Cartoon characters designs

[Jelly Bean]

Is it me, or does it seem like cartoon character desgins have gotten more and more simple over the years. I mean look at the detail on the faces and bodies from cartoons from the 80's and 90's compaed to the ones from the now.

http://i436.photobucket.com/albums/qq86/Storm71090/x-men-the-animated-series-x-men-315.jpg

http://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/_img/chars/char_3200.jpg

http://www.theraffon.net/~spookcentral/media/rgb_cast_ray.jpg

http://www.cartoonscrapbook.com/02pics/conantheadventurer01.jpg

http://img.webme.com/pic/t/theultimatejemsite/eric.png

http://www.hubworld.com/hubworld/img/shows/jem-and-the-holograms/jem-character-jerrica-large-570x420.jpg
vs.

http://www3.images.coolspotters.com/photos/496835/bridgette-and-heather-gallery.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5d/Maxima_from_Superman_TAS.jpg

http://cdn.static.ovimg.com/episode/60376.jpg


Is there a reason for this? I mean you see this kind of blocky design like in Total Drama Island alot more lately and even the better looking animation has simplitic facial and body designs.

http://www.comicbox.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/wwmhippolyta-amazons-1024x576.jpg

I was watching some cartoons from the 80's and 90's and a friend of mine said the more detailed look makes the character look ugly and "dated." Do you agree? How come the detail and quality in character designs have gone down over the years? The last cartoon I saw with detailed character designs was the 4KIDS show before the Fast Foward remodle. I mentioned before that during the turtles cross over movie I found the old school turtles more detailed and realistic looking than even the more serios 4KIDS turtles.

[Candy Kappa]

I blame Bruce Timm :P

[ThePickleweed]

personally, i appreciate the change. Most of the 80's and 90's designs were lazy copies of each other. duke looked like lion-0 looked like he-man looked like cyclops..........and you'll notice all of them were pretty poorly animated. but i think there has been a serious shift since the anime influence came in, along with bruce timm dominating the DC releases. Detailed designs are a real hinderence in traditional animation, and the proper route SHOULD be to have some simplified design that lends itself to the style and expectations of that particular show.

Alot of the change also has to do with the animation programs they use. you'll see a lot of stuff like foster's imaginary friends that's designed in a way to be successfully animated in flash. very geometric, very simplified, very designed.

IMO the best mix of detail and animation has been avatar. beautiful all the way around.

[Zany Orange Dude]

I honestly can't stand most designs today. Modern cartoons look a lot more lazy than they did back in the 80s and 90s. Now I am not saying they didn't have there crap back then, but I mean come on! Most cartoons now look like a drunk guy drew them!

[Candy Kappa]

think I have some long ranty rant somewhere in this forum on my stance about modern American animation designs.

so, to simplify it, I disagree with ya Zany.

[ThePickleweed]

I honestly can't stand most designs today. Modern cartoons look a lot more lazy than they did back in the 80s and 90s. Now I am not saying they didn't have there crap back then, but I mean come on! Most cartoons now look like a drunk guy drew them!

most cartoons then looked like a drunk guy animated them! have you seen some of those cartoons lately?

[TurtleTitan97]

most cartoons then looked like a drunk guy animated them! have you seen some of those cartoons lately?

I belive she was refering that some cartoons today look bad, not all. Like that show "The Problem Solverz", now that's a badly animated show. Even though the styles are different, that doesn't mean they are bad, it's just the artists' style, am I right Zany? :)

[oldmanwinters]

Simpler, more angular designs are easier to animate at a consistent level. That was always a big priority for Bruce Timm. By the time you get to Justice League Unlimited all characters look much more "toony" than the people see in Batman: The Animated Series. However, with the advent of digital technology and more rigid stylistic standards for animations, the JL shows have much more consistent animation than the BTAS show.

I personally prefer the more detailed character designs of the 90s, even if modern superhero shows tend to look much smoother in animation from episode to episode.

[Peanut]

I honestly can't stand most designs today. Modern cartoons look a lot more lazy than they did back in the 80s and 90s. Now I am not saying they didn't have there crap back then, but I mean come on! Most cartoons now look like a drunk guy drew them!

Really? Have you looked at how absolutely god awful the animation is on those shows? They're terrible. Not only is the animation choppy and ugly, but the character designs can't even stay consistent. Watch an episode of 90's X-Men and focus on the eyebrows of Professor X. It's a laugh riot. That show is a prime example of how detailed design can go horribly wrong.

[oldmanwinters]

Watch an episode of 90's X-Men and focus on the eyebrows of Professor X. It's a laugh riot. That show is a prime example of how detailed design can go horribly wrong.

:lol:

Yeah, I always thought those eyebrows were seriously messed up!

And everytime is Voice Actor screamed in pain it was just the most unbearable sound ever!

[Candy Kappa]

don't be dissing the eyebrows, the best part of the series :P

[SherlockJr]

I don't think the simple, stylized designs of today are horrible, but I do miss the more detailed look of the 80s and 90s. However, even those had problems, such as tendencies of becoming off-model and sloppy.

[Cure]

I don't see how anyone can look at the sh*t from back then and say it looks better than the stuff today.

[Redeemer]

To the OP
It looks like ur comparing two different styles, In the 80's and 90's most artist used a Western art-style, This is also why a lot of the characters looked the same. There is a certain formula for drawing Western style, u eventually develop ur own style, but certain styles for Western Artist r bound to look similar.

Many tv shows today use Anime style which I do not know nearly as much, bc I chose to use Western style personally, but Anime is a lot less realistic and more simplistic in most instances. Also most cartoons today tend to be Anime and that is why they look less detailed.

And guys lets not forget, all because a show looks choppy, is not necessarily due to the artist, but lack of budget or lead designer I would think would be at fault.

But an example of what I am talking about. Compare TMNT 2K3 to Avatar the last airbender. TMNT is a Western style, while Avatar is a Anime style. In Anime style the character tend to have big heads and Eyes, While Western tends to have more proportioned bodies. Another example is Young Justice(Western) and Teen Titans (Anime) (and most like Nick's tmnt)

I think the bottom line is that is comes down to what style u like in all honest....:ohwell:

[KROW]

I don't see how anyone can look at the sh*t from back then and say it looks better than the stuff today.

Considering most of that "sh*t" was prominent before you could form your first words means you have no valid argument on the matter. It does look better, but in some scant cases, it wasn't DONE better. There's a difference. Although I don't have some hatred for today's animation -- 90s Batman and its various WB spin-off shows are incredible -- it does display a lack in detail.

Also, picking out one show like X-Men for its flubs is meaningless when ones like Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer, Spawn, and even Superfriends from earlier on possessed better quality.

[Jester]

Part of me wonders how much of the difference can be attributed to a show being animated by multiple studios (I mean, how many studios did the animation on the Fred Wolf Turtles series?) and the fact that these shows were done before digital clean up and when things had to be mailed and changes couldn't be made as easily.

I do prefer the more detailed models, but the more detailed the model, the more likely a small missed detail could ruin the model. I'll admit to thinking "Uh, the models for The New Adventures of Batman suck!" when i first watched it, but then I watched it, and I got over it quickly. Sure Catwoman's model suffered, but Scarecrow was awesome.

I agree with Reedemer, it may be a preference issue. I prefer western style as opposed to eastern style animation, but I'm starting to respect both.

[oldmanwinters]

Part of me wonders how much of the difference can be attributed to a show being animated by multiple studios (I mean, how many studios did the animation on the Fred Wolf Turtles series?) and the fact that these shows were done before digital clean up and when things had to be mailed and changes couldn't be made as easily.

Well put, Jester.

That was a huge deal with cartoons back in the day. The studio would make all the difference. Some of the X-Men episodes still look fantastic to this day, while others can be an eyesore. Wild variations existed in just about every show from the era including Tiny Toon Adventures, BTAS, TMNT, and etc.

I tip my hat to TMS, the greatest animation studio there ever was and ever will be!

[Redeemer]

I agree with Reedemer, it may be a preference issue. I prefer western style as opposed to eastern style animation, but I'm starting to respect both.

Yeah thats same with me. I always preferred Western style, but over the past few years Anime style has grown on me. I like how shows like Teen Titans and Full Metal Alchemist use Anime style and exaggerate the characters to emphasize on the comedy in the scene. :lol:

[Jester]

Yeah thats same with me. I always preferred Western style, but over the past few years Anime style has grown on me. I like how shows like Teen Titans and Full Metal Alchemist use Anime style and exaggerate the characters to emphasize on the comedy in the scene. :lol:
I've been watching a lot of Dragon Ball lately. I'll say one thing it's consistent, though you can see the style change slightly between the 3 series.

[TheCanadiandrome]

Part of me wonders how much of the difference can be attributed to a show being animated by multiple studios (I mean, how many studios did the animation on the Fred Wolf Turtles series?) and the fact that these shows were done before digital clean up and when things had to be mailed and changes couldn't be made as easily.

I do prefer the more detailed models, but the more detailed the model, the more likely a small missed detail could ruin the model. I'll admit to thinking "Uh, the models for The New Adventures of Batman suck!" when i first watched it, but then I watched it, and I got over it quickly. Sure Catwoman's model suffered, but Scarecrow was awesome.

I agree with Reedemer, it may be a preference issue. I prefer western style as opposed to eastern style animation, but I'm starting to respect both.

I agree with you and Reedemer as well

[oldmanwinters]

I've been watching a lot of Dragon Ball lately. I'll say one thing it's consistent, though you can see the style change slightly between the 3 series.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of how they made all the characters look "shiny" as they went further and further along. The original DragonBall art style is my favorite visual look, even if the main characters tend to look a little too scrawny. The Saiyen, Android, and Perfect Cell Sagas are my favorite arcs of the DBZ era. The rest of the series is more or less filler... and perfect for parody!

[Jester]

Not sure I like Vegeta's GT model. There is such thing as too many muskles. :P

[TheCanadiandrome]

Not sure I like Vegeta's GT model. There is such thing as too many muskles. :P

Lol, as oppossed to the DBZ model? In any DB show they're way to muscled

[Jester]

Lol, as opposed to the DBZ model? In any DB show they're way to muscled
It may just be that DBGT is where I am now, and I've already forgot his design in later arcs in DBZ.... either way his neck makes me chuckle sometimes.

[oldmanwinters]

It may just be that DBGT is where I am now, and I've already forgot his design in later arcs in DBZ.... either way his neck makes me chuckle sometimes.

Yeah, nothing tops the original DBZ Vegeta design: semi-midget with noticeably red hair, scrawny neck, nerdy scouter, and tail wrapped around his waist like a belt.

The coolness scale on that design was well over 9,000.

[TheCanadiandrome]

It may just be that DBGT is where I am now, and I've already forgot his design in later arcs in DBZ.... either way his neck makes me chuckle sometimes.

Lol. I gotta see some DBGT then.

[ThePickleweed]

So you grew up with Jem, Real Ghostbusters, G.I. Joe, Superfriends, and Thundarr? If not, did you watch them? If not, you have no argument. If so, why call them, "sh*t"? X-Men alone does not count to debate animation quality compared to the style of programs that surfaced after 2001.

look, i grew up with all of that, hold it dear to my heart still, and can assuredly say most of it was - garbage. some hold up well, but honestly not many.

as a whole, 80's cartoons are more vinegar than wine. if youve watched any of it within the last 10 years (save ghostbusters, voltron, and occasionally robotech) there is no way that you could argue that its ANIMATED better than anything the 90's offered. batman, x-men, animaniacs, tiny toons, any of the disney shows ALL destroyed them on an animation level, and IMO an asthetic level as well. i can still enjoy ducktales, i tried to enjoy transformers again and couldnt.

[TheCanadiandrome]

look, i grew up with all of that, hold it dear to my heart still, and can assuredly say most of it was - garbage. some hold up well, but honestly not many.

as a whole, 80's cartoons are more vinegar than wine. if youve watched any of it within the last 10 years (save ghostbusters, voltron, and occasionally robotech) there is no way that you could argue that its ANIMATED better than anything the 90's offered. batman, x-men, animaniacs, tiny toons, any of the disney shows ALL destroyed them on an animation level, and IMO an asthetic level as well. i can still enjoy ducktales, i tried to enjoy transformers again and couldnt.
See I loved all that also

[KROW]

look, i grew up with all of that, hold it dear to my heart still, and can assuredly say most of it was - garbage. some hold up well, but honestly not many.

as a whole, 80's cartoons are more vinegar than wine. if youve watched any of it within the last 10 years (save ghostbusters, voltron, and occasionally robotech) there is no way that you could argue that its ANIMATED better than anything the 90's offered. batman, x-men, animaniacs, tiny toons, any of the disney shows ALL destroyed them on an animation level, and IMO an asthetic level as well. i can still enjoy ducktales, i tried to enjoy transformers again and couldnt.

Though I disagree that most of it was garbage, I do agree that as the years went by, the process of animation got better. The use of advanced computers made it much easier for animators to meet deadlines, which in turn allowed them more time to do touch-ups on anything that was missed.

Watching Generation 1 Transformers, and other shows that dominated television like G.I. Joe and Centurions, I can appreciate the grittiness and the effort put into them, even with the occasional mistakes.

[Jester]

I can appreciate the grittiness and the effort put into them, even with the occasional mistakes.
I can understand that, but really "occasional mistakes"? The FW TMNT had at least 1 per episode. :P

[oldmanwinters]

I can understand that, but really "occasional mistakes"? The FW TMNT had at least 1 per episode. :P

I'm almost of the opinion that TMNT animators intentionally made mistakes as an inside joke. Some of them are just so bad you have attribute it to a complete lack of supervision or an inside conspiracy.

:tlol:

[TheCanadiandrome]

Though I disagree that most of it was garbage, I do agree that as the years went by, the process of animation got better. The use of advanced computers made it much easier for animators to meet deadlines, which in turn allowed them more time to do touch-ups on anything that was missed.

Watching Generation 1 Transformers, and other shows that dominated television like G.I. Joe and Centurions, I can appreciate the grittiness and the effort put into them, even with the occasional mistakes.

Watching the transitions from 80s style to 90s style and into the latest decade has been interesting. Im partial to the old school but I dig the newer styles as well

[KROW]

I can understand that, but really "occasional mistakes"? The FW TMNT had at least 1 per episode. :P

Ugh, I know. But I figure, this being a TMNT forum, it deserves a pass... Maybe?

[ThePickleweed]

Though I disagree that most of it was garbage, I do agree that as the years went by, the process of animation got better. The use of advanced computers made it much easier for animators to meet deadlines, which in turn allowed them more time to do touch-ups on anything that was missed.

Watching Generation 1 Transformers, and other shows that dominated television like G.I. Joe and Centurions, I can appreciate the grittiness and the effort put into them, even with the occasional mistakes.

c'mon now, animation had been around since the 30's and the stuff out of warner and disney back in the 50's SMOKED the 80's cartoons in animation quality. it wasnt that they were working out the kinks of a new medium, they were working out the kinks of outsourcing it in a world with no cell phones, internet and instant responses. but it wasnt even issues with the animation that was the worst offender. there was no coherent story, plot, things happened simply to sell toys. there was no production value to it. im not sure what changed in the 90's, maybe guys who grew up watching the crap of the 80's took over, but there assuredly more substance to them.

*special note- ghostbusters is exempt from this because it is STILL unabashedly awesome and well done, even watching it today. :)

[Jester]

Ugh, I know. But I figure, this being a TMNT forum, it deserves a pass... Maybe?
Maybe... Heck I tend to agree with Adam, the fact that there are things like Raph's belt being on backwards in 50 Foot Irma, makes you think, that has to be intentional. Maybe it in itself is an homage to the continuity gaffs in the 50's sci-fi/horror flicks that the FW TMNT parodied.

[ThePickleweed]

Maybe... Heck I tend to agree with Adam, the fact that there are things like Raph's belt being on backwards in 50 Foot Irma, makes you think, that has to be intentional. Maybe it in itself is an homage to the continuity gaffs in the 50's sci-fi/horror flicks that the FW TMNT parodied.

more like it was drawn by some korean dude who had no idea what an r was. :lol:

[Jester]

Animation had been around since the 30's and the stuff out of Warner and Disney back in the 50's SMOKED the 80's cartoons in animation quality.
True, but the budgets were also bigger, since they were for movies and not TV. Hanna-Barbera could probably be blamed for cheapening animation as an art form to make it work with the limited budget of television...
As for the 80's vs. 90's storytelling, maybe the writers weren't used to the "write to sell toys" in the 80's and by the 90's had figured out how to tell good stories within the glorified toy commercials.

more like it was drawn by some korean dude who had no idea what an r was. :lol:

If I could post a screen cap, I would, but I mean the buckle and tie were on the back of his shell... :P

[KROW]

c'mon now, animation had been around since the 30's and the stuff out of warner and disney back in the 50's SMOKED the 80's cartoons in animation quality. it wasnt that they were working out the kinks of a new medium, they were working out the kinks of outsourcing it in a world with no cell phones, internet and instant responses. but it wasnt even issues with the animation that was the worst offender. there was no coherent story, plot, things happened simply to sell toys. there was no production value to it. im not sure what changed in the 90's, maybe guys who grew up watching the crap of the 80's took over, but there assuredly more substance to them.

*special note- ghostbusters is exempt from this because it is STILL unabashedly awesome and well done, even watching it today. :)

I don't see how you can compare a cartoon rabbit or mouse with something like Jem or Thundercats. Of course it's going to be easy animating Mickey Mouse strutting down the street then Lion-O clashing against Mumm-Ra and do it more fluidly and crank it out each week. And while watching old Disney and Looney shorts, you can still catch mistakes like blemishes and eraser marks.

As for production value, well, maybe it wasn't the greatest, but really, shows like MOTU and G.I. Joe developed some very good stories. Even though they were made to sell toys, they blossomed into something more. Sure, some episodes were ridiculous (a few Joe eps just had me shaking my head), but overall it wasn't just some claptrap like Captain Planet.

As for the 80's vs. 90's storytelling, maybe the writers weren't used to the "write to sell toys" in the 80's and by the 90's had figured out how to tell good stories within the glorified toy commercials.

Or had comic books for inspiration.

[ThePickleweed]

I don't see how you can compare a cartoon rabbit or mouse with something like Jem or Thundercats. Of course it's going to be easy animating Mickey Mouse strutting down the street then Lion-O clashing against Mumm-Ra and do it more fluidly and crank it out each week. And while watching old Disney and Looney shorts, you can still catch mistakes like blemishes and eraser marks.

As for production value, well, maybe it wasn't the greatest, but really, shows like MOTU and G.I. Joe developed some very good stories. Even though they were made to sell toys, they blossomed into something more. Sure, some episodes were ridiculous (a few Joe eps just had me shaking my head), but overall it wasn't just some claptrap like Captain Planet.



well, i dont consider ducks and rabbits easier to animate, but i do think they were tailored to the medium. squash and stretch, arcs, ins and outs, are all present and built around the design of looney tunes and the disney stuff.

i can try to paint realistic portraits with oils, or i can draw them with crayon. one is decidedly more difficult than the other, but at the end of the day, youre left with a picture. and you should judge the picture, not the road to get there. i dont appreciate the crayon drawing more because it was harder. they chose a style that was inherently more difficult to accomplish, and you could tell. disney and WB played to the strengths of the medium, and was performed by actual artisans, vs being sent overseas. i think youre seeing a reversal (well, not the overseas part anyways), and thats why you are seeing such simplified designs. something tailored to be animated. and with that, your seeing better results too.

[Peanut]

When did this become a fight between 80's vs 90's cartoons? I thought this was about character design?

It seems like KROW is getting defensive about his childhood based entirely on the content of the shows themselves, which isn't what this was about.

Where I was going with my animation argument is that, most of the time, shows with detailed character designs are also rife with bad animation, ugly deformations of the character model, inconsistencies, errors etc. That's why you can watch, again, 90's X-Men and cry laughing every 2 minutes. On the flip side you can watch a 50's Looney Tunes and the animation is fantastic. It's all in the design of the character. What Pickleweed said applies perfectly to this argument.

It's not like shows with more simple character design are free of problems. Some of the kid sh*t like Dora is absolutely inexcusably bad. However, take a show like Samurai Jack and you see how this argument holds weight.

[Sage Ninja]

I think I agree with the sentiment that I liked the more detailed character designs of the 80's and 90's than the more stylized ones of today. Yeah sometimes they could be off but that was more to do with the animation not the actual character designs. Some of the the detail character designs were just visual eye candy, to the point that sometimes the animation errors flew under my radar.

eKoKNYRfWk8

look at the detail on Peter's face at when they do a close up of him at 4:34, I know alot of you would say that not a big deal but for some reason it is for me.

PyP5iNeFTGg

Look at the close up of Raphature face at 0:40 seconds singing into her microphone. Just awsome.

and I think detalied character designs can exist and still have smooth and fluid animation. Just look at Gargoyals that had very fluid animation and wonderfully detailed character designs with shadows and highlights.

gfDxO4Z7SvA

Ze-pnhpKl5Q&feature=relmfu

just look at the close ups of the faces and all the movements.

I also find it interesting some of the better animated with detailed character desgins were animated over seas in Japan.

I'm not saying that the characters designs aren't as good now, it better quality animation now but I think I prefere more detail of yester year over the more stylized ones now. And with the advancements in technology they have now I bet that cartoons could have the detailed characters designs they used to have back then with out all the animation errors if they wanted to. It's just easier now I guess to go the simple route, and in a way thats a shame.

[Redeemer]

c'mon now, animation had been around since the 30's and the stuff out of warner and disney back in the 50's SMOKED the 80's cartoons in animation quality.

Im sorry, but I disagree, Ive seen 50's Loony Tunes and Ive seen 80's Thundercats, these two I am most familiar with, but I have to say 80's thunder cats were far better, Thunder-cats had character detail, it had fast paced Fight scenes. 50's Looney Tunes is less complex to design and draw It is so much easier and less time consuming to draw a slap-stick cartoon like Loony Tunes. This is like comparing Krillan from DBZ and Goku Super-Sayan in terms of difficulty.

:P yes I went there

[Peanut]

Im sorry, but I disagree, Ive seen 50's Loony Tunes and Ive seen 80's Thundercats, these two I am most familiar with, but I have to say 80's thunder cats were far better, Thunder-cats had character detail, it had fast paced Fight scenes. 50's Looney Tunes is less complex to design and draw It is so much easier and less time consuming to draw a slap-stick cartoon like Loony Tunes. This is like comparing Krillan from DBZ and Goku Super-Sayan in terms of difficulty.

Stop talking, Redeemer. Please.

[SherlockJr]

Im sorry, but I disagree, Ive seen 50's Loony Tunes and Ive seen 80's Thundercats, these two I am most familiar with, but I have to say 80's thunder cats were far better, Thunder-cats had character detail, it had fast paced Fight scenes. 50's Looney Tunes is less complex to design and draw It is so much easier and less time consuming to draw a slap-stick cartoon like Loony Tunes. This is like comparing Krillan from DBZ and Goku Super-Sayan in terms of difficulty.

:P yes I went there

Have to disagree. Just because it's a slapstick cartoon doesn't mean it's any easier to draw. There was a lot of artistry even in the classic Looney Tunes shorts-- look at something like What's Opera, Doc and compare it to any TV animation from the 1980s. No contest in terms of animation quality.

[TurtleTitan97]

Have to disagree. Just because it's a slapstick cartoon doesn't mean it's any easier to draw. There was a lot of artistry even in the classic Looney Tunes shorts-- look at something like What's Opera, Doc and compare it to any TV animation from the 1980s. No contest in terms of animation quality.

So true, Sherlock, so very true.

[Redeemer]

Have to disagree. Just because it's a slapstick cartoon doesn't mean it's any easier to draw. There was a lot of artistry even in the classic Looney Tunes shorts-- look at something like What's Opera, Doc and compare it to any TV animation from the 1980s. No contest in terms of animation quality.

My bad, slapstick is the wrong word I guess, What I am trying to say is that I don't think Looney Tunes is nearly as difficult in terms of drawing or animating, but that just my opinion. The reason behind my thinking is mostly bc of the lack of detail compared to Thunder-cats, mind u I am strictly comparing these two, bc I am most familiar with these two. Also the action scenes in Thunder-cats is more complicated than a boulder falling on someone in Looney Tunes.

Again these are strictly my opinions and I was jst comparing Looney Tunes and Thunder-Cats

[Candy Kappa]

someone saying the old Thundercats was well animated?

quick wheres the JJ Jameson's "you serious" clip?

honestly, the intro was well animated. rest of the show.... Oh boy it's bad. Or is it another instance of mixing design with animation?

[ThePickleweed]

My bad, slapstick is the wrong word I guess, What I am trying to say is that I don't think Looney Tunes is nearly as difficult in terms of drawing or animating, but that just my opinion. The reason behind my thinking is mostly bc of the lack of detail compared to Thunder-cats, mind u I am strictly comparing these two, bc I am most familiar with these two. Also the action scenes in Thunder-cats is more complicated than a boulder falling on someone in Looney Tunes.

Again these are strictly my opinions and I was jst comparing Looney Tunes and Thunder-Cats

and im telling you that thats wrong. and thats not an opinion. looney tunes were drawn with depth and volume that remained consistent and on model throughout, even when doing exaggerated movements. there seems to be some confusion on detail vs difficulty and its not one to one. its harder to draw daffy volumetrically through the range of motion he exhibits vs copying the model sheet from the 3 angles they shoot he-man from.

i wonder how many people arguing for against looney tunes are actually capable of drawing or animating well?

[Redeemer]

someone saying the old Thundercats was well animated?

quick wheres the JJ Jameson's "you serious" clip?

honestly, the intro was well animated. rest of the show.... Oh boy it's bad. Or is it another instance of mixing design with animation?

Really??? I watched the old Thunder-cats in a marathon in celebration of the new series on Cartoon Network, I only watch about the first 5 eps or so, but they all looked pretty solid.

I was speaking design wise also, I was talking about animation. I was born in the early 90's so I am not too familiar with older cartoons, but I have seen a few of the old thunder-cats show and a lot of the Looney Tunes. Again I jst think the design is better, not speaking in terms of fluid animation.

Oh and Asshole above me I am capable of drawing to a degree, not the best, better than the average person

[ThePickleweed]

Oh and Asshole above me I am capable of drawing to a degree, not the best, better than the average person

wow, someone got sensitive. people who dont know how to draw, sorry to say, tend to not understand the difficulties of drawing something they think LOOKS simple. just like i wouldn't weigh in on the difficulties of neurosurgery vs spinal surgery.....cause ya know, im not a doctor.

if you like the designs better, whatever, youre entitled to your opinion, and thats fine. im saying your claim that looney tunes were somehow simpler to draw and animate is flatly wrong. no need to get butthurt about it.

[Redeemer]

wow, someone got sensitive. people who dont know how to draw, sorry to say, tend to not understand the difficulties of drawing something they think LOOKS simple. just like i wouldn't weigh in on the difficulties of neurosurgery vs spinal surgery.....cause ya know, im not a doctor.

if you like the designs better, whatever, youre entitled to your opinion, and thats fine. im saying your claim that looney tunes were somehow simpler to draw and animate is flatly wrong. no need to get butthurt about it.

LoL what ever jst stating ur comment was asinine :P I do draw a lot, I was also taught a little about animation in school, Ive worked with photoshop with my sketches before. My main reason in thinking that Loony Tunes is easier to draw and animate is bc of less detail, simpler formula for character design, and also the more simplistic the design is on a character usually the easier and faster it is to draw.

[Peanut]

wow, someone got sensitive. people who dont know how to draw, sorry to say, tend to not understand the difficulties of drawing something they think LOOKS simple. just like i wouldn't weigh in on the difficulties of neurosurgery vs spinal surgery.....cause ya know, im not a doctor.

if you like the designs better, whatever, youre entitled to your opinion, and thats fine. im saying your claim that looney tunes were somehow simpler to draw and animate is flatly wrong. no need to get butthurt about it.

You're new here, so I'm just going to help you out...don't argue with Redeemer, there's no point. He's a kid with opinions and no way to back them up. Just ignore him.

[Redeemer]

You're new here, so I'm just going to help you out...don't argue with Redeemer, there's no point. He's a kid with opinions and no way to back them up. Just ignore him.

Lol technically an adult. Im sorry to break it to you, but Generally on a forum ur suppose to exchange ideas and information with other member, not force ur ideology down there throat.

[Vader]

Lol technically an adult. Im sorry to break it to you, but Generally on a forum ur suppose to exchange ideas and information with other member, not force ur ideology down there throat.

Maybe you should spell and write out your sentences like an ''adult''.

[Jester]

These guys did awesome work in the 30s. I'd take a Fleischer cartoon over almost anything.
oUgyWhKlH78

[ToTheNines]

These guys did awesome work in the 30s. I'd take a Fleischer cartoon over almost anything.

Right on. Their Superman cartoons were awesome.

[Sage Ninja]

I guess we can just chalk it all up to character designs have just gotten lazy over the years?

[Peanut]

...No? Have you read anything anyone has said in this thread at all?

[Sage Ninja]

dude what is your problem? All I have been reading is opinions that have gone back and forth, not experts on cartoon character designs. If anything, inconclusive beyond someones personal preference.

[Peanut]

Woof! I'm out of here!

[SherlockJr]

I wouldn't say anyone's concluding animation has gotten lazy over the years, just the designs have become more simplified and easier to animate; more practical than lazy, IMO.

[Candy Kappa]

designs have far from gotten lazy, that's a idiotic statement, There's a lot of diversity and variations. looking at the 80's and early 90's the majority of the popular cartoons have the same style and design, now many of the shows that are most recognized have a lot of visual differences in comparison.

[KROW]

It seems like KROW is getting defensive about his childhood based entirely on the content of the shows themselves, which isn't what this was about.

Did it come off that way? Gah... Wasn't my intention, honestly.

Pickleweed did bring up great points; most I agree with, others I don't. I'll just leave it at that. No harm done.

I wouldn't say anyone's concluding animation has gotten lazy over the years, just the designs have become more simplified and easier to animate; more practical than lazy, IMO.

Yes. Easier, not lazy.

[Sage Ninja]

designs have far from gotten lazy, that's a idiotic statement, There's a lot of diversity and variations. looking at the 80's and early 90's the majority of the popular cartoons have the same style and design, now many of the shows that are most recognized have a lot of visual differences in comparison.

please don't call a small remark I made an "idiotic statement." Don't be rude. I should have explained myself. Maybe what I percieve to be a dip in character design is more practical than "lazy" (poor choice of words I suppose), I'm just saying that I prefere the more detailed character designs from the 90's than the more simplified ones now. I was also trying to point out eariler that I think detailed facial and body designs can be done with fluid on model animation like it was done in the Gargoyals series. Some people one here (maybe I misunderstood them) seemed to say that the more detailed facial and body desgins meant smooth animation would be sacrificed like in cartoons like X-Men and Thunder Cat. I was also trying to point out that maybe since we have better technological advancement in animation that the detailed characters could be done without sacrifice in animtion, but most animators choose not to because it is easier to have stylized faces and bodies. Thats what I meant by "lazy." I realize budget and time constraints come into play with these things so thats probably what really decides things. Also this all just my own opinion.

[Candy Kappa]

if you didn't mean lazy you should have worded yourself differently. nuff' said

as for designs, I'd disagree that the 80's early 90's stuff looks more "detailed" compared to other designs of similar proportions and anatomy. the slight differences are that the more modern stuff tend to have a angular edge in comparison to the older designs, that are rounded out. Too much details can hurt an animated character, not just by cost and limitations, but also by looking weird, or older then the character should. The Hobbit Film and Return of the King is a great example on that, where the eyes have too many lines making Bilbo look very tired.

Honestly a lot of the simpler designs drives the visual effect of showing emotions a lot better then the more realistic designs, especially compared to the older 80's shows. Drama Island's simplistic Flash designs emulates way more emotion and inner thoughts compared to shows like He-Man.

But simple designs isn't exactly a new phenomenon :roll:

[SherlockJr]

if you didn't mean lazy you should have worded yourself differently. nuff' said

as for designs, I'd disagree that the 80's early 90's stuff looks more "detailed" compared to other designs of similar proportions and anatomy. the slight differences are that the more modern stuff tend to have a angular edge in comparison to the older designs, that are rounded out. Too much details can hurt an animated character, not just by cost and limitations, but also by looking weird, or older then the character should. The Hobbit Film and Return of the King is a great example on that, where the eyes have too many lines making Bilbo look very tired.

Very true, indeed. The designs in the Rankin Bass LOTR films made all the characters look 75 and up.

Honestly a lot of the simpler designs drives the visual effect of showing emotions a lot better then the more realistic designs, especially compared to the older 80's shows. Drama Island's simplistic Flash designs emulates way more emotion and inner thoughts compared to shows like He-Man.
Excellent point.

[Candy Kappa]

Very true, indeed. The designs in the Rankin Bass LOTR films made all the characters look 75 and up..

yeah, it works on the hard working humans and the Dwarves. Gandalf looks wicked. but on a Hobbit, it's a bit too much.

Take the Bakshi film, Frodo is a lot simpler in the details, making him look younger and boyish. or take the Bakshi Bildo, the art styles are vastly different, but the lines are more smooth making him look appropriately older, but not so dead tired

[ThePickleweed]

[QUOTE=KROW;932250]

Pickleweed did bring up great points; most I agree with, others I don't. I'll just leave it at that. No harm done.[/COLOR]

id love to discuss it if youre willing. this thread has kind of meandered all over the place between animation quality, vs the actual designs, vs simple preferences.

this topic is pretty in my wheelhouse so to speak. i went to school for animation and have heard guys like david coleman and stephen silver speak, and have drawn a lot of influence from their work. Really talented guys whom i wouldnt regard as lazy. Personally, Id love to try and make the jump to character design if i ever manage the time or the stones to switch fields!

cant wait for 2020 to hear people regard my stuff as lazy and ugly compared the stuff now :lol:

[Candy Kappa]

cant wait for 2020 to hear people regard my stuff as lazy and ugly compared the stuff now :lol:

same here ;)

[Redeemer]

I wouldn't say anyone's concluding animation has gotten lazy over the years, just the designs have become more simplified and easier to animate; more practical than lazy, IMO.

This I can agree with more the most part. I don't think they make design less detailed for the sake of laziness, but for sake of simplicity and cost effectiveness.

But I must say there are a few shows that stand out from others. The two that come to mine for me are TMNT 2K3 and Young Justice. I must say though Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent look almost exactly a like. In the Ep called "Schooled" They r at a diner and I was dumb founded at how similar they r drawn. :ohwell:
But I love how both these shows r drawn and the action scenes in shows r fantastic. Favorite fight scene is from the 2k3 series in April Apartment in "Shredder Strikes Back" Fight scenes were jst awesome :P

[Zany Orange Dude]

Okay, let me explain what I meant in my earlier post. No, not all cartoons today look like crap and like I said before, not all cartoons from the 80s and 90s are exactly gold either. Each decade has its own winners and losers. And when I really think about it, I unjustly went against modern animation designs. It's not really the designs or animation themselves, there are just very few cartoon shows today I enjoy. I prefer older cartoons so that was me being bias against newer ones. So allow me to mend my previous post now that I have a clearer mind.

No, modern designs are not God awul, but I do prefer the older more detailed designs. Too much detail, however, leads to far too stilted animation, just as too simple designs leads to looking somewhat lazy. Shows like the New Looney Tunes Show to me anyway are a good example of a simpler style. I hate the character designs on cartoons such as the Regular Show. But this is just my opinion and I mean no offense against people who like that show.

I am sorry for saying modern designs look like a drunk dude drew them. That was me being crazy me.:twink: I may not exactly care for them, but I understand that there are other people out there that do and I can respect that. In the end I think each style, whether detailed or simple, has it place depending on the type of show. I don't think South Park would be as appealing if it were in a detailed design just like Animaniacs wouldn't come off as good in a simplistic style.:)

[Lisardo]

I blame Bruce Timm :P

While I sort of like the "streamlined" look of today, I can't say I disagree with the above statement. Timm did set a trend for this style by the way he animated Batman and later shows. He started off fairly simplified with Batman: The Animated Series (when it was a Fox show) but when it moved to WB and became "The Batman/Superman Show" (technically the Batman portion was called "The New Batman Adventures"), I guess WB wanted a different, even more simplified look yet.

I can't say I was as impressed with the more simplified "streamlined" look to his shows. I thought it was simplified enough when it was B:TAS. Tho somehow it became popular even with today's shows. I think also Timm's streamlined style was somewhat anime-ish, and the American toons of today want that sort of look (maybe to compete with the anime shows in Japan..?). So they figured it's "in" now and all the co's wanna animate their shows like this. Not sure why the more detailed, "comic book" look was so popular in the 80s and 90s tho.

On the other token, I can't say I was super impressed with the overly-detailed look of say, Xmen. I do see how Timm made the animation better by focusing less on detail, and more on animation and style. Mostly, it works. Anyway that's my thoughts on it.

[Sage Ninja]

if you didn't mean lazy you should have worded yourself differently. nuff' said

...and I came back and explained myself. And I still stand by what I said. We don't agree with each other so I guess thats that.

Honestly a lot of the simpler designs drives the visual effect of showing emotions a lot better then the more realistic designs, especially compared to the older 80's shows. Drama Island's simplistic Flash designs emulates way more emotion and inner thoughts compared to shows like He-Man

to be honest I find alot of the facial emotions in the Total Drama series to be kind of exaggerated, especially when they're pissed. It's not all crap though.

As for the Hobbit, I kind of thought the rustic weary looks of the Bilbo and the dwarves was intentional. And it was a victim of it's time because other Rankin Bass movies was drawn in such a way that their characters conveyed a wide range of emotion and still looked age appropriate and good looking.

I will agree that if character designs are too realistic they can look ugly. Some modern day anime has gotten into this more realistic looking character designs and at times it can look weird, especially when it is an update of an old series that had a more traditional anime look orginally.

As for the Bruce Timm thing, I know it grew on some people but I never fully got on board with the visual changes the Batman characters underwent.

[Jelly Bean]

reading over this thread, and the portion that was cut away and placed in the disintegrator section, I had no idea that a topic on how cartoons look, then and now, would be like kicking a hornets nest. :ohwell:

[Sage Ninja]

are you new around here?