DVDizzy Forum

DisneyJedi wrote:By the way, sotiris2006? Where'd you get that neat icon?

Thanks But are you talking about my avatar or my sig? The avatar is a fanart i found on deviant art.com. I can't remember though where i found my sig...

I often wonder why so many insist that cels are better than CAPS, or that the use of a computer automatically removes a certain amount of artistic quality. I mean, I can understand to a point since cels were something tangible, painted in by hand, and all-around "old school" . . . but really, how many people are able to distinguish which parts or even realize in the first place that portions of The Little Mermaid were produced using CAPS? How many people that watched The Rescuers Down Under for the very first time back in 1990 had any idea that what they were looking at was not made up of traditional cels? The final product is still the result of many talented people, and the computer is just another tool that brings it to life.

DisneyJedi wrote:

Neal wrote:I thought CAPS has been used since "The Rescuers Down Under" and CGI elements since "The Great Mouse Detective".

Actually, I thought The Black Cauldron was the first Disney movie to use elements of CGI?

I remember hearing that The Black Cauldron was indeed the first movie to use CGI, and even though I've seen the wireframes I haven't actually been able to find it in the finished animation as nothing pops out as CG to me.

I'd love for someone to be able to point out which specific scene(s), it's bothered me for quite some time.

DisneyJedi wrote:Actually, I thought The Black Cauldron was the first Disney movie to use elements of CGI?

Yup, that is correct!

Thank you sooooo much, Neal, for sharing everything!!!

enigmawing wrote:I haven't actually been able to find it in the finished animation as nothing pops out as CG to me.

Eilonwy's bauble, the cauldron, and the boat are CGI.

Neal, thanks for posting the videos!

Wonderlicious wrote:

mooky_7_sa wrote:Woo hoo! So I'm guessing a January release for Europe?

If we take the release dates for Enchanted as a means of estimating (film that has an enchanting atmosphere, animated princess fairy-tale etc), then I think that The Princess and the Frog could be out in most foreign territories by the end of December, with a few international releases coming out as late as February/March.

I thought so too. Thanks!

Looks like stuffs about to start happening promotion wise. They added two new photos to the gallery. We've already seen them but still, something's stirring so looks like we could be getting a new teaser trailer soon.

http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... gress.html

"We've animated around 60% of the movie, and we've got maybe ten or eleven weeks to go on the production schedule. We had some wiggle room earlier but now things are tight, and we're really going to have to move things along ..."

---

"The cleanup crew will wrap up their work in late summer. Management's hired more staff on the back end because there's a lot of drawing on paper. The show isn't 'paperless' like they first hoped it would be ..."

(Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to make sure that people who already read the last post will read this one, too!)

http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2009/ ... sstoy.html

First, there will be no Toy Story 3 trailer in May... yes, I know. A bit disappointing isn't it? But the good news is that there will be a trailer that comes with(but not attached) "Up" on May 29th. That's when the full trailer for "The Princess and the Frog" will debut. At least in theaters. The Mouse may put it up online before that, but the plan as of now it to put it in front of the Senior Citizen Action Adventure film.

Yeah!

blackcauldron85 wrote:http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2009/ ... sstoy.html

there will be no Toy Story 3 trailer in May.

Boo!

Amy's quote wrote:"The cleanup crew will wrap up their work in late summer. Management's hired more staff on the back end because there's a lot of drawing on paper. The show isn't 'paperless' like they first hoped it would be ..."

Not quite sure what they mean. The movie was never meant to be animated paperless, as far as I know. They experimented with that with Goofy's short, but opted for good old paper for TPatF.

And what does the expression I highlighted mean?

What does it mean that the PatF trailer will be with Up but not attached to it? What's the difference? Does that mean the PatF trailer will only be shown for a couple of weeks before being replaced? Thanks for your help!

It means the trailer will debut simultaneously with Up, but will be attached to the print of another film (in this case, the "Senior Citizen Action Adventure film" ... whatever the hell that is )

That's "Up".

Julian Carter wrote:

Amy's quote wrote:"The cleanup crew will wrap up their work in late summer. Management's hired more staff on the back end because there's a lot of drawing on paper. The show isn't 'paperless' like they first hoped it would be ..."

Not quite sure what they mean. The movie was never meant to be animated paperless, as far as I know. They experimented with that with Goofy's short, but opted for good old paper for TPatF.

And what does the expression I highlighted mean?

More staff on the back end . . . I imagine that it just means they're hiring more artists to fill in the gaps of what can't already be done by the existing ones. That probably means the lesser-known assistants and inbetweeners.

I'm not surprised if they wanted to go for "paperless," but at the same time it doesn't sound like the best priority to make at the moment. It should be understandable that not every artist can easily adapt to a digital tablet; it takes practice and experience for many to reach the same comfort level as they had with paper, even for the pros.

blackcauldron85 wrote:

enigmawing wrote:I haven't actually been able to find it in the finished animation as nothing pops out as CG to me.

Eilonwy's bauble, the cauldron, and the boat are CGI.

Thanks for the info, I'll have to take a closer look.

Neal wrote:Tiana:

Hey! Where's Eilowny?!

Goliath wrote: Hey! Where's Eilowny?!

She was never included in the princess line, because The Black Cauldron was a flop. -_-

Like how Giselle isn't a princess because if she were, then they'd have to pay for Amy Adams' life image. Frickin' cheapskates.

DisneyJedi wrote:

Goliath wrote: Hey! Where's Eilowny?!

She was never included in the princess line, because The Black Cauldron was a flop. -_-

Like how Giselle isn't a princess because if she were, then they'd have to pay for Amy Adams' life image. Frickin' cheapskates.

Well, If they alrady have the animated version of Giselle, why would they have to pay to use that? I mean, Amy Adams already agreed to be used in the design of the animated portion of the movie, but unless she retains the rights to the artwork, I don't think it'd be that much of an issue.

What does the "13" Stand for in that image of the book with the Disney Princesses on it? I've seen the one with the Prince's and that has a "10" but I assumed it had something to do with the 10th Anniversary on the Disney Princess Franchise. I love how Tiana just fits in perfectly with the rest of them, though I wish theyd included Pocahontas and Mulan in the pictures, seeing as they're officially included within the franchise

ajmrowland wrote:Well, If they alrady have the animated version of Giselle, why would they have to pay to use that? I mean, Amy Adams already agreed to be used in the design of the animated portion of the movie, but unless she retains the rights to the artwork, I don't think it'd be that much of an issue.

I know I've mentioned it here before, but I agree with you- I don't understand. For example, wasn't Irene Bedard a physical model for Pocahontas, in addition to being her voice? Pocahontas doesn't look exactly like Irene. Just like how animated Giselle doesn't look exactly like Amy Adams. It's true that Enchanted is a different kind of Disney film, since the same character appears in both live-action and in animation, but I just don't get it. It's true that Giselle isn't the true princess of the film, but still...saying that Amy Adams didn't want her "likeness" used just makes no sense to me.

blackcauldron85 wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:Well, If they alrady have the animated version of Giselle, why would they have to pay to use that? I mean, Amy Adams already agreed to be used in the design of the animated portion of the movie, but unless she retains the rights to the artwork, I don't think it'd be that much of an issue.

I know I've mentioned it here before, but I agree with you- I don't understand. For example, wasn't Irene Bedard a physical model for Pocahontas, in addition to being her voice? Pocahontas doesn't look exactly like Irene. Just like how animated Giselle doesn't look exactly like Amy Adams. It's true that Enchanted is a different kind of Disney film, since the same character appears in both live-action and in animation, but I just don't get it. It's true that Giselle isn't the true princess of the film, but still...saying that Amy Adams didn't want her "likeness" used just makes no sense to me.

I guess it's because that they wanted to separated "Enchanted" from the other Disney Princess movies. I heard a vague rumor of it becoming a franchise all it's own, but I'm no longer so sure.