack of understanding of the limitations that come from different production cycles and pretending you know it all. go write a video essay. you'll fit right in


if you want things to be better you gotta do it yourself

>>147833704
is this a discussion though? cause you're just cherry picking and shitting on anyone who has different tastes than yours

>>147833716
You aren’t engaging with what he’s actually saying, you’re caught up in a thought terminating cliche “don’t cross streams between TV and Movies” when that adage has no relation to his point.

>>147833733
It is and I’m not whoever you think I am.

>>147833753
he's treating glen keane as an average artist and thats pretty retarded
cartoons made for tv and movies aren't exactly apples to oranges, but more like apples to pears. kind of similar but not really
meaning that you should probably compare storyboards from tarzen to a modern disney movie since its more of an apt comparison. and there obviously are things you can call out but you're not doing that. when you're picking out a scribble from a cheap show no one watched it is cherry picking. which is like comparing apples to cherries

>>147833694
You don’t have to hate something, in whole or in part, to criticize it and ask for better.
Modern stylistic trends are predominantly corporate decisions and the best way to affect corporate decisions is to get the audience to advocate for something else. OP is reasonable because he’s not asking for muh cel animation or muh on 1s 5-point shading autism, he’s pointing out simple things that could make television animation more compelling.

>>147833820
He simply provided an example of an artist who is skilled. Is it the ideal example? No, but it illustrated (heh) his point. I’m not a fan of extreme comparisons either but you could decide to engage with it charitably instead of getting into meta-discussion and off the core topic.

>>147832852
I think you can blame executive greed for decline in standards and knowledge, and the resulting cartoons are the work of the resulting workforce. It’s all relevant to the conversation.

>>147833916
It is relevant I only bring up the point because it is far more common for industry-criticals with low information to focus on the artists without mentioning the economic chain of decision-making. It’s also more useful because people are understandably defensive of artists but it’s pretty rare you see someone go out on a limb for Executive McMoneybags.

>>147833845
I think we just have a generation of insecure talent overcompensating by doing everything by the book–the "right" way not my way–making their work as clean and professional as possible and in doing so have paradoxically pushed away audiences by coming off as cold and alien.

File: RS Happy Helmet.png (1.08 MB, 796x902)

1.08 MB PNG

>>147833716
>I can't scribble that well! What do you think I am, a professional?!

If TV artists can't even match Glen Keane at his lowest effort, maybe we're just cooked then. But fine. Here's some TV drawings.

>>147834015
My biggest criticism of the artists is actually that they mostly stay silent on the decision-making that leads to cheaper cartoons and when they do advocate for something they almost exclusively focus on their salary instead of the product. The most charitable interpretation is there is a blacklist or something and they’re scared of standing out but it’s a real shame that they act as house niggas for massa instead of pushing for what SHOULD be a common interest between hardcore fans and artists. We ostensibly all care about cartoons.

>>147834058
there's the dunning krugger
idiots like you have some major issues
1. you think every drawing takes the same amount of time and effort
2. never understand just how many drawings an artist will make and how many will be good or bad
and 3. you don't understand that scribbles of masters are usually gonna be good because they're fucking masters. you need to understand that skill didn't take them seconds to draw, it took their whole life

File: Got me fucked up.png (469 KB, 695x677)

469 KB PNG

>>147834049
That is exactly why I am self concious as an artist, I wanna do everything perfect and the right way because Youtube "objectively bad" reviewers say you can be objectively good and bad in your art

>>147834096
don't listen to people who don't draw on how to be better at art

>>147834096
You can be more conventionally aesthetically desirable or less conventionally aesthetically desirable for sure. Both of those extremes have gray areas and range.

File: pang.mp4 (3.8 MB, 720x540)

3.8 MB MP4

gonna repost this webm i made for the cel aesthethic thread. this is a web show drawn in microsoft paint by one person. it might also have the best writing of any currently produced cartoon.
industry people are not the only ones to blame, because this also brings up the question why people who claim to care about cartoons only care to give attention(and therefore exposure) to the ones they like to complain about.

I think the most persuasive argument is to take it as a given that industry artists can draw well and leave it at that. Give them the benefit of the doubt, focus on the production realities coming from the top down (minimum viable product). If the artists are as good as they hopefully are they should be able to keep up fine and if the “they can’t” theory is correct that’ll become clear.
Focusing on the artists and their abilities just opens the conversation up to emotion and defensiveness. Give them the steelman and assume the best.

>>147834062
They might have a clear idea of their relationship to executives and at least part of an audience but all the other people in the supply chain might as well not exist, which is why they also feel so unappreciated

>>147834161
The indie space is growing but the industry is the big prize and if the ship can be steered we’d all be better off. I don’t think it’s correct to associate aesthetic critique with not being a fan, in fact I’d say it’s very much the opposite.

>>147834191
Most of the animators aren’t American anyway. They’d only need to keep up with more dynamic boarding.

File: 1719167787958.webm (3.81 MB, 640x360)

3.81 MB WEBM

>>147834224
plenty of recent industry cartoons also get ignored, how many times do you think the series in this webm was mentioned here?
pretty sure supporting productions closer to what you would want to see would be more beneficial than complaining about what you don't want to people who can't change it anyway. basically you are most likely talking to cartoon audience here, not cartoon creators. you have the power to introduce them to cartoons, but less so to make them change the industry.

>>147834397
It’s not an either-or scenario. Critique and celebration are both useful. Giving names and words to an issue people have is immensely useful in the information age.

>>147834397
Is this American?

>>147835051
Hungarian.
>>147834397
Celebrating Hungarian animation does very little for the state of the American industry, about as much as celebrating anime. (That is to say, not exactly zero but near zero). Should be celebrated regardless, but the idea that the better alternative to airing an aesthetic critique of American television animation in an ecosystem that can eventually reach the wider discussion/source (like “calarts style” caught on) is “praise this Jankovics cartoon”, is a bit silly.

File: Snagglepuss.png (60 KB, 247x286)

60 KB PNG

What a pretty schizophrenic thread you made anon!

File: IMG_9050.jpg (265 KB, 1170x752)

265 KB JPG

>>147834397
Lmao
>>147835459
This is one of the most reasonable and sober threads on the topic on quite a while.

File: John k kids picasso .jpg (94 KB, 1080x941)

94 KB JPG

Man media nowadays suck so much even John Kricfalusi's art is degrading.

>>147835498
I was never the biggest fan of his work but yeah he’s become a parody of himself.

>>147834093
>Can't use movie artists for examples
>Can't use TV artists for examples

Let's just fucking use stick figures at this point.

File: RS.png (1.1 MB, 1021x774)

1.1 MB PNG

>>147835498
Feels like he entered his Picasso stage a long time ago where he just wants to make crazy shapes and use crazy colors for his own enjoyment instead of what other people would like to see.

>>147835518
how about when you compare a movie compare it to another movie?

>>147835518
See
>>147834191

File: 1352837752014.gif (1.67 MB, 190x167)

1.67 MB GIF

can't remember the last time we had animation grads start a thread like this

The absolute peak of the “calarts debate” was when one autist galaxybrain figured out the problem was the name for the phenomena, and tried to rebrand it as Bauhaus. He got far enough that directors had to own the influence. I’d suggest another rebrand without baggage, my preferred name is “corporate minimalism” because that immediately strikes at the heart of the problem (and broadens it out to encompass the “grubhub” and “globohomo” artstyles). It’s more useful to paint this trend as an economic one, rather than having to defend a specific definition as slippery as “a singular style”.

File: file.png (2.51 MB, 1920x1262)

2.51 MB PNG

>>147835567
I also compared TV to TV but you totally ignored it because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Anyway, here's some of Dan Haskett's scribbles. He used to work on TV. Can we at least get some of these cartoon characters that have strong enough poses to look like this? Maybe we can cut down the cast so we can focus the budget on animated a couple of characters with strong poses instead of focusing on having eight characters on screen doing nothing. Does something like StuGo really need to be about six fucking kids going on adventures? How about we trim down the premise to be a girl and her mom or some shit. Be looser and more abstract with the backgrounds. We can even use digital puppetry if needed. I've seen nice animation techniques from Mercury Filmworks, it's not impossible to do.

If these artists were more talented, they would know HOW to cut corners and these budget restrictions wouldn't be an issue. CartoonNetwork showrunners did more with less at a studio that was notorious for not having much money at the time.

File: file.png (3.29 MB, 1920x1920)

3.29 MB PNG

>>147834191
You say that, but just looking at reboots of already cheap cartoons makes you question whether these people actually know the in's and out's of drawing. How is it that a low budget cartoon such as PPG cannot be replicated in modern-day? Am I supposed to believe that execs demanded it look worse or something? Why WOULDN'T the executives just tell them, "Re-use the fucking old model sheets, I'm not paying for new ones"? If it's really about cutting costs, wouldn't the latter make sense?

>>147835665
Are these people allergic to drawing thick lines and sharp edges or something kek

File: 1740962460073.jpg (14 KB, 259x194)

14 KB JPG

>>147835646
They would break the geometry of rooms to squeeze more camera angles out of one background!

File: 354654647.jpg (803 KB, 1544x3313)

803 KB JPG

Here's more evidence that artists now are just worse than the ones from decades ago. Your job is simply to COPY an already existing piece of animation and you somehow make it worse. The poses are worse, the colors are worse, the only thing I kind of like is the new yak design but it lacks any animation of the original so it still manages to be worse.

File: dana terrace.jpg (664 KB, 758x655)

664 KB JPG

>>147835646
dana terrace has a pretty good sketchbook

>>147835665
I think that executives look at what is currently happening and say “make it more like that”.
It doesn’t matter if you’re right or not. Optimal strategy is to call the bluff/assume the best of them. You’re far more likely to win minds if you aren’t attacking artists directly. If they really are flunkies they’ll have to go mask off or get squeezed out if the wider audience agrees that they’d like more (and Mr. Moneybags relents). I think in general they are not utilized to their full potential, but I can’t claim to know what that is and neither can you. Instead of telling them they’d drown, advocate to let them swim.

>>147835665
lets be real, no one wanted to work on that show

>>147833480
>Why can’t modern animators draw?
Because modern production companies need to earmark 95% of the budget to pay for producers, instead of animation staff.

>>147832238
You don't notice the different artists as a kid

>>147835764
But you feel it, or at least, I do. I am exhausted with the slavishly on model ethos. I’d honestly welcome the occasional derp cut if we could get a little personal aesthetic variety back in cartoons (just don’t be Steven Universe munchkin design flanderization pls).

File: file.png (1.09 MB, 1464x700)

1.09 MB PNG

>>147835722
She does, but unfortunately, TOH is following the art direction of Matthieu Cousin more than Dana Terrace. He draws nice, but you can tell there's untapped potential for pushing his art and he would greatly benefit having a mentor like we used to do in the pipeline.

I mean, just comparing his art to Dan Haskett's, you can feel that Dan's is on an elevated level of understanding strong silhouettes and shapes and making the most out of posing.

File: 22.jpg (155 KB, 496x640)

155 KB JPG

>>147835706
This is exactly what the book Drawing Comics the Marvel Way was talking about. The poses on the left just have that extra UMPH, they have more exaggeration and action in them, the anticipation and follow through is just plain better.

File: 1739896131058.jpg (64 KB, 648x486)

64 KB JPG

>>147835498
It's all in your head you're just nostalgic nothing ever happens it was always good/bad depending on how people feel right now

File: 1597944096429.jpg (113 KB, 1036x1114)

113 KB JPG

>>147835731
This is under the kind assumption that people in the industry don't just dismiss anything being said on "animation Twitter" and ESPECIALLY on /co/. These are the type of people who write horrid series finale and then go, "Why are people mad? Get over it, it's a cartoon" as a deflection.

But even so, Craig McCracken is still able to get a lot of production value with the SAME system that everyone else is working with. Had Lauren Faust's witch show gone forward, I'm sure that would've looked great, too. There is nothing they are doing that everyone else can't do. The only difference is that they HAVE the knowledge and experience. They don't have secret access to parts of the pipeline that other showrunners and art directors don't.

>>147832084
Angry Beavers had a legitimate reason for the inside to be constantly changing, since the house was literally just some garbage that piled up together into a perfect little house, so I always saw that as a running joke.

>>147835896
If you doubt the efficacy of consumer interest on executives then you’ve already resigned yourself to giving up. This board repurposed a term (with the absolute worst name imaginable, calarts) and was able to influence the critical conversation to this day. If the anti-establishment wing of the fanbase could get their shit together and stop making themselves an easy dismissal (retarded) and played smart by finding common ground and refining their arguments, momentum could absolutely be gained and we can get out of bad faith gridlock. I actually have faith that there *is* a normalfag sentiment under the surface that cartoons have been aesthetically lacking, if they get pitched a persuasive and articulable set of beliefs it could get the ball rolling well. Money talks, be it negative reactions and positive potential.
>Craig
He’s pushed puppet rigging in ways few do, sure.

File: Mr horse john k picasso.jpg (143 KB, 1080x1364)

143 KB JPG

>>147835543
His art has taken a turn after adult party cartoon ended. Still looks more appealing than thr beanmouth style any day

File: file.png (2.35 MB, 1267x836)

2.35 MB PNG

>>147835906
Nobody is looking for legitimate reasons for why cartoon sets will morph and change details, if your kid brain even notices them at all. If you keep it minimal enough and it works for the layout, you can get away with hammerspace and changing sets all day.

>>147835906
Rugrats is the same. Even The Simpsons fudges interiors when necessary. Realism is a limiting factor here to engaging direction. The goal is to be visually dynamic without being distracting.

File: 21432424423.png (93 KB, 612x676)

93 KB PNG

>>147835992
>was able to influence the critical conversation to this day
But NOT to the people who need to hear it the most. Many of those people just tune it out and pretend everyone who isn't their friend doesn't know what they're talking about. One of the only artists I know who is outspoken (on social media at least) about a lot of flaws of the industry while also still being in the industry is Aaron Long.

>>147833576
Yes, to me the talent of those folks are spilled and wasted for what? Some people who eat up slop? It disgusts me.

Look at I don’t Wanna be a magical girl just feels okay but it just drives from the folks who consume without thought

>>147830416 (OP)
SOVL

>>147836026
If you’ve given up already then your input isn’t very useful.
Consumer sentiment effects shit all the time, the sonic movie design as one large example, or Bud Light desperately rebranding back to manly beer for manly men. If the sentiment picked up steam, the right people will notice and start thinking/talking. It doesn’t really matter if there’s pushback initially.
Anyway, I’m working on some videos because that’s the best I can do to contribute to the cause, even though I don’t want to be public online at all. I’m sharpening my arguments and perspective as best I can, with a results oriented strategy. Can’t guarantee anything but I really do care and this is the best option as I see it.

File: 23534536.png (1.31 MB, 966x1578)

1.31 MB PNG

>>147836098
My input doesn't have to change the industry for me to share it. I don't care if it's dismissive, it's cathartic to me to complain about this shit in a sea of social media that is praising vapid garbage like "Pretty Please I Don't Want To Be A Magical Girl" or begging for more Adventure Time.

>>147835847
i like the left more

>>147836165
>I just like to complain
Wow you just went right out and said it. This is what I meant by people who agree with my sentiments making me look like a retard.
Anyway, have fun wallowing. I get it, but I see too much ground to gain to enjoy the bitching.

File: 5346363.png (327 KB, 590x380)

327 KB PNG

>>147836195
What's retarded is thinking that you're not allowed to be critical of this shit unless you have the intention of trying to change the industry. Not only is that fucking stupid, it's naïve. We have enough evidence that people in the industry don't give a shit about criticism and try their hardest to dismiss it. They think what they're doing is great and constantly praise each other for all their hard work.

They don't fucking care to improve because they don't think there's anything to improve on.

File: Goodbye CN.jpg (240 KB, 999x1293)

240 KB JPG

>>147836195
>>147836271
And keep in mind, many of these people are CHOOSING to draw like this. Even when they have no one over their shoulder, they still opt to draw the generic, static beanmouth ugly characters. Many of them like it, like a sick disease.

>>147836271
>The artists won’t listen
You’re thinking about the wrong people. The executives and money men are the prize.
>You’re not allowed
You’re totally allowed to be unproductive on 4chan, I don’t have a problem with you personally. I am regularly pigeonholed as a person who complains for the sake of it, though.
>Change the industry
My realistic goal is to contribute to the conversation, and if I’m lucky, better it. What happens next is out of my hands.

>>147836310
It's because the world is a panopticon. We're always being watched.

File: 1598041246478.png (412 KB, 1391x1335)

412 KB PNG

>>147836317
But then what is your realistic approach to change? E-mailing executives? Calling them up? "CalArts" already became a negative term about certain art trends and has been heavily mocked for years, but they're still greenlighting projects that use the style. These shows are all failing to capture audiences, and they're just scrapping entire animation divisions instead.

One of the few shows I thought had visual merit to it, Moon Girl, got marathon blasted by Disney never to be seen again because the writers dragged it down.

Most complaining is for the sake of it. People who kept going "UGH CALARTS BEANMOUTH" weren't trying to start a movement. It just happened because enough people who were complaining for the sake of complaining caught on outside the reaches of /co/.

>>147836165
I really hate this expression.

>>147836365
Step one is a series of videos. The very first video is actually “Everything I have to say about the Calarts style”. I have a few I’m in the process of writing now, hence my engagement with this thread. After that I have a few more ideas but it starts with seeing how the videos end up doing.

>>147836365
Make your own gothic satanist version of Princess and the Frog that the world has been waiting for for the past decade, and when you're the only animated series with a fandom, wait for the animation studios to copy you 1:1 as the MOSTEFFECTIVETACTICAVAILABLE

>>147836401
Oh and to elaborate, I actually advocate for a new term because “calarts style” is the worst thing /co/ could have called it and it’s high time that baggage was tossed aside.

File: Screenshot 2025-03-10 at (...).png (2.18 MB, 1623x913)

2.18 MB PNG

>>147830416 (OP)
HB's "backgrounds" are solid colors, meanwhile modern cartoons are beautiful, detailed backgrounds with furniture, objects and light sources; and characters today always are humans with FIVE fingers in hands, FIVE.

File: Untitled.jpg (765 KB, 2000x1494)

765 KB JPG

>>147836685
One shot of Scooby Doo kicks all of Steven Universe's ass. And that's a show known for being low budget and shit.

>>147836685
Backgrounds are the aspect of modern cartoon production I have the least issue with (actually this is one major aspect anime has been slipping on recently, lotsa phoned in photo filters). They can be a bit busy sometimes or incongruent (new South Park didn’t need to jump on the detail meme, cmon that kills the cutout vibe) but overall I’m unbothered and sometimes even aesthetically appreciative of the background trends.

>>147836365
Always see in social media all those posts "in job interviews", "the job market today", "I dont want be drug tested for start a new job".

I would not hire anyone who could confidently spend his entire life in social media 24/7

>>147836727
Where are You’s backgrounds are fucking GOATed though that carries the whole production and only Mook’s stuff compares in the Doo series. Walt Peregoy and his team absolutely killed it. I have a textural preference for hand painted backgrounds but digital has its own charm there.

>>147831768
I give Anne a pass because she has a lot of varied faces.

File: IMG_9052.jpg (1.29 MB, 1170x1145)

1.29 MB JPG

>>147836802
I mean holy fuck what a monster.

>>147830416 (OP)
>posts a HB still with a blank white background and a filing cabinet floating in the void
even bargain bin canadian cartoons like supernoobs look better than that

File: IMG_9053.jpg (626 KB, 595x801)

626 KB JPG

>>147836842
Peregoy headed Sleeping Beauty’s backgrounds too so you basically pitted a nuclear bomb against a coughing baby lmao

>>147833344
In Shadow has no dialogue and it's based.
Static animation with great writing is lame and will be replaced by AI first

>>147830479
That's literally shitty watercolor you dumbass. Go jerk of gen 1 pokemon while you're at it, you'll probably find better company that way.

>>147831555
The only message Americans got though were to be eternally attracted to western cartoon women with stick bodies but giant tits and ass.

>>147836271
>>147836310
>those pics
God damn it's fucking over

>>147832817
>the corporate minimalist (formally known as “calarts”) style of modern cartooning
lol the use of the "crapitalism" argument for why post late-2000s animation sucks despite the fact that even these animators hate capitalism and yet with all the support, backing, and whatnot still conceive and produce shows that look terrible.

File: IMG_20230702_212709_738.jpg (102 KB, 1245x1245)

102 KB JPG

>>147831950
>Fucking this. I'd rather watch hardcore interracial porn than modern cartoons.
This site is cooked

>>147830547
>SU in the GOOD example

You are fucking stupid

>>147833480
Post the comparison of that Looniversity shot done by the show itself and the Mex0n redraw

The one in the tub!

File: 1741648616003289.jpg (54 KB, 650x650)

54 KB JPG

>>147836685
Yet they look like amorphous cilenders and they cant stand consistent from shot2shot, and the women dont like like human females but androgynous drags, look at Garnet's legs, they look so detached, or that fashionista girl with the pachidermic legs in PPG2016

File: Screenshot_20250310_224256.jpg (418 KB, 1079x753)

418 KB JPG

>>147838130

>>147835498
>>147835543
He's starting to ape guy's style

File: file.png (494 KB, 1000x500)

494 KB PNG

>>147838061
I put a few modern examples in there to show that it's not impossible for a cartoon now-a-days to have nice looking moments.

I'll give credit when I see it. SU sometimes has some nice drawings and nice colors.

File: 1579469169677.png (600 KB, 1280x720)

600 KB PNG

>>147830416 (OP)
>>147830479
>>147830525
>>147830547
>>147830563
you sound angry

>>147838041
The person with the money makes the decision, and my point is in no way an attempt to squeeze an industry trend into a wider economic theory. This is a cartoon board not an econ board.
>>147838221
Lol
>>147838762
Tone policing isn’t an argument.

>>147831950
>I'd rather watch hardcore interracial porn than modern cartoons.

>>147835646
The thing is, it makes artists feel bad to hear that

File: 1bUywteJswltkkMA.jpg (37 KB, 720x484)

37 KB JPG

>thread is still going
I'm convinced that it's just 1 or 2 schizos posting ITT

>>147839747
Thanks for the bump.

>>147836271
This. Anon went to all the effort dismissing your point of view, appealing to a fantasy of using /co/ to communicate to the industry instead of with you, because you weren’t putting artists’ feelings before your own while stating your honest opinion and discissing and comparing their qualitative characteristics critically without flattery. The parts of this conversation that contain respect have been interesting, no need to shut it down.

>>147833066
>Actually unironically admitting you're part of the Idiocracy
Bravo, bravo. Anything else you want to share with the class?

>>147839779
>Anon went to all the effort dismissing your point of view
His point of view was not dismissed, but rather, acknowledged as being non-productive (which is not a value judgement or inherently a bad thing). He himself admits that his motivation is the personal satisfaction of a good bitch session. I got a little mental sparring and extra angles out of it, it served a purpose for me and him. No harm no foul.
>to a fantasy of using /co/ to communicate to the industry
Bad faith misrepresentation of my posts, this conversation is not an attempt to reach anyone, just part of information gathering and honing arguments and taking in perspectives.
>because you weren’t putting artists’ feelings before your own while stating your honest opinion and discussing and comparing their qualitative characteristics critically without flattery
I criticized the strategy as a tired and ineffective one to move the conversation among the anti-establishment wing of the fanbase towards effecting change. Once he revealed that his end goal was to enjoy a good bitch session rather than to move the conversation towards change, I moved on from that criticism, which obviously doesn’t apply to him.
>No need to shut it down
I’ll continue to interact with aspects of the conversation that I want to engage with, assuming the conversation continues.

>>147839862
>His point of view was not dismissed, but rather, acknowledged as being non-productive

Yes, I can see that. You presumed and dictated the productive purpose of the conversation when he told you from the start what he was about.

>I criticized the strategy as a tired and ineffective one to move the conversation among the anti-establishment wing of the fanbase towards effecting change. Once he revealed that his end goal was to enjoy a good bitch session rather than to move the conversation towards change, I moved on from that criticism, which obviously doesn’t apply to him.

But obviously I was also mistaken in my interpretation of your behavior, because the other’s perspective was eventually spelled out. Very well, thank you! Enjoy yourself.

File: 1624089694559.jpg (69 KB, 815x376)

69 KB JPG

>>147833480
No lust.

>>147830416 (OP)
>>147830479
The early Hanna Barbera cartoons from 1957-1963 were excellent due to Michael Maltese and Warren Foster's writing and Ed Benidict's designs.
They didn't became shit until the 1970s, and they were still much better then Filmation.
>>147831763
That has never been the case.
>>147831817
>>147832660
Not true.
>>147831891
Family Guy is still frame by frame ands still uses paper.
>>147831951
Cartoons are lucky to get $300,000 and only action cartoons get that amount, now of days they only cost $90,000 to $120,000 an episode.
>>147833480
The crew on top were force to do a Rick and Morty spin off no one asked for, just as a heads up.
>>147835706
TMS sued over this and having the rights stolen when their contract was still vailed.

>>147839954
>Not true
I’m >>147831817
And yeah it is. Just saying “nu-uh” does not contribute to the conversation. Give a proper rebuttal or be dismissed offhand.
>>147839954
>Family guy is done on paper
Sure and it sucks aesthetically. You can draw flat and boring composition on paper.

tl;dr, fuck off Famicom you poison every thread you post in and this thread was actually good because you weren’t in it filling it up with your production fanfiction.

File: Downgrade.png (291 KB, 417x922)

291 KB PNG

>>147835498

>>147840094
I always liked his girls, wish he got to make that girly rock cartoon or something like it.

>>147831525
>Better the Johnny Test
Wrong
>Better than Total Drama Island
Double wrong
Both of these shows were more expressive than a lot of stuff coming out nowadays.

>American Gen-Zers discovering that jews/executives are trying to dumb them down to feed them whatever garbageslop they'll readily accept out of not having anything else.
Thank God for the internet, huh gen-zers & millennials? IMAGINE if there was no internet , all you'd know is what you see on TV and what you'd see on TV is 24/7 of Teen Titans GO , but heaven forbid they ever play the original series. The recent chibi verse Disney show is painfully obvious that the jews are trying to control you and it's failing cause the imbeciles forgot about the internet which 1) zoomers care about TikTok & Youtubers, TV that's antiquated. 2) They can watch any show they want on the internet by going to some website.
Again it's the internet's fault for animation going down in flames.

2. Thank God CN was never my main channel and I never had Nick.
I instead had Fox Kids and a channel called Minimax which while for children aired some horror shows on it. For some reason toddler shows have much more competent animators and voice actors behind them so I never suffered from samefag voice actor syndrome like Tara Strong.
I did miss out on some good stuff though such as Men In Black, Extreme Ghostbusters and especially Roswell Conspiracies and Fillmore! But I also watched shows which nobody here knows about such as most Saban shows and some shows made in France & Germany that are more or less lost media now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtUhm7z5MLQ&ab_channel=Marius [Embed]

CN back then also aired a shit ton of anime shows. I also had Animax RIGHT AFTER Minimax which was the toddler channel. Imagine going from fucking Roly Poly Ollie to goddamn Trigun.

Jetix was also a good channel, but it immediately showed the lack of diversity in programming by overly focusing on action shows.
It used to be FoxKids+Jetix before they removed Foxkids and now the bastards removed Jetix ... then they introduced CN & Disney which had fucking live-action shows playing during the 2008s

3.

File: nlqIU1Py_2702172336141gpadd.jpg (59 KB, 540x800)

59 KB JPG

>>147840106
>>147840094
Yeah me too. John K is an asshole but damn can he draw cute cartoon girls.

>>147830416 (OP)
I don't watch new cartoons anymore since I'm an old fuck, but looking at the new cartoons posted on this board I can definitely understand why kids don't watch them that much anymore.

>>147840265
3. Which grown ass adult have you seen watching cartoons who isn't some shut-in freak?
People watch movies and unfortunately even movies took a massive nosedive after 2008. Study the economic crisis and learn about how writers used to be taught and selected. Learn about how these idiots are destroying every single industry possible.
Learn how CN, Nick, Disney are absolute dogshit channels but because of their global reach it's all everyone ever knows.
Learn how even a 60 million dollar TV Show like Green Eggs & Ham had less than 3 threads on /co/ on its premiere day and how nobody knows about it. Learn how everyone missed The Legend of Three Caballeros for months even years because it was stuck on an application

Look at yourself in the mirror at how you do things in your life and then imagine those same executives but 200x dumber than you.
Imagine having to hire people, but you don't know who cause 99% of you don't even read the credits at the end.

4. Animators who work on garbage like SU and AT are absolutely to blame cause that's what they KNOWINGLY sign up for. If they wanted to be different then they jump on a studio that worked on things they like.

5. Even when somebody tries to popularize and teach these dumb fucks how it's done , the dumb fucks are living in a stubborn bubble where nobody gives a shit and nobody wants animation to begin with and nobody wants anything to do with artistic pursuits.
Flying Bark Productions / Titmouse , why doesn't ""anybody""""(CN,Nick,Disney) copy them?
Toddler show productions such as the animation studio behind Bluey, why doesn't CN copy it?

Why does nobody here give a shit about Glitch Tech's excellent animation?

6. Gen-Z kids don't care about animation same way new-gen never plays with toys anymore.
So why do retarded companies still make animation? 1) They don't. They don't output as much as they used to. 2) They let anime and video games take their cashcow. Video games are doing better, ironically

>>147840265
Cool shit pops. Yeah the internet changed everything.

>>147840362
>garbage like SU and AT

They're called "Troony Tunes".

>>147840265
>Thank God for the internet, huh gen-zers & millennials? IMAGINE if there was no internet , all you'd know is what you see on TV and what you'd see on TV is 24/7 of Teen Titans GO

If the internet didn't exist, the cartoons shown on tv would probably be much higher quality than they are now, though. Computers and the internet have had a crippling effect on all forms of entertainment in ways most people don't even realize.

>>147840362
Other than Miko and the aforementioned animation, Glitch Techs just didn’t have much to engage with as fans. It was just kinda there.

>>147840417
Yeah, you really don't hear about this show outside 4chan and Jewtube. What CN, Disney and Nick needs to do now to stay relevant is release cartoons on YouTube and roll ads on their videos.
Nobody watches TV nowadays except old people, and old people sure as hell ain't watching Rock Paper Scissors or Oye Primos or TTG.

File: 1741631763994768.jpg (967 KB, 2544x2041)

967 KB JPG

>>147830547
Fixed because some of whats on the bottom is still shit.

>Sorry for removing the UPA stuff, their stuff slaps but misses the point for what this picture is supposed to mean.

>>147840466
Nobody under the age of 50 even subscribes to cable anymore. The only people still watching channels like Nick and CN are children being babysat by their grandparents or autistic 20 (and sometimes 30)-somethings who are still being cared for by their elderly parents.

>>147840501
I only have it because of my mother coming over

>>147840034
Theres no fanfiction here,Hanna Barbera cartoons from 1957-1963 kicked ass because of Michael Maltese and Warren Foster's writing and Ed Benidict's designs.

You can shit on 1970s and early 80s Hanna Barbera as much as you want but NEVER on 1957-1963 Hanna Barbera, even 1964-1969 Hanna Barbera is OFF LIMMITS.
Filmation is what fucked the animation industry, not Hanna Barbera, Bill and Joe did nothing wrong.
>>147840362
Reminder that Green Eggs & Ham: The Animated Series was nothing but bloated pay checks for Ellen Degeneres's friends to hawk about their work on her talk show, at least she paied for it put of her own wallet, at least theres that.

What a chinchy piece of shit that was.

>>147840501
Old people are fucking weird about cable tv and I don't get it. My mother is dead now but before she died the only things she watched were cop drama shows like Law and Order. Literally every single show she likes was on Netflix or some other affordable streaming app. But nope, she insisted on watching her shows with commercials on fossil-ass linear tv.

File: Debunked.png (157 KB, 800x620)

157 KB PNG

>>147840501

>>147840410
>If the internet didn't exist, the cartoons shown on tv would probably be much higher quality than they are now, though.
Doubtful hence in point UPA, CN & Nick's bobbleheads and 86s and 92s toy commercials.
Yes I understand why you're saying that because just like 86s it would mean there's a market for it cause kids would still be forced to watch TV, cinemas and go outside or play with physical toys instead of video games and watch Youtube & TikTok all day.


The Blu-Ray & DVDs sales would boom if there was no internet piracy. Back then VHS was expensive and it also looked like crap.
Imagine that if you wanted to fully watch a show then you'd have to buy the blu-ray or DVD.

Instead TV would be used to just show trailers, scenes and 3-4 minutes worth of episodes.

I remember back on CN when Genddy Tartakovsky's Star Wars kept getting trailers for MONTHS FOR MONTHS
and you know what the retards did when they aired it?
They aired only 60 second segments :)) after literally having entire schedules for it like it was a 20 minute show.

Later did they fix it, but I'm guessing somewhere INTERNATIONALLY the executives thought Genddy was going to produce a shit load more episodes and somebody had to really stretch & rip, tear & stretch the shit out of the episodes into 30s-60s minisodes so you can't watch the entire series in 3x20 minute episodes.

That would have been the future if DVD-players & DVDs were a thing back then and if DVDs weren't expensive to produce BACK THEN.
Same problem with video games who used photographs, but had no RAM to store full resolution pictures in so they quickly focused on morphing polygon animation and stylistic textures instead of just taking a photo of somebody's face and slapping it over. Same with the lack of bitmapping.

Thread’s over, the schizophrenic found it and now no sentient discourse can follow. Dang, that was a good run.

>>147840621
Theres no schizophrenic in this thread.

>>147840621
>Thread over, the schi-
You will never be a janny.

>>147840639
>>147840659
Debunked

>>147840362
Glitch Techs had shitty tweening animation, if you want excellent animation go watch Hollywood Plucky or Hooked on A Ceiling.

>They let anime and video games take their cashcow. Video games are doing better, ironically
Only Nintendo produced games are doing better, and anime is doing 20 times worse then western produced animation.

>>147840673
No, far from it.
Go touch grass.

File: IMG_9068.png (98 KB, 1540x1080)

98 KB PNG

>>147840711
>anime is doing 20 times worse then western produced animation
debunked from orbit

>>147840585
Are you a self-sufficient adult who willingly pays for cable television? If so... why?

File: Chowder.png (129 KB, 306x360)

129 KB PNG

>>147831763
>2014: hateful fart cartoon
>2024: oh my is that my heckin zoomer childhood show chowdah? I fuckin love chowdah

>>147840743
Money is meaningless if barely anyone is getting paid well, the products are shit and everyone is suffering at their job.

WE NEED ANOTHER JOHN K!!!! BADLY!!!! Except this time not a groomer.
>>147840751
I got rid of cable and moved to streaming around 2016'ish.

>>147840758
This is a schizophrenic post.

>>147839954
Thank you, someone finally gets it.

>>147840873
You're welcome.

File: IMG_9070.jpg (646 KB, 1170x1401)

646 KB JPG

>>147840776
>The products are shit
The hardcore fans, west and east, ostensibly disagree. Anime fans are far less doomer about the state of their medium, for good reason.

>>147839954
Holy shit, you’re way off.

>>147840987
I know, sorry…

>>147830416 (OP)
Scooby Doo had peak designs & backgrounds compared to Yogi Bear, with Yogi Bear pretty much going for that UPA style animation & design.
I wouldn't have minded UPA style as much if it was actually paired with good writing, but they ALL constantly used the same type of voice acting execution, same type of humour, even the laughtrack, same soundtracks, etc. with very minimal differences, it was like a hivemind just like CN,Nick,Disney nowadays. While the offshots are not remembered or at least not put into attention.
UPA was not know for bright colors and novel ideas besides simply simply not being Disney, all while opening a slew of new flaws to come.

Flash like this tries to copy UPA style vehemently. There's quite a few reasons why today's animators don't do a good job. (Ironically Invader Zim cost quite a pretty penny back then because Flash was new)
1) The program they work in doesn't promote them drawing keyframe by hand, it promotes Flash's shitty assetflip of puzzle-piecing together a character like how you'd animate in Source Filmmaker. You don't remodel and rerig your 3D model, do you? No you don't.
2) Animators who join CN, Nick, Disney know that they're signing up. People who agree to work on UPA productions agree that they're not working on Disney productions.
3) Nobody teaches them and the junior animators refuse to learn
4) Executives & HR allow it and promote it. If it was me I'd sue you for giving me a bad name over Twitter. Today's executives are retards who don't worry cause
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqbXHuLQ3w4&ab_channel=ANewKindofMagic [Embed]

7) Cartoon watchers aren't muslims who'd behead you for misrepresenting the PowerPuffGirls
7) The internet wasn't as popularized back then so studios & freelancers had no platform where to whine and act like retards
7) The internet & cartoons aren't taken seriously or else people would be more careful what they say online unless they want to get beheaded over a cartoon.

File: IMG_9069.jpg (83 KB, 1031x229)

83 KB JPG

>>147840982

>>147841030
Fake quote, read >>147841040's last post.

>>147841040
>If this was the case everything that come out of Japan will be like Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs to the T
Lmao, delulu. Anime fans’ aesthetic ideals are not TMS co-productions, Famicom.
>just like the time you posted an article from a Onion type/parody site
Bringing up whole other anons out of nowhere.

>>147841027
Decent take. Though I’d quibble with the statement they “refuse to learn” I think they’re just taught what is necessary for the job (make minimum viable product so number go up).

>>147841061
>Anime fans’ aesthetic ideals are not TMS co-productions.
YES THEY FUCKING ARE!!!! In fact they're the mother fucking gold standard for the whole country of Japan, Mononoke Hime changed it's entire movie from a family film to a adults only blood bath because Miyazaki had to play catch up to Animaniacs and if Animaniacs didn't exist Spirited Away, Howes Moving Castle, Ponyo, The Wind Rises and The Boy and The Heron wouldn't exist either.

>>147841111
I hope now, dear reader, you can see what I meant by “the schizophrenic has arrived”.

>>147833257
Dang... who are you? If nobody, you should be someone.

>>147841127
Theres no schizophrenic person in this thread, please go touch grass, it's clear that you haven't left your room since you dropped out of high school since this is how normies act.

>>147833480
these days they dont have a layout guy/gal to make it pretty, they make the koreans literally trance the digital storyboard

>>147841209
Even Japan just sends boards to Korea, China and South East Asia now of days since they're the ones paying for it.

>>147841209
Oof that makes sense.

>>147841382
Oops, sorry, meant to reply to >>147841356

>>147835763
:^) gotta pay those producers.

I've been part of a crypto DAO group lately and it's insanely accurate how these creatures think. They circlejerk in their little clubhouse yelling "MUH LOYALTY" , try to convince the retarded investors to take money out of the treasury (investors don't feel the pain until the treasury runs out and their crypto coin goes to shit) , they hire themselves to get more money all while hiring some freelancers to pay them 5% of how much they pay themselves to actually get the projects going. The more sensical pay their freelancers at least 50% , but rarely.
And they are indeed mentally retarded inexperienced people living in a cult-like mentality. They don't care for artistry, they don't care for common sense. And for fucks sake this is with cryptonerds, imagine what Commiefornians operate like.

>>147838198
Might be a touch too risqué for the project not that i’d mind but yeah that’s a better drawing.

>>147841166
Sorry meant to say I suck cocks because I’m a flaming faggot and this anon >>147841382
Is better than me in every single way.

>>147841415
Shut up schizo, he missed quoted.

File: IMG_9071.jpg (268 KB, 1170x529)

268 KB JPG

>>147841440
No, I didn’t. Bitch.
Your next post is “edited screenshot hurr durr” btw.

>>147841452
Yes, he did, don't pretend you're someone else.

>>147841394
It's ok, we all make mistakes.

Look at adult swim shows, netflix cartoons, and fox animated shite that isnt simpsons or family guy. Studios pay nothing for cartoon productions, they are all shoestring budgets. What I want to know is how long that has been a thing for.

File: IMG_8621.jpg (446 KB, 1096x1486)

446 KB JPG

>>147841459
And now, dear reader, we’ve arrived at the point where you realize what I meant by “no sentient discourse can follow”.

>>147841474
Family Guy costs $2 million to make because they have to pay Warner Bros and Universal to use Superman and The Minions on a regular bases.

File: Screenshot_20240114_01380(...).jpg (283 KB, 1100x1080)

283 KB JPG

>>147839954
True about Filmation. For being so historically relevant, Fat Albert has so many quirks, fuckups, and mistakes, and thats before talking a out it recycled animation as much as Scooby Doo did. It's like the inferior genetics of a DiC show crossed with HB reusing assets. Pic related is a face I've seen only once, an oddity.

>>147841494
Not true.

>>147841507
What is historically relevant about Fat Albert?

I’m convinced Famihamu64 and Guy are industry plants that sew discord among threads critical of the industry. They never interact with each other but they always disrupt the same kind of threads. One is a John K. worshipper who believes he’s fighting a spiritual battle through cartoon discourse and the other has a made up history of cartoons that turns Animaniacs and Tiny Toons into the epicenter of everything.

8) The industry is just plain dead. They're doing it out of incompetence, ignorance and dumbifying everyone including themselves and making special eds nepotism a reality.
If they were actually smart they'd do things differently, but they're too dumb and stubborn to try to change the environment or work around the internet environment.


And now about informing anons about those better shows of the 2010s and 2020s ...

https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/147432636/#147432636

And more novel ideas such as rainbow directing:
https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/147182935/#147192182

>>147841507
Thank you.
Early Dic did try and succeeded, it wasn't when Dic stopped using Japanese studios when everything fall apart, the TMS stuff was the bust of the batch due to said crew either being trained by Hayao Miyazaki himself (Toshihiko Masuda, Kenji Hachizaki) or worked with Hayao Miyazaki (Nobuo Tomizawa, Kazuhide Tomonaga) before he founded Ghibli.

Some were even though Osamu Dezaki/Shingo Araki/Aiko Sugino's unit at TMS, Dezaki himself was on Rainbow Bright with Tomonaga, Araki work on Inspector Gadget with Toshihiko Masuda while Sugino worked with Tomizawa on Heathcliff.

>>147841535
Between it being the first mainstream cartoon show marketed and oriented to african americans and its use of morals as after school-special preaching like a sesame street. Call the lessons outdated, say Bill Cosby was a rapist, but it was insanely relevant to kids in the 70s for attempting to entrtain and teach morals, like in a time when putting a fruity song at the end of the episode was genuinley cool and fun

>>147841559
That has never been the case.

>>147841570
Thanks for the effortposts and interesting perspective. The rainbow directing is an intriguing idea, FLCL (the original) was kind of like that.

File: IMG_9072.jpg (1.08 MB, 4082x930)

1.08 MB JPG

>>147841598
Being for black people has nothing to do with the quirks of the production. Sounds to me like you just wanted to push your meme chart again, Famicom. Your replies to yourself are so obvious too by the way.

>>147841602
Looney Tunes was nothing but rainbow directing and even Tiny Toons and Animaniacs did that too, we need to start doing that again.

>>147841559
Funny how there's no forward facing PR from the industry, why is that?

>>147841643
Theres been no self replies, but thanks for posting the unedited Cal-Art's character chart, we need it here.

>>147841570
https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/147432636/#147432636
Except for Futurama everything on that list sucks ass.

>>147841656
Just for you
https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/147830416/#147841739_1

>>147841776
Schizo posting.

>>147841643
Girl from Hamtaro isn't even the most important character in her own show.

>>147841647
I really like when a series gives more of a voice to the episode director for sure. Let shows have different flavors instead of all samey.

>>147841807
Yes she is, she in >>147840481 for a reason.
>>147841810
Indeed.

>>147841807
You just kicked the hornet’s nest anon. Duck and cover haha.

File: Spoiler Image (432 KB, 1170x2066)

432 KB JPG

>>147841816
Boo!

>>147841672
Yeah that’s a bit all over the place.

>>147841844
>Fake chart from that meme thread that had a bunch of 404'ed links.

>>147841861
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Laura%20haruna,Box%20ghost,The%20box%20ghost&hl=en

>>147841816
Saying that the generic loli is the most important character of the wacky hamster adventure show Hamtaro is like saying Nanny is the main character of Muppet Babies.

>>147841887
Still 404'ed after all this time.

What the fuck happened to this thread? It was good until TMSfag showed up.