Animation Source Forums

When I was watching Balto 3 this what i found.
the blooper look at kodi's tail.

Okay...I don't mean to be nasty, but wwwwwwhat is it?

I can't abide people who say "guess what, I found a blooper", then show a screen shot, and give NO explanation about what the blooper is! As if everyone is supposed to be savvy about what they're referring to!

Explain it, please...

This may help,but I don't see where there's any blooper?

Nope. Still not seeing it. Can we all just be plain about it, and say what the blooper is? Or are we supposed to be engaged in some kind of guessing contest?

I think I know what the blooper is. Balto_claw posted this on the shoutbox before and explained it.
Anyway, there's no white on Kodi's tail like there is in this shot:

Oh. Well, firstly, THANKS Kari!

From what I can see, it simply looks like the artists were supposed to color in the open area, between his body and tail, with the white color, and made an error in judgement...perhaps thinking that leaving no gap might confuse people, or make the body look out of proportion.

Still, if you all are going to post bloopers you found, have the courtesy, please, to say what the heck they are! Not everyone has a keen eye, or even really cares enough about bloopers to minutely inspect the dvds for them. What are we becoming now? Geek fans like those extremist types who go to Star Wars and Star Trek conventions, and know every line and episode number by heart???

Oh now I get it,Balto claw was saying there wasn't any white in one screenshot.

Not only that look how skinny kodi's tail is....

Kari,I found another blooper,in your screenshot,Kodi's legs and paws look like Jenna's.

Gang...a "blooper" is usually defined as a mistake made in live action. Not a momentary variation in art resulting from animation. And if we didn't have DVD players and DVD-ROMs, most of you would probably not even notice these things you refer to as "bloopers". Apart from everything else, you're using the wrong term. Still, a lot of what you people are calling "bloopers" are not at all. They're simple and momentary fluctuations in the art resulting from animation (and, perhaps, sloppy editing).

To wit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blooper (yeah yeah...but even though this is a Wikipedia entry, it actually is correct in this case)

Wikipedia is very reliable. It has been proved that it was as much reliable as the average encyclopedia. Even though anyone can edit.

Well, that's the problem...anyone can edit an entry. Even a child. And how reliable is anything that is posted by a child? LOL. It's bad enough that there are plenty of not-so-intelligent adults accessing stuff like Wikipedia and posting (and/or editing) things that have no foundation.

I repeat myself : there have been studies, and it has been proved that it is
as much reliable as the average encyclopedia.
Anyone can edit, but also anyone can correct. It's just an awesome system. I was sometimes wondering if I could do something similar on BS, but I think it would be too complex to organize. I'll stick with articles for now

Ok, well enough for the off-topic...

Well, it is a blooper. right?