GTx10 wrote:I've noticed the term "easier to animate" being throw around a lot lately. I fail to see how the Yamamuro/Takahashi style is not easy to animate. I don't think that concept even makes sense considering that we have seen highly detailed DB related material in that style move perfectly fine. All of this screams "change for change's sake" under the guise of "this will update DB's quality and reputation."
Which is another thing too... Who are these industry folks who "mock" / "dislike" DB's current style of animation? Does anybody have any links to these comments? Are these commentator's worth a damn to begin with that their opinion would/should matter? And if they are that important why don't they throw their hat in the DB ring and shut us all up then?
Moral of the story, I have still yet to receive any "good examples" of why DB as a whole should look like these modern anime shows or why it should adhere to anything around it? Because isn't it making a butt load of money as it currently is?. Come on people give me your best arguments and shut my mouth because none of you have convinced me that this new style is the "best path for Dragon Ball as a whole."
Battle of Gods (movie version) Looked and moved smoothly and beautifully.
F (movie version) looked solid.
Cooler's Revenge is a damn pretty movie and the character's move as naturally as their fictional world dictates. (Piccolo vs Sauza for example)
TLSS Broly was good looking from beginning to end and the character's were zooming about freely without limitation.
Bojack Unbound was a light show of colors and movement.
Return of Broly and Bio-Broly are stunning films that never feel clunky or not unique.
Fusion Reborn is a candy box full of interesting movements and visuals. Ones that even Toyotaro uses in his Manga!
WoTDragon is pretty to look at.
Shall I go on people?
They're been literally 100's of posts from people like Ajay explaining why Yamamuro's designs are hard to animate(basically it comes down to everything being so defined and rigid that there is little to no room for creating fluent movement).
Takahashi is just insanely detailed, and while his animation is generally exceedingly more pleasant than Yamamuro's because it draws from the old designs, the old designs themselves aren't exactly best-suited for creating extremely fluent animation, or at the very least, not as well suited as these current designs are.
Just because something moves fine under one style doesn't mean it can't move better, and I think that's exactly why these designs were bought on to create the most animated Dragonball film ever. Also, the people that criticise Yamamuro are either well known animators that worked under him like series veterans Hisashi Eguchi and Masaki Sato, or just huge industry talents like Yoshimichi Kameda(I would not be exaggerating if I called his work godly).
I don't know what argument you need made to you other than DB needs to look good and keep up with the times in terms of quality, something that's egregiously failed to do under Yamamuro's animation supervision for the franchise. The amount of money its making is irrelevant to the quality of the product, something that DB is lacking.
All the DB films you mention here don't hold a candle in terms of quality to what modern Toei can produce, and what baffles me, is that you don't want to see how good a modern DB film can be with the right creative staff behind it.
Why would you not want the franchise you love to be as good as possible? Why defend mediocrity?
Your argument is beyond me.
cuartas wrote:Don't like it, this approach makes a larger line between the art and the background, goku is just thrown in a scenario completely out of any consistency, just like ps1 games like resident evil, ff, etc.
And they are definitelly exaggerating with no shading at all.
Not to mention that it looks like goku was animated with that method (idk the name) where you draw on top of a real human model moving
Um, Its a preview trailer, all of the preview trailers for the big films didn't have any context to them, so I don't see the problem here, since it actually served to build up some form of hype.
Also, there is one tone shading during close-ups, so its not like its always no-tone shading.
And no, this was obviously not roto-scoped, I don't know where you got that idea? I guess the animation was just so good that you thought it was roto-scoped I guess?