cuartas wrote:It's the double standard I don't like at all
I'm not really sure how many more times I can explain this -- especially to you -- but Tate's work is rarely fundamentally broken from a construction standpoint, whereas Kitano's work
is, and you can see that right there. That's not 'style', that's a bad drawing.
Tate's art can be genuinely bad, especially during rushed episodes:
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]
This drawing is broken in a number of ways. Vegeta has an overly large head, colossal torso, and misshapen arms. Trunks' eye is straying off to the side of the face, too. That's not 'style', they're mistakes that make for a genuinely bad drawing. That's the difference. Same thing with your Kitano example - the construction of that image isn't his style, it's just... bad.
There are plenty of Kitano drawings that demonstrate his style while still being perfectly cromulent, if unappealing to me. I struggle to understand how yourself and a few others in this thread are apparently incapable seeing this when it comes to other animators. Not everyone needs to be an artist to see this stuff... it's pretty obvious. Going back to what someone wrote earlier: Uchiyama's drawings were very often broken, while Masunaga's were not. That's why the difference in response exists there.
Back to Tate, his work is drawn perfectly fine in the vast majority of cases and simply taken in a typically soft direction that apparently doesn't have mainstream appeal (see: Pokémon Sun & Moon). Again to pop back to other comparisons, Shida's work is flashy, angular, packed with detail, so of course it has huge mainstream appeal. It's easy for the average person to see that, easily digest it, and say, "Yeah, that's good". Anything that challenges you obviously won't have that same effect. Anyway... On to the drawing:
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with this drawing. He's opted for a half moon nose instead of the typical shape from the character sheets, but otherwise, it's literally just a softer take on Yamamuro's designs, and that's what you'll typically find from him, especially these days. For the millionth time, if that's not your thing, cool. Whatever. But for the sake of everyone's insanity, let's stop with the <insert expletives here> that's continually flowing at the mere mention of his name. It really isn't difficult, and after 666 pages, I'm blown away that 1. I'm still apparently responding to it, and 2. that the
same people feel the need to repeat their vitriol over and over again.
Amir wrote:Tate's art is mostly bad and it's a fact, no matter how good his animation is.
Bad art doesn't always mean badly drawn, it can also mean the character looks so weird and off model that you can barely tell it's him and it gives you the ''what the fuck is that'' look on your face. Tate's art also has a lot of weird facial expressions like the characters are on drugs/drunk or mentaly challenged.
This is so unbearably ridiculous at best, and horrendously embarrassing and inappropriate at worst. I strongly, strongly suggest you stop with wherever you're taking this.
--
The fact this conversation is happening is baffling. Not even a few weeks ago,
I posted about how all key moments must stick to the character sheets so as to adhere to the merchandisers' needs. The precious transformation episode won't be 'ruined' by Naoki 'The Devil Himself' Tate.
Put the conversation to bed. It's done. Thanks.
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]
She/Her 
[/spoiler]