I love it when it's done well.
The problem is when it's not done well even minor mistakes look really fricking bad.
I don't consider it lazy because it takes a frick load of work to pull it off and do it well.
Also using reference is standard practice in nearly all other visual art forms.
The animation it's self is mediocre, being way too stiff and slow, but the masking covers a lot of actual animation issues that would be more apparent if they used models closer to reference.
Though that isn't why you posted it.
You posted it because the furry foot fetish cringe.
Frick you for that.
Actually I posted it because it's weirdly better than a lot of actual industry attempts at matching 2D animation with 3D.
And it's stupid because it shouldn't, by any stretch of the imagination
Rotoscoping can be almost undetectable depending on how much detail is selectively omitted. That by itself is an animator skill. It's not a skill I hold in the highest esteem, but it is one.
That said, even when the rotoscoping is crude or obvious, it doesn't necessarily prevent me from enjoying something. American Pop comes to mind.
If you can't immediately tell it's rotoscoped, it's fine by me. The way they execute it here is good as both creating natural and fluid animation whilst being an effective cost-cutting measure.
that's what they do AND then they adjust it you moron
Or what, do you also complain they use their own colors instead of the colors of the video they rotoscope? moron
Then it stops being rotoscoping and becomes mixed media, if I take a photo of you and then digitally draw over it to change your appearance, it stops being a photo of you.
When you see the characters interact with the ground you can clearly see why.
They are floaty and not properly grounded in most scenes.
Nothing has the proper feeling of weight in many scenes.
And oh man, whenever someone sit on something it looks really off.
I think the hobbit was criticized because the actors performing were bad actors as far as the movements were concerned. They often "acted with their hands" which made the final product look weird.
That seems to be more reference than rotoscope. The gestures are similar but not the same.
I'd say like anything else it's a tool, all that matters is the results. If it's the rotoscoping that looks jarring and awkward like somehow the movements don't actually fit the artstyle or scenery, it's bad. If its seamless then its good.
Same with tracing.
There's a difference between liking (thing), and being sexually attracted to them.
Roller coasters, Jack Skellington, birthday cakes, there's something out there for everybody that is not able to be understood by everyone else. So the best thing to do is to divide it into harmful and not harmful, and that's why certain people should be forming a line at a guillotine, while others who just like the merch are not.
I've seen "e-girlcons" share literal traced cp, it's not about what they actually are or not it's about protecting their shallow reputation and seething over MUH BAD PEDO WORD because they're sensitive self assuring moralgays
Sadly Bluth suffered from a decay in quality in animation movement when he move out from disney, at least when it comes to humans, in fact on disney he rarely relied on rotoscoping but instead live action reference whoch was his best.
Some of what Disney did wasn't really even rotoscoping, including this GIF. Instead of drawing directly over live-action images, they used the footage as a frame of reference and drew/animated from scratch.
ALICE??!!
It's fine so long as it looks good like your pic or pic related
It's not even rotoscoped half the time. It's just live-action with filters cranked up
>with filters cranked up
You are joking right?
It's hard to tell through text alone.
Anon, that's clearly live-action footage.
Alice
I love it when it's done well.
The problem is when it's not done well even minor mistakes look really fricking bad.
I don't consider it lazy because it takes a frick load of work to pull it off and do it well.
Also using reference is standard practice in nearly all other visual art forms.
Thoughts on this?
>All those feet
Obviously coomer shit
The animation it's self is mediocre, being way too stiff and slow, but the masking covers a lot of actual animation issues that would be more apparent if they used models closer to reference.
Though that isn't why you posted it.
You posted it because the furry foot fetish cringe.
Frick you for that.
Actually I posted it because it's weirdly better than a lot of actual industry attempts at matching 2D animation with 3D.
And it's stupid because it shouldn't, by any stretch of the imagination
and yet
That's not rotoscoping, that's a character acting reference.
Disney is the house rotoscoping built
That's Fleischer
Confirmed. I just watched Forging the Frame: the Roots of Animation, 1900-1920.
Rotoscoping can be almost undetectable depending on how much detail is selectively omitted. That by itself is an animator skill. It's not a skill I hold in the highest esteem, but it is one.
That said, even when the rotoscoping is crude or obvious, it doesn't necessarily prevent me from enjoying something. American Pop comes to mind.
If it is done well(like in classic Disney, as your example) I don't mind it at all.
If you can't immediately tell it's rotoscoped, it's fine by me. The way they execute it here is good as both creating natural and fluid animation whilst being an effective cost-cutting measure.
The timing and spacing is completely different, the animation is bouncier and livelier than the footage, hence not rotoscoping
they adjust it to fit 2d aesthetics, that's what good rotoscoping does.
Rotoscoping means literally tracing the drawings over footage of real life, if you're doing anything else it's not rotoscoping.
that's what they do AND then they adjust it you moron
Or what, do you also complain they use their own colors instead of the colors of the video they rotoscope? moron
Then it stops being rotoscoping and becomes mixed media, if I take a photo of you and then digitally draw over it to change your appearance, it stops being a photo of you.
That's referencing not rotoscoping.
Why are Bakshi movies considered bad rotoscoping? This looks pretty good to me.
When you see the characters interact with the ground you can clearly see why.
They are floaty and not properly grounded in most scenes.
Nothing has the proper feeling of weight in many scenes.
And oh man, whenever someone sit on something it looks really off.
I think the hobbit was criticized because the actors performing were bad actors as far as the movements were concerned. They often "acted with their hands" which made the final product look weird.
Rotoscope a scene is a dificult job. Even making a cellshading looks good need a lot of skill and hard work.
It has its time and places.
That seems to be more reference than rotoscope. The gestures are similar but not the same.
I'd say like anything else it's a tool, all that matters is the results. If it's the rotoscoping that looks jarring and awkward like somehow the movements don't actually fit the artstyle or scenery, it's bad. If its seamless then its good.
Same with tracing.
That's not rotoscoping, that's reference, rotoscoping is tracing the original video 1:1
>rotoscoping is tracing the original video 1:1
Not exactly
Tracing, yes
1:1, no.
>trace artwork
Frick you worthless hack!
>trace film
Oh so beautiful!
Frick rotoscoping
its fine when done well. often, its not done well.
Where is Alice?
Is that rotoscoping? I thought Disney just used footage like that for reference. Rotoscoping requires tracing of some sort.
IT's not. OP is a baiting nincompoop.
You could fap to literal rotoscoped CP and e-girlcons would still insist it isn't pedophilia
>e-girlcons
call them pedophiles or frick off back to >>>Cinemaphile or >>>/jp/, you rotting weeaboo.
>call them pedophiles
Literally the furthest thing from
it literally means "somebody who is attracted to little girls," you fricking moron.
There's a difference between liking (thing), and being sexually attracted to them.
Roller coasters, Jack Skellington, birthday cakes, there's something out there for everybody that is not able to be understood by everyone else. So the best thing to do is to divide it into harmful and not harmful, and that's why certain people should be forming a line at a guillotine, while others who just like the merch are not.
I've seen "e-girlcons" share literal traced cp, it's not about what they actually are or not it's about protecting their shallow reputation and seething over MUH BAD PEDO WORD because they're sensitive self assuring moralgays
hes saying to use the western word for pedophile, if you want to use the eastern one go to the dedicated boards
Thats not rotoscoping.
If done right it can look natural
Sadly Bluth suffered from a decay in quality in animation movement when he move out from disney, at least when it comes to humans, in fact on disney he rarely relied on rotoscoping but instead live action reference whoch was his best.
I like it https://youtu.be/_HKjN7G16NQ
Some of what Disney did wasn't really even rotoscoping, including this GIF. Instead of drawing directly over live-action images, they used the footage as a frame of reference and drew/animated from scratch.