When I was little I thought they were Disney's, "3D studio," (this was before 2006 but I didn't realize Disney didn't actually own them yet,) and that it served a specific function for Disney of creating 3D-drawn movies while main Disney served the specifi

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive	Archive [500 char limit]
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 67e83132cbf7d63⋯.png (3.07 MB, 3840x1600, 12:5, pixar.png)

Anonymous 02/24/20 (Mon) 11:50:42 No.1072430

When I was little I thought they were Disney's, "3D studio," (this was before 2006 but I didn't realize Disney didn't actually own them yet,) and that it served a specific function for Disney of creating 3D-drawn movies while main Disney served the specific function of creating 2D-drawn movies. Each thing had its purpose. So, why couldn't it be that way, and Disney just continue to only make 2D-drawn movies?

____________________________

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 02/24/20 (Mon) 22:52:27 No.1072438

I'm talking out of my ass, but from what I remember, 2D movies are more costly than CGI ones. There's also the fact that Disney's last couple 2D movies didn't make them as much as they'd hoped (although in the case of Treasure Planet, that was their own goddamn fault for releasing it the same year as the first goddamn Harry Potter and spoiling the plot in the trailers). When those movies failed, they used that as the excuse they needed to move completely into CG films.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 02/25/20 (Tue) 01:40:33 No.1072440

>>1072430

The answer it's not really different from the other Disney thread, basically money. Disney it's a big company and it's sole purpose is to make money, of course that doesn't mean they can still make beautiful animated projects, but sadly they just went to the common denominator during the last couple decades.

>>1072438

>I'm talking out of my ass, but from what I remember, 2D movies are more costly than CGI ones

It's not really that hard to deduce that. For instance, if you want to change the hair color of a character, if you are doing traditional animation you would have to do all over again, while in CGI it's just a matter of a couple of extra hours rendering. Not to mention, since in CGI you are working with models, it's way easier to use camera shots and movement test with your characters.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.