Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- I've thought a lot about how to characterize the difference between 3D and hand-drawn stuff. I think the core of it is:
- With hand drawn animation, you draw what you have in your head, first roughly, then you refine it
- With 3d animation, you first need to model everything, then rig it, then work with the bone system to get the motions you want or else mocap, and then set up rigs and stuff so that the mocap actors can do crazy movements, etc etc. Then maybe undo some of the scaffolding the 3d software does: disconnect bones, fake perspective. You have to fiddle with lighting, textures, etc. Or you don't, and just go with whatever's easy to do in the 3d software.
Which means that spontaneity and emotion, like I think this guy's arms should be all wiggly here, are lost. Yeah, you can hand animate then 3d animate on top of the hand animation, but in an industry that's using 3d to cut costs and not because it looks better, that's not going to happen (in any way that keeps the spontaneity).
3d is awesome in that once you've done a huge amount of up-front prep, the rest is easy to iterate on and tweak, but that's a large tradeoff.
I thought that this is one area where I think AI could be a force of good. Keep the animators doing the rough sketches, and AI comes up with the lines, handles the filling, and maybe adds colors with a guide. I haven't seen this yet.
---
I'm not sure I agree on the mentorship parts. IIUC all the major studios and famous animators weren't taught by someone. All the studios have unique flairs that they came up with just by playing around and copying Disney. And they got there without drawing hundreds of thousands of in-between frames for someone else.
I think that being taught the correct way to animate based on existing productions probably also reduces creativity in the field.
I wonder if the earlier creativity was due to voids though, and now that there's some amount of saturation it's harder to break in, or if somehow the increase in revenue from global interest somehow increases stakes and causes more downward pressure squashing out experimentation.
---
There's a lot I don't get about this article though. It says the demand is way up, but the treatment and pay for animators is terrible... why? I didn't see it addressed. Japan has a long history of "non-monetization" though, like refusing to sell digital music overseas, or regional restrictions on streaming content.
---
Lastly, I think there's still a lot of indie animation that gets glossed over. There are lots of independent animators making animations for music videos, for instance, or releasing small animations. I don't know if that grows into larger productions, but there's a level of creativity you'd never see if you just watch televised anime.
by rendaw - The archive.ph link gives me a looping CAPTCHA…by Narushia
- Just today I saw this on Twitter a good example of how AI should be used for animation.by yomismoaqui
- This is actually impressive. If it can output each frame as layers, even more.by punkbit
- Teachers, nurses, game developers ...
Companies get away with paying less because they can exploit the "passion" or intrinsic rewards that the jobs give
by hyfgfh - Teachers and nurses get paid poorly because in general voters do no want to be taxed. And these areas have low efficiency gains. Pretty similar ratio of workers to those taken care have stayed around for long time.by Ekaros
- Sadly, some people believe that Generative AI output is the same; I find it very hard to watch and extremely cringe. I did see some good examples, but still not the same type of quality. For untrained eyes, all look the same, but I'm definitely not that type of person and very supportive of proper craftsmanship. You can see this same thing happening in software engineering and product design.by punkbit
- I'm sure some people believe that genAI outputs look the same as manmade ones. But for most, I think it's pretty clear that they just find them passable enough / not meaningfully different instead (or maybe even interesting in their own way). That is not the same thing: it's not that they don't notice, it's that they do notice but don't mind it. They're not being fooled, as there is no trick from their prespective. The differences were simply never a concern for them to begin with. There isn't even anything wrong with that per se [0].
I can also appreciate how a significant chunk of such images would make someone wince though, but I find it more than a bit confused to then bring up "proper craftsmanship" as the contrast. There's an incredible amount of extremely mediocre illustrations, anime, and other related work, that were made without any genAI tooling. High effort is reserved for the probable hits. Anime is especially teeming with extremely cookie cutter productions, and heavily overused tropes in saturated genres. I don't think the absolute chokehold that the high school romcom and isekai fantasy genres have on recent seasons needs much introduction. You can often just take one glance at a promotion visual and already identify both the genre and the quality right away. Cue the big 3DCG enemy on episode 1 (or 2).
It's also hard to reconcile this with the fundamental fact that the audience of these works is the mass market. Mass market targeting things are inherently bound by mass market sensibilities. Willingly not adopting a breakthrough technology - provided it is actually that - is about as far from proper craftsmanship in such context as it can be. So is being a one trick pony and sticking to an older fad. Making something good while locked away in an ivory tower is one thing. Making something good while simultaneously riding out the wave of actual real world circumstances is another [1]. I respect the latter a whole lot more than the former. Especially since the latter tends to devolve into self-abuse contests, to round off the self serving tendencies they inherently carried anyway. Code golf is a positive example for this. High art, maybe not so much.
I really don't see any reason to go on ideological adventures like this anyhow. You can just not like it, find it cringe, and leave it at that. It does not need some big philosophical undercurrent to suck. It can just look like garbage, be used lazily, and suck that way. And others can simply just disagree with those labels applying.
[0] A friend recently showed me their expensive sunglasses collection. They are indisputably expensive indeed. They are also the same cheap-feeling finnicky garbage as every other pair of sunglasses I've ever encountered. One can appreciate the expertise of someone who can recognize them as expensive, sure. But I think it says a whole lot more that the average person cannot. It's a sign of deep, long running cultural recursion, not unlike how when an LLM is fed LLM text, it degenerates.
[1] Could the average run of the mill show maybe look better and be more animated using genAI than they currently are? I definitely think they might just.
by perching_aix - My only problem with generative art is
1: right now, it's basically 90% beautiful hyper-realistic woman in some scene.
That is SO incredibly boring. These models are able to generate all kinds of never before seen mixed together content. Yet, everyone just wants to generate photos of things you could have already searched for.
2: creative people should be the biggest and loudest voices celebrating it but the vision researchers building the tools have only been interested in solving the math side of it and haven't bothered to ask creatives what they even wanted. It's fine in private R&D, at the hypothesis stage, but then these corporate heads went and shipped as finished products and charge us serious money for it. So, creatives rightly feel uneasy about the models that legitimately "stole" their content without permission, while also minting new millionaires at these companies by selling it back to them.
Once companies license the content and artists can make royalties, and the tools to interface with the models become sophisticated so that you're not one-shot prompting into existence a random thing, more creative people will come back. (i.e. ComfyUI)
---
Plus, these models need actual fully staffed product teams behind them to solve and own the ethical issues around things like character identity locking that can be used to deceive. Or being too easy to say "in the style of" that could almost perfectly replicate another artist's entire voice. Then, there is the nudity issue. I don't want generative models to have morals, especially when it's art. Art is meant to be provocative and boundary pushing. I realize that's an entire deep-hole of shit in there waiting to get through, but that's why we need people spending their work day thinking about it more than just blocking anything that shows too much skin.
by jarjoura - your comment makes me think of how photography was treated by painters. I think similar things will be true for generative AI. It will mostly be trash, just like most photograph is forgettable. But, a few people will find ways to use it to make amazing things, the way amazing photographers have elevated photography.by socalgal2
- Interesting, the "training of new animators" mirrors what has/is happening in other industries.
When I started programming decades ago, an experienced programmer would review my work and help me out. That started ending in the very late 80s and 90s. By 2000 or so, you were on your own as a new employee. I even mentioned it to a high level manager a while ago, he said we expected people we hire to know what they are doing.
I have heard similar things have occurred in manufacturing too.
by jmclnx - God forbid we invest in the future. Investors need those profits now!by jackyinger
- > we expected people we hire to know what they are doing
I feel this is a generational thing. Many baby-boomer parents never took the time to teach their children any skill. They thought they learnt it by osmosis I guess. Their generation outsourced everything they could.
by arkh - Do you think this is a global phenomenon or regional maybe just in the US or the Anglosphere?
- I feel like this might be the transition between an industry driven by apprentice-ship like guidance to an industry driven by credentialed training.by InfiniteRand
- Remember the joke about asking for 5 years of experience with a 5 month old framework?
This is part of the whole move fast and break things mantra. If you have to train people you aren't moving fast enough. And now they can bolt on AI turbochargers.
by MisterTea - It'll be very interesting reading future studies on how this has negatively impacted entire generations. Hopefully people realize that you need to pay younger people living wages to learn skills, if they want people to have those skills in the future.by KyleTheDev
- Anime has never been more popular but honestly its quality has declined a lot. It's all isekai and supernatural-sexy-schoolgirl-whatever (kinda creepy) these days. Or the same old animes that go on forever.
Every year there's less and less animes that are worth the time to watch IMHO.
by world2vec - Funny, that was already true in 2006. It's the thing people keep saying, and yet anime keeps coming out.
Right now they're stuck in the whole "ten shows from the same budget, each run by their own 'committee' and each competing for cash that runs out well before the show's over, and the poor performance very quickly get less per episode". Great for networks, shit for shows. Even worse for animators who need to get paid a living wage.
by TheRealPomax - Given the sheer volume of the output, it is conceivably difficult to maintain the quality of the plots/characters, even if the animation is stable or even improving. As a byproduct of that, more and more ambitious/batshit source texts are being animated, which sometimes works well (Dandadan) and sometimes doesn't (Uzumaki).by macleginn
- by scythe
- What? This is a golden age of anime.
You could count the number of anime available in the west and worth watching 25 years ago on one hand, maybe two.
Now? If you can't find something, you're not looking hard enough. Off the top of my head, current anime that do not remotely fit your categories:
- Spy x Family
- Dandadan
- Dungeon Meshi
- Apocalypse Hotel
- Yumi no Tsugai (Daemons of the Shadow Realm)
- Kaiju No. 8
- Marriage Toxin
- Steel Ball Run
- The Summer Hikaru Died
- Akane-Banashi
- Dorohedoro
edit: formatting. edit 2: added Dorohedoro, good call down below
by KerrAvon - The same ratio of garbage to quality was available back then, there just wasn’t the same level of exposure to the range of output so the worst ones faded into history.by shikshake
- Sturgeon's Law: “[…] they say 'ninety percent of science fiction is crud.' Well, they're right. Ninety percent of science fiction is crud. But then ninety percent of everything is crud, and it's the ten percent that isn't crud that is important.”by kps
- Of course quality is subjective, but my own stats on AniDB show no decline.
I've watch at least one anime produced every year from 1977 to now. For 2000-2025 I've watched 24 to 62 anime of each year. My average vote by year is surprisingly stable at 5 ±0.6.
My top votes also don't show any significative tendency. Out of my 25 favorite anime, 6 were produced in 2020 or later. Notably the film "Kaguya-hime no monogatari", but also seinen series like "Nami yo Kiite Kure", "ACCA" or "Eizouken".
BTW, "Eizouken" (2020) is wonderful, and it's about a young girl wishing to become an animator, and how she creates short animes with her friends. I strongly recommend it!
by idoubtit - After reading this article, I got curious whether there was a similar article from Japan, and there actually is. The average monthly income in the animation industry is 200,000 yen (about $1,300 USD), but the median working hours are 2,745 hours per year. That comes out to 225 hours per month, or 52 hours per week [1][2]. Considering that animators' work is essentially drawing labor, that's an insane amount of work. But even as total production costs and promotional effects grow, none of it reaches the workers on the ground. It seems like in modern industry, the value of promotion and fame outweighs what the laborers actually produce. Actually, when you think about it, this problem is happening across all sectors of society. Ultimately, it's a system where platforms intermediate and monopolize value.
Platforms concentrate their investment in IP and star creators, and the commercial success of these creators in turn increases the platform's value, creating a virtuous cycle. However, this success ultimately ends up concentrated among a small upper tier, while the vast majority are excluded.
The article essentially says the same thing.
It seems like we're in the age of platform capitalism. Come to think of it, the programming world feels similar too
[1]https://nafca.jp/news20241226/
[2]https://prtimes.jp/main/html/rd/p/000000004.000121993.html
by jdw64 - So basically they get paid peanuts and are overworked and so no one wants to do it.
Also seems like something AI could really cut into. You could have a master animator doing much of important thoughtful work and AI filling in the obvious as well as doing tweening (sound similar to programming)
Really, who needs a studio if you have the creative talent and ability to leverage AI for the grunt work. Or have a couple grunt work humans paid these rates to manage the tedious work of leveraging the AI to make it look seamless.
by RobKohr - I'm not sure that average across the entire industry is a good measure of how animators are paid for high budget, high talent features.by limagnolia
- You've just described Hollywood, the music business, but even the supermarket/distribution business. The middleman tends to accumulate all the profit.by toyg
- There's a japanese docuseries called 'Manben' (available on youtube) that interviews a bunch of famous manga artists. Without fail they all talk about how much work, hours, suffering goes into the first years of making manga.
It's very interesting to watch and I highly recommend it. But it's also a GREAT advertisement for avoiding the industry.
by fusslo