If you don't know what "the stage" is, compare the way these two images construct their environment
On the left, the characters exist 'inside' the shot, on the right they look like they're stood in front of a backdrop atop a stage and are viewed from a flat side angle
The problem is that it seems modern cartoons rely more and more on this "stage" whereas older shows relied on it less

Why? You might argue it's cheaper, but wouldn't digital art make it easier to do the former? I never understand the "it's cheaper and easier" excuse for cartoons no longer doing what they did when making cartoons was overall harder, more expensive and more complicated, why would it suddenly need to be easier? We have fewer limitations when it comes to time and money, not less, in fact of course

>>149357782 (OP)
I do it because I was trained on newspaper comic strips. Sure I read cape comics, but I had trouble understanding what was going on in any panels that weren't set up like this.

but yes tv does it because it's cheap. same reason sitcoms have a simple 3-camera setup so you don't have to do elaborate and repeated moving shots with pro cameramen
>does digital art make it easier
i mean, only if the background is cgi
>we have fewer limitations when it comes to time and money
... are you just now realizing the animation industry cooks its books? Yeah they eliminated paint and cels, and then suddenly acted like animation got MORE expensive so they had to tone down its detail and animation even more. duh. they're crooks.

Modern Arthur is all tweening shit, so of course it's flat by design. It doesn't make sense to draw a new character when you can just have one-size-fits-all puppets.

>>149357782 (OP)
>You might argue it's cheaper, but wouldn't digital art make it easier to do the former?
Yes, but it makes animating flat angle sitcom shots that accommodate modular characters almost effortless.

>>149357822
tbf you see it a lot in shows that aren't tweened and i think the reason is the same reason as to why a lot of modern cartoons are shittier which is that new blood is no longer trained by the old masters they just follow basic tutorials and think cartooning only involves one skill which is drawing good, staging, framing and the likes don't matter
it's like every new member of the animation industry is that one kid in class who could copy anime characters pretty well so every normie told em they'll be a good cartoonist when they're older and they just took that at face value and never learned any of the other neccesary skills

>>149357822
>It doesn't make sense to draw a new character when you can just have one-size-fits-all puppets.
Right aside from you know if you want it to actually look good

>>149357860
>it's like every new member of the animation industry is that one kid in class who could copy anime characters pretty well so every normie told em they'll be a good cartoonist when they're older and they just took that at face value and never learned any of the other neccesary skills
That's ironic when some of the best framing can be found in anime but I totally agree with you. Good animation needs a director with experience and a vision.

>>149357898
>That's ironic when some of the best framing can be found in anime
i think you misunderstood my post

>>149357860
https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/149209741/#149210208
https://desuarchive.org/co/thread/149260998/#149261243

These comments wholly apply to Spongebob, Simpsons, etc, too.

>>149357782 (OP)
>You might argue it's cheaper, but wouldn't digital art make it easier to do the former? I never understand the "it's cheaper and easier" excuse
Because you aren't seeing it from a company perspective. If animation is easier and cheaper, that means they can allot a smaller budget. Smaller team, fewer resources, less experience.

It's still a business. And the business execs who haven't drawn anything more complex than a stick man, will look where they can cut corners. It's a product of our current state. Not as a society, but this idea that you can make profit simply by spending less on a project and pocketing the difference.

>>149357961
is this permissible to post again yet? i know /co/ had a chimpy over these images a while back cause if you post the same thing a few too many times someone deems it to be some kinda, idk, fallacy or something purely to banish it from all future arguments, but it still holds true

Bump.

>>149357976
It's got a point on :T being overused, but the redrawn facial expression don't convey quite the same feelings

>>149357782 (OP)
because cartoons have basically only regressed in artistic quality since the 1940s

>>149357976
> They would have a moment where he's really, really angry, draw him with an INTENSELY ANGRY face, and THAT would be the funny part
> Why is Babs making a funny face here?
Babs' face is clearly an INTENSELY ANXIOUS face. It's the exact same idea they praised in their Ed, Edd n Eddy example.

> artists over-using the :T face
True.

>BETTER expressions would be ten times suited to these moments
The edited expressions don't seem to convey the same meaning as the original :T face in the given examples, especially Amity's and Steven's. They may or may not be more suited to the scene, but it's hard to tell without context. I do generally prefer the edited expressions, however.

>>149357908
but he said he agreed with you
the irony is that that kid in class was not learning proper anime, yet that is what anime is to a lot of people, because of those kids.
>>149357974
i wonder how long it has to go on and how bad it has to get before they go "oh, this isn't making us money. saving 10% while the economy deflates 50% means i'm poorer"

When was the last time there were good layouts in TV animation?

>>149357782 (OP)
Jeremie Perin had this to say, but not really an explanation, other than it's a form of limited animation:
> So you have many kinds of limited animation. For you, what’s the fundamental difference between all of these?
> Jérémie Périn: As I just said, in Japan, they compensate for the lack of drawings through a more elaborate framework. Taking the old Toei series, which were extremely limited, you had a lot of effort put into the photography, with lighting, parallax effects, all that stuff.
> In Western – both American and European – animation, depth-of-field wasn’t really something important. It was much closer to stage theater – you have this very horizontal, flat field and the characters rarely moved into depth. Whereas in Grendizer, the characters run in the hallways and are animated in perspective. In Scooby-Doo, they just run from the profile with the backgrounds looping behind them. You can notice it most of the time, too.
> Also, in things like Grendizer, Harlock, or Cobra – which isn’t actually that limited either – you have a money shot or two at some point that creates a strong contrast effect. It’s almost like Sergio Leone, in a sense: it’s very still for a long time, and then all of a sudden, for the climax or whatever, the animation explodes. There, you’ll have something more elaborate, more animated, which, by contrast, seems much stronger and creates emotion. In that regard, Western limited animation is more uniform.
webmrel from Mars Express, with sound: >>>/wsg/5920877

test

>>149359419
>the irony is that that kid in class was not learning proper anime
my post wasn't about literal anime so yes he misunderstood it, i wasn't saying it's bad or good cause it's anime, or worse than anime, i'm making a comparison to the type of individual who thinks every art field, cartooning, animation, comics, illustration, whatever- can just be achieved by having the base skill of "draw character good" like those kids who draw anime and are told they'd be a good cartoonist and think that's it, they've done it, they've achieved the only necessary goal

it's not actually about anime

>>149357866
People will consume the slop anyway. It doesnt need to look good. They will cut corners where they can.

>>149359546
Most people are probably only half watching with something else going on with their phones

>>149357782 (OP)
Lazyness

>>149357782 (OP)
Amerifats forgot stagin