Right then, initially, whats better? or is that the right take? in the lecture we were showed a clip of fantasmagorie, originally a 2d based animation that has now had 3D added to it, it shows the contrast between movement, bill explained in the lecture that its not always the quality of the key drawings but its what happens in between them is whats important, further going on to say that the ultimate thing that defines the two typed of animation (2D/3D) is how easily that's done, for example, a 2D artist is pretty much god to the page and his pencil where as with 3D the are calculations that need to be made that cant always create the same free art work that 2D artists can.
http://www.indavideo.hu/video/Fantasmagorie_2008
A good example of this is the movment shown in the Fleicher brothers adaptation of snow white with Betty boop. where the story line falls down the character animation and movement brings it right back up to life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNG8GYrh1mg
Another version of this is Disney's take on snow white where the same movement isn't shown but the storyline in significantly better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gWiVs5Q0kc
basically to round it up i currently think that 2D artists with they're originally animation talent have the upper hand on the movement side of things but i think it wont be long before 3D catches up and more importantly loosens up
No comments:
Post a Comment