As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Stop Animation Vs 3D
Mr Explody
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I've been thinking about the quality of the current stop animation videos going around at the moment, and wonder why people still use it. With 3D tools becoming increasingly powerful, I have to wonder why someone would spend the time to agonisingly shoot a stop animation film.
For Example: The software consultancy company I work for recently ran a competition for the staff members to create youtube videos about the company (Not really an advert, but most of the entrants missed the point). One of the entrants created a short Stop Animation film, which I found hilarious. However, when I asked the guy who made it why they chose to do Stop Animation instead of 3D, he stated that even though he could have got the film done in half the time if it were 3D, he just really liked the style. I disagree.
You can find the stop animation film here.
Personally, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference if it were 3D instead of stop animation.
I can understand why shows like Robot Chicken would do stop animation, as it's the point of the show to re-use action figures found in toy stores. But in my opinion there's no reason to go with stop animation anymore, unless it's the artist 'point' of the film.
I think I just find stop animation/claymation ugly... but maybe that's just me.
For Example: The software consultancy company I work for recently ran a competition for the staff members to create youtube videos about the company (Not really an advert, but most of the entrants missed the point). One of the entrants created a short Stop Animation film, which I found hilarious. However, when I asked the guy who made it why they chose to do Stop Animation instead of 3D, he stated that even though he could have got the film done in half the time if it were 3D, he just really liked the style. I disagree.
You can find the stop animation film here.
Personally, I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference if it were 3D instead of stop animation.
I can understand why shows like Robot Chicken would do stop animation, as it's the point of the show to re-use action figures found in toy stores. But in my opinion there's no reason to go with stop animation anymore, unless it's the artist 'point' of the film.
I think I just find stop animation/claymation ugly... but maybe that's just me.
Mr Explody on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
The biggest tell of stop animation is the disjointed effect, but that's not necessarily a good thing.
Exploding Studios | Twitter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBjLW5_dGAM
I mean, there is mediocre animation in 2D, 3D and stop motion. But the medium itself isnt the issue, its just a tool after all. Are you really asking if all stop motion animators should do 3D instead? The awnser is no.
I think you're the odd man out on this one.
for one thing, rendered 3d animation can produce motion blur, which corrects for the jerkiness and "not quite right" motion effect that stop motion creates, unless it is done using incredibly sophisticated models like the tauntaun in Empire. However, most 3D models are limited to the motion granted to them in the rigging, which means that unless a modeller wants to spend their time planning and building a rig that allows them the freedom of movement of clay (next to impossible), the clay medium will provide much more freedom. If alternative mediums are used for stop-motion, such as legos or whatever else, then it's just a matter of building a well-made model that is rigged to move like it.
Again, this comes down to planning, though. If you know what you want to animate, you can build a 3d model to move just as the scene demands, or you could build a clay model jsut as the scene demands, or a lego model or a painted cell or whatever. It really comes down to the talent, dedication and craftsmanship and cleverness by the animator themselves
I suppose my point is more along the lines of, why would someone choose to develop a film using stop motion instead of CG. I can understand the 'artistic' choice of having a slightly disjointed look and feel (works well for films such as 'The Nightmare before Christmas'). It just seems that it would take that much longer to create a stop animation film, than a CG film, for very little benefit, if any.
Exploding Studios | Twitter
for one thing, you got real damn models to play with
right there, in front of you, that you made with your hands
that's a huge benefit. It's fun.
and it lends itself to a certain look and feel without having to replicate that look and feel through a different medium
and there's tradition and history behind it as well
not that the lego version up there is a good example of history and tradition, but trying to duplicate that exact look and feel digitally would have been incredibly time consuming. It is very difficult to get digital art to not look digital.
Corpse Bride achieves a lot of effects that i simply haven't seen anywhere in 3D. Or the night scènes in Wallace and Grommit... Beautiful.
And the way the light hits an actual piece of fabric. The fuzzyness of a vest, etc.
3D may be awesome, and i love pixar, but stop motion is just different. difficult to compare.
They're just different mediums, like aquarel and oil paintings. sure, 3D is more spectacular now to the general public, but to the craftsmen, there'll always be a difference.
if you think we should ditch stop mo. why wouldn't we ditch everyother animation technique? and then EVERYTHING could be 3D. animators and artists are after a certain style. with 3d you wouldn't need to worry about inbetweens anymore. but computers inbetween like shit. if all we did was 3D animation all we'd be production would be floaty, robotic shit like the dodo ads. we need to use the fundamental animation techniques to create interesting, snappy animation. it would be a sad world if we only had 3D animation.
I personally like the style of stop motion. You are crazeh guy.
3D can look good, but, stop motion just has that certain style 3D doesn't.
I hear you, man. I don't even know why they hire real actors any more, or build sets. All that shit can be replaced by CG, right? No one can even tell the difference any more!
You disagree that he really like the style? Surely he knows what he likes?
Your eyes are broken.
What does that even mean? You could say there's no reason to go with any kind of animation at all, "unless it's the artist 'point' of the film."
I find movies like Sin City and 300 ugly, but many others love them. It's called personal taste.
I also really like Flushed Away, so who knows...
EDIT: dammit, mooshoepork just said pretty much the same thing, but with fewer words.
also the fact that the op has no original art in it.
but mostly ignorance.