Dragon Ball Super's new art style and animation

[emperior]

I wanted to talk about Super's animation/art, and see what you guys think of it.

Animation has been inconsistent in Super, while it was a lot more consistent in DBZ.
I also think the new art style is really bad, clearly worse than DBZ's: it looks like a 12 year old kid is drawing it on Paint.
DBZ had much better art and colors in my opinion, and art looked less childish and more realistic.
I don't remember DBZ having bad animation and art so often, especially not on important episodes.

If only Super was drawn like DBZ, then it would be much better and would actually feel like a continuation of DBZ.
Too bad Toei will never change it back because now it looks "fleshy and new". At least, if art/animation was consistent like in BoG and RoF, I would enjoy it a lot more.
Hopefully once Super gets dubbed and airs worldwide, Toei will have already polished more the bad art episodes.


Here's an example of bad art and animation:

Spoiler:

Was drawing Goku good that difficult? A deviantart user could do it, why couldn't Toei?

Here's a comparision between old art and new art:

Spoiler:

Even if new art Goku SSJ3 was drawn the best it can be drawn, it still wouldn't look as good as the old art one.

EDIT: With this example, I wanted to show why I think the new art will never be as good as old one. Here is the best shot of SSJ3 Goku with the new art I could find:

Spoiler:

As you can see, it has to do more with the colors/shading than with the art in general. I also know there were definitely also some bad shots of SSJ3 Goku on DBZ, but even when it happened, it still didn't turn out as bad as it did on Super, thanks to a superior art/shading/usually more mature drawings.


What do you guys think? Would you like if the art style was more like 20 years ago, or do you prefer the new art?

[Doctor.]

Those are cherry-picked examples that don't illustrate the quality of both Super and Z as two separate products.

[jjgp1112]

We've had this discussion ad nauseum. The animation in Dragon Ball Z was everything BUT consistent.




Need I give more examples?

[DBZAOTA482]

The 1995 shot from a movie which would naturally have better art/animation. The original anime series (especially around the time Goku went SSJ) varied significantly in art/animation style and quality.

I agree with Super's art/animation being poor overall, though.

[B]

That first shot where Goku is freaking out is clearly an inbetween shot. What is wrong with it?

[Rory]

I think people are forgetting that way more happens in Super. Like, the pacing is totally different from Z, which was filled with padding, re-used animation, and staring contests.
In comparison Super is downright ambitious, it squeezes in full fights within episodes, so obviously that's gonna have an effect on the animation quality at points.
But holy shit, really? People are using screens from the movies and comparing them to the new episodes? Welcome to Dragon Ball, guys.

[Ajay]

Dragon Ball, Z, GT, and Super are just as inconsistent as one another. Don't mistake that for one second. When Studio Live and Last House are handling the huge bulk of the episodes you're calling "realistic", you can't in any good conscience equate Super's animation to a child's scribbles. I don't know when you last watched Z, but a majority of it looks like this, this, and this, with only the really beautiful stuff peppered throughout some key episodes here and there. There's an animation guide on this very site that can give you more information on this. It's the result of a huge number of different studios working on the show; all with varying degrees of skill. There's no consistency whatsoever.

Super is absolutely no different. Lots of different animators who, again, all have varying degrees of skill. Here's a few comparisons for the first 15 episodes of Super that should give you an idea of how different everyone's drawing the show. Do love me some Vegeta:

Spoiler:

Honestly, I'd argue Super is probably more consistent that the previous series ever were, but these differences are simply a staple of longrunning shows. You're never going to get a consistent look throughout, nor should you really want it. Animators having the freedom to draw how they want can sometimes lead to very interesting moments. Maeda's work on Dragon Ball, for example, is nothing like the animation you see in other episodes, but it stands out in a positive way. If you had a unified look to every episode, I think you'd get bored pretty quickly. It's nice to see striking imagery, even if it strays from the norm. Super made use of this in Episode #11 to give a really striking look to quite a powerful moment.

I do think modern Dragon Ball animation has issues, but I think it's important to understand where to place your blame. Don't mistake unappealing character designs for outright bad animation. Yamamuro's character designs for modern Dragon Ball have come under heavy fire from fans and fellow animators alike. What's unfortunate about his designs are that, while unappealing on their own, they also look horrible if they're drawn even remotely off-model. That's definitely a big contributing factor to why a lot of the low-skilled animator episodes look as off as they do.

Here's a comparison between some older designs and the newer ones:

Spoiler:

There's a pretty stark difference there, and I think that might be one of the biggest issues a lot of people have with today's animation, even if they don't realise it.

I was so happy to see the animators for Episode 16 of Super ignoring Yamamuro's designs in favour of drawing far closer to how Dragon Ball once looked. There was a lot of praise for the way this week looked, and I think this was probably one of the contributing factors. To quote a post I made in the relevant episode thread, here's the differences that helped the episode look so nice: "A fully formed earlobe is something Yamamuro almost never uses. It was nice to see a return to fully formed ears. Likewise, the shading on the face is rarely done as well as it is here. In modern Dragon Ball, the shading tends to be a straight line up the cheek. However, it once dipped in below the eye to give the face some real definition. Very cool to see that, too. Of course, I can't go without mentioning the return of Vegeta's crazily pointy nose."

To illustrate this further, below are a few comparisons between Episode 16 and the latest two films. I don't know about you, but I much prefer how Super looks in those examples. It feels new, but it's also close enough to the Boo arc that it actually feels familiar.

Spoiler:

Your comparisons aren't very fair, and you really shouldn't use them. They're from the nonsense posts people made when they were upset over Episode 5. That episode was an exception to the rule; acknowledged by the staff for having an "animation collapse". Moreover, you're comparing frames with highly detailed fan drawings; that's not how animation works, at all. Animators can't afford to spend that amount of time drawing to that quality. That's a problem with the animation industry as a whole, and is certainly not exclusive to this series. Likewise, comparing a key frame from a movie with an inbetween in one terrible episode is totally asinine. You won't find any serious conversation if you attempt to use that as an argument.

In terms of lighting, tone, and direction between Super and Z, then yeah, there's definitely arguments to be made. I don't think Super uses mood as well as it could do, which I think is where many people are getting their "this is too childish!" complaints from. I don't necessarily agree that it makes it "childish", but certain moments of tension are certainly lessened by poor direction. This is ultimately to do with the director and not the animators, however. Again, make sure your blame is placed in the right place.

Super isn't perfect, but it's certainly not the shit show that the internet has attempted to make it out to be. Like any longrunning show, it has its moments of shit and it has its moments of brilliance. Ultimately, it has about as many ups and down as the previous series did. We won't know where it really stands for a long while.

Anyway, hope this was informative!

[dae428]

Bravo sir, I tip my hat to you. I was just gonna say the basic, "Dragon Ball Z had inconsistent animation too." nonsense, but you really went above and beyond.

[Lord Beerus]

We've been down this road before. Ajay has already summed it up perfectly, but my thoughts will echo his and many other in this thread. The animation in Dragon Ball, Z and GT was inconsistent as well. If we were to cherrypick example of a "bad shot" from DB, Z and GT, like you have with Super, there would be many examples.

[JulieYBM]

Well, shit, you saved me a lot of time, Ajay.

Anyway, I will say that very little of these discussions ever actually talk about the animation itself, just cherry-picked in-betweens or key frames. These threads are less "hey, this moves good" and "hey, let's all pretend a fan re-drawing is better animation!" What is there to learn?

[emperior]

Thanks a lot to everyone, especially to Ajay for the very long and informative post, which cleared my mind up.

I now understand my main complaints are not so much for those bad frames, but more for the colors, the character designs (in fact I noticed how Episode 16 felt FUCKING great, hope they will continue drawing that way) and for the art in general, which I find unappealing but that's my opinion and it might be also because I'm so used to DBZ art and I'm still adapting to the new one. Sometimes though, the art in Super was superb in my opinion.
What I wanted to say was, that I know DBZ's art had its many flaws, I watched it many times during my life and I noticed how many times Vegeta was poorly drawn and many other things, but anyways DBZ's art felt more consistent than Super's and even when it was poorly drawn it wasn't as noticeable.
If you see DBZ's bad shots, they were bad, I can't deny it, but they weren't as bad as Super's bad shots in my opinion.

I understand my examples were really poor but I couldn't find anything better on the Internet so I posted those comparision pics but those were more for example than for complaining.
I will edit my OP to clarify more why I posted those pics, though I won't delete what I wrote as I find it pretty stupid to change the OP, for this discussion's sake.

(Sorry if there's some grammar error, I'm not english mother-tongue. Also, if something I wrote wasn't clear, feel free to tell me and I will try to explain better)

[fadeddreams5]

it might be also because I'm so used to DBZ art and I'm still adapting to the new one.

No. The art in Super and modern DBZ stuff is just bad. It doesn't hold a candle to DB/DBZ.

Also, DBZ may have been inconsistent in the animation department too, but even at its worse, it never looked as bad as Super tends to (e.g. SSJG ritual).

[Doctor.]

No. The art in Super and modern DBZ stuff is just bad. It doesn't hold a candle to DB/DBZ.

Why, what's so bad about it?

Also, DBZ may have been inconsistent in the animation department too, but even at its worse, it never looked as bad as Super tends to (e.g. SSJG ritual).

The SSG ritual didn't have bad animation. It didn't have animation at all, pardon the hyperbole.

[precita]

I just dislike the way it makes Krillin look like a little kid.

In DBZ Krillin was always short, but he always looked like an adult. Now he looks barely any older than Trunks.

[fadeddreams5]

Why, what's so bad about it?

I'm just really not a fan. It's actually partially because of you that I realized I really don't like it. You photoshopped that pic of retro SSJ Goku and gave it blue hair. Before that, I thought I disliked the blue in SSGSS, but really, it's just the art in general.

To give some examples:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs

This:

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This:

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This:

Spoiler:

I am not an art critic, nor do I know the proper terminology to use to express myself here, but there is something wrong with the art in this series nowadays. Like, something missing. The designs and colors just feel...off.

The SSG ritual didn't have bad animation. It didn't have animation at all, pardon the hyperbole.

They were completely stiff with deformed faces. All while a blond Videl had a poker face. lol.

[Rory]

You're likely referring to how things aren't done traditionally anymore, the grit is gone because artists do everything digitally.
There's no grain, no inks, no natural looking colours. Everything is super saturated and vibrant, it all just pops a litte too much. Old Dragon Ball artists seemed to have a much firmer grasp on colour, and how it can be used to make an emotional gut punch when it needed to (like the Trunks scene). There's tons of scenes where the artists took liberties to enhance a scene using colours or specific art styles, like Piccolo's sacrifice going black and white, and each movie having its own colour palette (I personally associate certain colours with certain DBZ movies). That being said, we've not seen much from Super to see what tricks they use yet, but from the two movies alone, it's not exactly hugely impressive, it's just good. On top of that, those ink lines man, you just can't replicate that.
So I actually agree that old Dragon Ball is much easier on the eyes (though I disagree that Super looks like garbage, as everyone seems to tout these days).

[Lord Beerus]

Why, what's so bad about it?

I'm just really not a fan. It's actually partially because of you that I realized I really don't like it. You photoshopped that pic of retro SSJ Goku and gave it blue hair. Before that, I thought I disliked the blue in SSGSS, but really, it's just the art in general.

To give some examples:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs

This:

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This:

Spoiler:

This:

Spoiler:

vs.

This:

Spoiler:

All of those example you provided for Dragon Ball Z were from movies and TV specials which naturally had a higher budget and more production time to work with, in comparison to the video game cutscenes and commercials you used in the case for modern Dragon Ball which were most likely had little to no planning and were rushed because they were insignificant animations in the grand scheme.

[fadeddreams5]

All of those examples you provided for Dragon Ball Z were from movies and TV specials which naturally had a higher budget and more production time to work with, in comparison to the video game cutscenes and commercials you used in the case for modern Dragon Ball which were most likely had little to no planning and were rushed because they were insignificant animations in the grand scheme.

The first two are both from movies (Cooler's Revenge vs. Battle of Gods). The second two are from a special and movie, respectively (the latter should have the bigger budget!). The Gohan comparison, eh, but I could see SSJ2 Gohan looking like that in Super if there was ever a flashback scene. As for Broly, I just needed something that showed him with the icky green hair.

You're likely referring to how things aren't done traditionally anymore, the grit is gone because artists do everything digitally.
There's no grain, no inks, no natural looking colours. Everything is super saturated and vibrant, it all just pops a litte too much. Old Dragon Ball artists seemed to have a much firmer grasp on colour, and how it can be used to make an emotional gut punch when it needed to (like the Trunks scene). There's tons of scenes where the artists took liberties to enhance a scene using colours or specific art styles, like Piccolo's sacrifice going black and white, and each movie having its own colour palette (I personally associate certain colours with certain DBZ movies). That being said, we've not seen much from Super to see what tricks they use yet, but from the two movies alone, it's not exactly hugely impressive, it's just good. On top of that, those ink lines man, you just can't replicate that.
So I actually agree that old Dragon Ball is much easier on the eyes (though I disagree that Super looks like garbage, as everyone seems to tout these days).

Yeah, I guess that might be it.

[kei17]

As Ajay pointed out, Super's got the most consistent animation among the entire series so far. However, to me, the problem is how it's consistently true to Yamamuro's current art style which I strongly dislike. If they're good enough to keep the animation looking consistent, they should stick to something better instead. Their aim is wrong.

I prefer inconsistent animation as far as it has its shining moments that something consistent at a low level doesn't have. Z was too inconsistent, though.

inconsistently good > consistently mediocre

[JulieYBM]

Inconsistency isn't a bad thing. The bad thing is simply bad animation, like a lot of Ebisawa and Uchiyama supervised episodes were. Dragon Ball Super has something the first three series didn't, too, chief animation supervisors and multiple key animators on each episode. Dragon Ball Super has the problem of being consistent with Yamamuro's current designs, like Kei said, which in turn makes the series look terrible. Toma, Tate and Iseki seem to be the only ones really willing to break from those designs, which is what makes their episodes the best to look at.