Winnie the Pooh 2011?
Did it do well? I honestly dont recall seeing even a single commercial for it.
Winnie the Pooh 2011?
One frame/picture that get's squashed, stretched and rotated to appear as if it's animated, only very poorly.
Did it do well? I honestly dont recall seeing even a single commercial for it.
i hate these topics because they always shit on modern animation. animation now is amazing and mindblowing and way better than any other time pretty much
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
i hate these topics because they always shit on modern animation. animation now is amazing and mindblowing and way better than any other time pretty much
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
i hate these topics because they always shit on modern animation. animation now is amazing and mindblowing and way better than any other time pretty much
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
Just shows how lazy and over-entitled we've become in the modern era
They were awesome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDATXtewPrg
Some bold claims in this thread, and it certainly makes me wonder how the Animation OT I'm working on will go down.
i hate these topics because they always shit on modern animation. animation now is amazing and mindblowing and way better than any other time pretty much
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
Fleischer animation produced comics' hardest worker
Slightly off topic but how come this style of voice/video was used for so long, like up until the 60s. It's like all documentaries/commercials had this kind of propaganda voice narration, with quaint music in the background. Why did it stop though? Did people 'grow up' out of it in the late 60s/early 70s or something?
I posted this in another thread but....
The lines between them (2d and 3d) have been getting gradually blurry for a very long time. Films like Tarzan - aside from the kickass Phil Collins croons - had buckets of 3D, and it looked utterly beautiful because of it (seriously, watch this - utterly amazing, utterly leveraging the ~80 years of animation knowledge, utterly reliant on 3D) Even Beauty and the Beast back in 1991 had a scene where everything but the characters themselves were 3D, and it's more or less the most iconic scene in the entire film (this one, of course). the Princess and Frog came after a statement that they'd finished with 2D, and maybe if more of you had gone to see and/or not entirely forgotten the subsequent, totally 2D Whinnie the Pooh, they'd make more "traditional 2D" films, but the reality is that what most people see as "2D" and "3D" is a wholly stylistic choice. It's not about closing a certain studio or whatever - it's about what the director wants their film to look like. The techniques, the knowledge of animation and the visual styles are all still there. Paperman was beautiful, but I raise my eyebrow at the idea that someone painting the eyeballs (with a wacom pen, no doubt) rather than it being rendered by Renderman is what makes or breaks a film.
Ghibli is exactly the same, incidentally - a huge chunk of it is 3d and it's all CG.
I don't believe they had Flash or even computers in the 30s.You're talking of 30's animation
Go buy a Disney BluRay and watch the extra content on how they made the films.
Raw talent. Animators were on another level.
i hate these topics because they always shit on modern animation. animation now is amazing and mindblowing and way better than any other time pretty much
id rather see like superjail or gravity falls than popeye or transformers or yogi bear or whatever
i dont disagree i just dont like how these topics turn into dumping grounds for the modernity. its not even specifically animation, same thing for like pink floyd wankfests or classic videogaming threads
Well, Hanna Barbara cartoons were garbage. The '60s through the '80s were a dark age for western animation in many ways. A lot of older cartoons are still great, though. Stuff from Disney like Sleeping Beauty and Fantasia are still mind-blowing, even today.
You still had good animation in the 90s, but nowadays most of it is crap.
Utterly wrong.
Yes Avatar is good. But that's only 1 example.
.
MC isn't a good example. Iv seen the storyboards and the animation process. Its just awkward camera positions and tricks that makes it look cool in motion.
Ponyo was 100% hand drawn animation with no computer tricks except for the color correction, etc. The tsunami scene is one of the most amazing examples of pure 2D animation in recent memory, everything is so goddamn fluid.Not sure about all the directors. But didn't Miyazaki start using CG with Princess Mononoke and then go back to traditional/mostly traditional with Ponyo? I remember reading something like that.
Not that I disagree with your point entirely (always thought that beauty and the beast scene looked goofy)
I don't care too much for modern Disney, but it seems like you are completely ignoring Japanese animation. I don't want to turn this into a East vs. West debate, since they are different styles.Want to elaborate? It's general knowledge that the golden age of animation had the most insane, complex and best constructed animation ever made. Modern Disney for example is flashier, but the animation principles themselves are shit in comparison.
Yup, afaik, Ponyo was the only one in the last ~15 years produced like that.Not sure about all the directors. But didn't Miyazaki start using CG with Princess Mononoke and then go back to traditional/mostly traditional with Ponyo? I remember reading something like that.
Not that I disagree with your point entirely (always thought that beauty and the beast scene looked goofy)
I don't care too much for modern Disney, but it seems like you are completely ignoring Japanese animation. I don't want to turn this into a East vs. West debate, since they are different styles.
Me neither, but you gotta remember that even anime and manga took huge influence from the golden age of american animation and cartoons. It's the base working principles for the whole industry in general.
Today anime seems to have overcome the western animation decades ago. Things like avatar just copy age old anime fight choreocraphy :b
The person I was responding too only posted one example. Besides, there are plenty of examples, I just don't feel like making my own gifs from every single show.
Shows like Gravity Falls, Adventure time, Futurama, Young Justice, Clone wars, the upcoming Wander over Yonder and even Bob's Burger's has moments of animated brilliance.
Hell, even kids shows like Jake and the Neverland Pirates, and Justin Time are very well animated.
What tv shows in the past are better animated than the ones now?
The entire purpose of animation is to tell a story and look good doing it. Who cares how it's made.
Does anyone have any tips for getting better with tablets?
So what the hell is your point exactly? Of course the early stuff had more cost-cutting. And there was no need for more than four fingers on those early characters. Sure it "saves" you to animate one additional finger, but all good character design aims to make the characters as easy to animate as possible while retaining enough complexity to keep them lively and expressive. It's not lazy by any means.
Yes Avatar is good. But that's only 1 example. Storyboard are super detailed when they come up with the fights, love their stuff.
MC isn't a good example. Iv seen the storyboards and the animation process. Its just awkward camera positions and tricks that makes it look cool in motion.
and regarding the simpsons post; The older animation are better, much more fluent. The newer version just seems cleaner, but lacking life. Notice how Marg isnt even moving except for her head. Bland stuff.
Just shows how lazy and over-entitled we've become in the modern era
Wait, how is the use of far more creative camera angles and visually engaging perspectives somehow a bad thing?MC isn't a good example. Iv seen the storyboards and the animation process. Its just awkward camera positions and tricks that makes it look cool in motion.
Wait, how is the use of far more creative camera angles and visually engaging perspectives somehow a bad thing?
"There's a giant on the beach! There's a giant on the beach!"
You still had good animation in the 90s, but nowadays most of it is crap.
Wow, I saw that movie a thousand times as a kid.
holy crap that's bad
Anyone else surprised by how many women apparently worked in animation back then?
...but but but the feminists said that women weren't allowed out of the kitchen.
Nope. Kirby arguably WAS Marvel. Beside his own work, he trained other Marvel artists by drawing layouts for them. He was outpacing the writers he collaborated with and writing his own stuff, including Lee.Tezuka didn't work for Flerisher. He was inspired by them, though.
I made that post because I hate all of this circle-jerking against modern animation that actually manages to do its stuff, that it implies laziness.
Simpsons actually didn't feel like they managed to find a sweet spot until seasons 3 or so. 1 was utterly atrocious in the animation.
With that said, while I can see the main gripe on the Marge animation... I chuckled because do people want characters spazzing out whenever they move, just to show that they are "animated"?
Not at all. Just be good at what you're doing. Also, Tablets aren't expensive, you can get a decent Wacom for like 60$I think what I meant by my post, is just that it seems like artists need expensive things to be taken seriously as individuals these days.
practice and more practice.Does anyone have any tips for getting better with tablets?
Wait, how is the use of far more creative camera angles and visually engaging perspectives somehow a bad thing?