Animation Poll -- CGI or Handrawn

[airlarry!]

We've been debating about the future of animation. Give us your thoughts....

1. I prefer CGI animation (Shrek, Monsters Inc.) over hand-drawn (Lion King, Snow White)
2. I prefer hand-drawn animation over CGI animation
3. I do not like CGI, I do not like hand-drawn animation. Clay-mation is coming back, man!

 

[Eeyore2U]

I mentioned it in the other thread. I don't think The Lion King or Alladin or The Little Mermaid would have been as good in CGI. It is choppy movement and to me not all that appealing.

 

[airlarry!]

I think Hollywood has already proved that not every story can be told in every style. 'The Flintstones' may well have been a good movie to some viewers (not me), but it would be hard to argue that they actually captured the spirit of the fun little cartoon series.

 

[airlarry!]

Hmm...getting closer now between the HD & CGI camps.

Still no claymatian fans?!?

 

[MelissathePooh]

I didn't vote - I think each has its place in the world of animation. As far as Claymation - "Nightmare before Christmas" is a really good example of fairly recent claymation. I thought it was extremely well done and fit the story.

CGI is fine and has its own appeal, but I think its much less useful when human characters are called for - they just don't look believable. With hand animators the flexibility to make charaters as "people", while seldom realistic, is easier on the eye.

 

[Baileymouse]

Although I voted for hand-drawn, I think that those are 3 different art forms. CGI has it's place and has proven to be quite popular with what it does. Even the traditional hand-drawn flicks are helped out by a computer. Remember the sweeping dance scene in Beauty and the Beast? It looked so real! Claymation, too, has its place. Take them for what they are - you can paint in many different styles and you can animate in different styles, too.

 

[SPAGo 98]

In general, I much prefer hand-drawn, but there are some things that look better in CGI. I'm glad that TS and a Bug's Life were done in CGI, but if Beauty and the Beast had been done in CGI, I don't think it would have had its charm.

 

[YoHo]

I voted CLaymation, because I didn't Like the options. I don't think Computer animation is a fad. At the same time, I don't see it replacing traditional animation. Both have their place and both will coexist.

 

[airlarry!]

Should I have added one more option? That commercially successful movies would continue to be made in both or all three mediums?

 

[YoHo]

Yes, unfortunatly, I can't revote.

 

[Safari Steve]

Honestly, you may as well say, "Art: Oil Paintings, Sculpture, or Multimedia? Make one choice as there is never any room for variety."
I think that CGI has to some extent put an end to the once commonplace practice of using extensive modelwork for special effects in film, but at the same time, the CGI dinos in the Jurrassic Park movies did not stand alone without the use of elaborate creature effects. I believe that technology, despite the best efforts of the hollywood "Show me the bandwagon, I'm ready to jump!" crowd, tends to add to the variety of techniques used, not to narrow it down to one choice.

 

[Quentin Disney]

Ahh! The age old debate of CGI and Traditional hand-drawn animation. Both certainly have their upsides and downsides. I usually prefer it old school as some CGI productions have left me cold. However, with CGI, you can present more detail in the characters than ever before.

I don't really hate CGI, so I hope that future animation productions don't just use it as a gimmick to attract audiences.

 

[airlarry!]

Hey Steve, that is why I put the poll up. There was another thread with some of us arguing that one will not replace the other...and we talked about it, albeit not with the great example you used.

Then we argued as to which one people like...and someone mentioned that CGI movies have blown away traditionally animated ones at the box office recently, and therefore, hand-drawn movies would soon be a thing of the past. So I figured I would see if people like Quentin and me are old dinosaurs who are in the minority. So far the poll seems to suggest that on this limited scale we are not.

I think the poll suggests two points.

One, CGI is not as popular as the box office numbers would suggest.
Two, there is still a market for both...or at least for hand-drawn animated features AND CGI.

Oh yeah. And then Yoho! correctly deduced that the choice of 'both' is missing from the poll. I've thought about it, and yes, it works better for me this way, because I can isolate the two camps...this question forces you to pick the one that you think will dominate in the future. Unless of course you like Claymation.

 

[hopemax]

But no "both" takes away my prediction. Not to say that complete CGI and complete hand-drawn will both be made, but that they will be both used simultaneously. CGI used for back-grounds and certain characters, but hand-drawn for male/female leads for example. Actually, I hope we see more blending of live action, CGI and hand-drawn animation. Like Dinosaur had CGI and live-action backgrounds, Roger Rabbit had hand drawn and live action. CGI and hand-drawn have their advantages and disadvantages and if it were me, I would be trying to figure out how to use all the forms within one project.

 

[Safari Steve]

They called it 'Monkeybone'... if only the story had been better... oh well.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

I think CGI will dominate for awhile, because the cost will continue to come down and the quailty will go up. Already, Shrek was made for about 2/3 of what Atlantis cost. I don't think it would have worked quite as well as an animated feature either, with the current technology.

Pretty soon, computers will be able to generate these movies at a fraction of the cost of traditional animation. If one of them can be done for 20 million, vs. 100 million for a traditional feature, and they both have an equal chance at the box office, then which one do you think Hollywood will favor?

Artists and Directors will continue to push for movies in their favorite medium. It's getting a project greetlighted that will present the greatest threat to traditional animation.

CGI is getting pretty good also. The subtle gestures and expressions of the characters in Monsters was far and away the best yet.

Moving even farther into the future..... I bet that we soon will see more and more combinations of the two mediums. Hand drawn characters in a CGI universe? CGI characters in a hand drawn universe?

Eventually Computers will be able to create movies that look entirely hand drawn too. You won't be able to tell the difference, except by the animator's and directors individual styles. The word "animation" will come to mean any movie element that isn't directly filmed from a "real" sorce. I bet we are just a few years away from that possibility.

So personally, I think the future of animation looks very bright. Also very interesting!

 

[Another Voice]

I’ve tried to stay out of this one, but…

‘Atlantis’ was almost as much of a computer generated movie as ‘Shrek’ was. We’re already at the point were “computer animation looks like hand-drawn” and we’ve been there for a long time. The last Disney animated movie to actually use cells was, I think, ‘Aladdin’ (and even then all the coloring was done by computer). At best there are a some drawings that get scanned into the computer and some backgrounds – but between the color processing and the automated “in-betweening” these film pretty much exist only in a computer. The real difference is between “traditional” style animation (i.e., two dimensional) and three-dimensional animation.

“Hand drawn” animation still exists for a lot of television and direct-to-video work because it’s sometimes cheaper to higher a roomful of Koreans than it is to hire a couple of computer graphic artists, but that’s changing too. Most movies released these days has some form of computer animation in them, and not just special effects. Crowd scenes, background elements, removals, or just plain tweaking around (including special “fat reduction” plans for some actresses and “instant muscles” for actors – you’d be surprised).

The future of CGI is not to replace “hand-drawn” animation, its future is replace real life. Just wait until everyone sees the new Bruce Lee movie that’s being rumored around town…

 

[Safari Steve]

Just to clarify, computers don't create the work. They are a tool used by actual people to create the work. Also, while coloring, compositing, and compilation are performed with computers, the vast majority of the work is still done by hand (I believe the percentage given is about 60%).
BTW, Larry, I didn't see the original thread, but I dig what you're getting at.

CLAYMATION ROCKS!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Just to clarify, computers don't create the work. They are a tool used by actual people to create the work.

Yes!!! I knew there was something wrong with my take on this thread. That's why I've stayed away. I couldn't put my finger on it though. But Steve did!!! Though I think he didn't mean it as I do.

It doesn't matter if it's computer, hand drawn, claymation (Yeah!!), three frames per second (Huckleberry Hound - Pixie, Dixie and Jinx) or three frames per minute with moving lips (ala Clutch Cargo!!). It's story and creativity that matters. Not what what kind of pen (or computer) the artist uses!!!

Thanks Steve!!!

That said, I think there is a market for both. I like both, depending on my mood. (I have a love-hate relationship with claymation. I can't stand it, but I'm strangely compelled to watch it. Kind of like a car wreck!!!)

So there's no place for me in to vote. Unless I use my Chicago option and vote more than once!!

 

[Safari Steve]

That's pretty much exactly what I meant. And even in work that is done totally CG (Like the gold that Pixar turns out or the tripe that PDA gives us) requires a good deal of "pencil & pen" work in the visual development and storyboarding processes (I don't care what anyone may have told you, there is not an electronic box somewhere deciding what characters look like and what kind of stylized look the production design will have). As for the use of cels, color and layout consistency has improved vastly (IMHO) since computers have been utilized for these tasks. Regardless, the 'Hand-Drawn' part comes in way before color and compositing.