Alright, so we didn't make the bi-weekly time line we set up. But a new episode is gracing your face now so you can't be TOO disappointed. We have the next couple already tentatively planned out, so we should be sticking to schedule.
In this episode we are all over the map, both topically and geographically, coming to you from 3 different countries. Rick was out playing Johnny Pumpkin Seed, so we are sadly one man short, but our guest this week is Dan Schoening who is an animator/artist at Inlight Entertainment, character designer on the PS2/Wii GhostBusters game, and animator on DC Online's Shorts. He is also the artist and co-creator of Benjamin Franklinstein. PLUG!
Our first words hit on some political themes as part of the October Podcast Theme "Politics in Comics"... er games in our case. Find out more about the other podcasts taking part in the fun at Comic Related, Superheroes-R-Us, and Weekly Comic Book Review.
Our main discussion topic is the age old debate of 2D vs 3D animation and how the experience of each translates to the other in the world of game animation.
This weeks show notes:
- Ummm, I think I added them all into the description. Awesome.
Episode Twelve - Politically In-Correct
(right click the above to download)
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Hopefully we can get a better edited version up soon :P
i think we 25-35 year olds) assume our views are shared by the younger generations.
We're concerned with the method of delivery because we were there to formulate an opinion on the change of the artform. For us something is new and something is old. Most kids these days have always had 3D as an option, so for them it's just a different type of cartoon (if they even MAKE that distinction).
I just asked my kids what their favorite movies are. Now obviously this will probably change minute-to-minute for kids these ages. But my daughter started listing all these 2D Disney movies, starting with "SleepingBeauty" & "LittleMermaid." My son said "Pokemon" and "IncredibleHulk" (the new movie) I clarified that i meant "kid movies, like cartoons." and he said "Ghostbusters."
So also depending on their exposure, if they like it, they consider it a movie meant for them. Our kids KNOW what "cartoon" means but it doesn't define what they're watching for them.
On a regular basis, my daughter will ask to watch "ShaunOfTheDead," both of my kids also love the "AmazingScrewOnHead" DVD, which I'm sure was never intended for them.
I waited about 10 minutes and went to ask again. She said "ScoobyDoo" and "Shrek" were her favorites and he said "Tom&Jerry" and "TopCat." I tried to start baiting them mentioning other titles (both 3D & traditional) and whether they were "cartoons" or not. My son said ToyStory was a cartoon but Shrek wasn't. I asked him what he though of when I said "cartoon" and he responded with "Wallace&Grommet" and "Smurfs."
So there's some research data for you.
This is great stuff Matt :) You're totally right, it's easy to get stuck in the blinders not only of age but our interests/trade, in the same way we cringe we hear an adult who should know better credit Pixar with "Hoodwinked".
It's great to hear the young generations take on this stuff, since I don't get much exposure to kids, at least any old enough to talk (and speak English).
And my hats off to your parenting skills; if your kids are under 25 and know "Top Cat" then you win at fatherhood.
Oh, and that 2d game for Playstation I mentioned is King of Fighters XII.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Fighters_XII
...and it looks beautiful.
Pretty good show. I just want to respond to your discussion of 2D and 3D though. Firstly, I think you misread the article you mention that compared the storyboard to the still frame of a hamster character in Bolt. (link: http://www.cartoonbrew.com/cgi/bolt-storyboard-vs-cg) It wasn’t at all an article stating that 3D is inherently less expressive than 2D. What the article was about was a lacklustre approach to 3D where all character lost in pursuit of detail, shading and fur effects. Plus, you can’t dismiss Amid’s concise argument. The storyboard of the hamster conveys pure ecstatic joy. The still conveys that the hamster…um…is hamster. It’s not that 3D or 2D is better - it’s just that the 2D storyboard reads beautifully – and the finished product scraps all that expression. If the artists had worked hard, they could have made the 3D animation as striking as the storyboard, but they didn’t.
The other thing I wanted to point out on that topic is the idea you raised that some 2D animators are prejudiced against 3D animation and refuse to take it up. But there’s an element you forgot to take into account here: the creation process. When drawing you can create a character, stretch it, break it, morph it and go nuts with relative ease. In 3D you have to model it, rig it and go through all these hoops before you even get to move the character. It’s a totally different approach. Personally, I find 2D animation a lot of fun but as soon as I start to model in 3D it just becomes a chore. That said, I haven’t even touched the animation side of things in 3D and I do plan on giving that a go sometime with someone else’s pre-made model.
Finally, it isn't so much 2D versus 3D - that's like arguing whether a pencil or a paintbrush will create a better piece. They’re both just different tools as a means of creation.
I'm really pumped that we are getting some conversations going on here. This topic is always good for that.
Kyle, I'm going to play devil's advocate here for the sake of discussion, though we are both ending at the same decision of both are just tools, and animation is the heart no matter the application.
When I brought up that side by side from Bolt, I meant the reaction to it quickly turned to 2D is better than 3D, even though Amid's points were well made. Something that was not pointed out however is that storyboards have the purpose of telling an entire action with one drawing, so for the sake of clarity, the drawings can and should be pushed/exaggerated to read better. But when it comes to animation, there are a myriad of of actions and facial expressions going on in that shot. And often times, it is the most subtle of expressions that can resonate the most. Yes, there is some great vitality to the storyboard, but that is what storyboards do best. Often times when you still frame an animation, especially one that has been cleaned up/rendered, it won't read as well because you are removing it from it's whole. What needs to be judged is if that whole shot in the film conveys the same amount of ecstatic joy as the storyboard. Because even if this was hand drawn, chances are the style would have been more "streamlined" than that of the board, and a single cleaned up shot of that could be just as boring.
As for the creation, I felt much the same way, and still do on certain days. But the best way I found getting around my dislike of the computer, was not worrying about modeling, rigging, etc, and just focusing on animation. Because then the realization hit me that 3D can be and is as much fun as 2D, because like you said, the tool doesn't matter, it is all just animation. And when I get a character handed to me with a rig, I don't have to worry about anything but that.
Now, there are times when you are restrained by the rig, but I say it is a hand off, because there were many times when doing 2D that I was restrained by my inability to draw what I wanted. Both have restrictions, and both can be alleviated with enough practice and time learning who your character is and what needs to be done with it.
Post a Comment