I've always been wondering on what makes the great, "great". Art is a general topic to tackle on but let's put our scope to be here in StickPage, specifically animators. A common example of this is "Terkoiz". People refer to him as "One of the greats" or "Legendary-tier" but what exactly makes him different from other great animators that I've seen here(Animators such as Drone and MX, to name a few)?

Is it the quality look of their animations? It's a factor but I don't think it really impacts the audiences that much as there are other animations that look bad but it gives me the final thought "That was great!". So, is it the concept of your work then?

I want to hear your thoughts on this.

Maybe another factor is how much work they've put out. Terkoiz has plenty of well-known animations and his popularity only increases with each successive release.

Another probably thing is their "star works", Terk's primarily known for his RHG track record as well as his RUSHED series. Those probably get spread around and people learn about him through those, get hooked and joined the choir.

Quote from GuardianTempest

Maybe another factor is how much work they've put out. Terkoiz has plenty of well-known animations and his popularity only increases with each successive release.

The idea I'm getting here is that Quantity with Quality = Popularity?

That's an interesting point. The more you pump animations, the more views you'd get since the chances of running by into one of your works increases as your animation count increases. Although, then again, there are animators out there that has only created a 2-3 animations but yet still receive, or even have better, popularity count than those who make more. An example would be Alan Becker's "Animator v.s Animation".

Another probably thing is their "star works", Terk's primarily known for his RHG track record as well as his RUSHED series. Those probably get spread around and people learn about him through those, get hooked and joined the choir.

Which leads to another question. What makes your work qualify as a "Star Work"?

Being unique, creative, original, entertaining. Putting work into your passion.

Quote from WafflesMgee

Being unique, creative, original, entertaining. Putting work into your passion.

That's one thing I'd also like to tackle on.

What is Unique? I can't seem to wrap in my head this term used in describing works of art. Also, "Original" means "Something fresh; Something new in a long time" right? I've seen this word get thrown out a lot but I have not yet seen a criteria for what makes a work "Original". Care to expound in this aspect?

Disclaimer: I am not an expert.

Quote from Zero

The idea I'm getting here is that Quantity with Quality = Popularity?

That's an interesting point. The more you pump animations, the more views you'd get since the chances of running by into one of your works increases as your animation count increases. Although, then again, there are animators out there that has only created a 2-3 animations but yet still receive, or even have better, popularity count than those who make more. An example would be Alan Becker's "Animator v.s Animation".

That is true, but I attribute that to being one of the firsts. I guess if Xiao Xiao guy ever came back and released one animation right now, it would be met with the same applause as it did back then. Tthings were probably different back then.

Which leads to another question. What makes your work qualify as a "Star Work"?

It's a combination of factors, I think, one of which would be preexisting reputation, no matter how small. Of course, following your Alan Becker example, his work is (as waffles said) original and fresh. Rambling here, but I think star works are made when it is notable on a broader scale. The wider the scope of things it is compared to, the better.

Quote from Zero

That's one thing I'd also like to tackle on.

What is Unique? I can't seem to wrap in my head this term used in describing works of art. Also, "Original" means "Something fresh; Something new in a long time" right? I've seen this word get thrown out a lot but I have not yet seen a criteria for what makes a work "Original". Care to expound in this aspect?

My speculation is that it's original when compared to the local environment. For example, amidst the dozens of sword-wielding speedsters, there's gladiators like Handyman, Oxob and ShadowRose. Of course, when you compare them to the entire pantheon of fiction, they're not that original because there's Beetlejuice, Yang Xiao Long and Kurama. (I know, Beetlejuice isn't the embodiment of Psychological Horror but that's not the point)

Quote from Zero

That's one thing I'd also like to tackle on.

What is Unique? I can't seem to wrap in my head this term used in describing works of art. Also, "Original" means "Something fresh; Something new in a long time" right? I've seen this word get thrown out a lot but I have not yet seen a criteria for what makes a work "Original". Care to expound in this aspect?

Unique is having something not directly copied or borrowed or intentionally similar to something else. If it's similar to something else out of pure coincidence, then that's just what happens, but being unique is aiming to do something from your own ideas rather than using someone else's. That's what I think.

I think it's idea of making impressive work, but continuously.

Fyte animashuns with sooper eazing n spacing. Gud hand positions are a must. Dats wut makes a gr8 anim8er.

Quote from GuardianTempest

Disclaimer: I am not an expert.

It doesn't matter but it does help if you have some experience with animation. So, feel free to give out your inputs.

That is true, but I attribute that to being one of the firsts. I guess if Xiao Xiao guy ever came back and released one animation right now, it would be met with the same applause as it did back then. Things were probably different back then.

One of the firsts?

It's a combination of factors, I think, one of which would be preexisting reputation, no matter how small. Of course, following your Alan Becker example, his work is (as waffles said) original and fresh. Rambling here, but I think star works are made when it is notable on a broader scale. The wider the scope of things it is compared to, the better.

Broader scale? To what length?

My speculation is that it's original when compared to the local environment. For example, amidst the dozens of sword-wielding speedsters, there's gladiators like Handyman, Oxob and ShadowRose. Of course, when you compare them to the entire pantheon of fiction, they're not that original because there's Beetlejuice, Yang Xiao Long and Kurama. (I know, Beetlejuice isn't the embodiment of Psychological Horror but that's not the point)

That's an interesting point.

Quote from WafflesMgee

Unique is having something not directly copied or borrowed or intentionally similar to something else. If it's similar to something else out of pure coincidence, then that's just what happens, but being unique is aiming to do something from your own ideas rather than using someone else's. That's what I think.

Isn't that originality?

Quote from Rosie

I think it's idea of making impressive work, but continuously.

Which delves into what I asked earlier, what makes your work "Impressive". Like, when you watch something and you go "Wow, that was amazing!" and you remember it for a long time. What's a factor/s that makes you say that.

Quote from Nish

Fyte animashuns with sooper eazing n spacing. Gud hand positions are a must. Dats wut makes a gr8 anim8er.

God dammit Nish.

i don't mean to offend anyone, but i honestly don't enjoy stick fight animations at all anymore, and i'd be hesitant to call Terkoiz a "great animator." there are endless professional animators spanning decades who have made things i would admire and enjoy much more. however, he and many other stick animators certainly have achieved a mastery of their craft and are extraordinarily good at what they do, so they are great in that regard.

Quote from Zero

let's put our scope to be here in StickPage

if i keep the scope very small, then i would say a great stickpage animator is someone who can consistently transfer their ideas to fleshed out videos (achieving their goals without disappointment) that entertain people, and someone who gives back to the community using their skills.

originality is not a big factor here when you are trying to fit into a genre, imo

I dunno wut u guyz r tlkin abt. Its nt abt bein orignial or uniqe. Itz abt tking the sme tired formula dat gets old aafta 2 tymes n mkin fyte animashun wit relly good movemnts n FX n smuthness n avoid ne type f story or thotz lelz.

Depends on how much it interests you or how well they've executed the animation to everyone's/one's liking, thus making them like it just like how other people do too, and maybe inspiring them to try to do things like it.

Nish:
Lol, you're speaking like a bee stung your tounge

Quote from Index

i don't mean to offend anyone, but i honestly don't enjoy stick fight animations at all anymore, and i'd be hesitant to call Terkoiz a "great animator." there are endless professional animators spanning decades who have made things i would admire and enjoy much more. however, he and many other stick animators certainly have achieved a mastery of their craft and are extraordinarily good at what they do, so they are great in that regard.

Likewise. This is the reason why I've moved on to studying art so I can start making Full Body animations. What I meant by Terkoiz being called a "Great animator" is the community here claiming him to be one(At which, I don't disagree. He really is good at animation) but they put it in such a way that he's the best of them all which isn't true(You already pointed it out though haha, I just reworded it).

if i keep the scope very small, then i would say a great stickpage animator is someone who can consistently transfer their ideas to fleshed out videos (achieving their goals without disappointment) that entertain people, and someone who gives back to the community using their skills.

Also, how does one differentiate "Amusing" with "Entertaining"?

originality is not a big factor here when you are trying to fit into a genre, imo

Oh, how so? Isn't giving a fresh idea(Of course, when executed well enough) a big factor? Things like One Punch Man makes the idea of "Originality"/"Uniqueness" a big thing, or am I wrong?

Quote from Ipman

Depends on how much it interests you or how well they've executed the animation to everyone's/one's liking, thus making them like it just like how other people do too, and maybe inspiring them to try to do things like it.

We'll talk about this objectively. Yes, it is impossible to please every viewer but there are standards to tell if something is "Good" or "Shit".

That's what I want to know. Certain factors that makes someone "Good" or "Shit".