aquilon Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 OK, so after not having seen it in over two years, I popped in my DVD of DYRL last night. One thing that struck me about DYRL was how ahead of its time it was in terms of its technical qualities - all in the days before CGI! If anything, I feel the art is better than Frontier. Yeah, I know Frontier's a TV series and DYRL is a movie (therefore more dollars/yens/etc. per minute of film) and the styles are different. I also realized Frontier lacks a good instrumental soundtrack compared to DYRL and I do like Minmay's songs more than Sheryl's.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
505thAirborne Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 In terms of Artwork, minimal if any CGI work, Musical score and emotional effect and character appreciation. DYRL wins the prize! I like Mac Frontier alot, yet Macross DYRL is the definitive champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrie addict Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 DYRL and FB2012 by a mile is better than Frontier animation... this stupid CGI and poorly designed characters make me weep for the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renato Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 I just saw the Frontier movie last night. While the CG and backgrounds were for the most part highly detailed, I spent most of the time thinking how ugly the character art was, and how jerkily they moved. DYRL's character animation was mostly handled by Mikimoto (and he even drew the genga, too -- these days I think that's pretty much all done overseas, not just the in-betweening), and he put a lot of love into those frames. The curves in the lines and the detail in the eyes of the characters all have slight nuances that only he could perfect or replicate. In fact, his style has changed so much now that there is no-one left who could ever draw keyframes for animation like that, including himself. You certainly won't see an animation movie with character art as beautiful as DYRL again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Well, duh. DYRL is one of THE CLASSICS. That doesn't mean Frontier is bad, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilSpex Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 why o why do kids these days equate new with automatically better? Heres a fun fact for you young people, the quality of animation is not a function of its age, it is a function of the hard work of the animators. Hard work was around a long time before you were even born. ipods, digital high definition, also worse than their predecessors. Lots of stuff is worse now than it was. Standards have gone down if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Heres a fun fact for you young people, the quality of animation is not a function of its age, it is a function of the hard work of the animators. Hard work was around a long time before you were even born. Who are you talking to? No one here has said that Frontier is better than DYRL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lott Sheen Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Gubaba, I am often misunderstood on MW. If you read the OP you will see what I mean: OK, so after not having seen it in over two years, I popped in my DVD of DYRL last night. One thing that struck me about DYRL was how ahead of its time it was in terms of its technical qualities - all in the days before CGI! If anything, I feel the art is better than Frontier. Yeah, I know Frontier's a TV series and DYRL is a movie (therefore more dollars/yens/etc. per minute of film) and the styles are different. I also realized Frontier lacks a good instrumental soundtrack compared to DYRL and I do like Minmay's songs more than Sheryl's.... The OP clearly believes it is unusual that an older program is higher quality than a newer one. Something that is just not true in so many cases. He also assumes that the days SINCE CGI are some kind of golden age. Therefore I assume this guy is some kind of kid under 25 years old who has a warped view that NEW SHOULD BE BETTER. Even the space program was better 40 years ago! Fact is that OLD IS USUALLY BETTER and standards go down over time, not up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bri Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Not many anime movies can match the visual performance of DYRL to this day so comparing it to Frontier isn't that useful. Frontier was all round pretty good for a TV show. Altough it looks the makers definitely prioritised the mecha action. Character animation, design and art is rather unremarkable compared to some other recent anime productions and even the 90s Macross OVA's like M Plus and M7 Dynamite look better in that department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkenstein Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 The music in Frontier is a lot more varied, and honestly, a lot more entertaining than DYRL. Music has evolved a lot since 1984. As for dog fighting, Im surprised that Frontier's dog fights didn't have more missiles involved. Character art is a bit ho-hum for some of the characters. Mechanical design is obviously cooler, like the Konig Monster and the VF-27. The story though, has some holes in it, though DYRL had the same problem. I would say, Frontier edges out DYRL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lott Sheen Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Not many anime movies can match the visual performance of DYRL to this day so comparing it to Frontier isn't that useful. Frontier was all round pretty good for a TV show. Altough it looks the makers definitely prioritised the mecha action. Character animation, design and art is rather unremarkable compared to some other recent anime productions and even the 90s Macross OVA's like M Plus and M7 Dynamite look better in that department. Again, WHY do people assume that something older should be inferior and why do people act surprised that something made in the `80s or `90s looks better than something made with the aide of CGI? Can I get an answer to this question please? CGI is mostly a cost saving measure, not a great artform. A hand drawn high framerate combat scene will beat CGI everytime and some of those Ishiguro dogfights in SDFM will never be topped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renato Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 some of those Ishiguro dogfights in SDFM will never be topped. Itano, not Ishiguro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MastaEgg Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 I think the benefit of using CG, especially for mechanical objects is that the proportions are always maintained during the animation. It's probably why you don't see arguments like "so how big is the Macross Quarter?". And yeah it does cut costs, especially when your trying to animate huge objects with a lot of detail, but there's still of lot of work in making them blend in with the 2D stuff, otherwise it really sticks out (see Shadow Chronicles). As for character design, I guess the reason why Mikimoto wasn't brought on was his characters don't appeal to that Yaoi craze that plagues today's anime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lott Sheen Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Itano, not Ishiguro. Thankyou, I always get those two mixed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Gubaba, I am often misunderstood on MW. If you read the OP you will see what I mean: The OP clearly believes it is unusual that an older program is higher quality than a newer one. Something that is just not true in so many cases. He also assumes that the days SINCE CGI are some kind of golden age. Therefore I assume this guy is some kind of kid under 25 years old who has a warped view that NEW SHOULD BE BETTER. Even the space program was better 40 years ago! Fact is that OLD IS USUALLY BETTER and standards go down over time, not up. Wait a sec...you're jumping on the guy's case when he agrees with you that DYRL is better? Cripes, how do you treat people who DISAGREE with you? And, um..."Old is usually better"? What kind of crap is that? It's just as much of a fallacy as saying "new is better." Better is better, and it doesn't matter if it's old OR new. Greatness doesn't have an expiration date. (And, um...how can you be often misunderstood at MW, if that was your first post?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bri Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 (edited) Again, WHY do people assume that something older should be inferior and why do people act surprised that something made in the `80s or `90s looks better than something made with the aide of CGI? Can I get an answer to this question please? CGI is mostly a cost saving measure, not a great artform. A hand drawn high framerate combat scene will beat CGI everytime and some of those Ishiguro dogfights in SDFM will never be topped. I wasn't talking about mecha action. Character animation, coloring, lighting and shading have all improved with the help of digital aides last few years. Allowing for more character movement and faster story pacing as less stills and other cost cutting tricks are neccesary. Compare for example what newer studios have produced like Production IG, Bones, PAworks, Kyoani or Makoto Shinkai's Comix. These studios all use new animation innovations to improve their work, instead of just cutting down on cost. Compare that to the relative unambitious work on character animation in Frontier versus 90s Macross OVAs and you'll see the difference. Edited December 7, 2009 by Bri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lott Sheen Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Wait a sec...you're jumping on the guy's case when he agrees with you that DYRL is better? Cripes, how do you treat people who DISAGREE with you? And, um..."Old is usually better"? What kind of crap is that? It's just as much of a fallacy as saying "new is better." Better is better, and it doesn't matter if it's old OR new. Greatness doesn't have an expiration date. (And, um...how can you be often misunderstood at MW, if that was your first post?) In all seriousness and with all due respect do you have asperger`s syndrome possibly? I never jumped on him for agreeing with me, I jumped on him for coming from the assumption that an old show like DYRL SHOULD be worse, becaus it is old. And then being surprised that it was not inferior, despite its age. To me that is ridiculous. When you think about it most things decline in quality over time. Cars used to have bench seats, plenty of leg room, cruise control, power steering starting ine the `50s. While we kept power steering everything else has gone in the name of cost cutting and environmentalism. Japan had analogue HD broadcast to analogue HD tubes in the `90s aswell as HD LDs. At its peak the PQ of these was superior to digital HD, but broadcasters went with digital to fit more lower quality programming on their bandwidth because analogue took up too much. I for one prefer less channels at a higher quality but as with most things the first of class is superior and its always dumbed down for the masses. We went to the moon in 1969, now the best we can do is take antfarms into orbit. The youth of today think mp3s are high quality audio and actually don`t like the sound of CDs or LPs because they aren`t used to it. In conclusion humans are dumb and buy the marketing and hype that tells them every day the latest is the greatest. Don`t believe the hype, thats my motto. And btw I am MilSpex, I changed handles because I thought I should have a Macross based username here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamweaver13 Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Wow, this old vs. new debate sounds awfully familiar. Oh well, at least it didn't spill over into hip-hop and plato like the last one did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hulagu Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 (edited) As for character design, I guess the reason why Mikimoto wasn't brought on was his characters don't appeal to that Yaoi craze that plagues today's anime. Really? Because it really doesn't seem that way from the character design of Tytania. Disappointing show BTW. Ah, well, they can't all be LOGH. Edited December 7, 2009 by hulagu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gubaba Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 In all seriousness and with all due respect do you have asperger`s syndrome possibly? I stopped reading there. If you're to stoop so low, you're not worth my time or effort. No offense intended, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts