Style ≠ Animation

Here’s a brief overview on the difference between animation and style, and good vs. great animation.

In simplest terms:
– Animation is about movement.
– Style is about character design, colors, anything not related to movement.

One thing that differentiates good animation from great is the level of detail that’s put into those movements. When the character walks, is their motion limited to simple arm and leg swings, or did the key-animators draw out the motions for their shoulders, torso, hair, and other parts as well? Really skilled animators, if their schedule and budget will allow it, will even add subtle movements to the fingers and face.

An example of great animation that I like to use is this scene from Sleeping Beauty (1958). The level of detail is insane. Everything, the hair, clothes, fingers, feet, everything is moving. And on top of that, their mouths were also animated to match the dialog and lyrics.

Another thing that makes animation look nice is when it’s done on 1s or 2s instead of 3s. Film plays back at around 24 frames per second, and, to save money and time, studios will sometimes only do 8 frames of animation for every second, and then play that animation back at third-speed so it’ll fit the 24 frame space. This is called animating on 3s, which often results in choppier playback than animation done on 2s (12 frames of animation for every second / half-speed playback) or 1s (24 frames of animation for every second / full-speed playback). Sleeping Beauty was animated on 1s and 2s, and most TV shows and anime are animated on 3s.

On a personal note: I think Disney did some of the best animation in history, but anime has far more interesting styles and stories. I’d much rather watch Death Parade again than Sleeping Beauty.


6 thoughts on “Style ≠ Animation

  1. Most television animations also don’t have the budget to film live action for rotoscoping.

    I remember when the original Mobile Suit Gundam finally came over here after Wing; one of the complaints I kept hearing was that the animation was so much worse than Wing. I had to point out to some of my friends that while the art was a lot rougher, the actual animation was much better; if you paid attention, even though the style in Wing looked slick, nothing on screen was actually moving. Similarly with SEED, I couldn’t watch it with how things seemed to slide across the screen like a bad flash animation.

    1. Hahaha. Good art gets confused for good animation all the time. Yeah, it looks beautiful, but very little actually moving. The ultra violent Shigurui is a good example of this. Most of the series is just pans over (very nicely drawn) still shots.

  2. Good explanation and I see your points about movement. You really do feel it in the link you posted. The fabric flaps like actual fabric.

    Here’s a question for discussion (maybe we can both write a post about this). What’s more important? Art style or animation quality?

    1. Interesting question. With a lot of anime, there’s very little actual animation. Most shots are just camera pans over still images, or the character is stationary while their mouth flaps. I think most people, myself included, don’t mind the simplicity of anime animation because the style is often so nice to look at.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s