PDA

View Full Version : not much of real anims. why?


deadline
07-17-2004, 01:25 AM
I noticed that 90% of animations featured on reels are cartoonist. Why nobody making any realistic animations? At least proportional models... I am getting ready to work on my reel and rigs I have at this point are more or less human bodies. No funky stuff. I plan to have sort of a fight, a dance and some other smaller stuff. Is it a bad idea and I should go for more of a cartoon type of animation?

SheepFactory
07-17-2004, 03:24 AM
cause realism is boring?


I personally prefer cartoon style animation which offers more freedom and expression. If I want realism I would watch a live action movie :)

KevinKraeer
07-17-2004, 03:43 AM
Yeah, I think it really depends on the artist. I prefer doing realistic stuff; in fact I do less cartoony stuff because there's so much of it out there.

Cartoony stuff challenges your creativity cause it's so open ended, but reallistic stuff challenges you because if you do it badly it's really easy to pick out the flaws.

It's all about what keeps you goin'.

deadline
07-17-2004, 07:04 AM
cause realism is boring?


I personally prefer cartoon style animation which offers more freedom and expression. If I want realism I would watch a live action movie :)
Why boring...? if done well, it could be entertaining. Don't u think?

Mooncalf
07-17-2004, 07:17 AM
Funny, I was recently discussing this very thing with a friend.

I think there's a lot of cartoony animation out there for a few reasons. In no particular order:

1) Animation is a medium of exaggeration and caricature. We've learned that if we rotoscope a piece of live action, it feels dead unless we exaggerate the weight and the poses. So, if exaggeration is what we learn to strive for, perhaps it's only natural that we... well, exaggerate the exaggeration.

2) There's so much cartoony stuff out there, and so much of it is great and interesting--it's difficult to find many examples of "realistic" animation to be inspired by. There's not a huge paradigm of realism.

3) As some people have already mentioned, if you want realism, go get a video camera or a film camera. Why recreate what's already possible? I remember a great passage from a book in which an architect argued that he designed for certain materials and their surroundings. In the beginning, man lived in caves which were made of rock. Soon he learned to work with wood, so he made wooden replicas of the caves. And then he found stone, like marble, and created marble versions of his wooden buildings. And then metal versions of his marble buildings. But marble can do different things than wood can, and metal can do different things than rock--so why not exploit those differences? Same thing with animation; it can do things that real life can't, so why not exploit that aspect of it? (and you can further argue that 2d can accomplish things that cg can't, which can accomplish things that stop-motion can't, which can accomplish things that 2d can't)

4) When you talk about "realistic" animation, you may not even be talking about "realistic" animation. I think my favorite pieces haven't been "cartoony," but they haven't been "realistic," either. I think they'd best be described as "stylized." Things like "Fifty Percent Gray" or "Tim Tom," I absolutely love... and they FEEL real, but they're actually highly stylized. I think this is really where animation excels, and has a lot of potential for exploration.


Just my $0.02 :)


- M

mkt
07-17-2004, 07:53 PM
Its true that highly accurate motion is boring - just try to watch some roto! As mooncalf says realistic has to be stylized to entertain - and cartoons are better to learn what 'style' is. It takes a very long time to master a style well enough to do it with subtlety and I think that is why you dont see much so called 'realistic' animation.

pearl3d
07-17-2004, 07:56 PM
i personally believe that cartoon style animation looks boring... than real
:rolleyes:
better it would be both style on a showreel

the_gibble
07-17-2004, 10:31 PM
one point that was overlooked too was that mo-cap has become so accessible that there is less need to be able to do realistic animation. If they need it realistic animation, its much quicker and more realistic just to use mo-cap, so the demand isn't as strong either [not saying hand animation is not needed, b/c it very much still is.]

Also, think back to when you first started drawing- what was funner to draw? A realistic sketch or a charicature/cartoon? Usually people chose the latter, as it was just simply funnier to do cartoonier stuff . That in turn graduates over to animation once you hit that level.

Realistic is also harder b/c you can tell when something is 'off' but when its stylized, that can be translated into an artistic choice instead. There is a number of choices why cartoonier style is more predominant.

the_gibble
07-17-2004, 10:34 PM
Pearl3D says:i personally believe that cartoon style animation looks boring... than real
So you are saying that you'd rather watch 'Final Fantasy' than 'The Incredibles'?

I can guarantee you'll have much more empty seats in that theater than the one I will be at.

SheepFactory
07-18-2004, 01:23 AM
i personally believe that cartoon style animation looks boring... than real
:rolleyes:
better it would be both style on a showreel

umm , style does not make content. Just because something is "cartoon style" doesnt make it boring or entertaining.

I said realism is boring , i didnt say realism LOOKS boring. aka: I have more fun having the freedom of exaggeration than being limited to the confines of realism.

RayenD
07-18-2004, 04:24 PM
Because if I'd to do a realistic human animation, I'd just go get my camera and shot some actors. Result would be 100% better even if actors would be amateurs. Same with super realistic static human models. My wife is 200% more beautiful that any CG chick I've ever seen and I can just grab a camera and make a photo of her. Ding, instant masterpiece ;).

Of course you can always make your CG character do some impossible stunts, but after watching some J. Chan movies, I don't think there is anything what is impossible for a skilled actor with some help of wires.

Super realistic CG Humans make no sense in most cases.
Good use of "realistic" CG (I mean not cartoony) is "Jurrasic Park" and organic monsters/aliens in "Attack of the clones" for example.

But I'd like to see Marylin Monroe with Robert De Niro in one movie one day.

CGTalk Moderation
01-18-2006, 05:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.