>>517
After thinking about it for a short while, basically it's great to see so much movement but god damn those characters look so awkward. It would've been better to use the live-action footage for just movement, and draw the character faces without tracing the actors faces.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 9:54
>>521
Dude , the blur is done to separate different plans
Like reality if you want
My main concern on this pic is the onion effect haha
Looks like a drunk view
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 9:54
>>523
Yes, it was announced to fully utilise rotoscoping a while back.
>>525
I agree. The faces were definitely the biggest flaw in it for me. If they'd done that, kept the art closer to the manga, but with a more realistic touch to it so it wasn't just flat faces on realistic bodies, I doubt people would have as many complaints. It might still look weird, but not as flagrantly.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 11:16
Is rotoscoping more expensive than animating traditionally?
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 11:20
I feel there's going to be a backlash against the Aku no Hana complaints by people claiming it's getting hate just because the visuals are different, when that's not true at all. Sure, your average fan will cry about it not being ANIME enough but it's got some genuine issues I don't think you should overlook.
Many people have mentioned this thing about the faces lacking all features if they're far enough (read as: not very far, really) from the camera due to, I'm assuming, the filters on the footage. The funny thing being that if they move towards you, eyes, mouth and nose will gradually appear. Now if this was uncommon I wouldn't mind, but it keeps happening throughout and it's as distracting as you'd imagine.
There's also a recurring issue with rotoscoped pieces, and realistic animation in general, which is the acting being too exaggerated. As an animation fan I obviously don't hate motion, but this case is bad enough to become jarring. It feels like a problem with the base footage, it's kinda over the top and it doesn't feel natural even though the aim of the series appears to be extreme realism. Your mileage may vary greatly here though, I can't deny that it's nice seeing an anime with characters acting for real.
Add more factors like the clash between characters and backgrounds or the apparent lack of an animated opening and you get an overall package that will feel more cheap or atmospheric depending on who judges it. Nagahama's managed to make a creepy manga feel even more eerie, but there's plenty of reasons to question his artistic choices (and things that people will justify as such, when they're just cheap shortcuts).
I wouldn't say Aku no Hana is bad because it's different. It's different, and also bad.
I think the issue is Japanese acting in general is very over-acted and hammy. So if they use footage like that as a basis, then of course the animation is also going to look over-acted. It's a valid issue, but something that can't really be avoided.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 11:34
is it wrong if I like to pretend that the show is not rotoscoped?
no, Disney used rotoscoping for Cinderella because it was cheaper than traditional animation
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 11:37
>>544
Sure, just imagine the whole of Aku no Hana is a solo animation by an Okiura on drugs.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 11:40
>>543
Yeah, that doesn't help. It's like they're having weird spams rather than acting like normal people, and that backfires really hard because the whole thing is meant to look realistic.
I always find Dennou Coil's case funny but kinda sad. It was for kids and serious people but its main audience turned out to be pedos and doujin artists. LOL.
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-05 12:32
Looking at the aku no hana credits, they have an entire live action team, tons of actors were used it seems.
Which begs the question, why not make it LA in the first place?