Are people exaggerating ZUN's drawings?

[TheRadicalX]

I completely agree; granted, I do find a few of his designs to be a bit clunky every so often, but then again, nobody's perfect, right? For example, although I'm well-aware that there are quite a few people on this forum who really, really love Utsuho, I would suggest that, while her overall design has plenty of worthwhile inspiration to it, I'm not the biggest fan of her schoolgirl motif or the unexplainable control rod attached to her arm that virtually came from out of thin air in canon, especially considering that her best friend, Rin, has a much more appropriate color scheme and style of dress for the area in which they live, in my honest opinion~

I believe that he's referring to color luminosity, such as with the gradual changes from light to dark and vice versa~

I agree with that. Utsuho's design is cool to us because we're used to it, but really, it's not one of ZUN's best works. It's kind of a mish-mash, to be honest. Rin's design is another one of his best though.

And that's pretty much it, yeah. Having a grasp of value is understanding how luminosity and light works - value studies are often in black and white for this reason so as to eliminate color as a distraction.

I think this is a fair point. Illustrations can cover all kinds of styles, though, not just realism with regards to proportion, values and skin tones. I'm sure the style is due in part, as you say, to not have the time to put into character art, but I think it's never been his intention to draw realistically. You can definitely see some major screw-ups in intent in the early Windows games, but I think these have for the most part smoothed out over time to a preferred style, aesthetically speaking, not just in regards to his time frame. The charm, for me, is less about the comedic value and more about ZUN's chosen style of illustration. The familiarity you bring up is also naturally a part of this.

The problem with saying it's just his style, though, is that it... isn't. I may not be the best artist, but I do frequent several art communities so I can at the very least say this - exaggeration or abstraction without a grounding in fundamental basics is different from deliberately choosing what to abstract, stylize or exaggerate because you understand how everything works at the basic levels. ZUN's arms, legs, to some degree torsos, and blatantly his faces aren't just that way because of his style - they're that way, and obviously so, because ZUN fundamentally does not understand how to realistically portray anatomical features. That's why instead of proper calves, all of his characters have anaemic sausages attached to their knees. It's why he can't draw a chin to save his life and there's no sense of how his characters' skulls actually sit inside their heads.

I'm not saying that the only right way to do art is to do it realistically, I'm just saying that until you have that fundamental knowledge of form, value and color (of which ZUN only has the  latter, and only to a certain degree), you won't be able to stylize in a deliberate, informed way, and mistakes, poor choices and lack of study will be apparent.

[Clarste]

I completely agree; granted, I do find a few of his designs to be a bit clunky every so often, but then again, nobody's perfect, right? For example, although I'm well-aware that there are quite a few people on this forum who really, really love Utsuho, I would suggest that, while her overall design has plenty of worthwhile inspiration to it, I'm not the biggest fan of her schoolgirl motif or the unexplainable control rod attached to her arm that virtually came from out of thin air in canon, especially considering that her best friend, Rin, has a much more appropriate color scheme and style of dress for the area in which they live, in my honest opinion~

I also kind of dislike Utsuho's design. While individually the parts seem like they should be cool (the red eye on the chest, the giant wings, the starfield cape, etc), in practice they kind of get in each others' way rather than complementing each other. Throw in the rather uninspired generic clothing and giant ribbon for no reason and she just looks kind of weird.

[pineyappled]

This is what TD Seiga looks like under her clothes.


e-

[Ikari]

e-

That pose always freaked me out. She's an extra boss, a never seen character and we get that pose. A winking weird pose.

[M M]

I also kind of dislike Utsuho's design. While individually the parts seem like they should be cool (the red eye on the chest, the giant wings, the starfield cape, etc), in practice they kind of get in each others' way rather than complementing each other. Throw in the rather uninspired generic clothing and giant ribbon for no reason and she just looks kind of weird.

I think it's on the contrary. Having a single feature of her removed would shift the attention to the left side of her body, making her look too asymetrical. The eye draws some of the attention to her center, and the enormous wings and cape makes her sillhouette seem more evened out. The ribbon is so she won't die :V

Design-wise, I think she was simply brilliant, being an excession in a game where most characters are recognized by their dresses, hair color or hats. The only weird thing imo is how her hair isn't divided, making it seem like her cape and wings aren't attached to her.

Even alphes overlook this... but the artist who drew her in SoPM divided her hair.

[Chuckolator]

This is what TD Seiga looks like under her clothes.

You awful man, remove those immediately.

[Darth_Sirov]

You awful man, remove those immediately.

This reply made me lol in conjunction with the username.

But that template is so like Ao Usagi's

[pineyappled]

You awful man, remove those immediately.

If it makes you feel any better, I did my zombie waifu.

Which is admittedly not that bad aside from those godawful hands.

[Imosa]

I also kind of dislike Utsuho's design. While individually the parts seem like they should be cool (the red eye on the chest, the giant wings, the starfield cape, etc), in practice they kind of get in each others' way rather than complementing each other. Throw in the rather uninspired generic clothing and giant ribbon for no reason and she just looks kind of weird.

I pretty much agree. I always thought she was a very busy looking character. however I feel like everything could be fixed with a better color scheme.

[Tengukami]

The problem with saying it's just his style, though, is that it... isn't.

Only I didn't say it's just his style. I did say time concerns probably go into it. But there is clearly a style he has, that he has developed, and chooses to use.

ZUN's arms, legs, to some degree torsos, and blatantly his faces aren't just that way because of his style - they're that way, and obviously so, because ZUN fundamentally does not understand how to realistically portray anatomical features. That's why instead of proper calves, all of his characters have anaemic sausages attached to their knees. It's why he can't draw a chin to save his life and there's no sense of how his characters' skulls actually sit inside their heads.

Yeah, and what's up with Fred Flintstone? His head is the size of his torso! Homer Simpson's eyeballs are halfway out of their sockets, Ren's legs are way too short to support his torso, and don't even get me started on the Moomins.

You see where I'm going here, right? You're taking a very narrow selection of criteria for what constitutes "good" illustration - in this case, proportion, values, and drawing chins properly - and using it as the yard stick, when there are many, many examples of fantastic illustrations that ignore all of these things.

I'm not saying that the only right way to do art is to do it realistically, I'm just saying that until you have that fundamental knowledge of form, value and color (of which ZUN only has the  latter, and only to a certain degree), you won't be able to stylize in a deliberate, informed way, and mistakes, poor choices and lack of study will be apparent.

Ah, now I see where you're coming from. This is the kind of artistic prescriptivism that people have been hammering on for centuries, with regards to illustration, music, writing and so forth, and it's just demonstrably false. You do not need "fundamental knowledge" of anything to produce good art. It helps, and it can certainly give you an enriching education on styles and techniques, but they are not prerequisites for "good" art.

[Zerviscos]

His anatomy is pretty bad. Fan arts are more likely to be more prominent as being considered the "canon" for those who aren't even familiar with the series. If I'm going to guess, ZUN never really mind any of these. Ever since HRtP, his illustrations looks weird, deformed, and whack. Then again, he never cared, nor even he tried to improve even if it's a long shot. We can clearly see all his illustrations vary so much that it's different in each series. If he's lazy, he'll just recycle a character image and put it on another game(just like Cirno is PCB stage 1).

All I got to say is...ZUN is a drunkard bastard who said he keeps drawing little girls 'cause he can't draw mature women and the fact he can't draw well, but he doesn't really care.

[BL2W]

Yeah, and what's up with Fred Flintstone? His head is the size of his torso! Homer Simpson's eyeballs are halfway out of their sockets, Ren's legs are way too short to support his torso, and don't even get me started on the Moomins.

... Except it's clear that ZUN isn't trying to make the next Fred Flintstone or Homer Simpson; he's clearly attempting an anime-esque style of illustration. Apples to oranges is all I'm saying.

You do not need "fundamental knowledge" of anything to produce good art.

Er... Yes, one does. "Fundamental knowledge" can account for simply an acute observation of one's surroundings and how they appear from their perspective; the person may not know the terms that apply to such observations, but there clearly needs to be some sort of awareness in one's brain in order to create any sort of art, regardless of others' opinions of the results~

[Tengukami]

... Except it's clear that ZUN isn't trying to make the next Fred Flintstone or Homer Simpson; he's clearly attempting an anime-esque style of illustration. Apples to oranges is all I'm saying.

How is it apples to oranges? We're talking about illustrations. This doesn't change what I'm saying - there are countless "good" illustrative works that follow few if any rules of proportion and value.

Er... Yes, one does. "Fundamental knowledge" can account for simply an acute observation of one's surroundings and how they appear from their perspective; the person may not know the terms that apply to such observations, but there clearly needs to be some sort of awareness in one's brain in order to create any sort of art, regardless of others' opinions of the results~

No, one really doesn't. Learning fundamentals such as body proportions, sheet music and the Inverted Pyramid of journalism can help you improve tremendously, but they are not absolute pre-requisites of good art, and there are thousands of examples across history and media that demonstrate this.

Ultimately, this is an unresolvable argument, I think. Prescriptivists are always going to insist that "good" art can be objectively measured, while everyone else is going to go by their tastes.

[BL2W]

And anime characters are all about proportion, right? This doesn't change what I'm saying - there are countless illustrative works that follow few if any rules of proportion and value.

First, TheRadicalX has a reference for his opinion: anime-style artwork. ZUN is clearly working based off of the proportions commonly demonstrated in anime, manga, and the like; therefore, the anime, manga, and the like are the point of reference here in this discussion. Second, by saying that ZUN shouldn't have to care about--or even be knowledgeable of--such proportions or values that he clearly is, in fact, already aware of and comparing himself to... actually comes across as demeaning his ability a bit, in my honest opinion. Just saying~ :wat:

[Zerviscos]

Ah, now I see where you're coming from. This is the kind of artistic prescriptivism that people have been hammering on for centuries, with regards to illustration, music, writing and so forth, and it's just demonstrably false. You do not need "fundamental knowledge" of anything to produce good art. It helps, and it can certainly give you an enriching education on styles and techniques, but they are not prerequisites for "good" art.

Er... Yes, one does. "Fundamental knowledge" can account for simply an acute observation of one's surroundings and how they appear from their perspective; the person may not know the terms that apply to such observations, but there clearly needs to be some sort of awareness in one's brain in order to create any sort of art, regardless of others' opinions of the results~

I'm gonna cut you guys off there.

As far as for this "fundamental knowledge" goes. It's also clear that one doesn't simply see art as good art. You cannot just make good art like that without having something known. Throughout art's history it's always been like that. Good art varies from time to time, and person to person. Though having little knowledge seems unlikely to actually produce good art. Let's talk about history. Dadaism in the 19th century, became fundamental for anti-movements 'cause it was a way of expression, their idea came from older arts they "learned" and simply wants to change it, and ridicule common customs. Surrealism came into mind in the early 20th century as the changing of the old ways of dadaism, as dadaism was a way like expressionism did as a tone of underlying madness, as said by Salvador Dali, for madmen; "The only difference between a madman and myself, is that I am not mad." It was more of visualizing in-depth imagination(not only dreams, but everything else you would "think" is surreal or can exist in the subconscious).  It was clearly a much more harder-to-understand movement, but the thing that makes it good is that "it's so wrong, that makes it so right".

Thing is. There might be no direct "fundamental knowledge" to produce good art, but there is in fact a need of anything you will find knowledgeable to make good art. As art is not something completely easy to understand for the common folk, as they will always criticize, and that's why you need a certain degree to have an idea pop up. It's not the fundamentals of art if we're talking about proportions, anatomy, perspective, or anything else, but there are the "fundamentals" of art(google if you don't know). Art doesn't need to be precise to be good art. Again, history...Expressionism, Pablo Picasso, a known expressionist, and his painting "Starry Night"...it did not perceive right perspective, nor right lighting. Edward Munch's "The Scream", again no right anatomy, wavy lines, yet depicting motion. Yes, we all know that "dem damn expressionist are mad bastards", but they are good art, and they did get their "knowledge" from experience. Same goes with neoclassicism, having older art styles, yet differing some points. Impressionism, having seen the basis of what you see as art.

Lastly again, for the fundamentals of art. You can't make art, if you don't even know them. It doesn't have to be exact as perceived by our 3-dimensional reality. As long as it has the fundamentals of art, it is art(again, google if you don't know.) Minimalism, is a good example of how the "common folk" see as "what the hell is this?!" art.

So going back to ZUN. ZUN, doesn't really mind he doesn't follow the right proportions. Thing is, other than he is drunk, he is quite a bit stubborn, and lazy for a room of improvement, IF HE IS FOLLOWING the traditional way of creating manga/anime characters. Then again...did he really try to improve ever since PC-98's HRtP up to Window's TD? Maybe he did quite a bit, but not by much.
 

[Tengukami]

Second, by saying that ZUN shouldn't have to care about--or even be knowledgeable of--such proportions or values that he clearly is, in fact, already aware of and comparing himself to... actually comes across as demeaning his ability a bit, in my honest opinion. Just saying~ :wat:

What? No. This is either deliberately obtuse or just dishonest. Saying that a person does not need to know The Sacred Fundamentals Of Art to produce good art does not demean his drawings in any way, shape or form.

My entire point is that I am a bit tired of folks who preach from their ivory tower about their being some objective standard for what constitutes "good" art. It's a pointless argument that has been going on for millenia, no matter how many new works come and go, no matter how forms change, no matter how, yes - shocker of shockers - you don't even actually need to know whatever these nebulous "fundamentals" are to end up producing something loved by many, many people. There's always going to be a group of people who treat art like math, insisting that X = X when X can equal toothpick.

[Zerviscos]

What? No. This is either deliberately obtuse or just dishonest. Saying that a person does not need to know The Sacred Fundamentals Of Art to produce good art does not demean his drawings in any way, shape or form.

My entire point is that I am a bit tired of folks who preach from their ivory tower about their being some objective standard for what constitutes "good" art. It's a pointless argument that has been going on for millenia, no matter how many new works come and go, no matter how forms change, no matter how, yes - shocker of shockers - you don't even actually need to know whatever these nebulous "fundamentals" are to end up producing something loved by many, many people. There's always going to be a group of people who treat art like math, insisting that X = X when X can equal toothpick.

I myself is not constituting what good art is. That's completely impossible to quite do.

ZUN did not go by eliminating the fundamentals of art...as of again, the fundamentals are:

Spoiler:

Elements:
line
shape
value
etc

Principles:
proportion
emphasis
movement
etc

Others:
contrast
dominance
symbolism
etc

ZUN does not need to learn all these, as this are already acquired by his mind already. As again, saying that knowledge is needed, as knowledge can be passed down from influence, and experience.
ZUN has everything of what makes an art. The same goes as what little kindergarten kids doodle, as it is still defined as art, as long as it has one of the fundamentals(again go back to what I said about "minimalists").

[Tengukami]

ZUN does not need to learn all these, as this are already acquired by his mind already. As again, saying that knowledge is needed, as knowledge can be passed down from influence, and experience.
ZUN has everything of what makes an art. The same goes as what little kindergarten kids doodle, as it is still defined as art, as long as it has one of the fundamentals(again go back to what I said about "minimalists").

Yeah, you and I are in agreement. I was responding to folks who were chiming in to say that his art is "objectively" bad, and then tried to back this up with "evidence".

Just to be clear, guys - I am not saying that an artist should not learn the fundamentals of their chosen medium. They can help tremendously in the creation of good art, and can be useful tools for an artist to convey what they want to convey. What I take issue with is the very idea that there is even such a thing as "objectively bad" art, let alone that learning certain fundamentals is necessary to make "good" art.

[BL2W]

You cannot just make good art like that without having something known.

Thing is. There might be no direct "fundamental knowledge" to produce good art, but there is in fact a need of anything you will find knowledgeable to make good art.

This was, indeed, all I was trying to say about that particular subject. Thank you for summarizing it~

[TheRadicalX]

Bah, my tone is still more aggressive than I intend it to be. I didn't mean to turn this into a heated argument, sorry. xD

I'm not saying that in order to ever produce a good drawing, an artist needs to go through years of rigorous study! I'm not saying that any person who does art without having done that studying will ever and on be incapable of producing anything we can judge as "good" until they pass that magical point where they've done enough studies to be considered "good." There is no magical point and there is no precise scale. If I was prescribing that, I'd be trying to support a horribly illogical binary notion of skill that was just completely at odds with reality.

But I don't think many artists could produce art that is consistently good or appealing without that sort of studying, no matter what sort of art they're trying to do. They won't have the knowledge to be able to deliberately choose what parts of their picture they stylize and in what way. So one time they might hit on the perfect combination of symbols to produce a really aesthetically appealing drawing. Take a look through any teenager's deviantArt page and I'm sure you'll find a gem or two, depending on your own tastes. But the odds of them producing that same phenomenon over and over again get lower the further you go on - you can't just follow a formula you don't understand (eyes are this collection of lines, mouths are this collection of lines, etc. etc. ...) and expect success every single time.

I think most of the great artists that En posted certainly bent, broke and outright ignored the rules in their pictures, and those pictures came out fine. And that's not something I'm trying to argue shouldn't happen! Again, quality is not a binary and the enjoyment of art is subjective. But in order to do the things they did, each one of those artists studied. [nsfw][nsfw]Salvador Dali[/nsfw] [nsfw]studied.[/nsfw] [nsfw]Pablo Picasso[/nsfw] [nsfw]studied.[/nsfw] Edvard Munch... well, I couldn't really find any works explicitly labelled as studies, but he did realism too.

The above NSFW links to academical studies and realistic works by a couple grand masters, I marked them NSFW because, well, studies imply nudity.

I'm not going to boast about how I could probably find studies and realistic portrayals from any artist you can name because I know that's arrogant and that that way lies madness, but these are all great men famed for their flouting of the artistic convention of their times. Before and during that, they studied and worked in realistic fashion. I'm (again) not saying that the only good art is art done in a traditional style, or with perfectly correct anatomy, or that art can only be good if the artist has passed some arbitrary point in their studies that now marks them as "good." None of that is true, and it'd be daft to suggest it.

But in order to produce consistently good, appealing art, you either need to be lucky enough to win against the odds despite not really understanding the choices you make in a piece or the symbol sets you're using, or you need to study. And I'm passionate about this because I never had anyone tell me that. I just kept doodling away as a teenager without any real understanding of what I was doing, and the public idea of "art" as being some sort of strange hedge magic meant that there was never any indication that hey, all the great artists did studies. All the great artists worked their asses off to get to the level of skill they did. And it seems daft to me that I didn't realize that before, but I never had the information. My art has improved by leaps and bounds since I started doing studies, and I'm still just mediocre.

So I guess what I'm saying after all this is that there's no magical formula to get good at an artist, but like anything else you have to put the time in and actually study your medium. ZUN clearly either doesn't have the time or doesn't care to do that - and I can't really blame him, the dude juggles like five different mediums and is excellent in most of them. So he remains a poor illustrative artist. This doesn't mean I'm saying it's bad to like his drawings or that no one should enjoy them! I'm just saying that, at least to me, most of the mistakes he makes are actual mistakes, not deliberately breaking from convention for a desired effect, and that means that whether I'm fond of them or not, to me they're poor drawings.

EDIT: I'm getting the feeling I don't actually understand the use of the NSFW tag.

[Tengukami]

Thanks for the thoughtful response. For the record, as a writer, I do believe that a writer should learn certain writing conventions, whether journalism or fiction. This will assist them tremendously in being able to produce good writing. These conventions are tools. Now, you can buy tools from a store, or you can make them yourself - one is infinitely easier than the other, but both can produce consistently good work.

I appreciate the clarification of where you're coming from here. I just bristle at any notion of an objective standard of "good" or "bad" in the arts, because that notion has been wielded by convention to repress pioneering forms and styles. But the notion that learning convention helps produce good art, yeah, no dispute there.

[haoreos2]

Reply in Haiku:
Full consensus unlikely;
Art is subjective.


There's this cool Asian guy in a hat;
And while his art isn't really "all that",
His designs are amazing,
So fans' inspiration be raising,
Thus producing great fanworks; that's that.


Some think it a purposeful stroke,
To make his art seem like a joke;
With too much on his plate,
He did delegate,
To relieve himself of such a yoke.

For the drunken man in Japan,
Who drew but a passable Ran,
Had fans of great skill,
Bearing pens, (or a quill),
Who improved on the art (as his plan!)

This probably isn't the case,
But it's a fun concept to embrace,
To use art most call bad
To promote a new fad,
Through doujins and say, Hinaface.


A closing statement:
PCB Sakuya rocks
You cannot deny.

[Ikari]

Haiku answer

Someone give this man a medal.

[Aba Matindesu!]

Btw, EoSD Sakuya:
http://i.imgur.com/TFZ6s.jpg

These are the two of the funniest expressions in the series. I don't understand how someone can hate it

Why have I never noticed the ripped sleeves and, more importantly, the blood on her knives?

[Ikari]

Why have I never noticed the ripped sleeves and, more importantly, the blood on her knives?

I... I never noticed it either.

I'm afraid to play EoSD now.

[chema1994]

He's a great composer and programmer, his drawings aren't the best of the best but are still aceptable.