In terms of what fans and viewers usually discuss when it comes to the quality, impression, or impact that a show or piece of media has on them, they normally talk about the various aspects that make up that work in its finished state. Selected character designs, plot twist choices, narrative flow, animation, and sound mixing are all basic aspects that a reviewer will note when describing an anime. Sometimes, though it is significantly less common, a reviewer will discuss aspects of production that went into a show, ranging from mentioning the director and their previous works, to rumors or interview statements regarding aspects of production that determined the direction that the show eventually went toward.

These aspects aren’t greatly discussed for the majority of fans because it’s difficult to understand and grasp all of the roles that go into creating a work without extensive research, or even taking classes on the subject. Most don’t feel qualified to make judgments, and it’s responsible to not bring up something like that when you don’t feel comfortable with what you know. So, normally, referencing older works from an individual on staff with a large amount of power and control over the show is typically good enough to give viewers a decent idea regarding what the show will be like if they are familiar with their old works. Telling someone who has never seen Space☆ Dandy that the director, Shinichiro Watanabe, also wrote and directed Cowboy Bebop and Samurai Champloo will hopefully let them know what kind of show they are in for: a fun and episodic adventure with unique personalities and interesting settings with, more than likely, a strong musical composition. In terms of a recommendation, this is beneficial and easy to mention and helps the viewer if they know the past works or individual in question, or have been a fan of anime for a while.

Sometimes reviewers or critics push beyond this and discuss more complex or abstract concepts, like budget and production value. While on the surface these concepts are pretty easy to understand, that does not make them necessarily easy to use in a critique or breakdown of the overall quality or presentation of a show.

One thing that is very important is how anime gets made and the kinds of roles that are delegated to the staff. Many of us who are from western countries who have our own way of creating animated works, will assume that it is similar to what we are familiar with here. In terms of Disney, for instance, one usually pictures a large amount of artists (at least in terms of traditional animation) each working on different shots in a scene or painting each frame. The director is rarely the writer of the movie, and normally the writer is rarely on staff passed the storyboard stage, and the director has a lot of power over the work. Whether these descriptions are accurate or not, it seems like a lot of people tend to go off some of these aspects in assuming that all animated works are made this way (along with staff reduction and different teams in terms of digital animation.)

Anime is not created this way, wherein one aspect of animation is normally taken on by one individual, and scenes can be hired out to other individuals if need be. There are teams working on aspects, certainly, but a lot of the bulk is taken on by individuals on individual aspects (one person creates every key frame for one episode, for instance.) One of the best examples of how anime is created has been released to fans in the best way for them to absorb the information: an anime about making anime.

This recently finished two-cour show presents two examples (one per cour) of this small team of individuals working on a project and dealing with many things that can go wrong during production. People leaving in the middle of a project, problems with scheduling and finishing an episode on time, finding an animator for a scene that is beyond the current artists, and plenty of other problems. It’s a fascinating inside look on how our favorite medium is made, in the form of that medium. Although the show doesn’t necessarily dive into budget or production value as terms or ideas, it gives a very straightforward look at the process and attempts to shed some light on the daily activities of the people who work in anime studios and what their jobs consist of.

A lot of critics, when discussing fluctuation in the quality of an anime, will normally cite the budget as the reason behind the change or downgrade. When episodes in shows randomly have a style change in regards to animation (Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann‘s Ep. 4, Shin Sekai Yori‘s Ep. 5, etc.) those who do not think to or don’t find it important enough to attempt to research the cause of the change (different episode directors)[1][2] will typically chalk the result up to budget running out for that episode, or being pressed for time and thus the style being affected. While these could potentially make sense, when you know even the slightest bit about how anime is handled, especially in regard to the above examples, that assertion is ridiculous. When you consider Yamauchi Shigeyasu, the guest director for the fifth and tenth episodes of Shin Sekai Yori, who also was the official director for Casshern Sins, the stylistic change makes a hell of a lot more sense.

The two styles are incredibly distinct here. Episode 5 and 10 have much simpler character designs with less attention to shadow on the characters and a lot more bloom, color experimentation, and lighting affects. While this style difference is a bit jarring to viewers, it is still very interesting, and is a clear tell for the person that directed those episodes, considering the look of Casshern Sins.

If the style of a show changes dramatically for one or two episodes and then goes back to normal it is almost always because they changed the people that were working on that episode. Budget will really only come into play near the end of a show, since it is the over all amount of money that the company, and team of workers, are receiving to keep the project moving forward. Sure, the overall budget is divided amongst all the aspects of the show and the teams that create them, but the likelihood of that monetary amount reflected randomly for an episode in the middle of the show is almost nonexistent. Quality in any aspects of a show could potentially be due to budget restraints, but the most likely answer is the changes of the people involved, whether that be episode directors or writers themselves, or changing ideas that can be difficult to keep up with (as is the case most cited besides budget for Ep 25 and 26 for Neon Genesis Evangelion.)

Production value is probably the most traditional and multimedia spanning buzzword we’ll discuss in this series. This term can refer to anything with a staff or anything created for entertainment and consumption. This word is used in reference to any television show, anime included, and is also typically used in reference to films. First, let’s define the plural form of the word, which is the most common:

This definition[3] isn’t quite what you might have expected. It refers mainly to physical abilities and skills that are used in production of a movie or stage performance. According to this definition, production value would refer to a singular skill, like Jim Henson’s skills in creating amazing animatronics and puppets. In reference to anime, if we were to use this definition towards the animated medium, we would more than likely be referring to the particular skills of each of the staff members. The key animators and their skills in creating the most accurate and uniform key frames, the director’s ability to compile a fleshed out and intuitive storyboard, the cgi animators’ abilities to make well-blended and good looking 3D models, etc.

However, in terms of what fans usually mean when they use the term production value(s), is the overall quality of a show or its various aspects. That’s generous, considering most reviewers or those writing a critique will use it to refer almost exclusively to the way a show looks and little else.

– “The only thing that made Fate/Zero (Unlimited Blade Works) stand out was high production value; its characters were terrible.”

– “There really isn’t much more to Guilty Crown than its production value, and if you watch it more closely you’ll see that it’s all production value (or passion, as you call it) and no substance whatsoever.”

– “In terms of production values, Madoka Magica wins for simply having the biggest budget. I am not a fan of the style but I admit far more effort was placed into this show than the other [Magical Girl deconstruction shows] combined.”



Bonus points for TheAnimeSnob for using both in the same example. The three anime that these examples are siting are well known for their visuals which are shown by the example scenes provided. These assertions claim that what you see in these gifs (good lighting, use of color, unique direction, good choreography, etc.) is all these shows have to offer. To be fair, if “production value” in any of these examples were to be followed up with “in terms of the artistic direction” or “in reference to the animators,” then they would be more accurate and essentially correct. In these examples, all are arguing that the shows look pretty, but that they are what you might call “style over substance,” in that the looks are all the shows have going for them. Anything in terms of narrative, themeing, characters, and depth is inconsistent at best and nonexistent at worse according to them. There is nothing wrong necessarily with a show that does these qualities well and focuses on them, but fans of these shows will undoubtedly disagree that they are hollow in other aspects.

Using production value to refer to only visuals has its roots in the original definition, which references skills for visual aspects, but using the term to discuss the overall look of something, or even as a reference to the budget that the team was granted is a clear misunderstanding of what the word actually means. It would be naive to imply that the value of a piece of media hangs strictly on how good it looks (*coughvideogamescough*) as well as implying that the amount of money one is given for a project has zero impact on how that project looks when it’s finished, but the look or quality of something doesn’t hinge completely on needing a large monetary backing either. It might sound sappy, but it’s the people on a team that matter and how well they work together that really determines how well a project turns out. As Digibro mentions in his video discussing budget[4], Kyo-Ani has a tightknit team that consistently puts most if not all of their efforts into one project at a time, maybe two, and rarely if ever hires out of the company for work on their shows (in terms of animation.) They shouldn’t receive a higher budget than anyone else (there’s no reason for it,) but they funnel that money and effort into as few properties as possible and allocate it in such a way that the shows are consistent in quality. While this sounds like a partial argument for more money = better quality, if the team has difficulties working together and decisions are being overturned, no amount of money can fix the team’s splintering. On that note, if money is being spent arbitrarily or there isn’t a very well coordinated effort to use their given money wisely (i.e. waste a lot of complex fight scenes early in the show and have to recoup those loses later by using still frames and reused footage) then that will also impact a show negatively, despite them having plenty of money to make a good show.

If Shirobako has taught us anything, it’s that the human element is always most important when making something that is chiefly a creative work. Each role is a cog in the whole machine, and each needs to function in order for all roles to eventually succeed. There is no such thing as perfect production of a project (even Cowboy Bebop went through problems with sponsorship) and it is up to everyone working on said project, be it anime, video games, or something else, to adjust and work around any obstacles. Sometimes money is that obstacle while other times it’s outside pressure, or inside fighting. When it comes to critiquing a work, especially when referring to the more technical details behind how something is made, the critic only hurts themselves when they don’t do proper research into that process. While budget is certainly important, and can reflect on certain production values in a work, it is not the only contributor to a show’s quality, and that is important to keep in mind when examining the quality and value of a creative work.

Thank you to everyone who has been keeping up with these so far. This is the fourth part of a multi-part series on anime buzzwords. If you would like to read the others, click the “buzzwords” tag at the bottom, or “anime” for those articles and more!

Banner image from here.

Sources/More Information

[1] – Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann Wikia – Episode 4

[2] – MyAnimeList – Yamauchi Shigeyasu Staff Credits

[3] – Definition for Production Values – Wiktionary

[4] – Stop Blaming Budget for Animation Quality – Digibro, Youtube

– First two production value quotes are from the Hummingbird Forums and the last quote is from TheAnimeSnob’s Magical Girl Deconstruction Comparisons on Youtube.

-Shin Sekai Yori Stills for Episodes 5, 9, 10, and 11.