YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
No.1022951
Now I know people are split on CG but lets talk about it for a thread. It has its uses and it doesn't but when it comes down to it is great for animation as a whole.
Take for example Hotwheels Highway 35 a typical toy movie but I think you can appreciate it for the little things the human animation is very dated but I the car/racing animation is really top notch even for todays standards.really shows you why Mainframe were the kings of this shit back in the day.
No.1022954
Texture wise things have kind of improved. But I don't understand how CG animation has gotten worse. Just look at the framerate of the Dragon Prince show that just came out.
No.1022956
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1022954
I think its a mix of how cheap CG can be for easy animation but also the fact if you actually put money in it like 1 million dollars an episode you can some top notch work.
No.1022957
>>1022955
Is it laziness or money grubbing executives and creators being too afraid to take risks with CGI even though we have all the technology to do good stuff with it?
>>1022956
I'm still surprised Star Wars Rebels was such a complete downgrade compared to Clone Wars. A fucking Cartoon Network production looks and has better stories than a cartoon under the biggest animation/movie/theme park company in the world. Really makes you think.
No.1022958
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Beast Wars is near unwatchable sometimes with its animation. Yeah it was one of the first but still we have came a long way
No.1022961
>>1022957
>Is it laziness or money grubbing executives
Probably both. I mean, we're at a point that there's so many things competing for kid's attention and quality doesn't guarantee an audience. So you hire cheap and often lazy people to turn out some obnoxious, low brow, and loud shows and hope it'll grab kid's attention for a few minutes. None of the executives care about quality, only about numbers.
No.1022962
>>1022961
I'd wanna say that focusing animation for teens and adults would change this kind of thing around…. but we all know the kind of low brow shit adult animation that gets successful. So I don't think there's really a way to fix this issue.
No.1022966
>>1022965
That's what's surprising. You'd think Disney would throw all their money at the show to make it look great. But they cheaped out incredibly.
No.1022970
I always find that CG cartoons when they have care put into them have some of the best world building in animation
No.1023011
No.1023032
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
I remember having some Dan Dare episodes on VHS
Don't remember if it was any good though
No.1023072
>>1022969
But wouldn't you make more profit if you made a better looking show with more budget to do better things than the previous show?
No.1023076
>>1022958
Ya know, if there was any early CGI cartoon that deserved to be remade with improvements to it's animation and only it's animation- keep the old audio and story it'd be Beast Wars.
No.1023079
>>1023077
But now we've seen they've lost more than they've gained because they haven't put any effort or real money into Star Wars.
No.1023143
>>1022954
>But I don't understand how CG animation has gotten worse.
Laziness and incompetent animators with artistic style as excuse. WTF is this stop-motion and anime imitation with always low framerate. Stop-motion and anime animators use to slowdown and speedup the animation through ones, twos and threes timing.
Usual CGI animation doesn't need this spacing timing without expections. This is most likely the reason for modern CGI degradation.
No.1023162
>>1022951
It's pretty tough and I have a good appreciation for it now.
No.1023164
>>1023143
>>1022954
Great CG animation is located in film and videogames now.
No.1023169
>>1022958
Even if the animation was competent, the art choice behind the models is a mess. It's impossible to tell anyone apart from the background.
No.1023170
Jimmy Neutron looked pretty good, even if model reused quickly became apparent. They could basicly only afford one new set or character an episode (N-Men, which gave everyone a new costume and included several new sets, had to be one of the more expensive episodes), but they made the reuse work with a solid main cast and town.
No.1023177
>>1023079
Because they thought they were guaranteed a fanbase and wouldn't have to invest in anything other than trying to get nigs and chinks to like it. And sure, there's the faggot convention goers that cry every time a poster is released or some shit, but even casualfags will eventually stop clapping for a logo when you give them nothing but cheap shit.
No.1023296
>>1023164
>Great CG animation is located in film and videogames now.
Yeah, but they are getting slowly affected too from short deadlines. For example in films the clippings in the Warcrafts.
No.1030705
No.1030756
>>1022957
To be fair, CW was funded by Lucasbucks, while Disney always goes cheap for their cartoons. See also: Marvel.
>>1022970
Well, yeah. If you're going to have a single location and a recurring cast, might as well make them interesting.
No.1030767
>>1030756
Has Disney always been so cheap with their money? I feel like it's a recent phenomena.
No.1038360
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1022951
Say, what you will about XRA's animation. Sure it looks dated even by time's standards, but it was more imaginative than most of what Pixar puts out these days.
No.1038473
>>1023032
From what I remember it was pretty decent and supposedly comic accurate, every episode was a 2 parter which is something you don't see with many cartoon series. Though I'm frustrated that outside of the first (2 parter) episode seems to be the only one I can find online.
>>1030756
>Well, yeah. If you're going to have a single location and a recurring cast, might as well make them interesting.
Like how ReBoot was mostly contained to the city of Mainframe and the cast would temporary leave to a new setting when a "game" would happen?
No.1038521
>>1030767
>Has Disney always been so cheap with their money? I feel like it's a recent phenomena.
I don't know what you're talking about.
No.1038534
>>1022958
I love this old TV CG, some PSX games have the same type of FMV cinematics and it's rather charming in its own way.
No.1038577
>>1023170
I was actually surprised re-watching this.
The animation is pretty smooth for the time and on a tv budget.
I wish there was an HD version.
No.1038618
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Nobody seems to remember Dan Dare but I had some of it on VHS
No.1038799
>>1038618
I had no idea they'd done a series. Ugh, that CGI is atrocious.
No.1038828
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
I liked embed related, it was well written, or at least good enough that it held up on a rewatch shame it never got a proper ending
No.1038845
There was that Mechwarrior series, but I always thought the actual game had better graphics than the show.
That was a weird example, of the CGI being in-universe CGI, some kind of "tactical vision", like the targeting computer in Star Wars that turns everything into wire-frame.
No.1038846
>>1038473
From what I've seen it wasn't really comic accurate at all, outside the 1950's stiff-upper-lip characterisation of Dan and Digby themselves (which would be a miracle in itself if it was made today. They'd almost certainly make Digby a bird or a nigger). The most comic accurate screen renditions of Dan Dare are 2-3 adverts for Mobil 1 motor oil from the 80's. They've even stuck to the canon timeline of the first Venus mission happening in 1995, Dan talks about then-current F1 drivers as if they're a recent memory.
No.1038876
>>1038846
At this point I'd even take a Nick Frost/ Simon Pegg Dan Dare, at least you know those two would be respectful of the material.
Pegg made such a good Johnny Alpha in the radio plays…
No.1038929
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1038846
These Mobil 1 ads?
>>1038876
Could definitely see Frost working as a live action Digby.
No.1048537
No.1048562
Using 3DCG to replace 2d is cheap. At least use the advantages of 3D like camera angle changes/
No.1057955
No.1057963
CG is much more static and limited then 2D. I feel like most 2d styles are melting into one bland pot.
No.1057964
>>1057963
Well I meant 2D in one way but 3D in a major way.
No.1057969
>>1057963
>>1057964
this but unironically
No.1058281
>>1057963
That's because everyone was turned into a robot.
No.1058291
you guys like green lantern
No.1058301
>>1057963
>CG is much more static and limited then 2D.
3DCGI is very complicated not static or limited just complicated. You have to care for the rigs, 3D space, lightning, textures, most of the works goes to asset preparations. The workflow is quite similar to stop-motion animation. How complicated this workflow is: Errors are not allowed or you waste rendering time. You can see this in 3DCGI TV Show why they go are safer route, have looped animation and look somehow static.
No.1058314
>>1038618
>>1038846
Also, they made Digby a cockney, he's supposed to be from Wigan!
No.1058316
>>1038828
Holy shit yeah. The series was so much better than the shitty CG movies. Sad tbh.