LAZY ANIMATION!

[Super Aurora]

That dude on the right look like such a badass. Maybe I should write a story revolving around that awesome character.

[nomad2010]

And I agree about the "Part of Your World (Reprise)" scene--Ariel always looked weird to me there. I wonder if that was rotoscoped, or just very weirdly animated.

Actually I'm pretty sure I saw a video that said it was. I always thought it was some great animation (except certain little segments looked odd yes). I will see if I can get ahold of some caps.

[Disney Duster]

Actually, remember that Walt Disney filsm were worked on for many, many years, and it was never pinned down exactly how many. For instance, they were working on other features even during their first work on Snow White!

I'm surprised no one has mentioned how Sleeping Beauty took great pains to have perfect masterpiece animation in every frame...and the story and thus the film as a whole is considered lackluster by most people.

Goliath, do you know that the meaning of rotoscoping is debated? You see, some people say that just tracing over photostats of live-action is rotoscoping, while others (including me) say it's only when you trace over the live-action footage and use those tracings as the final animation.

I think even Disney artists called just tracing over photostats, but NOT using those tracing in the final animation (they just looked at the traced photostats, referencing it) rotoscoping. But others have called it live-action reference, which fits better and is clearer.

So, it may be true that Cinderella and Lady Tremaine and other Disney characters were made a little to close to the poses and movements the animators were looking at, but there has never been any evidence that Disney used tracings over live-action footage, however changed, in the actual final animation you see in the film.

And if they did, then while drawing over it they still put their imagination and creativity into coming up with their own stylized interpretation of the pose, proportions, and design of the whole character. More so than and pulled off better than other studios, but maybe in some scenes they didn't use as high a standard of imaginative interpretation as in other scenes, not enough for you at least. Still, there's never been indication they used imagination-infused tracings in the final animation, but rather that they looked at some tracings when animating completely free hand.

[blackcauldron85]

So, I'm looking at screencaps trying to improve my avatar, and look what I found. I said out loud, to myself, "What the hell". You know it's going to be kind of epic.

http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/the ... id_460.jpg

[steve]

So, I'm looking at screencaps trying to improve my avatar, and look what I found. I said out loud, to myself, "What the hell". You know it's going to be kind of epic.

http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/the ... id_460.jpg

That sort of drawing is never supposed to be presented in isolation. It's an animation technique called squash and stretch (with 'stretch' being the applicable half here) that here creates the illusion of a very fast movement. If you watch the scene, it goes by so fast that you don't even notice it. But without it, the movement of her popping up behind Ariel wouldn't have been half as smooth/fast/etc.

Often if you pause a cartoon and step forward the frames you come across the weirdest looking extreme poses that you don't normally notice when the film is playing at regular speed.

Yes, it's funny looking, but it really doesn't belong in a thread titled 'LAZY ANIMATION!' (Perhaps there's the basis of a new thread here?)

[blackcauldron85]

I know, Steve, but when I saw the picture, I thought of this thread. Other pictures posted here aren't "lazy", either, so I agree, the thread maybe has a misleading name. I still thought the picture was weird and wanted to share.

[steve]

Oh yeah, weird is definitely the word!

[rodis]

Hey, glad I found this topic

Well, my two favorite Disney movies are "Mermaid" and "Beauty" so if any lazy animation bothers me, it's in these two.


I just HATE how they drew the rocks here. I've just always cringed at that shot.



http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/the ... id_602.jpg
Same thing here. The background just looks blah. The whole scene is beautifully drawn, I should add.




http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 60-540.jpg
Again, the background. Not on the same level as the rest of the art in the movie.




http://beautybeast.enchanted-rose.org/l ... t_4287.jpg
Now if that's not cost-cutting, I don't know what is!


Probably all these wouldn't have bothered me if I weren't such a huge fan of these two. And I also happen to be a perfectionist so that doesn't help either. OK, but they're still amazing films with artwork that is personally my favorite of all the Disney classics

[ajmrowland]

except for that first BatB one-which is really beautiful-I agree. I didnt even notice the last cap until you brought it up. thx for ruining it.

[Super Aurora]

Hey, glad I found this topic

Well, my two favorite Disney movies are "Mermaid" and "Beauty" so if any lazy animation bothers me, it's in these two.


I just HATE how they drew the rocks here. I've just always cringed at that shot.



http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/the ... id_602.jpg
Same thing here. The background just looks blah. The whole scene is beautifully drawn, I should add.




http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 60-540.jpg
Again, the background. Not on the same level as the rest of the art in the movie.




http://beautybeast.enchanted-rose.org/l ... t_4287.jpg
Now if that's not cost-cutting, I don't know what is!


Probably all these wouldn't have bothered me if I weren't such a huge fan of these two. And I also happen to be a perfectionist so that doesn't help either. OK, but they're still amazing films with artwork that is personally my favorite of all the Disney classics

Rudy Matt and I were talking about this in another thread. He pointed out that mostly the animation and the character is the focus detail of the movie rather than the background. Also that if the background too detailed, the character gets lost in it's focus for the audience.

If you want go by more graphical detail in background, some anime has that for you.

[rodis]

Rudy Matt and I were talking about this in another thread. He pointed out that mostly the animation and the character is the focus detail of the movie rather than the background. Also that if the background too detailed, the character gets lost in it's focus for the audience.

If you want go by more graphical detail in background, some anime has that for you.

I don't agree with this statement. Assuming I'm right and you're talking about TLM, I think it has beautifully detailed scenes (Main Titles. Sunken Ship, Part of Your World, The Storm, Under The Sea, Poor Unfortunate Souls, Eric's castle, and so on) These are scenes with GREAT attention to detail, even compared to most of the animated classics. If anything, I think Hercules suffers from lack of detail in the backgrounds and Mulan as well. Those abstract strokes of water color as an excuse for "background" is ridiculous.

[Super Aurora]

Rudy Matt and I were talking about this in another thread. He pointed out that mostly the animation and the character is the focus detail of the movie rather than the background. Also that if the background too detailed, the character gets lost in it's focus for the audience.

If you want go by more graphical detail in background, some anime has that for you.

I don't agree with this statement. Assuming I'm right and you're talking about TLM, I think it has beautifully detailed scenes (Main Titles. Sunken Ship, Part of Your World, The Storm, Under The Sea, Poor Unfortunate Souls, Eric's castle, and so on) These are scenes with GREAT attention to detail, even compared to most of the animated classics. If anything, I think Hercules suffers from lack of detail in the backgrounds and Mulan as well. Those abstract strokes of water color as an excuse for "background" is ridiculous.

We didn't say ALL Disney films had this(Pinocchio and Hunchback are prime examples), just most. TLM not one with most complex background detail. It's excellent and beautiful, yes. No not to the caliber Pinocchio or Hunchback had. Or some anime like this scene:

from Akira

or

[blackcauldron85]

So, I always had to search for screencaps online, but I just learned how to make my own. To learn, I just grabbed a DVD off of my shelf, and it just so happened to be The Little Mermaid II. There are 2 non-consecutive frames of Sebastian's eyes looking like this:



Kind of scary...what happened there?!?

[Super Aurora]

So, I always had to search for screencaps online, but I just learned how to make my own. To learn, I just grabbed a DVD off of my shelf, and it just so happened to be The Little Mermaid II. There are 2 non-consecutive frames of Sebastian's eyes looking like this:



Kind of scary...what happened there?!?

He wanted to be Hypno-toad.

[Marce82]

Hey everyone,

Im afraid this screencap of sebastian is not lazy animation. Its called a "smeared drawing", which can be found in many disney films (look for one in Aladdin when Jafar finally gets his hands on the lamp and aladdin says "we'll just see about that....the lamp!" When he looks up, there is one smeared drawing).

These are used when an element has to travel a long distance within the screen, and there arent enough drawings within the required time frame for it to look like a jump (meaning, it was on the left and suddenly its on the right).

Another option is having a drawing with multiple of the same thing. Like having one drawing out of the 24 per second where a character has several arms. Again, this is done so the animation looks smooth. This was done in several instances during Poor Unfortunate Souls.

No time for screencaps here. :P

[Lazario]

http://beautybeast.enchanted-rose.org/l ... t_4287.jpg
Now if that's not cost-cutting, I don't know what is!

What's wrong with this shot? The faces on the crowd?

[Duckburger]

They're holding torches, though their faces can't be seen. Pretty lazy.

[blackcauldron85]

Im afraid this screencap of sebastian is not lazy animation. Its called a "smeared drawing", which can be found in many disney films (look for one in Aladdin when Jafar finally gets his hands on the lamp and aladdin says "we'll just see about that....the lamp!" When he looks up, there is one smeared drawing).

These are used when an element has to travel a long distance within the screen, and there arent enough drawings within the required time frame for it to look like a jump (meaning, it was on the left and suddenly its on the right).

So it's just because they needed his eyes to move faster than the time it normally would take for them to move from one side to the other?

[Kyle]

Simplifying the background is a perfect legitimate technique to help make the forground pop. if the focus is meant to be on a character then they should make sure the background isnt too detailed.

It would be like complaining about a narrow depth of field in live action to me. Sure, you might not want it all the time, but it does help the forground pop more.

That beauty and the beast shot with the blue crowd looks fine to me. your not supposed to see their faces any more than you should see individual blades of grass in Bambi. no one complains about that do they?

Its a Good thing to imply detail rather than spell it all out all the time. not only does it cut cost/time, but it also keeps it from being distracting.

[sunhuntin]

i dont know if its deliberate or not, but one thing that bugs me is when a character who is white [ie, duchess, 101 dalmatians, cruella] changes shades of white between frames but in the same sequence. i dont know if its sloppy work or what, but its annoying all the same.

i also dislike recycled animation, but i know why they did it and respect that.