Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 10:14 pm
You said it dude! I could not agree more.Bradandez wrote:But I feel that Traditional Animation will always have way more heart and soul to them.
Rayman Pirate-Community
Off Topic
Page 1573 of 2413
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 10:57 pm
Adsolution wrote:Why?
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 10:58 pm
Then you're agreeing with a somewhat close-minded perspective.OldClassicGamer wrote:You said it dude! I could not agree more.Bradandez wrote:But I feel that Traditional Animation will always have way more heart and soul to them.
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:04 pm
Possibly, but it simply appeals visually more to me.
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:09 pm
Can I? Am I even real? How can you tell?Bradandez wrote:Tell me, can a computer feel? :u
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:10 pm
You read too much Asimov...Shrooblord wrote:Can I? Am I even real? How can you tell?
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:11 pm
What is life? Am I dreaming? AM I IN A DREAM!?Shrooblord wrote:Can I? Am I even real? How can you tell?Bradandez wrote:Tell me, can a computer feel? :u
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:12 pm
I, RUBUT.Imco97 wrote:What is life? Am I dreaming? AM I IN A DREAM!?
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Sun Oct 19, 2014 11:13 pm
wololosaerleiya wrote:You read too much Asimov...
Actually, I have a book with a collection of his stories that I have yet to read. I can't wait!
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:36 am
I think it's a matter of preference when it comes to liking traditional animation more than CG. I don't see traditional animation fading out completely because there will be and are people who enjoy it. And we still see it on the web, it's still being taught in classes and used as foundation in big film projects. It won't die. It's just a medium that's been around a lot longer than newer media and it's living amongst them now. It's not dying. We've just expanded to other forms of visual storytelling.Adsolution wrote:Adsolution wrote:Why?
On a completely unrelated note: there's finally news on the new house I'll be moving to. We close in just a few days, and we move in about a week. So excited!
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:06 am
Since this has been a matter I pondered on numerous times, I might as well contribute my view to the discussion. First off, I do concur that both types of animation offer different ways of storytelling. I must say, though, that I have a preference for hand-crafted forms of animation over CGI, likely due to the fact that CGI films are over-saturating the market, at the moment. Every major studio in the U.S. is producing CGI films that look quite similar in style, and it is made only worse by how many are released per year. Namely, DreamWorks , by November, will have released three animated films this year alone. This, coupled with yearly releases from pretty much every other major studio causes, in my opinion, over-saturation. CGI, in itself is fine, but there a far too many productions that use it, and few that want to actually be experimental with the tools. On the note of traditional forms of animation, there's always been something very alluring to me about the stop-motion technique, and due to the over-saturation of CGI, I've grown to appreciate 2D films even more. One of the few major animation studios still doing 2D is Ghibli. Either way, CGI is fine, but I have a preference for traditional techniques.
On the note of 2D animation, The Tale of The Princess Kaguya is looking fantastic. Just behold the animation in this trailer:
On the note of 2D animation, The Tale of The Princess Kaguya is looking fantastic. Just behold the animation in this trailer:
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:39 am
For me too, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of heart and soul put into them.OldClassicGamer wrote:Possibly, but it simply appeals visually more to me.
Don't forget too that there's an exponentially higher amount of soulless 2D-animated features than there are 3D-animated films alone.
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 7:43 am
I have my own reasons, but it's already late over here and I'm pretty sure no one really cares.
G'night!
G'night!
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:11 am
WTF IS YOUR SIG BRAD :O
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:17 am
Y'know, I was just about to ask the same question, Rolesfamily. o_o
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:14 am
Me tooTHEdragon wrote:Y'know, I was just about to ask the same question, Rolesfamily. o_o
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:04 am
Yes! Congratulations. I hope you didn't have too many headaches in the past few weeksEarth Gwee wrote:On a completely unrelated note: there's finally news on the new house I'll be moving to. We close in just a few days, and we move in about a week. So excited!
.Some studios are making mixes. The BoxTrolls is a mix of CGI and Stop-Motion techniques.Disionity wrote:On the note of traditional forms of animation, there's always been something very alluring to me about the stop-motion technique, and due to the over-saturation of CGI, I've grown to appreciate 2D films even more
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:28 am
Oh, I really wanna see The Boxtrolls. Not only does it look wonderful, but one of my favourite and lesser-known bands, Loch Lomond, performed a few songs for the soundtrack. I think that's pretty cool.
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:10 pm
I've personally never been a big fan of stop-motion, the primary reason being that I've never seen a stop-motion feature portray realistic movement, and the painted models pretty much always have the same material to them. Not that any of these things can't be improved, but when you have films with a decent budget that still can't manage to up the quality that much, I don't really see that happening any time in the near future.
Of course that sort of thing is often a stylistic decision, such as the case with Wallace and Grommit where the whole idea is for them to look exactly like they do (it wouldn't be Wallace and Grommit without the stop-motion), but I feel with films more akin to Boxtrolls, the stop-motion isn't nearly as signature. It's trying to look more like CG but it doesn't. Stop-motion is by definition a less-efficient form of animation, but it also doesn't carry the same reputation as something like traditional animation. I'm not hating on stop-motion, it just doesn't charm me that much except in a few select cases.
Of course that sort of thing is often a stylistic decision, such as the case with Wallace and Grommit where the whole idea is for them to look exactly like they do (it wouldn't be Wallace and Grommit without the stop-motion), but I feel with films more akin to Boxtrolls, the stop-motion isn't nearly as signature. It's trying to look more like CG but it doesn't. Stop-motion is by definition a less-efficient form of animation, but it also doesn't carry the same reputation as something like traditional animation. I'm not hating on stop-motion, it just doesn't charm me that much except in a few select cases.
Of course you have your own preferential reasons, but you don't have any for believing that one form is inherently more soulful than another. This is trivial though, so I shouldn't bave to explain.Bradandez wrote:I have my own reasons, but it's already late over here and I'm pretty sure no one really cares.
Re: Off Topic
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:55 pm
You guys never seen a cartoon cat before?
I should have put it in better words, but what I meant that my preferred animation method is traditional. It seems like they have more effort with drawing each frame and have no aid with rigging character models, so that's more the impression it leaves on me. I remember watching Pinnochio and seeing the Monstro scene I thought to myself 'Damn, there were guys that had to draw every single wave, splash, and drops'.
Sure you have the difficulties with CGI, I can see the pros and cons of both animation methods. But I feel that traditional animation will always have that feeling that CGI rarely gives me.
Also, stop-motion is way more satisfying to me than CGI. Sure they have models but the animators have to move everything and they do it so carefully. It's an amazing art form that I deeply love.
Persistent little bugger, aren't cha?Adsolution wrote:Of course you have your own preferential reasons, but you don't have any for believing that one form is inherently more soulful than another. This is trivial though, so I shouldn't bave to explain.Bradandez wrote:I have my own reasons, but it's already late over here and I'm pretty sure no one really cares.
I should have put it in better words, but what I meant that my preferred animation method is traditional. It seems like they have more effort with drawing each frame and have no aid with rigging character models, so that's more the impression it leaves on me. I remember watching Pinnochio and seeing the Monstro scene I thought to myself 'Damn, there were guys that had to draw every single wave, splash, and drops'.
Sure you have the difficulties with CGI, I can see the pros and cons of both animation methods. But I feel that traditional animation will always have that feeling that CGI rarely gives me.
Also, stop-motion is way more satisfying to me than CGI. Sure they have models but the animators have to move everything and they do it so carefully. It's an amazing art form that I deeply love.