How come 1940's animation looks way better than the shit we have in 2016?
>>81588077
Tumblr and CalArts didn't exist back then.
Because you didn't listen...
They taught fundamentals and not feelings.
>>81588077
It was made for the cinema. It had higher budgets and significantly less competition, so deadlines were easier in a lot of ways.
>>81588077
1940's cartoons had bigger budgets and more time. TV cartoons in general have to work a quarter of what theatrical cartoons have.
>>81588077
Because these were cinematic shorts to be shown in theaters and had animation budgets equivalent today to several millions of dollars for 10 minute shorts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDMQ3tXNKgM
>>81588137
What?
>>81588163
holy shit i did not know the animation was THAT good
>>81588077
Rotoscoping is for hacks.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$
>>81588077
You're comparing theatrical animation to television animation. Compare them to movies and the Fleischer toons look primitive.
Fleischer Studios was really the good shit.
>>81588077
Because studios actually animated their shows and had a set of standards without as many cut corners as today
>>81588291
>without as many cut corners as today
Anon, TV cartoons have been cutting corners since your parents watched Scooby Doo.
>>81588201
They're animated features to run before the movies, produced by Paramount Pictures through the Fleischer Bros studio. Same reason Merry Melody's exists in such high quality, pre-movie cartoons in the theater.
>>81588077
They had a batshit insanely high budget for the time, and historically when adjusted for inflation, and a seasoned and talented staff.
You go on /a/, and you see people mocking rotoscoped stuff, but Superman was rotoscoped and it looks spectacular.
>>81588077
Cartoons were made for theaters back then. They had a bigger budget and more time than cartoons on tv networks do
>>81588291
You just missed the hanna barbera era, didn't you?
>more frames = good cartoons
When will this meme end?
You can have an entertaining cartoon shot on 3s or 4s as long as it has good, solid drawings.
Unfortunately, few people bother to learn proper construction, and those that actually do are then stuck drawing the same well-constructed but generic Disney shit, because today's cartoonists sit and grow up watching other cartoons, taking their inspiration from that instead of the world around them.
>>81588512
/a/ only knows and gives a shit about weebie garbage, this people doesn't know nothing about animation outside Japan.
I've always hated how in older cartoons the characters would be bright and vibrant in front a pastel background the character drawing were obviously placed on top of.
>>81588537
It's not a meme, have you never seen the Thief and the Cobbler?
>>81588537
>4s
holy shit
>>81588625
>It's not a meme, have you never seen the Thief and the Cobbler?
Yes, and I thought it was ugly, melty shit that tried way too hard to mimic live action instead of taking advantage of its own medium.
>>81588663
But the Thief and the Cobbler didn't try to mimic live-action at all, and took advantage of the medium arguably more than any other animated work ever made.
>>81588663
>tried way too hard to mimic live action
>>81588537
>taking their inspiration from that instead of the world around them
>brings up framerate when nobody else has mentioned it
>argument isn't consistent over two posts
>dumb frogposter
Str8-up b8
>>81588705
The world around you isn't "live action", dipshit.
I'm talking about drawing real facial expressions instead of phony, stock "cartoon" expressions, not sitting and busting your balls nedlessly doing le epic camera angles and all of that other nonsense.
I was actually just watching these last night at 4:30 in the morning. Good stuff
>>81588077
Because they actually tried to make shit look fancy
>Rotoscoping
>tfw your first exposure to Superman was public-domain VHS tapes of the old 40s cartoons
I wish everyone could know this feel
>>81588766
>The world around you isn't "live action"
>>81588916
Lad, if you think you're living in a movie, you're more fucked than I am.
>>81588144
There are ways to make the quality better without additional cost.
The sophistication of cartoon has been thrown out the window for lazy character designs and bullshit/retarded stories.
>>81588705
Taking inspiration from real life isn't "trying too hard to mimic live action". Animation itself is the act of making something look alive.
This guy gets it:
>>81588766
Animating based on other animation gets you shit, like photocopying a photocopy. You don't have to make it realistic, but if you don't stylize it yourself and instead base your animation on someone else's stylization, it's gonna look worse.
>>81589005
>and bullshit/retarded stories
As opposed to "Superman beats up evil robots, the end".
>>81589005
>The sophistication of cartoon has been thrown out the window for lazy character designs and bullshit/retarded stories.
I disagree. It's just a different style of animation. Every era has them.
>Expensive theater short from a competitive era looks better than a 60 episode made-for-TV cartoon
wow......................
>>81589252
>competitive
here's our problem
>>81588077
It's really not that good. I mean it was amazing given the time but compare it to Beauty and the Beast or The Little Mermaid and it's worse.
It's not fair to compare these shorts to tv shows because most people didn't have televisions back then. These were made for theaters.
>>81588291
What?
They did nothing but cut corners back in the day.
Hell in the old Superman cartoon, they didn't want to draw 8 frames of animation every time Superman was to leap, so instead they just made Superman fly, which was half the animation effort.
They gave Superman the ability of flight so they could cut corners.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDMQ3tXNKgM
>>81588137
People didn't go to schools for cartoons. They went to schools for drafting and realistic drawing.
They took those abilities and applied them to cartoon styles. Every single one of them started by drawing properly though.
>>81588077
Because each episode of Flescher's cartoon cost them about half a million dollars. I am not American, but I bet today it'd be like more than a million each and TV today goes for quantity over quality.
>>81588163
That's a good guy. Promote that guy. Where's my new video though?
>>81589043
I would take the giant robot smashing superman over the retardation that is Teen Ritans Go any day
>>81589056
Style is not the issue, it's the quality of animation
>>81589765
>Style is not the issue, it's the quality of animation
And you're comparing theatrical animation to TV animation. If you want a fair comparison, use Kung Fu Panda or Zootopia.
Hey no matter what,
Be it the 1940s or the 2010s
At least it ain't the 1960s
When Hannah Barbara actually was the closest to decent animation.
>>81588077
That was theatrically released.
>>81588077
Because each episode cost over $100,000 to animate. That's about $1.7 million today.
>>81589802
Theatrical quality animation done 40-50+ years ago is achievable for a fraction of the cost of the garbage being shown today.
>>81589845
Huh? When did HB ever have decent animation?
>>81590116
>>81590071
Don't be an oldfag.
>>81590154
The actual animation itself was cheap/limited, but 1958-1962 had great backgrounds, character designs and voice acting to make up for it.
>>81588874
I know that feel, anon
>>81590879
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp6HCzW7AFo
>>81590116
It is not. It's gotten more expensive.
>>81590261
Modern voice acting and backgrounds are no worse. Amateurish character designs are a recent trend that bugs me, but not universal.
>>81589751
I'd be surprised if they cost half a million dollars in 1940. That would be around 10 million dollars today.
>>81591211
A single episode of ATLA cost 1 million, and that show only had really active animation for a few scenes each episode.
>>81591263
Right, but we don't know how they split the budget up. I would guess for the Fletcher cartoons, almost all the budget went to animation. Avatar, a good portion but probably not anywhere as much as the Superman cartoons.
>>81591211
Their initial quote was $100k per episode (to try and avoid doing it) but they got talked down to $50k, which is around $800k in today money
>forced animation
>good
I don't think so senpai.
Only cartoon I think does good animation (i.e. No noodle limbs) nowadays is the Venture Bros. It also helps that the latest season possessed fantastic backgrounds that you don't see often in TV animation.
>>81592254
>good animation (i.e. No noodle limbs)
you mean art style
>>81588142
This. Plus cartoons got color first so the visuals were a bigger draw.
>>81588077
Just do their animation, they paid them, went to the bar and brothel, took their dose of coca and did again.
They had no stupid and patethic manchilds criticizing per ridiculous detail of your work
And if some fucker was saying shit simply gave him a beating that left him silent forever because so things were done in the old good times
>>81590154
When it was compared to Rocket Robin Hood and 60s Marvel cartoons.
HB was mediocre but watchable, more than most 60s cartoons can say.
>>81591263
A single ATLA episode has about twice the runtime as a single Superman short and far more extensive VA work. ATLA also produced ten times the amount of content in roughly the same production period.
>>81588077
The Fleischer superman cartoon had an outrageously high budget even back then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkKjRr_zlxw
this is how cartoons use to be made
>>81588077
The Fleischer shorts were expensive as fuck, ESPECIALLY the Superman ones.
>>81588845
First of all, fuck you.
Second of all, was it really rotoscoping?
Third of all, fuck you.
>>81592254
>fantastic backgrounds that you don't see often in TV animation
There are a whole bunch of recent shows that have really nice background art.
>>81595199
Rotoscoping was used for difficult to animate segments. Apparently a lot of the lead animators didn't have backgrounds in figure drawing.
>>81595199
Rotoscoping was used all the time in the old days.
>>81588163
>Suddenly
IIIIIIIIIIIIII'LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE GOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE
>>81596129
>Apparently a lot of the lead animators didn't have backgrounds in figure drawing.
To be fair, the world of cartooning was still back then mostly made up of glorified amateurs. Even Disney used rotoscoping for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
That said, rotoscoping can still be a fun technique to use nowadays and can be absolutely valid as animation and an art form.
>>81588163
>B-B-BUT MAN OF STEEL AND BATMAN V SUPERMAN ARE FOR THE REAL DC FANS
>ONLY DUMB MARVEL DRONES HATE THOSE MOVIES
>>81596583
He kinda missed the point of the Krypton scenes; they're there to contextualize Zod and his actions, not serve as Clark's origin story.
>>81588137
the fact that this is the recurring attitude here shows me you guys don't know shit about animation schools. i've had many friends go to top tier schools and the program is intensive. you only get in if you have solid fundamentals, and then once you're in prepare for lord of the flies because the only way you get anything is by being better than everyone else. also 2 all nighters a week is normal, and this is standardized for people who spend all their time doing work, real hard worker types.
>>81589005
Simplified character designs can and do cut costs though. Stories have nothing to do with the thread topic
>>81588077
>LESS WHITE MALES
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Rotoscoping actually saved Chinese animation in the 1940s
>>81588077
The Fleischer Superman shorts had an absurdly large budget, even by modern standards
In fact the Fleischer were initially opposed to doing the shorts so they drafted their proposed budget to scare off the producers
>>81588163
Had to pause the video because I thought my eyes deceived me.
gucci mane @ 3:03
First of all, I'm gonna need a ratio of 1940s cartoons looking better.
Secondly:
>Fleischer Superman
That series had a high animation budget and used rotoscoping, so it had an unnatural advantage. However, despite the generous assets, the animation still looked frequently wonky. One of the glaring flaws of the show was how the semi-realistic character models would often morph into Elmer Fudd, chins and necks would merge, and people would move like gelatin.
Thirdly, looking better than most of the animated shows we have now is not a big achievement.
>>81588163
The guy who made this video is a /co/fag
>>81588077
The animation union is one of them. They raised wages on even the lowest jobs to the point were everybody is seeking artists from places like China or the Nam. On television it cuts back budgets, might be the reason why animus tend to look better.
>>81588281
This. Everyone talks about Disney, but WB and Fleischer Bros were GOAT.
>>81588625
But bro more frames: more money. The secret seems to be good drawings and using the best ones as keys. Again the Japs do this shit all the time, ever heard of the money shot?
>>81588537
Fucking this. In the olden days veterans trained artists not just in schools but in the production process. It's why Richard WilliAms was based, he learned from a lot of masters.
All I'm getting from this thread is that we need less TV shows and more shorts in theaters.
>>81588163
No one post this in a single BVS thread.
Those guys are already on so much alcohol that they had to put have "Haters will be reported and banned, stop trolling around." the op because they needed a hug box. >>81568731
I think this would just push them over the edge.
