https://youtu.be/7a9MzuQ3Xlk?si=E-fvRd0euE6XCHmT
They need to use ai generated stuff
then have team of artists alter the studf with their own skill
it will be a lot easier and faster to produce content than from scratch
They need to use ai generated stuff
then have team of artists alter the studf with their own skill
it will be a lot easier and faster to produce content than from scratch
Did you even watch the video?
You solely mean the state of 2D animation.
It's more time consuming so it's more expensive to do. It's not so much the cost that prevents big studios ( only the big ones ) from producing it, it's the time crunch.
There's production quality animation, and there's full/limited animation.
- Production quality is the shit we see on TV shows, where the animators have to cut corners to produce something acceptable.
- Full animation is where the animator will take more time to produce more a impressive animation. This is generally what's used in animated movies.
While production quality animation cuts corners, it's actually more demanding as a series is more lengthy than a movie.
.
.
My opinion on the state of animation. It's been on the decline since the 80's in terms of production quality. If you see the stuff made in the 90's it hasn't changed much since then. The charter designs are more simple and basic for the sake of production. In the 80's 2D production animation was more detailed.
3D students reference 2D animation into their studies in schools too, as we had to learn how to implement "the 12 principles of animation". As long as they are considered the animator can impress.
1973 Disney made did Robinhood with a bunch of furries with some redrawn animations, some of which was rotoscoped, but that King character up to this day is insanely animated. His expressions and behavior, his poses.
By today's standards animating a character like that isn't fun, but it would be rewarding for a 2D artist to pull it off. And I mean the hairs on his chin need to work. He doesn't appear flat either, the length of his nose matches the angles, he turns his head to the side and the length is correct to how it looks from every perspective. Drawing that guy over and over again, not very nice.
We can go from then all the way to now, and the best stuff is still way back there. I look at your video and see people are amazed by the blue cat's walk cycle and a few facial expressions, and we can see it really doesn't take as much to impress people these days. I checked out the video, and it was animated by James Baxter.
Okay James Baxter, let's see your demo reel.
Really insane reel. The Beast dance animation isn't all that great though. Very flat compared to the King in Robin hood. lol Still the man is hard to touch.
.
.
Production quality animation.
Chuck Jones is the king of that.
He managed to do production quality animation better, and is regarded as an influence in timing and efficiency in the 2D world. He knew how to do it quickly, when to have the character still, and used a lot of quick or looping motions within the 12 principles.
This guy.
Telling stories efficiently. Now we look at stuff from the 90's and up, it really doesn't compare.
Chuck Jones draws while distracted, still shows how fast he can go through a page when animating. He can probably do a character in less than a minute. The guy's a machine.
If you see what he just drew, there something called "Line of Action" and his sketch is dripping with it. It looks good without even being animated, as though it already has life. Compare that to what we see today. Everything is really stiff and doesn't have the same level or expression.
Everyone likes their 2D shows, and the style they bring, but the state of 2D animation got worse, cause it's all about production. It's not going anywhere. And I mean production animation. It's mostly trash these days. Only sufficient.
Hollywood is dying, Netflix is the new big ticket and they're pumping out 2D animation all the time.
And wow...
^ The combined work of human, CGI and Ai.... That is so not right, and wonderful.