Moana
-
DisneyAnimation88
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:00 am
When? Maybe I'm forgetting something but as far as I can remember, I don't think I've seen him expressly say that hand-drawn animation is dead. It's not his fault that there aren't currently any hand-drawn films in development at Disney but that's not Steve Hulett's fault so blaming him is pretty pointless. In one of his most recent posts, he said that beyond Wreck-It Ralph and Frozen there isn't actually any other film on the slate so why not actually wait and see what might happen in the future rather than needlessly worry over something you can't control?
We're not going to Guam, are we?
Okay. Sorry I'm being drama king.....again.DisneyAnimation88 wrote:When? Maybe I'm forgetting something but as far as I can remember, I don't think I've seen him expressly say that hand-drawn animation is dead. It's not his fault that there aren't currently any hand-drawn films in development at Disney but that's not Steve Hulett's fault so blaming him is pretty pointless. In one of his most recent posts, he said that beyond Wreck-It Ralph and Frozen there isn't actually any other film on the slate so why not actually wait and see what might happen in the future rather than needlessly worry over something you can't control?
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
You're always a drama queen.TsWade2 wrote: Okay. Sorry I'm being drama king.....again.
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
Well, I can't help it. Even if I try to help it.Super Aurora wrote:You're always a drama queen.TsWade2 wrote: Okay. Sorry I'm being drama king.....again.
Last edited by TsWade2 on Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
I probably sound like I'm beating a dead horse by now, but is it possible to do a hand-drawn film with everything drawn and using computer technology to fill in everything between the drawn lines and color everything?
This is kind of what I'm hoping they mean by CG with hand-drawn elements:
<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kRO6EHhPr5g?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Of course, I don't know for sure if this clip WAS hand-drawn and the rest was filled in with CG and all that jazz...
This is kind of what I'm hoping they mean by CG with hand-drawn elements:
<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kRO6EHhPr5g?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Of course, I don't know for sure if this clip WAS hand-drawn and the rest was filled in with CG and all that jazz...
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
Technically speaking, it's already what they've been doing with hand-drawn since the late 80's.DisneyJedi wrote:I probably sound like I'm beating a dead horse by now, but is it possible to do a hand-drawn film with everything drawn and using computer technology to fill in everything between the drawn lines and color everything?
But if you're talking polygons and rendering and what-not? Characters, props, and sets still have to be built within the computer, but the models can be manipulated to match a drawing or set of drawings.
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
Well, that's sort of what I mean. What I mean, of course, is drawing the lines on paper first, then filling everything between the lines with CG magic.enigmawing wrote:Technically speaking, it's already what they've been doing with hand-drawn since the late 80's.DisneyJedi wrote:I probably sound like I'm beating a dead horse by now, but is it possible to do a hand-drawn film with everything drawn and using computer technology to fill in everything between the drawn lines and color everything?
But if you're talking polygons and rendering and what-not? Characters, props, and sets still have to be built within the computer, but the models can be manipulated to match a drawing or set of drawings.
That makes sense, right?
To be perfectly honest, if Frozen does indeed try to mimic the look of Tangled then I will be very happy.
I know that Disney purists think CG is the spawn of Satan, that Tangled sucks because it is a CG creation and that the only one at Disney that should always do CG is Pixar, yadda yadda yadda, but Tangled was to me one of the most beautiful films of 2010, above even the likes of Dragons and Toy Story 3. The reason why it's because it manages to do something a lot of CG films don't do these artists: be artistic.
The tower on both the outside and inside, the kingdom, the look of Rapunzel's hair, the character design, everything about it looked like it was trying to be colorful, warm and surreal rather than being extremely realistic. Usually CG films, even those at Pixar, aim for extreme realism (and in the case of mocap, super duper realism). Tangled was wonderful in that it didn't try to be a realistic CG movie (or at least implement realistic CG textures), but be a fairy tale done in the third dimension.
If Frozen manages to capture that aesthetic I will be set.
I know that Disney purists think CG is the spawn of Satan, that Tangled sucks because it is a CG creation and that the only one at Disney that should always do CG is Pixar, yadda yadda yadda, but Tangled was to me one of the most beautiful films of 2010, above even the likes of Dragons and Toy Story 3. The reason why it's because it manages to do something a lot of CG films don't do these artists: be artistic.
The tower on both the outside and inside, the kingdom, the look of Rapunzel's hair, the character design, everything about it looked like it was trying to be colorful, warm and surreal rather than being extremely realistic. Usually CG films, even those at Pixar, aim for extreme realism (and in the case of mocap, super duper realism). Tangled was wonderful in that it didn't try to be a realistic CG movie (or at least implement realistic CG textures), but be a fairy tale done in the third dimension.
If Frozen manages to capture that aesthetic I will be set.
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- RyGuy
- Special Edition
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:50 pm
- Location: Orange County, California
Technically speaking, I don't think Disney has been using paper for quite some time, with 2D images being drawn on tablets, not paper.DisneyJedi wrote: What I mean, of course, is drawing the lines on paper first, then filling everything between the lines with CG magic.
(hoping someone will either correct me if I'm wrong, or confirm which film marked this transition.)
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
Well, didn't Glen Keane try something like that for Rapunzel Unbraided, before it became Tangled?enigmawing wrote:There's no magical method to fill in a drawing with dimensional CG, if that's what you mean.DisneyJedi wrote:Well, that's sort of what I mean. What I mean, of course, is drawing the lines on paper first, then filling everything between the lines with CG magic.
That makes sense, right?
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
They had apparently planned on animating The Princess and the Frog strictly on tablets so they could go "paperless," but some of it was still done with paper and pencils.RyGuy wrote:Technically speaking, I don't think Disney has been using paper for quite some time, with 2D images being drawn on tablets, not paper.DisneyJedi wrote: What I mean, of course, is drawing the lines on paper first, then filling everything between the lines with CG magic.
(hoping someone will either correct me if I'm wrong, or confirm which film marked this transition.)
Nothing "magical" about it, as it was experimentation and a lot of hard work. You're making it sound like they should be able to do it by pressing a button or something.DisneyJedi wrote:Well, didn't Glen Keane try something like that for Rapunzel Unbraided, before it became Tangled?
- Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 14066
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
Well, I never said CGI is satan and I don't hate Tangled. Tangled is an excellent movie. In my opinion, I think Tangled is Disney's best CGI movie ever. My concern is Disney trying to give up hand drawn. I wish someone give an interview on John Lasseter and ask is hand drawn dead or alive, then everything will calm down.
I was mainly kidding when I said that CGI was the spawn of Satan, but I have seen enough fans on Tumblr and other sites to make the joke have a little bit of merit. Some have even gone as far as to declare Tangled was one of the worst Disney movies ever, not because of its characters, story or music but because it's a CG film.
To be perfectly honest once again, I am way past the "OH NOES 2D IS DYING" and I care more about how the medium is used rather than what medium is used in the first place. Yeah, I do love 2D animation and would love to see it a comeback in some way, shape or form, but until that happens I'll just enjoy the CG revolution and see what they can come up with. Like I said, Tangled was great because it was designed to have an artistic, warm vision in mind rather than being as real as possible.
Tangled was I think the first CG movie to truly feel like a classic Disney film, which arguably Meet the Robinsons did. In fact... the three CG movies prior to Tangled were the Disney 60s films in CG form: they are experimental of a new medium, they are light in story and thus are not as "timeless" (though Meet the Robinsons was beyond awesome and needs more exposure than what it gets).
To be perfectly honest once again, I am way past the "OH NOES 2D IS DYING" and I care more about how the medium is used rather than what medium is used in the first place. Yeah, I do love 2D animation and would love to see it a comeback in some way, shape or form, but until that happens I'll just enjoy the CG revolution and see what they can come up with. Like I said, Tangled was great because it was designed to have an artistic, warm vision in mind rather than being as real as possible.
Tangled was I think the first CG movie to truly feel like a classic Disney film, which arguably Meet the Robinsons did. In fact... the three CG movies prior to Tangled were the Disney 60s films in CG form: they are experimental of a new medium, they are light in story and thus are not as "timeless" (though Meet the Robinsons was beyond awesome and needs more exposure than what it gets).
Yeah, I'm thinking that the Paperman short is heading in a direction that DisneyJedi is talking about. While obviously not so simple as "magic"... I'm thinking this "new technology" that they are developing that is apparently really groundbreaking has something to do with literally taking hand-drawn animation and turning those actual drawings it into CG... it's hard to explain and still make sense haha. I'm trying not to get my hopes up for it, but I'm really prepared to be blown away. If people within the industry are truly impressed by it like many have said they are, it must really be something.
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3748
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male






