Video Game Forums

I think I'm just out of the loop here, but here goes.

I'm currently sailing through the final week of my current semester in college taking three art classes. And every one of the professors had a common opinion: Focusing on an anime-influenced style will not help you when you take your art into an actual profession. Which left me wondering why. Is it the reputation for anime to be quite limited with its animation? (because let's be honest--anime generally isn't known for its FLUID, SMOOTH ANIMATION) Or is it more specific than that? Namely the stereotype of simplistic faces complete with huge shiny eyes featuring gratuitous, unnecessary cheesecake girls in the mix? Speaking of such, maybe it's the sexual connotations with anime that still plague it to this day that put these people off. Or perhaps it goes deeper than that. A theory being that anime-styled art is so pervasive among the amateur artists' circle that it has lost its value on an aesthetic level and seen more as a crutch to adapting a more original art style rather than an art style itself. I'm just speaking from the point of view of my school, because as far as they're concerned, nobody will take your art seriously if any anime influences are perceived.

I can't say I can either agree or disagree with them as I am obviously not a professional and know nothing about art as a career, but really...what puts these people off to the genre? If you strip anime/manga down to its essentials, it's indistinguishable from any other form of art. Now I admit--I suppose I'm arguing this given that I've fallen into the trap of possessing preferences for drawing manga-influenced art that match every stereotype attached to it, but it's not like it's what I can only do, as some of you may have seen from my art threads--it (unfortunately) genuinely appeals to me (and it doesn't help that I have trouble putting effort into certain art when I'm not interested in it) and I have my school arguing that I'm screwed for life if I insist on this. Plus, I do put my own spin on it, as evidenced from Western-animation influences, such as the overblown slapstick, and Western-oriented humor, but would that be enough to have professionals look past the art style?

This is not enough to deter me as I still plan to do my comics for a living... somehow, but what are any of your opinions on this matter? Do any of you know anyone that share these sentiments? What are your experiences on this issue, if any? Am I just being a total loser and should quit justifying my cribbed art style, adapt something original and get over myself?

The mind boggles.

yeah i mean there's no way that took artistic talent. its anime

I think most teachers don't even consider anime a "real art style". Which is really lame, 'cause they're essentially dissuading you from even drawing anymore. Looking into it online, loads more people have the same problem, and I think it's rather ridiculous.

I did find this:

[QUOTE=some anime blog]From an American perspective, anime isn’t often considered art because it’s too frequently misunderstood. Mainstream America, to a large degree, still thinks of anime as either children’s cartoons or pornography- neither of which the average American tends to think of as “art.” Part of the traditional goal of Western anime fans has always been the enlightenment of Westerners to the culture and integrity of anime. Not only do Western anime fans want to promote anime in order to make it more commonly available, Western fans want anime to be respected. However, the traditional domestic anime distribution industry has done little to consciously emphasize the artistic nature of anime. Altering titles, changing character names, emphasizing deluxe packaging as seemingly more important than the animation itself, dub scripts that partially or totally disregard the original Japanese dialogue and stories: actions like these common in the American anime industry have only solidified the impression that anime is not art- it’s merely a commercial product to be modified and altered to be more suitable to American tastes and expectations, and thereby more profitable.

Anime fans themselves are also partially to blame for the impression of anime in America. Among those who know something of anime, it’s common to take a reactionary stance to some fans’ rose colored view of anime by accusing anime of being nothing more than extended toy advertisements or product created for the express purpose of selling television advertising time. To a large degree these claims are valid, but there’s no reason to assume that anime shouldn’t be considered “art” in spite of its commercial nature. I hope it won’t be necessary for me to point out examples of anime, even highly commercial products like the Pocket Monsters or Gundam TV series, which do exist to sell toys, but still convey a significant degree of artistic creativity and expression. Even in the case of the most blatantly commercial anime productions, and in spite of the anime industry’s increasing use of time and money saving digital animation, all anime is still fundamentally created by artists who devote themselves to low pay and long hours drafting original art by hand. If this isn’t the prototypical definition of art, what is?[/QUOTE]

anime is such a broad, useless term for art style

I think your professors are being rather closed-minded and limited in their definitions of 'anime.' Because first of all, whether or not the anime style works depends on what you plan to do with your art. As far as comics are concerned, using an anime style may not be the most original and it may deter some people, but it can be used well and fit the work. It all depends on how you employ it.

tbh there is a really broad range of quality and of styles in anime and some look really nice and some look kind of shoddy and it may be that stigma of cheaply-animated, shoddy, badly-proportioned with-attached-sexual-connotations image of anime that can lead them to completely shut it out as an option.

Basically I 100% agree with Dash but am not good at workds

--

your sort of "average" anime art style works for cranking out weekly episodes and looks visually fine enough to keep watching, but in more detailed or focused forms of art [if someone is just painting a singular piece or w/e] then obviously drawing influence from this style is fine but it really shouldn't look like an anime screencap if you get what I'm sayin

tbh one of my favorite webcomics has a sort of not-great style, it isn't anime but it isn't like gorgeous art, but it looks good enough and i like the comic enough to keep reading. but i wouldnt buy a print in that style because a print should be more detailed and visually engaging and asthetic is much more important there if that makes sense

also it fails to talk about how ****ty a lot of american cartoons are lol

The real issue is that art firms require a portfolio display an inherent understanding of fundamentals. There are vast differences between fine art and illustrative fields such as animation. That said, a studio looking for illustrative work is bound to be interested most in consistency in performance with a variety of subjects, while freelance clients tend to understand the flexibility of style poorly, and you will be expected to offer a unique approach to art (and adhere to it). Writing (slapstick) is not a visual art form, and is not going to set you apart as an artist.

Traditional Manga and Cartoon styles are designed in such a way as to minimise the detail required to crank out panels or cels, and be interchangeable/reproducable by a team of artists with no noticable difference between artists.

Failing to provide a portfolio which depicts your flexibility to work in the western industry ensures that you will not be given a supportive/entry level artistic position.

Even a solidly educated background cannot guarantee you success as a comic artist. While you can attempt to launch a comic line yourself, you have to start thinking from a marketing perspective. In that sense, you should be questioning what will set your work apart - but most importantly what will make a strong positive first impression. If you think others will perceive your work as unfinished or lackluster or unoriginal, reconsider your core concepts. In terms of style, you've got to ask yourself how much you're using because it is in your comfort zone. If it is because you did not expect to or did not want to work, you're just going to have to shrug off those kinds of thoughts. Even artists who love their art still have to work.

Rainbow Dash wrote:also it fails to talk about how ****ty a lot of american cartoons are lol

If I had to watch a random Japanese or American animation, Japanese definitely.

Maybe I should just go back to my initial career choice as a garbageman.

I suppose it really comes down to one's artistic versatility; presenting a single art style won't do much and I suppose when these professors see you drawing manga-styled content, it's quite easy for them to assume that's all you can draw. Good thing I have some decent portfolio material with some diversity. Soon it shall blossom into a gallery of astonishing flexibility that's sure to earn instant support when I start presenting it to higher-ups.

Or I can just keep presenting my already monotonous stuff to everyone in existence and take endless rejections until someone takes the bait. Hey, it worked for the likes of Stephen King and e.e. cummings--it all comes down to persistence.

Rainbow Dash wrote:also it fails to talk about how ****ty a lot of american cartoons are lol

Well, if they can get published, it should be a cinch for me! ;)

I think Rainbow Dash has a point in that it's so broad because when someone uses the term "anime" to describe a style it can range from the picture Random User posted to something like Crayon Shin-Chan in people minds. Unfortunately much of American society will only view the lower end of the spectrum and are very close minded to researching it further.

But hey, video games got an art exhibit at the Smithsonian, so there's hope yet.

People that think all anime fits a specific style and that it all has low quality animation (with regard to fluidity especially) have not seen much anime themselves. This goes even more for manga, which has a great amount of diversity if you actually look. I say this as an expert.

Also, many of the details on anime localization from that blog post (2nd post, RU) seem to criticize practices more common to the 90's than the current state of affairs.

Art style snobbery is kind of annoying anyway. Would these academics prefer that everyone just keep to TRADITIONAL EUROPEAN STYLES and 19th century goodness? Or whatever goes these days, I am not too sure since I have not taken any sort of art class since I was in mandatory education. Give it a few centuries, and any art will be acclaimed.

anime



not anime

That can't be anime, the eyes do not take up half of the face and there are no catgirls or tentacles in sight.

Odd that you would compare those two things. Teen Titans was very much influenced by anime style, while Hokuto no Ken does not fit the stereotype that most hold all that well. Or is that your point?

I can't think too much about anything Loot says as of late because his hideous avatar ends up coming to mind.