Computer Animation May Be Killing Hand-Drawn Kind

[Bic]

Discovered this sad bit of news at: IMDb (http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/)


Computer Animation May Be Killing Hand-Drawn Kind


The continued box-office success of computer-animated films is resulting in wholesale layoffs and other cutbacks in traditional animation departments, particularly at Disney, the Los Angeles Times indicated today (Tuesday). Steve Hulett, a business representative of the screen cartoonists' union told the newspaper that the "huge amount of dislocation" affecting studio animators has resulted in the union's membership dropping from a high of 2,999 in 1996 to about 1,500 today. Tom Schumacher, president of Walt Disney Animation, acknowledged that the unit, which cut hundreds of jobs last year, will likely cut several hundred more by the end of the year. Meanwhile, traditional animators are flocking to local colleges and specialized schools to be trained in computer skills, the Times observed, quoting one computer animation teacher as saying, "I have a waiting list longer than my arm."

[Mattashell]

Death to polygons.

Mattashell

[Zoddman]

It just shows these guys have no trust in their own medium when they all take college courses on Comp. animation.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

If the 2d animated movies hadn't been so crappy for the last few years, this may not have happened.

On second thought, maybe not. Lord knows the masses are into shiny trendy things and computer animation is right up their alley.

[Killtacular]

People are just going to have to learn Flash, because that's going to be the next trend.

Yes, it won't be a particularly PRETTY trend, but at least people like me that are prepared for it will GET some sort of job in that area.

[RockItShipper]

Look- any effective use of computer animation requires the same kind of background as 2-D or stop-motion. I don't like the look of the bulk of CGI out there, especially when it's made for the small screen.

But Pixar certainly has alot going for it. One, there's texture and volume and all those good things. Two, their story approach. While ironing out the story of TS2 after it was picked up for a theatrical release, animation started on the sequence where the toys crossed the street. It's not so neat and tidy as the usual method of waiting for a script, but it buys time to work on more plot-centered scenes before animation.

[Psycho Fox]

Look there will allways be 2D animation due to the fact that it is by far cheaper. With 2D celless animation you don't need to constantly update the software package and hardware to keep up with everyone else plus with 2D you need less people and it will be finnished sooner. Alot of studios don't have the big bucks to invest in 3D animation thus they will most likely stay the course.

[RogueMartian]

I'm not so sure. CGI is new and expensive now, but I'm sure it won't always be that way. I fear that it may take over regular cartoons some day. I personally don't like the look of CGI, No matter how detailed or textured it gets, it just doesn't sit right with me. The CGI movies i've seen haven't really impressed me either. They spend so much money on the graphics and getting expensive voice talent that they forget to get a good story to tell. But i'm in the minority opinion there, I realize most people like toy story, a bugs life, and shrek. But I would take The secret of nimh, the lion king, or mulan over the cgi movies any day of the week. The animation is prettier and the stories are more interesting.

[Ricochet]

You know what? It will all pass, I think. Little Rugrats-hypnotized paste eaters just like the smooth, shiny look. When they actually appreciate gags, they won't care what kind of animation it is. :yakko: :wakko: :dot: :bosko:

[I.R Joey]

Yeah I agree, I'm considering getting into the fild of animation, and I kind of like the look of 2d stuff when it's done right, understand that I don't have a problem with using computers to enhance things, but it seems to me that alot of the full on 3D stuff today looks kind of hokey (Pixar, and Mainframe, and maybe Dreamworks I think are the only ones who got it truely to work right) and not very seemless.

[optimal321]

Hopefully the producers will remember that 3D or 2D animation is not what matters as much as the story does. I guess i'd favor 2D to CGI, but i don't have anything against it. What really bugs me is when they do it both ways. Some new animated movie, called something like "Spirit of the West" shows the preview w/ complete CGI backgrounds and only the animal characters are 2D. That just seems like a cop-out to me. If it's too hard to draw flowing water and grass blowing in the breeze, then they put it on a computer. And if it's too hard to make a bear or horse in CGI, then they put it in digital cels.

Sorry if i got off there... :p Um, both are okay, and i hope 2D never fades away :D .

[Barb Gordon]

As much as it seems to be now, I doubt hand drawn animation will ever fade. CGI is quite popular with people, and it has made a lot of things easier for artists. I for one, am not all that fond og CGI, depending though, on how much it is used. But artists need to not be relying on computers so much as they should be relying on their own skills. I've looked back on all animated films, and have been amazed at the talents of these artists. I hope that today's artists, and future ones wont immediately go for the computer instead of the sketch pad.

Barb^-^