Find the Anime Challenge

[Raven Crowking]

No face faults, body proportions are regular (if comic bookish), colors are pretty standard. What anime am I supposed to see here?

Define the qualities that would make you agree that something is anime inspired, O Most Biased of Judges.

See? This is why an impartial judge is needed. Hussar still hasn't changed his sig!

 

[RangerWickett]

So, in two posts we have two different (if not necessarily opposet) opinions on the same image. So I ask both posters (and anyone who wants to reply) "Why is it anime/manga style or why is it not anime/manga style?" And yes; just so everyone is sure we are all on the same page (HA!) and not speculating (then where is all the fun?) cover the obvious stuff.

There's a difference between anime-influenced and anime. Here's a quick demonstration, courtesy of Adobe brand Photoshop.

Anime or not?

Anime style has a much lower level of detail, since it's designed for animation. Putting all that detail into every cell of animation would take for frikkin-ever. Mind you, actual anime style would be even more simplified than the version I have here.

I wish I was more talented as an illustrator, in which case I could just draw the difference. Now, I fully admit that this particular illustration has exaggerated physical features which are similar to what anime character designs look like. But the whole language of storytelling in anime is completely missing from D&D art. The previously discussed face-faults, recycling cells of animation, and long moments of stillness with just pans or zooms are things that don't crop up in D&D.

Really, though, that's not what people are complaining about when they say D&D art is becoming too much like anime. They're either complaining that illustrations show action instead of full scenes, or that artists are being hired who have their own personal styles.

In 2nd edition, I almost always preferred the work of Tony DiTerlizzi to that of Jeff Easley or Larry Elmore, because Tony D had style. His work was distinctive.

 

[Beckett]

So, what do I win?

My sincere admiration. It's not often I have to choke back a laugh at work. Well done.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm miffed no one is impressed with my finding a super-longeared elf dude with deformedly large arms firing several arrows in less than a second. C'mon, I deserve some props for that.

 

[Mythmere1]

I agree with your underlying point -- art has changed, and the more recent artwork is stylized differently than older editions. However, there has always been 'comic-book' art in D&D. The fact that you remember seeing less may be because there was less, or it may be because you skimmed and forgot the art you didn't like.

Cheers, -- N

We're in agreement about stylization: I do remember both the art I didn't like and I definitely agree that there's comic book influence in early editions. When I said: "My real objection, properly phrased, is that the art derives from comic book styles, some inherent to all superhero comic books, some a recent development in comic books." I meant (and didn't write well) that the art I don't like derives from some comic book styles inherent to all superhero comics, and from some comic book styles that are recent developments. I didn't mean to say that I object to all comic book influence - I was trying to specify which comic book influences I objected to and which I didn't.

So, stylization isn't what I'm objecting to (in fact, I think EO is a genius, and his work is more stylized than most comic books). I'm objecting to some recent forms of stylization PLUS some (like wild poses) that aren't recent but are from comic books.

The two cartoons you posted aren't things I've forgotten or disliked, but I don't think they're relevant one way or the other because they're cartoons. If the one of the guys with mouse ears had been in there without the caption, I'd have hated it in the old days, too. If there was a cartoon in a new book, I wouldn't subject it to the same kind of evaluation I do with the serious art. If you want an example of something I don't like from the old books, it's the PH picture of the powerful magic user superimposed over a cartoon apprentice. Hate that, because it uses cartoony art in a real illustration.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

In 2nd edition, I almost always preferred the work of Tony DiTerlizzi to that of Jeff Easley or Larry Elmore, because Tony D had style. His work was distinctive.

Well, from where I stand, Caldwell, Easley and Elmore had their own distinctive styles, too. But there's no accounting for taste.

 

[RangerWickett]

Judges?

Actually, it looks vaguely Japanese, but the color is too dark for anime. More like this:

It does have simple lines, which is a major component of the anime style. It might fly as a manga, but it's certainly not mainstream. Remember:

This is what we're shooting for here!

 

[hazel monday]

Both sides in this argument have a point.
No, there isn't necesarily a lot of actual anime art in 3.5 D&D books.
Yes, there is a lot of Anime influence in 3.5 D&D books.
But that same anime influence can be seen in modern american videogames, comic books, fashion etc...
WOTC is just going with the currnt fad.
Even though I personally don't like it, I really can't fault them for that.

 

[Xyl]

Actually, it looks vaguely Japanese, but the color is too dark for anime.

Sorry, there was supposed to be a second image there. Fixed.

 

[Raven Crowking]

If I could find an anime program rare enough that you didn't know it, and claimed the images taken from it were from a D&D book you didn't have, I have the strong impression I would be told that the pictures were American Comic Book Style......or anything other than anime.

This contest is rigged.


RC