DVDizzy Forum

This looks awesome! That proves Disney is not giving up hand drawn after all. WHEE!

^Here, Handdrawn is overlayed on heavy CG characters, just so you understand.

ajmrowland wrote:^Here, Handdrawn is overlayed on heavy CG characters, just so you understand.

Yes, but while the CG animation is fundamental, the final look is more reliant on the hand drawn aspect of it. The hand drawn aspect shouldn't be downplayed simply because it isn't completely traditional.

After seeing that, it looks to me like rotoscoping, but with CG instead of life action as the base. The keyframes are traced/drawn by hand with inbetweens automated not too dissimilar to techniques used in toonboom or flash. Just a more flexible version of it.

Kyle wrote:After seeing that, it looks to me like rotoscoping, but with CG instead of life action as the base. The keyframes are traced/drawn by hand with inbetweens automated not too dissimilar to techniques used in toonboom or flash. Just a more flexible version of it.

And considering how rotoscoping was used in Snow White to create a huge leap in technology it's easy to see how this could simply be the next step for Disney animation.

The idea of using 3D software to create a hand-drawn environment is nothing new.

South Park has been using Maya to simulate a paper cut-out world for years.

Semaj wrote:The idea of using 3D software to create a hand-drawn environment is nothing new.

South Park has been using Maya to simulate a paper cut-out world for years.

Wasn't Mickey Mouse in South Park once? That was so funny!

Yeah, it was.

Semaj wrote:The idea of using 3D software to create a hand-drawn environment is nothing new.

But... that's not at all what's going on here. They're not using CG to create a hand-drawn environment. The hand-drawn aspects of this are actually hand drawn.

PatrickvD wrote:And considering how rotoscoping was used in Snow White to create a huge leap in technology it's easy to see how this could simply be the next step for Disney animation.

I'm not sure what you mean about that. If you mean that Disney improved the rotoscoping technique itself, I havn't heard about it before. If you are referring to the actual process, they were forced to use it because they were running out of time. Some people considered it cheating, and disliked Snow White's creation compared to the lively dwarfs. Given more time and money, Snow White herself would probably been created without rotoscoping.

My impression is that there is a big difference between traditional rotoscoping and the method used in Paperman. In the old days, you were stuck with the footage they gave you. In Paperman, and especially future projects of the same kind, there is a feedback process between the hand drawing and the CGI. If you are not happy with the foundation (CGI), you change it, and probably vice versa, to make sure it all look as good as possible (even the CGI elements are to some degree "hand drawn" frame by frame, if they are using similar techniques as those used in Tangled). Unlike other CGI projects, where one department is doing the hair, another one the clothes, the skin and so on, it's all done by the same animators:

"In Paperman, we didn’t have a cloth department and we didn’t have a hair department. Here, folds in the fabric, hair silhouettes and the like come from of the commited design decision-making that comes with the 2D drawn process. Our animators can change things, actually erase away the CG underlayer if they want, and change the profile of the arm. And they can design all the fabric in that Milt Kahl kind-of way, if they want to."

"John had this thought in mind, that modern animated films require so many different skill sets and collaboration of so many different departments, that the artists and animators do not have control over the final image. He wanted to give them back that power over the final shot. The team behind Paperman accomplished this through a very unique software that they had been developing for some time."

And because CGI has evolved as well, you can now give the characters the same design and make them move like they did in hand drawn cartoons, which is very different from live action footages or CGI from the early days.

What really matters is not how it is done, but how the final product looks like (there were even those who said that using backlight animation was cheating, because it was not all done by hand). Hand drawn animation gain something by using this process, but does it has to sacrifice something when it comes to how it looks in the end? Does the animators face any restrictions they don't have to care about when they do movies like The Princess and the Frog? If the answer is no, then I can understand why the animators are exited about it. Can they do everything they used to do, and some more, it probably is the next step in hand drawn animation.

Andreas Deja said during the production of The Princess and the Frog:
"I always thought that maybe we should distinguish ourselves to go back to what 2D is good at, which is focusing on what the line can do rather than volume, which is a CG kind of thing. So we are doing less extravagant Treasure Planet kind of treatments. You have to create a world but [we're doing it more simply]. What we're trying to do with Princess and the Frog is hook up with things that the old guys did earlier. It's not going to be graphic..."

About the same movie, Lasseter said:
"And there is a way that Louis moves, we call squash and stretch, with the bounciness of all his fat and the liveliness of him. And when it's done in traditional animation, there's a believability to a character moving around like that. If you were to do it in computer animation, it would be done totally differently, and I think having Eric animate him the way he did it, it's so perfect. It's the squash and stretch. It's the weight. It's the believability of this large character being able to move around quite like that."

Paperman and future work does include volumes and depths a lot, so it seems that projects that take advantage of the flatness of the old way of doing things may have a look that will be lost in the new way of doing it. Which should give us at least two approaches to hand drawn movies. The more, the merrier.
Still, I would like to know if the new look from this short allows characters like Louis the alligator to move like seen in The Princess and the Frog.
What the two styles have in common, is that both seems to be focusing on the line. Also, it would be interesting to see how far the animation could be pushed when it comes to a more realistic design before it looks too realistic.
Anyway, based on the current trend, I suspect that the "old style" is gonna end up as an animation niche (at least in Western animation), just as stop motion is today. Walt Disney always tried to add new tools and complexity to animation. I'll probably repeating myself here; if the techniques from Paperman represent a new branch in the tree of hand drawn animation, then it frees the old school style from trying to achieve what the new one does so much better, and it can specialize in what works best in its own domain.
(And I'm still waiting for the CGI style that looks like it is painted instead of drawn.)

Of course, the use of computers in cartoons is not a new idea:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gN8HuBuTvQ
(Jump to 2:40)

Much more could be done in the old days if you just had enough time to do it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdJbo-4r ... r_embedded
(I could be wrong, but some of it looks like very complex cutout animation)

So now that Paperman has been released, I'm curious to hear everyone's reactions! What'd you think of the animation? The story?

Going to see it tonight. I'm more excited about this short than Wreck It Ralph.

SWillie! wrote:So now that Paperman has been released, I'm curious to hear everyone's reactions! What'd you think of the animation? The story?

I've seen it twice now and I loved it!! The story was beautiful (I'll admit that I am a hopeless romantic and teared up a bit at the end) and engaging. My kids (4.5 and 3.5) liked it too, but that may be because they're obsessed with paper airplanes at the moment.

In terms of the animation, I'm not that knowledgeable about 2D and 3D techniques, not exactly sure what rotoscoping is, etc. but it felt more 2D than 3D to me, if that makes sense. Artistically, I loved that it was in black and white and that it was somewhat grainy.

I would be curious to see what this technique looks like in color, so here's hoping there will be some more shorts that explore and refine the technique.

Disney’s Paperman Is a Perfect Short Film
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/11/paperman/

Director John Kahrs Talks PAPERMAN
http://collider.com/john-kahrs-paperman ... ew/206840/

Exclusive Interview: John Kahrs & Kristina Reed on PAPERMAN
http://www.assignmentx.com/2013/exclusi ... -paperman/

Paperman Short is True Love Plus Producer Kristina Reed Tells us How This is a Different Form of Animation
http://www.southernbellaswaystosave.com ... ation.html

Oscar nominee John Kahrs on being frontrunner for animated short 'Paperman'
http://www.goldderby.com/news/4064/osca ... 79086.html

'Paperman' flies high among Oscar shorts
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movi ... t/1921211/

Oscar Favorites: The Hand-Made Tale Behind Disney's Gorgeous 'Paperman'
http://www.fastcocreate.com/1682369/osc ... s-paperman

'Paperman': Watch the step-by-step animation process for Disney's Oscar-nominated short
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/02/10/p ... sion-reel/

Oscars Wrap-Up
http://www.wearemoviegeeks.com/2013/02/oscars-wrap-up/

Sotiris wrote:Disney’s Paperman Is a Perfect Short Film
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/11/paperman/

Ugh..

my anticipation to read the rest is halted by the very first sentence

"For the first time since 1990, Disney Animation has created an animated short to accompany a feature release (the last time was Mickey Mouse in The Prince and the Pauper, released with The Rescuers Down Under)."

Lnds500 wrote:"For the first time since 1990, Disney Animation has created an animated short to accompany a feature release (the last time was Mickey Mouse in The Prince and the Pauper, released with The Rescuers Down Under)."

I didn't even notice that. And to think it was only last year since 'The Ballad of Nessie' accompanied Winnie the Pooh.

And didn't Runaway Brain precede Pocahontas? Not to mention Tangled Ever After being shown before the 3-D re-issue of Beauty and the Beast.

Speaking of which, are we ever going to see Tick Tock Tale?

estefan wrote:Speaking of which, are we ever going to see Tick Tock Tale?

Nope. Neither 'Glago's Guest' nor 'Lorenzo'.

perfectly usable short films which really have no reason not to be released to the public. these would make an excellent BD collection

Sotiris wrote:

Lnds500 wrote:"For the first time since 1990, Disney Animation has created an animated short to accompany a feature release (the last time was Mickey Mouse in The Prince and the Pauper, released with The Rescuers Down Under)."

I didn't even notice that. And to think it was only last year since 'The Ballad of Nessie' accompanied Winnie the Pooh.

It's strange that the rest of the article seems very well informed and written. Cuz that's a pretty blatant mistake.