What does pic related have in its animation

[Anonymous No.6373535]

That
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/748327890973884476/1040461179593695302/take.webm
Does not?

[Anonymous No.6373539]

At a first sight, the difference seems to be slighty more frames and trad vs digital. Not to mention the difference in subject matter as well

[Anonymous No.6373541]

>>6373535
looks traced

[Anonymous No.6373561]

>>6373541
It probably is. Back then animation animation was the best way to combine realism with special effects and fantastical designs. I can imagine the artists had to make small scenes like that initially to confirm they had the skill level and those are what we are seeing.

[Anonymous No.6373567]

>>6373535
rotoscoping

[Anonymous No.6373584]

>>6373535
motion capture

[Anonymous No.6373600]

>>6373535
this entire intro sequence was rotoscoped (but obviously with high skill). likely what attracts you to that sequence vs the other is that everything is moving. parts of the body don't remain static / shift across the screen without being drawn in a different new perspective like the one in the link does. tracing real people is obviously going to pull out more lively movements (providing the right things are exaggerated just a bit, rotoscoping can easily look lifeless without it.)

[Anonymous No.6376894]

>>6373600
Was it ever confirmed that the intro was rotoscoped?

[Anonymous No.6377303]

>>6376894
fucking look at it you retard

[Anonymous No.6377306]

>>6376894
Yes, I confirm it to you right now.

[Anonymous No.6377308]

>>6373535
Rotoscoping by Skills Animators vs Skilled Animators.
There are points in the CB intro where the artists seem to have the figure move less for more effect, rather than drawing out every movement the model makes.

[Anonymous No.6377325]

>>6377303
>>6377306
>IT JUST IS OKAY?
>Dude trust me
fuck off

[Anonymous No.6377329]

>>6377325
if you know what rotoscoped animations looks like you can easily tell just by looking.

check out fire and ice by frazetta then look at this animation.

[Anonymous No.6377376]

>>6377325
>people with supernaturally realistic animation are common enough that we can make a movie with it...
>because I WANT IT TO BE SO, OKAY?
Nigger, do you know how much time it took Richard Williams, a master, to finish Prologue?

Get a grip.

[Anonymous No.6377410]

>>6373567
Probably the most soulless form of animation right next to 3d anime models being poorly animated in blender then doused in after effects to poorly resemble traditional drawing animation.

[Anonymous No.6377861]

>>6373567
>>6373600
>>6377303
>>6377306
This was most likely not rotoscoped. It looks like this was animated by Hioyuki Okiura, a really talented animator who specializes in this kind of naturalistic movement. He's also known for directing the Jin Roh film. That film also has really realistic animation and many people came out and asked the studio (production IG) if they rotoscoped. The studio said no they didn't and they found the accusations insulting and flattering. So ye, no rotoscope, they guy is just really good.

[Anonymous No.6377993]

The anon above is right in his attribution. Here are a couple of videos regarding Okiura's work.

The first is a clip from a recording of the panel presentation "Sakuga: The Animation of Anime", held in 2013 at Anime Central Chicago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVr0tmlnRyI

The second is an analysis by animator Howard Wimshurst:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvY76ETeGIE

[Anonymous No.6378295]

>>6377861
Either way, it shouldn't be taken as a compliment when you're animations look like soulless rotoscope with almost no real stylized animation. That's like the people who take pride in drawing almost indistinguishable photorealistic drawings. Impressive for the first half second but instantly boring and forgettable content that will soon be easy to reproduce via AI.

[Anonymous No.6378306]

https://www.sakugabooru.com/post/show/119363

[Anonymous No.6378378]

>>6378295
gonna have to disagree with you there, rotoscoping is a tool, and it can be appplied well or applied poorly, I definitely wouldn't say rotoscoping is inherently "soulless"

https://youtu.be/cKOSJ5AAwfc?t=259

[Anonymous No.6378398]

>>6378378
I'm at the opposite with you
Directly opposite

In that
rotoscoping is so bad
that if you do it
anything you put effort in that comes alongside that
is going to be supplanted by the idea that
>oh this is also rotoscoped, it doesn't matter
Even if it isn't, that doesn't matter, because the audience is going to think "this is rotoscoped"

The best place I can describe this
would be Chainsaw Man

There's a lot of effort and skill
There's also a lot of shortcuts
And because of those shortcuts, I just sit there thinking
>Oh, this isn't actual skill, these are 3D models being moved around.
And even when they aren't,
because there's already that slight doubt that they're actually hand-drawn and not just rotoscoped over 3D models
any skill or effort put into the shots is meaningless
3d cgi mappa trash

[Anonymous No.6378573]

>>6378398
Are you a poet?
What zoomzoomshit is this?

[Anonymous No.6378665]

>>6378378
I'll have to disagree with your opinion. Rotoscope changes the pace of the animation and looks out of place and uncanny. It is usually limiting the original animation art style with the physical limitations of the human being you're tracing over.

That Betty Boop scene is a perfect example. The character is literally sliding across the floor with its baby steps, pretty much out of sync of the scene while all of the other characters were walking solidly on the ground while following the animations' general rhythm.

[Anonymous No.6378835]

This is Sakuga
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZmis8g_ilc

[Anonymous No.6378846]

>>6377376
>make a movie with it
Nice outing yourself retard

[Anonymous No.6378878]

>>6377410
nearly all disney stuff was rotoscoped up to a certain point, they literally have live action versions of cinderella/alice in wonderland/sleeping beauty

rotoscoping all comes down to how much you follow the tracing and how much the artist can change it.

[Anonymous No.6378888]

>>6377325
rotoscope has a very unique style that's very hard to not see when you know what to look for.

[Anonymous No.6378993]

>>6378835
>weird creature thing
>its fucking roiland again
ugh

[Anonymous No.6379234]

>>6377861
>This was most likely not rotoscoped
Is google banned in your country, retard? It's easy to look into this and find out it's fully rotoscoped. References and all. Get japan's dick out of your mouth and spend some time actually doing basic research on the subject matter you obviously no nothing about.

[Anonymous No.6379458]

>>6379234
sauce or stfu retarded moron

[Anonymous No.6381179]

>>6373535
OP's pic rel is rotoscoped. they're tracing over footage. the linked webm is definitely referencing footage to get realistic but isn't traced.