• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.socialEnglish
    39·
    7 days ago

    They used a lot of rotoscoping back in the day. Basically they filmed a scene normally with real people, then traced over every frame to give us those fantastic moments of fluid movement in things like Snow White, Mary Poppins, and Beauty and the Beast (which also used 3D by the way).

      • quid_pro_joe@infosec.pubEnglish
        7·
        6 days ago

        That is indeed a fun fact! I am somewhat obsessed with sodium vapor lights and the bandwidth of light they produce. I would love to have seen the original camera rig and their special prisms, but apparently they only made three and they’ve been lost.

        • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.caEnglish
          4·
          6 days ago

          High intensity discharge lamps are awesome, can confirm. I miss when streetlamps were still HPS/LPS and mercury vapor, the lighting felt a lot more comforting than the harsh LEDs used nowadays.

      • BeeegScaaawyCripple@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        7 days ago

        Dude Ralph Bashki made things weird for fun. Maybe if I volunteer to watch the Bashki LOTR with my wife, who loves that movie, I can convince her to watch Wizards with me. I have been wanting to watch that.

  • greedytacothief@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    10·
    6 days ago

    I think animation, when the animators care, has improved. Yes treasure planet looks better fight me. But I think the problem is that there is more shit animation now, and we have forgotten the shit animation of the past.

  • Nangijala@feddit.dkEnglish
    261·
    7 days ago

    Fun fact: 101 Dalmatians was the first Disney movie to be produced with the help of xerox. This was as a result of the financial flop that was Sleeping Beauty, that almost bankrupted the company and cut their budgets for future movies all the way from the 60s to the financial success of the little mermaid in 1989. This is why Disney movies within that time period has a rougher look when it comes to the characters’ lineart and the more simple backgrounds compared to the very detailed, painted backgrounds and colored lineart of all Disney movies up until 101 Dalmatians.

    The xerox was a cost cutting method to save time and money and while it absolutely killed Walt Disney to have to compromise on the art, it also paved the way for a new look and feel that, especially in the case of 101 Dalmatians, created a timeless look that still looks as fresh and modern today as the day it was made.

    Without the invention and utilization of the xerox, there most likely would have been no Disney company today.

      • Nangijala@feddit.dkEnglish
        6·
        6 days ago

        Not arguing with you there xD I have basically boycotted Disney. Last straw for me was their Mulan remake.

        Didn’t watch it. Heard it was trash like all the other remakes, but the thing that did it for me was when I learned they had used actual concentration camp prisoners for free labor on the movie. That was it for me.

  • Owl@mander.xyzEnglish
    161·
    6 days ago

    A lot are still “painted by hand”, the use of vector graphics isn’t as prevalent in other cartoon producing countries as it is in the US

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      6 days ago

      really?

      I know of zero studios that are still doing any painting. they are all digital. sk, china, japan - no one uses paint filmed one cel at a time, or any of the old analog processes anymore. I’d be happy to be wrong, but I don’t know of anyone that’s still doing painted cels recorded on film.

      Even Ghibli. https://www.dqindia.com/features/studio-ghibli-blending-tradition-and-technology-in-the-age-of-animation-8921913

      “Ghibli’s selective integration of technology, primarily digital ink-and-paint techniques facilitated by software like OpenToonz, stands in stark contrast to the unbridled embrace of AI in the recent Ghibli-style art phenomenon.”

      • Owl@mander.xyzEnglish
        71·
        6 days ago

        I didn’t say that they were painting on paper

        Digital painting by hand is still qualifies as “painted by hand”

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          312·
          6 days ago

          I didn’t say that they were painting on paper

          tell me you don’t understand animation at all already… ffs, no one painted on paper. can’t really shine light through it lol. it was all cels man.

          Digital painting by hand is still qualifies as “painted by hand”

          ROFLS okay bud. Perhaps you weren’t born yet but there have been a few arguments about this… well, more than a few. LOTS. Like, animator holy war levels of arguments. And it wasn’t a one-and-done transition either, lots of productions went back and forth because of the requirements of the episode or availability.

          https://animesuperhero.com/forums/threads/cel-animated-show-that-switched-to-digital-coloring.5782621/

          Take a look at the simpsons to see a show that eschewed digital ink and paint until they went all in. when they did, they changed the aspect ratio of the show, knowing it was going to look so different that few would even notice the swap to 16x9 from old crt 4x3.

            • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
              210·
              6 days ago

              aw, sorry, I didn’t realize I was supposed to ignore your ignorance. please, continue to lie about things you obviously know jack shit about.

  • miellaby@jlai.luEnglish
    71·
    6 days ago

    Yeah I feel old too.

    That behind said, I don’t think a modern drawing tool is inherently less capable than an older one to produce magic. Digital painting used to have limitations in comparison with traditional technics, but a good 2d illustrator can do gorgeous drawings with a tablet nowadays.

    When I see magic in animated movies, its when people do things by love and passions, and not for seeking additional profit. Flow and Arcane are examples of animation with such ingredients.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.worldEnglish
    5·
    6 days ago

    Thankfully they’re learning this and we get movies that are starting to look less like plastic cgi and are using painted textures and drawn in motion blur like in k pop demon hunters which gives the movies more character and makes them look like a mix of the old and the new

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    6 days ago

    The original Mobile Suit Gundam 0079. The US cartoons from the 1960’s and 70’s were the best with plenty of lessons from Wile E. Coyote.

    • OopsOverbombing@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      6 days ago

      When’s the last time you watched the original MSG? I too love the old Gundam series… I’ve actually been rewatching the og recently but there’s been more than a few instances where I’ve seen some very dodgy and poorly drawn frames pop on screen. I say this with love and respect but it’s not a great example for good animation. There are beautifully drawn examples to draw from. 0083 Stardust Memory comes to mind. Absolutely gorgeously drawn and animated. 08th MS Team is another great looking one.

      • Gammelfisch@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        5 days ago

        Saw the first one in Nagano, Japan and then recently on Netflix. My favorite is the MSM-04 ACGuy and I built the model kit from Bandai.

  • sunbeam60@lemmy.mlEnglish
    821·
    6 days ago

    I’m sorry to say that a AI could recreate that look in a flash. And within 5 years you could have a completely consistent, feature length film done in that look.

    Let’s not minimize the threat. If we want to avoid being replaced by computers, it’s now the fight has to be had.

    • Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      3·
      6 days ago

      Fatal mistake.

      There is a venn diagram of anti ai including both people who believe ai is incapable of producing value and people who believe it will take their jobs,

      But they do not mix nor understand how the other exists.

      • sunbeam60@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        5 days ago

        I’m not really sure if your comment is a reaction against my statement, in support of my statement ir adding further nuance to my statement.

        I certainly believe AI is capable of producing value. I certainly believe AI will take people’s jobs. Exactly because it is able to produce value.

        I’ve seen both things first thing, many times, already.

        My statement was meant to highlight that it is exactly because it is producing value and taking people’s jobs that we ought to have a debate about whether it should and who it will benefit (and who will lose out) from that great replacement.

        Right now, all I see is a further concentration of wealth built on the backs of thousands of years of human creativity. It’s the ultimate rent seeking.

        • Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          1·
          5 days ago

          Its part nuance part friendly warning because your attempt to rally people is easy to be misunderstood.

          In the first part you try to convince that ai will be capable of producing quality.

          In the second part you try to rally against the threat of ai taking jobs but the people you just adressed don’t believe this is going to be a problem.

      • smiletolerantly@awful.systemsEnglish
        541·
        7 days ago

        Yep.

        Those older movies are beautiful achievements for sure. But it’s disingenuous to say that there isn’t a plethora of movies and shows today that rival and surpass those older examples visually. Not to speak of just how much more fluent animation has become.

        Many of the people who worked on those older masterpieces are still in animation today, and have only become better at their art.

        • Ron@zegheteens.nlEnglish
          383·
          7 days ago

          The older movies are more atractive because of the flaws, you see the pencil strokes changing between frames. Today IMO they are too flawless.

          • TexasDrunk@lemmy.worldEnglish
            18·
            7 days ago

            That’s actually a really good point. The flaws make the beauty more human the same way music recorded reel to reel back in the 70s was very human because of the limitations of the day. And it is beautiful.

            Not that a flawless thing can’t be beautiful. I just have a bias towards the humanness (pencil strokes, tape flutter) of the older stuff because that’s what I grew up with.

            • anomnom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              4·
              7 days ago

              That’s one of the awesome things about Bluey. The voice acting is genuinely kids talking with their mums and dads.

              Was at least, looks like Joe Blum wanted to end it, and Disney is keeping its corpse alive to license the shit out of it with no new episodes in production. Too bad really, but if the creator wanted to move on, he should have been allowed to.

      • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        5·
        7 days ago

        I don’t think it actually looks very good. The computer generated look is pretty fugly. Story is a different matte

        • ChexMax@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          7 days ago

          Yeah, Up was a weird example for me, too, but as someone who has watched Moana two dozen times, it’s always beautiful. The people are aged, with deep lines, the sand and the water and the straw, all the textures, all beautiful, and the setting is of course gorgeous.

          Lilo and Stitch is a similar background, also so so beautiful, but it doesn’t make Moana ugly or useless in comparison.

    • zloubida@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      285·
      7 days ago

      It’s not the same. Of course things can be beautiful if painted on a tablet, but differently beautiful.

    • sqgl@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      4·
      2 days ago

      Thanks. Fascinating read. However…

      The character Roger Radcliffe in Dalmatians was entirely outlined in black

      This is not true, as you can see in their provided still. Some internal “outlines” are not in black, especially his hat and shoes (hard to tell with his jacket whether dark brown or black). It is similar to their Sleeping Beauty (supposedly) counter-exanple.

  • GraniteM@lemmy.worldEnglish
    79·
    7 days ago

    My kid got into Lady and the Tramp, so I watched it about a dozen times in a row, and Holeee shiiit is that thing beautifully animated. The backgrounds are needlessly lavish, and look at this…

    I’m in awe of the work done on Tramp’s ears. The expressiveness, and the subtle balance of flexibility and internal structure is exquisite. You can find other examples of masterfully-done materials all throughout the movie.

    Other movies might get more attention, but Lady and the Tramp is worth looking at for some peak Disney animation.

        • EldritchFemininity@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          2·
          6 days ago

          While true, with hand drawn animation it’s slightly different as not every frame is drawn (usually). Disney films looked so good because they were done “on the two’s” instead of the industry standard of “on the three’s” - meaning that Disney films had a drawn frame for every 2 fps instead of every 3, or 12 drawn frames per second instead of the normal 8. Your brain interpolates the rest of the between frames, but this is why Disney looks so much more smooth.

          Another great example is Akira, which was done on the 1’s and 2’s. That it has 12 to 24 hand drawn frames per second makes the visual quality difference really visible when compared to other movies.

    • phar@lemmy.mlEnglish
      10·
      7 days ago

      I am not a big fan of Pinocchio in general, but the animation is absolutely nuts. The part with the whale is truly remarkable.