Cartoon production question

[Frank]

Do studios still shoot cartoons on film?

[I.R Joey]

I believe its done digitally now, but I'm not sure.

You'd have to ask someone who works at a studio.

[nakak]

Most cartoons are done digitally now, or at least a digital tape. If the cartoon's a theatrical movie, it's printed on film.

[Frank]

How many fps does digital tape run on?

[nakak]

NTSC tapes is about 30 fps. PAL is about 25 fps.

Oh, and just because these tapes are in that fps doesn't mean they're animated with that much drawings per second.

[Frank]

NTSC tapes is about 30 fps. PAL is about 25 fps.

Oh, and just because these tapes are in that fps doesn't mean they're animated with that much drawings per second.

They should. Technology is advancing, animation techniques should be advancing as well.

[nakak]

I doubt it. It's expensive enough to make cartoons in current frame rate anyway.

IMO, 30fps are only good for exterior shots in animation, like those in "Futurama", but character animation should be 10 to 24fps (depending on the movement).

But I'll always prefer the "film" look. I don't know why, but there's a certain charm to it.

[Frank]

I doubt it. It's expensive enough to make cartoons in current frame rate anyway.

IMO, 30fps are only good for exterior shots in animation, like those in "Futurama", but character animation should be 10 to 24fps (depending on the movement).

But I'll always prefer the "film" look. I don't know why, but there's a certain charm to it.

Character animation should really be done at 24-30 fps. Depending on the design of the characters less frames would be required for characters of simpler design, while detailed and complex designs require more frames.

[nakak]

Character animation should really be done at 24-30 fps. Depending on the design of the characters less frames would be required for characters of simpler design, while detailed and complex designs require more frames.

Well, I always prefer simpler character designs than complex ones (usually, characters with complex designs are anime, and you know how the animation quality is like).

[Duke]

The problem with doing everything at 20-30fps is that it's expensive and time-consuming. Digital animation just means that it's painted digitally and computer CG effects are easily added. The actual animation is still done by people drawing the various movements by hand and then transferring them to the computer, much like the old times. Compuiters do save a lot of time, but it still takes about 6 months to complete one episode of a high-end animated series.

Well, I always prefer simpler character designs than complex ones (usually, characters with complex designs are anime, and you know how the animation quality is like).

Samurai Champloo, Fullmetal Alchemist, Outlaw Star, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (especially 2nd Gig), Kiddy Grade, IGPX, Full Metal Panic, Chrno Crusade, Jubei-chan 2, Paranoia Agent, and almost anything done by Gonzo, Production I.G., and Madhouse are all detailed yet still have gorgeous animation.

[Frank]

Well, I always prefer simpler character designs than complex ones (usually, characters with complex designs are anime, and you know how the animation quality is like).

Don't forget Spumco or even Klasky-Csupo. Their characters are very detailed and thier designs are more complex as well.

[I.R Joey]

Samurai Champloo, Fullmetal Alchemist, Outlaw Star, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (especially 2nd Gig), Kiddy Grade, IGPX, Full Metal Panic, Chrno Crusade, Jubei-chan 2, Paranoia Agent, and almost anything done by Gonzo, Production I.G., and Madhouse are all detailed yet still have gorgeous animation.

I'd beg to differ actually.

I think alot of times the terms "good animation" and "good design" are equated to the same thing when they aren't. Sure one can often depend on the other, but they are still quite seperate things. Good animation is based on pretty solid basic principles. Things like squash, stretch, anticipation, follow through and proper timing.

What is and isn't good design however is alot harder to pin down. That can be as much a matter of opinion as "good music" or "good food". Diffrent styles can appeal to diffrent people.

Each of the anime that you've mentioned (that I've seen) have pretty good design sense in my opinon, but I wouldn't really say that they had particularly good animation. Each of them resorts to the classic tricks of fooling the eye. Everything from camera shakes, to sliding charecters across screen, to still frames in which the drawings have the apperance of alot of motion but the charecters don't really move at all.

Then of course you could get into the whole argument about motion capture and rotoscoping in cartoons when you talk about IGPX and Gits, but I'll leave that one to Matt

[Duke]

Each of the anime that you've mentioned (that I've seen) have pretty good design sense in my opinon, but I wouldn't really say that they had particularly good animation. Each of them resorts to the classic tricks of fooling the eye. Everything from camera shakes, to sliding charecters across screen, to still frames in which the drawings have the apperance of alot of motion but the charecters don't really move at all.

That's more in the Shonen type of shows (like Zatch Bell, Naruto, and One Piece), which has a lot more episodes to produce at a lesser amount of time with a lesser amount of budget-per-episode.

True, many of the shows I mentioned do have camera shakes & stuff like that, but that was put in by the director because he/she saw it in a Hollywood movie. It's a style-choice, as many of the shows (such as Cowboy Bebop, Samurai Champloo, and Paranoia Agent) tried to capture a motion-picture feel to it (it also helps that Shinichiro Watanabe and Satoshi Kon are nuts in their own way). I don't remember seeing any digi-panned characters in any of the shows I mentioned, though the closest one would probably be Cowboy Bebop, though the only static character in that show was the Bebop itself.

[I.R Joey]

Hello everybody, don't mean to be a nuisance by bumping this thread. But I thought I'd share this. I've been reading Don Bluth's "The Art of storyboarding" recently and I think that this passage will help answer the original poster's question.

From page 43.

"The animation camera stand (ACS or Rostrum camera) is now an antique. It has been replaced by a very "mobile: camera inside the computer. The ACA could accomidate six levels of cels pressed together over a flat background under 70 pounds of pressure from a glass plate. But methods have changed the backgrounds have become three-dimensional. The computer gives the impression that it can move freely in and around the art with a constantly changing perspective. To accomplish this effect, as shown above in A,B,C,D (the book then shows 4 3D shots from The Secret of Nimh), the set would first have to be constructed and mapped with paintings in the computer, then the camera moves plotted out and rendered. From those rendered computer moves a wire frame of the charecters in constructred and positioned in the set. The move is then duplicated to give charecter animators a guide showing how the move changes the perspective of the charecter. In other words the animators drawings will have a built in camera move to match the movement of the moving 3D background. The animators will draw over print-outs of the wireframe charecter level. If the charecters are 3D, you can skip the printout and animated the models in the computer with the same change in perspective."

Hope that helps.

[Jeremiah_Fox]

As to answer the question that was first posted. Traditional Animation or Cel Animation was replaced by CGI, Cel Animation is only done by the few in films and the many on shows.
However i think that was wrong to do so. I feel like as though that because one type is more revolutionary and cheaper than the other doesn't give 'em the right to "abandon" Cel! If i were Walt Disney, it would feel insulting!!!

My career plan is down the drain becuase of places like Pixar~

[Johann Mouse]

The last major cartoon to be done by cel was Ed, Edd, n' Eddy. But since the fifth season that has been done digitally also.

[Dee]

As to answer the question that was first posted. Traditional Animation or Cel Animation was replaced by CGI, Cel Animation is only done by the few in films and the many on shows.
However i think that was wrong to do so. I feel like as though that because one type is more revolutionary and cheaper than the other doesn't give 'em the right to "abandon" Cel! If i were Walt Disney, it would feel insulting!!!

My career plan is down the drain becuase of places like Pixar~

Gotta love it when year-dead threads get bumped. Please don't seek out such old threads and bump them. It's extremely confusing and messy.

If we want to discuss the media, a fresher thread would be alright.