Why does 3D look so fucking uncanny and unnatural?
>>885900there was a time that anime looked unreal and unnatural to the west. one day shitty 3d will be the norm, you'll have your day to shine.
>>885900>Why does 3D look so fucking uncanny and unnatural?Most anime style video games now are cel shaded, and look more like 2D than 3D. It's more the bizarre juxtaposition between something hyper realistic and cartoonish (like in OP's pic) that looks uncanny.
>>885900Because it is made by nerds with no talents.https://youtu.be/ZsvZsVPhTVs?t=639
I could have sworn we had this exact same thread, with the exact same text and op image just 2 months ago. What is going on in here?
>>885944Absolutely. These people are technicians, not artists.
>>885902I used to think old ppg was too simple and then the new animators rolled around and I learned that you could ruin something simple
>>885900Its because of lighting.You cant use accurate lighting that is meant to represent real life objects on Anime characters. If you do you will see that theyre monstrosities that shouldnt exist in the real world with eyeballs the size of tennis balls.This is why cell shading was created. One of the newest Anime techniques is not even making the eyeballs, instead the pupils and highlights rest on an empty socket with a white background.If you use the correct techniques for making Anime in 3D they're almost indistinguishable from 2D. Look at Geishin Impact, Dragonball Fighter Z, Granblue Fantasy etc.
>>885975good post
>>885965These people aren't technicians or artists at all, they're not capable of separating their art from the medium. If the software won't supply them with certain effects they will never try and get around it in clever ways. For good 3D NPR rendering you have to be both a technician and an artist. If you miss the artist side your stuff will miss composition and other artist fundamentals which are even more important in NPR than elsewhere. If you're an artist but not a technician you will forever be stuck with what your software will offer you instead of what you can squeeze out of it, and your renderings will look samey and uninteresting.
>>885975I really there was more hyper realistic anime art like this. Might have something to do with the people using Blender instead of V-ray.
>>885975>You cant use accurate lighting that is meant to represent real life objects on Anime characters.Then why do anime figures look good?
>>885988Have you seen an anime figure moving? It would look uncanny. I mean if you're good enough you can make everything work but for 99% of the cases you will get an effect like OPs post.
>>885988There’s this one Chinese anime with these figurine dudes moving and it doesn’t look good. It’s popular but I can’t remember the name
>>885900I prefer that it looks odd rather than try to emulate 2D 1:1 like >>885944
Youre using an example of 3d attempting to replicate someone's original vision that was only supposed to be in 2d. There is no guarantee that 3d will look good in these cases. Its the same thing thats wrong with lots of 1 to 1 remakes and reitterations. They only do it for money and nothing else. No vision.
>>885988my assumption would be because the eyes, mouth and other finer details are painted on
>>885900because 3d is 1000x harder to master then 2d
>>885944The city scenes with lots of mechanical stuff look great but a huge thing missing in all of the examples he shows are human characters. The ones there are always facing away from the camera and pretty much not moving at all, the hardest part of matching 3D and 2D is stuff like OP's picture which unsurprisingly looks really shitty
>>885975i need to master all of the anime techniques
>>885900Next time try using cel-shading, makes direct 2D to 3D conversions look less abominable
>>886000To be fair, I've not seen any figure move.
>>886397liar
>>885900Because you;re fucking retarded. It's like saying>Why does ic beg tier art, aka what I'll deem all 2D art that isn't made by Japanese people, look uncanny and unnaturalProfessional 3D looks better than 2D, when a skillful creator puts his soul into it.
>>885988That still has an uncanny look to it, but like >>886000 said (nice digits btw), it looks ayy lmao tier when they move. Anime is a dead medium for realistic 3D, and only disney looking western designs work in both 2D and 3D.
>>885900Shading with black
>>885900wtf is that ear.
>>885900>Why does 3D look so fucking uncanny and unnatural?because the guy creating it doesn't know how to create ArcSystem Works level stuff. 3d can look even better than 2d.
>>885900In stills the most common issue is shit lighting. In motion it's that 3d animation is usually bad.
>>887087soulless : soul
>>887087Arcsys is definitely one of the best but even here showcases one of the biggest issues of 3d which is adding detail is insanely expensive, hence Frieza and Goku are basically spotless unlike in the anime
>>887098both have soul>adding detail is insanely expensiveI wonder about that. They could have used models that have those details but it would have just been for that cutscene so not worth it. Good 2d animation isn't cheap and is very time consuming. There are probably positives and negatives for both.
>>887087>>885900Tobal had the same artist as Dragon Ball and the 3D looked pretty good:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H4DOL906NM
>>885902What is this image even supposed to show?
>>887087Left loses some of the expression but considering it's a video game that's pretty good.
>>885900trying to imitate 2d with 3d is always a bad idea. Just look at Ghibli's Earwig and the Witch. 3d has its own kinks and tricks that prohibit it from having the same feeling as 2d. That's why everytime a studio tries to make a 3d version of an old cel animation, it always looks uncanny and unpleasing to the eye.
>>886000nta but yes i have seenhttps://www.youtube.com/shorts/wBR-qYutOEs
>>885900Lighting is off in this pic. Better off with a nonblack shadow.
>>887355>shortsChoke on a fat onehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBR-qYutOEs
>>885902BTAS is the only fair comparison since it's the one action show on the Western side, and it's minimalist look is compensated by having twice as many frames as most Shonen.
>>887520>stop motion what century is this lol
>>885900The right one isn't natural either. We all know this image since childhood so this version/style is the original to your imagination + 3D looks shit when it doesn't have much detail.
>>885900I like Square Enix's approach to hybrid anime.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omxH7zg-OXw
>>885902Add CN's fusionfall models
>>885902proof japenises can't be creative
>>885900Needs the right shaders and positioning, retard.
remakes in 3d always look bad compared to the original
>>887099They still do ingame though, damage shows while fighting aa scratches and clothes ripping, not as excessive as the anime though, thats true
>>885900Bad example, the issue is lighting, you need good lighting artists for 3d anime to look good, and complex 3d meshes too
>>885900they don't use cans or other natural things to make it
>>885900shading & lighting. it's a chief priority for illustrators, but a computer program for CG artists.
>>885975guilty gear xrd had an amazing write up on what they had to do exactly.
>>887099adding detail, especially what would need to be added to make that work, is cheap as fuck, but its all that little detail work would add up over time not only in cost but in filesize for next to no benefit to the consumer other than being show accurate for single scenes.
>>885975he's right.
>>885988Maybe something to do with the light source being wide and far away because they're small? How do they look lit with a small torch nearby?
>>885975You certainly can use accurate lighting. Form is revealed through light and shadow, just as >>885988 points out. It's the old false dichotomy of realism vs style that so many artists fall into, when the real issue is form. Over rendered cartoon figures will always look uncanny, and this applies to form as much as light and shadow.
>>889583>How do they look lit with a small torch nearby?Like shit. But everything would look like shit with shitty lighting.
>>885900because good anime doesn't work in 3d
>>885902But Batman looks good?
>>887087literally soulless x soul
>>891366But you just showed that it works with the correct camera angles.
>>885900The stylization is cancer in that thing you're showing since they're relying on the 3D lighting stuff itself. If the textures of the model were making to act more as the ones in the 2D ones, take for example what they did with Guilty Gear and how the textures and shaders work together to give off that 2D look, despite being 3D, you'd understand. It's trying to emulate a certain style in the wrong way.
>>887087Not bad considering these finishes are just easter eggs for post match finishes in specific situations.
>>892050Depends on how you intend to pull it off.
>>885900Lighting's a big one. Smooth lighting really freaks your eye out for unnatural shapes, because the soft shadows and color gradients give more depth to what's you see. It gets even worse when you introduce things like subsurface scattering. In 2D animation often times for the actual cels there's no more than about thirty two colors. This makes it easier for your brain to accept and interpret the abstraction of the line art.There's also the issue that in 3D, the "camera" tries its best to recreate what a real camera does. If you put the added detail into certain effects like volumetric lighting, depth of field, and radial motion blur, your brain notices those because they're the realistic parts in an unrealistic scene. That then makes things like faux cel shading and simplistic features stand out even more. 2D doesn't have this effect, and in some ways is superior for it because you can get away with more shortcuts.The actual animation's a third big point. In 2D you can get away with skipping parts of an action. This is a major principle in anticipation frames, where eight to twelve frames are spent on a relatively small amount of motion, and then the actual action occurs in only one or two. Doing that in 3D makes it look choppy as fuck, and there's several reasons why. In 2D you're drawing the frames by hand, so the slight imperfections change the actual visual center mass location from frame to frame. These imperfections are why 2D animation interlaced to 60FPS look like shit, because it's sticking to one visual center mass and then snapping to another, giving it a jittery look that is augmented by frame blending. In 3D all motions are smoothed using math, so those slight imperfections don't happen. It looks unnatural, because in real life when anything moves it's not a perfect smooth ease in ease out motion. Adding perlin noise makes it worse, because then you have smooth easing with random pops and jitters like the model has tourette's or something.
>>885900shading
>>885900U wot m8?
>>885902>Avatar the last Airbender not on the listAnon?...
>>892250A recent youtube suggestion brought me to a video where some guy made a breakdown/tutorial for imitating the Arcane look with photoshop and Blender. He showed clips from Arcane and points out that for many of the shots the light and shadows and details are just hand painted on from the perspective of the camera, when the characters are in motion that would cause the existing lights/shadows to look off, they just repainted the 'correct' or visually appealing lighting and blend between the two sets of textures as the shot progresses.I think OP is looking for reasons why realtime 3D models/shading don't have the same visual appeal. And while Arcane looks really good, it's because in almost every shot the texture is reworked look it's best.
>>892250Ugh the hideous red-blue fringing. Some producer with "a good eye" must have had an irresistible urge to piss mark the shot with their flair.
>>892479So this is the highly praised Arcane. Did they actually used chromatic aberration on a stylized render....What the fuck where they thinking?
>>885900>cherry picking
>>892485they were thinking like artists, which you are not.
>>892441you have a link for that?
>>892441post it plz
>>885900https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3htJ8pg9t-A
>>885900No one really understands 3d or everything would look better like arcane or AAA games
>>885988Mostly due to material and lighting. Anime figurines are made up of one material and use mostly matte shading for the eye's hair and clothing. The issue is when you try and take and anime style and use 'real life' textures. Using realistic eyes and flesh textures on something that was flat shaded often bumps it up into uncanny territory. I could see a 'fake stop motion' style working if you played with the theming correctly.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot6fa6IQ1NA
>>885900Thought went into every outline and what area is in shade. These things have psychological meaning to humans. 3D characters are only ever going to look like rubber ducks by comparison.
>>893784>>893929i assume they mean this video https://youtu.be/gG7ZoP3fd1w
am i the only one that thought arcane looked ugly?
>>895930Unfortunately no, but you're wrong.
>>895930Yes, you're the only sapient lifeform in the entire universe that thought that arcane looked ugly.
>>895956>>895953characters looked like they were made out of wood. bad style.
>>885900>Why does 3D look so fucking uncanny and unnatural?Dumb cherrypick, model creator here -> mostly this >>885975. Also, Anime models have shadows and darker areas drawn on the texture. In the pic >>885900, it comes clearly not from the texture, but from the light calculations of that program. This is the equivalent like you put an manikin in to a spotlight, it is expected to look like this.
>>885900correction>why DOES ANIME LIKE TOTALLY NOT TRANSLATE INTO 3d OR IRL ?Turns out the anatomy is impossible and looks uncanny. PS: Notice how 2D ashes eyes curve upwards while 3D ashes are like some oversize balls.
>>885975>Its because of lighting.>You cant use accurate lighting that is meant to represent real life objects on Anime characters. If you do you will see that theyre monstrosities that shouldnt exist in the real world with eyeballs the size of tennis balls.>This is why cell shading was created. One of the newest Anime techniques is not even making the eyeballs, instead the pupils and highlights rest on an empty socket with a white background.You're correct and it's a good explanation but I think it can be explained differently.The reason the left pic looks weird as fuck is as you said because of that goddamn eye. That goddamn shaded tennis ball eye. Why doesn't the pic on the right look wrong? Why doesn't the way eyes are drawn in Pokemon look bizarre to us?It's that our brains can fill in the gaps. It's not detailed enough and barely has ANY elements of realism.The picture on the left literally causes cognitive dissonance, as hyperrealistic features such as shading, lighting, the curvature of the eye clash with the anatomically impossible aesthetic.Ash on the left is an abomination.Ash on the right is a normal looking kid.And same goes for the rest of his face - no human face has the contour of an anime face, and no anime face has the smooth, computationally precise shading, with subsurface scattering and global illumination. I don't even want to talk about that fucking disfigured ear.
>>896487To be fair even in the Pokémon anime the eyes look fucking horrible.
3d anime is plenty possible to make look right, its just that you cant follow the reference 1:1 when you're adapting it to a completely logical setting like 3d cgi, especially if you arent gonna go for stylized shading. taking the square enix approach and using semi-realistic faces seems like a way smarter approach
>>896818>o make look right, its just that you cant follow the reference 1:1 when you're adapting it to a completely logical setting like 3d cgi, especially if you arent gonna go for stylized shading. taking the square e Is that supposed to be bad or good? It looks pretty good to me. Source?
>>896818I like the quasi anime look that Dragon Quest and Lupin pulled off. They work much better for 3D. It's shame both films are rancid dog piss though.
>>896818Sauce?
>>885959He's noticing
What if you implement some kind of system that "warps" faces depending on the camera angle like >>891366
>>8859003D models don't normally contort as they rotate, unlike 2D drawings, which tend to change shape as they animate. You often have to put in effort to make them look a bit less uncanny.
>>897205
>>887087everyone keeps saying arksys goes anime good, and they are only halfway there, their movements are choppy, their models are pointy as hell, and most of all they break model all the time as a crutch, like okay its fine in cases where its expressive and bodies have to squash and stretch, but they just don't give a fuck and go to the extreme just to make a shot look slightly better, often times falling into mistakes cause they have to mimic a funky shot.And its also their half-baked "refreshed" look, cant you just make it look how it should? No it has to be wrong in just enough ways, also they don't care for detail at all, 18 jumps her hair aint budging one bit, she does a special now it has to move, chins don't move when talking, sometimes fine but you have the tech to just move the jaw with no problem, that's the annoying thing, we fallow the anime sometimes when we feel like being lazy, but not other times when it requires more work.
>>897202Studio Orange has been using something like that for a while. Any sysem like that will probablt still need manual tweaks though.
>>899929I remember there was also a type of anime character system that made the eyes float in front of the face and just changed their size and positioning depending on the angle, so it always looked like it was attached to the face.
>>896915>>897076i'm the sauce. i made it.
>>900904Thanks
>>885900https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ES1oVgmq8Q
i mean for all its shortcomings rwby seems to look ok
>>901132incredibly subjective
>>885900Nothing about that picture looks uncanny.
I think the Fire Emblem games did 3D anime style the best imo
>>885988Because the material makes it obvious that it's a toy figure.
>>885900with 3D physics some into play. you have to put in extra work to stylise it.>t. compsci student who did 0 3D modeling but wasted his 20's watching youtube videos
Shading carries the show, but it's doable.https://twitter.com/DB_super2015/status/1532648708952702976
>>901246i love their work, but I actually think fire emblem is Anima's weakest production. The stuff they did for the SAO games is really really cool
>>885900Its the uncanny valley effect.
>>885900>>901576Nothing uncanny about it.
>>885987You're thinking of robot chicken
>>885987>Blender instead of V-ray.Blender is a modeling application.V-ray is a renderer.
>>901979>And u are fucking retarded
>>902117who are you quoting newfag?
>>885900It can absolutely work. Take a look at the Lupin III movie that came out no too long ago.
>>901978>>885987>You're thinking of robot chickenIsn't Robot Chicken stop motion animation??
>>902170>Nailed the artstyle>One of the worst fucking stories in all of Lupin
>>885944>>885975These two get it.Most 3D "arists" just make the model and let the dynamic lighting do the work. You should never be at the mercy of the softwares systems during any single frame. You need to set up your shading and design to give you complete control over every parameter which takes effort. Most companies do 3D because they dont want to put in effort.
>why does 2D stylization not translate easily into a completely different dimensional space???It took centuries before artists established the proper way to parse a 3D world into a 2D image.Just the same, it takes a lot of study to take a 2D world and translate it into a 3D volume.
>>902714Except no.
>why does shitty 3D look like shitTruly a mystery.
>>885901I don't want animation to go away.
>>885900Because people use shit shaders instead of UTS2 for unity or other flat lit normal edit shaders?Phong does not look right on models designed to represent drawings.
Are VRChat avatars creepy?https://youtu.be/rCEo4sluFoA
>>904965Just cringe and low quality.
>>904968Only the western ones.
>>905085No.
>>900904can you teach me?
>>891366western animation studios already do this, its no secret knowledge
>>892479it was a good call since you dont want a crisp uncanny result
>>887087Looks choppy as hell, pretty what this anon said >>899824
>>892112Source on this? Google couldn't find anything.
>>885900Bad 3D is jarring.
>>885900>>885901Pencil-drawn art is superior to 3D model animation.
>>906871Assuming infinite funds and time, yea. 3D looks better for the same money and time, though
