Current Events > Do you prefer traditional animation over CGI?

(+) Yeah! (+)

If so, why?

Of course, there are good examples and bad examples of any animation form, but in general I feel like there's elements of (human, animal, etc) movement and emotion that are captured better with the pencil than with CGI.
---

Vol2tex posted...

elements of movement and emotion that are captured better with the pencil

Yeah, that exactly. Saved this gif from 101 Dalmatians because I love the way he fumbles his coat sleeve once before getting it right. New stuff from Pixar is really good with getting that same level of expression, but I still kinda just prefer flat animation.

---

CGI just looks soulless to me most of the time, but maybe that's because most CGI movies outside of Pixar are soulless
---

Hand drawn is way better but it's probably dead forever, except in tiny indie things and anime.
---

CGI just gets outdated every handful of years no matter how well-done it is at the time. Meanwhile, traditional animation can look amazing decades later without any issue provided that any resolution issues are handled appropriately.
---

K181 posted...

CGI just gets outdated every handful of years no matter how well-done it is at the time. Meanwhile, traditional animation can look amazing decades later without any issue provided that any resolution issues are handled appropriately.

This.

Bascially CGI sucks balls.
---

Disney eyes in CG are fucking horrifying

Second_Chances posted...

Disney eyes in CG are fucking horrifying

Dead eye.
---

Meanwhile, at least we're not seeing this very often anymore:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gcyZc3bhyM" data-time="
---

i enjoy both as long as the execution is top notch.

they can both be good or bad depending on the amount of time put into it. i can probably find thousands of horribly animated examples from both sides. i don't have a particular bias toward either direction, but i do believe it's easier to get away with things in traditional art, which makes it easier to accept and appreciate.
---

Second_Chances posted...

Disney eyes in CG are fucking horrifying

I like to think you really are some maniac who is afraid of Elsa and Ana
---

bump
---

Absolutely. CGI looks like a video game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIQdpjzOUa0" data-time="
---

It depends, really.

Either one done cheaply looks bland, and most of the time 2D ends up looking better than CG would, with the notable exception that Pixar has wizards working for them that can make their films look amazing anyway.
---

Vol2tex posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIQdpjzOUa0" data-time="

I don't know why they made her look so plain in comparison to her sister. Is it to teach guys to not be concerned with looks?

Skye Reynolds posted...

Vol2tex posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIQdpjzOUa0" data-time="

I don't know why they made her look so plain in comparison to her sister. Is it to teach guys to not be concerned with looks?

Not really that plain.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ieCjpmliSg" data-time="
---

They each have their uses. Hand-drawn animation is great for something like Fantasy/Magical settings, but CGI can be used to touch up a live-action movie.
---

yes
---

I wouldn't say that I prefer one over the other but I do find it sad that traditional animation has gone the way of the v-raptor :(. I definitely think it's two artistic methods that can co-exist.
---

K181 posted...

CGI just gets outdated every handful of years no matter how well-done it is at the time. Meanwhile, traditional animation can look amazing decades later without any issue provided that any resolution issues are handled appropriately.

I still love how Toy Story looks but I know what you mean. TV CGI usually looks awful.
---

http://moviemezzanine.com/wp-content/uploads/spirited-12.png

don't think CGI can top visual artistry like this.
---

AsucaHayashi posted...

http://moviemezzanine.com/wp-content/uploads/spirited-12.png

don't think CGI can top visual artistry like this.

Wow
---

Traditional/ hand-drawn has a special heart in my place, but frankly I enjoy both equally.
---

I hate CGI. 2D animation for life.

CGI has very little artistic expression.

If you look at the big early (and renaissance) Disney movies and look at the colours, the lines, the expressions and contrasts between different pieces, you can see the artistry that went into the creation of the film. Compare that to something like The Incredibles or Monsters, Inc., which are great films. They just look like computer models that have nothing particularly artistic to them. Talent and honing of the craft went into them for sure. Sully's fur is rightly considered a great achievement. But it doesn't give a glimse into the process of the artist that made it.

I guess if you want to be sappy, my point is that CGI animation lacks soul in comparison to (good) handdrawn animation.

NibeIungsnarf posted...

CGI has very little artistic expression.

If you look at the big early (and renaissance) Disney movies and look at the colours, the lines, the expressions and contrasts between different pieces, you can see the artistry that went into the creation of the film. Compare that to something like The Incredibles or Monsters, Inc., which are great films. They just look like computer models that have nothing particularly artistic to them. Talent and honing of the craft went into them for sure. Sully's fur is rightly considered a great achievement. But it doesn't give a glimse into the process of the artist that made it.

I guess if you want to be sappy, my point is that CGI animation lacks soul in comparison to (good) handdrawn animation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOHOsEO_g0U" data-time="

There's so much life and energy and expression in something like this, I love it.
---

NibeIungsnarf posted...

CGI has very little artistic expression.

If you look at the big early (and renaissance) Disney movies and look at the colours, the lines, the expressions and contrasts between different pieces, you can see the artistry that went into the creation of the film. Compare that to something like The Incredibles or Monsters, Inc., which are great films. They just look like computer models that have nothing particularly artistic to them. Talent and honing of the craft went into them for sure. Sully's fur is rightly considered a great achievement. But it doesn't give a glimse into the process of the artist that made it.

I guess if you want to be sappy, my point is that CGI animation lacks soul in comparison to (good) handdrawn animation.

Ratatouille, UP and Zootopia are probably the best animated films of the past decade both artistically and for the writing department, including narrative and themes. I personally loved Tangled as well but being as objective as possible it's not on par with the first 3.

I thought Zootopia had some exceptional display of animated expressions.




---

CG in handrawn or computer animated shows look terrible period.

I dropped alot of shows when I saw this terrible practice brought into shows. It's fucking awful.
---

Current 3D = Current 2D animation > 2D animation at any given point in time >>>> Early 3D

Low budget 2D >>>>>>>> Low budget 3D

This applies to games just as much as movies. McDonald's Treasure Land Adventure looks way better than Sneak King, Yoshi's Island looks better than Super Mario 64, and Ristar looks way better than Space Channel 5; but now that 3D animation has gotten better, 3D vs. 2D is now Odyssey vs. Skullgirls, Fighting EX Layer vs. BlazBlue Central Fiction, and to use a slightly earlier example, at which point it really comes down to personal preference.

That said

Mid 90s-Early 2000s CGI >>>>>>>> 2008 cutscenes with ingame assets

Looking at you, Klonoa. And NiGHTS too.
---

RachelSam posted...

They each have their uses. Hand-drawn animation is great for something like Fantasy/Magical settings, but CGI can be used to touch up a live-action movie.

Frankly, most CGI in live action basically looks like Who Framed Roger Rabbit to me.

Basically, the only good CG in live action is the kind where somebody says "wow that was some good CG" and I legitimately don't know what they're talking about.

If you can't pull that off, just go all practical or all CG.
---

Sonic23004 posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ieCjpmliSg" data-time="

*God has joined the game*
---

How CGI are we talking here? Full 3D or flash or other 2D styles that can be made with computers?
---

The worst part about the current CGI trend in movies is the art-styles all look pretty much the same. Deformed heads with huge eyes etc and I swear they have the same facial expressions most the time. It doesn't stop a good movie from being a good movie but I think visually it stops characters looking as iconic as they would have been back in the 2D eras.
---

Yes. Though Pixar does some damn good CGI. Disney has their moments too(yeah I know Disney owns Pixar)
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8S-Sx-mJXk" data-time="&start=136
---

I prefer traditional animation.
---