Animation on twos looks like ass.
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Animation on ones should have caught on.
Animation on twos looks like ass.
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
You don't know what you're talking about. Thief and the cobler was animated at a higher framerate, basically higher than "ones". All disney movies are animated on "ones"
the 90s disney movies were animated on twos because when i watch an aladdin video on yt and i push the , . buttons, it takes two button presses for the frame to change.
The Disney Renaissance films often alternates between the two a lot; either in different scenes, or even within different elements of the same scene. It ain't just about the timing either; it's also dependent on how the drawings are spaced, and if those drawings themselves look good enough to communicate the intended actions well.
>The Disney Renaissance films often alternates between the two a lot; either in different scenes, or even within different elements of the same scene. It ain't just about the timing either; it's also dependent on how the drawings are spaced, and if those drawings themselves look good enough to communicate the intended actions well.
That seems just fine to me. Thief and the Cobbler is needlessly indulgent even if it does look pretty.
>when i watch an aladdin video on yt and i push the , . buttons, it takes two button presses for the frame to change.
Black person you are watching a copy of a copy which is probably from a dvd/blu-ray playing at 30fps which doesn't directly correlate with 24fps. The fact you don't know this highlights how much of a dumbass you are when it comes to animation.
Thief and the Cobbler's animation was unsustainable
glowie alert
the thief and the cobbler is a treat but he's still right, it took 30 fricking years to get done, and the recobbled cut took 40.
What about Loving Vincent? Or rotoscoped movies like A Scanner Darkly?
Rotoscoping's a whole different ball game, i'm not an animator, but having a perfect reference for every frame is going to probably going to make it far easier to draw lots of frames quicker, haven't ad a chance to see loving vincent yet
>recobbled cut
MIRAMAX cut is better.
I mean, if you have the time and budget to draw twice as many frames, sure.
Which one of these movies actually came out as intended though
didn't disney buy thief&cobbler through one of their sub labels then edited it to add in aladdin ripoff references to kill its legacy
mhm...
People like to say Disney changed, but that's a lie. Disney has always been scum, all that's different is now we have the internet and they can't hide it as easily.
Miramax, but I believe that operated fairly independent of Disney, so that would have been Weinstein’s fault.
Thief and the Gobbler stole the idea of Disney's Aladdin. That is pathetic.
>animation
>still image
One fricking job, you FRICK.
What does that even mean
Thief and the Cobbler has great animation, but that's all it has going for it. Aladdin has memorable characters and music to go along with good animation. Cope and seethe.
Tack is cuter than aladdin
I still don't get what's that supposed to mean
Disney hater alert.
You say that like it's a bad thing
i like both
You vision is very superficial, just as your life
The Thief and the Cobbler had great animation, true. But also a frickugly artstyle. Nobody would have bothered even if it was finished in a sensible time frame, because nobody wants to watch characters uglier than those taken straight from a soviet block cartoon.
you have a child's taste in art. all the intricate, mosaic-like geometric shapes and optical illusions are much more impressive art direction than disney's style. the "all characters must be generically attractive" moetard thinking is cancer. and it's not even true because thief and the cobbler has the hotter princess and cuter main character too
You argue like a child, OP
HAVE NO FEAR
HAVE NO FEAR
ZIGZAG THE GREAT IS HERE, IS HERE
Stupid mother fricker god your so stupid and have no sense of appeal you stupid fricking STUPID fricking moronic shithead fricking stupid idiot idiot idiot
Fun fact, most traditional animated movies use both depending on what the scene calls for.
Faster action sequences are animated on 1s, while slower scenes are animated on 2s.
That said hand drawn traditional animation for mainstream film has been dead for almost 20 years.
It's a bit pointless to argue about the finer technically of frame rate.
Get a grip. Limited animation produces better results.
>MGM
>limited
firstly, the one on the right doesn't ask for crazy antics and secondly, MGM had the second biggest budget at that time. Avery shorts looked better than Warner's on every level
What's the difference
>1s
Every frame has new drawings. (24fps)
>2s
Every drawing repeats once. (12fps) This does not include pans and zooms which are still at 24fps.
What
said holds true for Thief and the Cobbler as well, and it does use animation drawn on 2s in many scenes. Richard Williams just preferred to use 1s as much as possible.
and the twos was only because the hollywood elites fricked with the thing. if they had just let it btfo disney 90% of it would be animated on ones.
Cobbler seems cheaper than Aladdin in many areas, I hope they get the film back. but i don't expect anything surprising
Cobbler looks cheap because it's pre-digital
I had no idea about this until just now. Looked it up on YouTube and I couldn't be more impressed with the quality. I suppose I can understand why it might seem cheap, but from what I saw it's rich.
it got cheaper because halfway through production it was completed by a sat-am studio
>"WE WANT SMOOTH ANIMATION!"
>digital methods generate perfect inbetweens
>"NOOOOO NOT LIKE THAT!"
Animation snobs are impossible to satisfy.
>digital methods generate "perfect" inbetweens
> Its looks artificial as frick
>perfect inbetweens
>shape goes from x to y
>perfect
By that logic why not switching to live-action and just filming it at the highest possible resolution?
Smooth and perfect are not the same thing, the inbetweens must also be art.
Even vidyia bugmen get it:
>makes everything look like rubber or flash level animation
No it looks like shit.
When did you realize you are addicted to buzzwords, Op?
whoops sorry everyone now wants fake low FPS even though the inbetweens take no effort to create because hipsters won
This scene is just a masterpiece
the whole camp sequence is just amazing