Little Nemo McFly Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Rotoscoping was an essential part of the process, since the earliest...budding of animation as a trade. I think you'd be surprised how much is actually rotoscoped n' then later given artistic flare. Fleischer's Superman run is nothing short of spectacular - a super-human effort. Is that what you're talking about? Blatant rotoscoped presentation - or rotoscoping in general as part of the process? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Rotoscoping was an essential part of the process, since the earliest...budding of animation as a trade. I think you'd be surprised how much is actually rotoscoped n' then later given artistic flare. Fleischer's Superman run is nothing short of spectacular - a super-human effort. Is that what you're talking about? Blatant rotoscoped presentation - or rotoscoping in general as part of the process? Like with light boxing, it works fine when they use it as a base. But when the artist just traces over a video like Ralph Bhakshi or Prince of Persia it looks cheap and has an uncanny valley effect. Like I don't notice it as much on The Aristocats, but it bugs the shot out of me in Snow White because it's so blatant. And the only Ralph Bhakshi movie I can stomach is Wizards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Nemo McFly Posted September 9, 2016 Author Share Posted September 9, 2016 (edited) For y'all who ain't in da know - light boxing is how animators trace - also, how they'd trace over film frames. I can totally see it taking you out when it looks too 1:1. Yeah, Disney has been essentially shooting their animated films in live-action first, well into the Disney Renaissance (Little Mermaid and Aladdin have pretty much full live-action versions that were essentially light boxed) It was a very common practice back-in-the-day, even w/ simple dumb Looney Tune sequences, same w/ 30s Popeye! The industry / artists were still learning / studying / experimenting / discovering timing n' techniques...they'd shoot each other and analyze / expand ideas frame-by-frame. I've heard people calling it cheating - but you can argue so is using a mirror or watching your buddy act out a gesture a thousand times over. Using directed footage as a guide - totally makes sense. Now there's mo-cap. As far as Disney's early stuff goes - it's amazing how real, the stylized version of filmed-footage looks, but - back on your point, I personally actually really like that 1:1 rotoscoped-look when it pops up in a Disney flick. Heavy Metal, Lord of the Rings...it messes w/ my brain seeing an 'animated character' move absolutely naturally - it just feels different. (shrugs) LOL - totally dig it. Edited September 10, 2016 by Mr. Hakujin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 (edited) I don't consider it cheating so long as it's not 1:1 reproduction but you just change the clothes and hair. I know a lot of old cartoons used rotoscoping but most of them used it more like one of those wooden mannequin dolls. I don't consider that to be true rotoscoping though I know it technically is. But this for example: The super-deformed cartoon animals somehow look more naturalistic than Snow White because her actions are too real. The animals are actually drawn, Snow White is traced. Edited September 9, 2016 by Iambaytor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Nemo McFly Posted September 9, 2016 Author Share Posted September 9, 2016 As far as Disney's early stuff goes - it's amazing how real, the stylized version of filmed-footage looks. That's not 1:1. They totally had reference / a guide, but they made it look gooooood... I'm pretty sure I have a doc w/ the original filmed footage of that very scene and what Disney did to it. It's genius how they added and adjusted subtleties...brilliant. Seamless. Slowing down an arm...completely reanimating the head - or combining gestures from different shots. I'll see if someone has it up on youtube...it's amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 In that dancing picutre, Snow White looks like she exists on an entirely different plane of reality from the dwarves. She looks like she belongs in a different movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Nemo McFly Posted September 9, 2016 Author Share Posted September 9, 2016 LOL - totally. Damn, of the stockpile of material that's on the bluray, no one has uploaded any of the awesome reference footage or the before n' after stuff. Disney Inc. must've pulled 'em. Best I could find was this - @ :55 and @ 2:49 Snow White existing / dancing on a entirely different plane / synch than the dwarves is what I'm trying to get at - the results look 1:1 - it looks amazing. Reference material - up the wazoo, for sure - but it's a very disciplined stylization...resulting from many, many attempts and studying many, many different takes. Disney settled for nothing less, than his artists' absolute best...and then some. It's a combination of takes and several attempts at artistic romanticization(?) / flair. It just being 'traced' is really putting it lightly - but technically, they did have a model...(shrugs) Here - this is what I can't find for Snow White online. The Aladdin stuff is pure corn - LOL - it's on the bluray. Snow White's style of performance was intentionally very realistic, natural / human 'cuz Walt wanted a real character performance to get a real connection w/ the audience. In 1938, a full-length animated feature had never been done before, let alone even thought possible. He wanted to push the medium to a place that no one had ever been. Every scene was scrutinized and entire segments were reanimated if it simply didn't 'feel right' to him. It paid off - fucker changed the world. Oy - Supermod, you maybe wanna this conversation should be ported over to the Animation Blargh, there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 ...Oy - Supermod, you maybe wanna this conversation should be ported over to the Animation Blargh, there? Sim-sala-bim. And it is done. Supermod not in name but in deeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Nemo McFly Posted September 27, 2017 Author Share Posted September 27, 2017 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Nemo McFly Posted January 11, 2018 Author Share Posted January 11, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Boy they sure skimmed over Fleischer's animation sweat shops which were a pig part of why those cartoons looked so amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted January 14, 2018 Share Posted January 14, 2018 i always assumed that was the case - id read a ton of money was thrown at them, but whenever you're at a comic shop & see them in the background, it's unreal for their era. no way that wasn't a botalod of barely-compensated people making that witchcraft happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.