This is something that I've noted many times in Lion Guard thread's, but why don't more cartoons actually use different perspectives? Gumball, which I've cited before, always has the characters standing at a slight turn. You pretty much always see their body and face from the same perspective and it's incredibly rare for them to turn around or for the camera to show them from behind.
The Lion Guard, for all of its faults, shows the characters from every angle possible. They'll routinely switch the angle during some scenes to show what's going on from a different point of view. In this episode, Fuli runs out of energy and gets attacked by vultures. They could have easily kept showing her from the same angle, trying to fend them off, but they also showed her from behind as the vultures began to swarm her. It helped emphasize how defenseless she actually was.
Perspective matters.
I'm just going to go through the angled shots from this one scene alone.
Her POV back up at them.
Because if you showed them head on they would look like this
Standard slightly turned perspective that most cartoons employ. Note, I admire what they do, but I'm not saying it's necessarily high quality. It really doesn't look like her feet are even on the ground. It's like she was placed over a greenscreen.
>>81474822
Oh they don't look so bad
Zoomed back and elevated from image C. Note how the tree from image C is still there. It's consistent.
>>81474700
>thread's
You people actually go out of your way to type something incorrectly. It's amazing. All you have to do to pluralize a word is add an "s", but you go the extra mile.
Shot from directly behind her. There's a living tree directly in front of her and a dying tree directly to her right. If image D went on longer, the living tree would be in front of that rock.
>>81474904
Thanks for bumping the thread. I honestl'y dont give a fuck about grammar.
>>81474822
This is the case for many.
Some characters are just designed to be viewed from one or a few certain perspectives and can look odd when seen straight forward. So even if the show gets creative with their acting/staging, there are some things they try to deliberately keep to a minimum.
And of course some shows are just directed/animated in a pretty shitty way.
A more front perspective, between the living tree cited before and the dead tree.
>>81474700
Because it takes less effort anon. Isn't it obvious?
A rotated back shot from down by her feet. Showing off the living tree and the dead tree more clearly.
>>81474985
But The Lion Guard is a preschool cartoon. If they can put in the effort, why can't other shows?
The legends of Sideball
She managed to turn around by this point and is now facing the other direction.
>>81475032
Disney has lots of money
The Lion Guard is more action oriented than most other shows which are mainly sitcoms so the needs of the storyboard are different.
Unusual angles mean more work for the artists. They have to draw more complicated stuff than the normal 3/4 or profile views, and they have to put an effort into keeping the details consistent across all the shots from different angles.
This, too >>81475246
In a sitcom, wildly moving and dramatic camera angles would probably look distracting. They're more useful for action scenes.
Also, sometimes you've got cartoon characters that look just plain weird from certain angles, and the reference sheets for those characters may specifically guide the animators to avoid those angles.
Do you have a webm of the scene you're discussing? Alternatively, which episode is it from? Just curious to see how it looks in action.
Most modern cartoons use almost exclusively 3/4 perspective because it's easier to animate and stay on-model.
>>81475510
Just bear in mind this thread isn't about the quality of animation, just the use of perspectives.
This wasn't the scene being discussed, but since I used it as the opening picture, I may as well include it for good measure.
>>81476050
>>81476103
>>81476283
Thanks.
It's not TV-animation and it's CGI rather than 2D so it's somewhat different, but the Incredibles commentary had something to say about this scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvElQvrx7ns
They had to keep track of where each bit of food was at which point, and they had trouble with it. The food kept changing places between different shots (for example, Dash's broccoli moves on top of the steak soon after the three-minute mark). Nerds who freeze-frame movies notice shit like that, and the consistency errors bothered the Pixar guys too, so they kept fussing with that scene quite a lot.
Anyway, my point is that you can end up with similar problems and extra work when you switch the angles a lot. You have to focus some attention on the positions of the characters and the objects in the scene. And if you do everything perfectly, most people who see the animation won't even realize or appreciate the effort it took. They'll only notice if you fuck it up and end up with consistency errors (characters looking off-model from a rarely-used angle, disappearing and reappearing objects, characters teleporting around, etc).
>>81474700
>thread's
>>81474700
Lion Guard shows off the different animals and whatnot, I'd imagine.
Gumball is a comedy, so much of the show has them talking to each other and making jokes.
Plus Gumball has a large variety of character designs, the CG ones in particular are often turning so you can see all sides.
fuck i was just thinking about cartoons that dont overuse the 3/4 stage view and had a good example but i've forgotten it now
>>81474822
They look cute though
>>81474700
3/4th is a more comfortable view to see any cartoon character's features. Lion Guard still uses it often even if it's getting creative with the camera. Gumball is an extreme example because they're meant to look as flat as possible to contrast with the 3d environments and characters.
>>81474700
I really want to like this show but I can't get over the fact that the main characters presumably eat the people they protect. Their society is Rainbow Factory levels of fucked up but they never even acknowledge it in the show.
It just doesn't seem heroic when the characters uphold this structure.
>>81481045
Fuli talks about hunting and eating all of the time. It's just all of her hunts fail in the show for various reasons. She presumably eats them between episodes.
>>81481077
That's what I mean. It'd be like if every Justice League episode opened with people doing a mass human sacrifice to appease Superman, and then the episode just continued normally with them protecting the world as though this wasn't going on.
>>81481518
The pride lands are essentially a protection racket. The prey consent to being hunted under a quota system to ensure that they aren't ALL hunted to the point of extinction. The movie showed what happens when you allow people to hunt unchecked.
It's a shitty system, but it beats the alternative. Some die so that all of them don't.
>perspectives and Gumballs
oh boy. here we go again.
The main characters are also sparingly subject to other perspective views, but their artstyle specifically meant for them to be only viewed in one particular way.
>>81481871
Not that slapstick shows should require the elements to be viewed mostly from the top.
>>81474700
>why don't more cartoons actually use different perspectives?
It depends on their genre. Action cartoons will use different perspectives more often than cartoons that are mostly about characters talking to each other.
>>81481721
>It's a shitty system, but it beats the alternative. Some die so that all of them don't.
It'd be easier to accept if we didn't live in a society that moved past that. The characters in TLK presumably have the intelligence to recognize and cultivate nonsentient creatures for food, but doing so would go against the whole "circle of life" theme.
Every piece of worldbuilding only makes the setting more depressing, as it establishes that these aren't animals, they're just assholes.
>>81474700
At least Gumball is actually watchable
