2dornot2dforum.myfastforum.org

andylatham · Joined: 10 Aug 2007 Posts: 13 Location: Manchester, UK

I was just wondering what people think of the combination of 2D and 3D animation in movies. Is it best to make a 2D movie exclusively with 2D methods, or is it okay to use 3D?

I ask because of films like Disney's the Hunchback of Notre Dame in which the main characters are hand-drawn, but a lot of the backgrounds are 3D computer creations. Also in that movie, there are scenes with huge crowds of people. These people were animated in 3D to look as if they had been hand drawn. While appreciate that this is a big time-saving device, is it not cheating? Why not just go the whole hog and animate the main characters in 3D but have them look 2D still.

I like watching the old Disney movies in which backgrounds are hand painted and have texture to them and a hint of the third dimension is given with the use of multiplane shots. On the whole, I don't like the use of 3D in 2D movies.

There is one exception though. Tarzan. I quite like the "deep canvas" method of painting the backgrounds. I think it would probably have been way beyond any traditional animator to keep track of all the tree branches that Tarzan swings between, even given unlimited time.

So I would be interested to hear other people's opinions!

_________________
Feeling artistic? Visit Andy's Animation!
www.andysanimation.co.uk

slowtiger · Joined: 25 Jul 2007 Posts: 3 Location: Berlin, Germany

Don't make this a religious decision. If your story needs 3D-elements to be told effectively, use them. If your style decision is for strictly 2D, don't use 3D. If you think that 2D and 3D don't match nicely, spend some extra time to blur the edges. It's all up to you and this specific film you're doing.

idragosani · Joined: 22 Sep 2006 Posts: 85 Location: Germantown MD

I think it all depends on whether or not 3D is actually *needed* or is it put in just for the woo factor. I think it is way overused these days and no longer has the impact it might have if it were used more sparingly.

With feature films like 'Fantasia' or shorts like 'What's Opera Doc' and the glorious artwork that was all done by hand, I am still amazed at what they accomplished just with sheer imagination and artistry.
_________________
Brett McCoy
Programmer by Day, Musician by Night
http://www.electricminstrel.com

MarkBorok · Joined: 17 Jun 2007 Posts: 15

I like 3D backgrounds because they are very liberating, plus I don't really enjoy drawing backgrounds. Nowadays you can make them very painterly, too.

andylatham · Joined: 10 Aug 2007 Posts: 13 Location: Manchester, UK

I agree that it's overused. Used sparingly, it can be fantastic. I remember going to see Beauty and the Beast at the cinema and being amazed by the ballroom scene. Of course I was too young to know that it was computer generated and I hadn't seen anything like it before. I don't know if anything can give that wow factor anymore. I guess it's like watching Toy Story for the first time. You can never again have that "I've never seen anything like this before" feeling. However, I do find it curious that I'm mesmorised by older 2D shots. I guess it's the knowledge of how much work and talent went into making them.
_________________
Feeling artistic? Visit Andy's Animation!
www.andysanimation.co.uk

Rob Richards · Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 2 Location: Hollywood, CA

andylatham · Joined: 10 Aug 2007 Posts: 13 Location: Manchester, UK

You are right that Hunchback is a great film, and like many of Disney's more recent offerings, it is largely underrated. I was just using the crowd scenes as an example to get people's opinions. I do think that it's impressive (although the knowledge that it is 3D distracts me in subsequent viewings).

My gripe is with smaller uses of 3D. I think in that film (as is the case in most computer-assisted 2D movies) there is at least one scene where an object such as a wooden cart is animated in 3D. This obviously saves time, and some would say it looks better - more realistic. But that's not what 2D animation (or indeed animation as a whole) is about. I won't pursue arguing the realism aspect of things, but I will argue that what is essentially a moving box should be well within the animation abilities of any professional artist.

In my opinion, making the cart (or any other object) 3D, while you have 2D characters, is hugely distracting. From a moviegoer's point of view, I think it looks disjointed. From an artist's point of view, I think it's lazy. It does nothing to further the medium...I think it actually pushes it backwards!

Going back briefly to the crowd scenes....what do you make of Alice in Wonderland? The scenes with the cards marching. If that movie was made today, there is no way they would do that by hand - and it would have absolutely no impact on the audience if done by computer.
_________________
Feeling artistic? Visit Andy's Animation!
www.andysanimation.co.uk

Rob Richards · Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 2 Location: Hollywood, CA

andylatham · Joined: 10 Aug 2007 Posts: 13 Location: Manchester, UK