http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapunzel_%28film%29
According to some Disney insiders, the studio's upcoming animated feature Rapunzel is going to look a little different from other mainstream animation. That's because the animation will be done via CGI while resembling traditional hand-drawn animation.
While it's far too early to jump to any conclusions (after all, the film is slated for release next holiday season), this approach seems somewhat counterproductive to me. If they want to emulate the look of classic 2D Disney animation, why not just make a 2D-animated feature? The use of CGI comes across as a bit pointless.
Having said that, it is doubtlessly an ambitious undertaking. It will be interesting to see what the finished product looks like.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/the-first-iron-man-2-trailer-is-here
This is a new trailer for Marvel's upcoming and highly anticipated film Iron Man 2. Overall, I'm really looking forward to this film, and the trailer does a great job of showing viewers what to expect without giving away too much. Most notably, the visual effects seem to be a step up from the original film, quite an accomplishment considering the excellent effects of that film. During work on the first film, director Jon Favreau worked extensively with Industrial Light and Magic to combine rubber and metal versions of the titular character's armor with digital effects.
I found that last bit of trivia to be interesting because it marks a step in visual effects towards a path that combines old with new, traditional special effects with newer digital effects. This will allow special effects artists to make the most of the strengths of both sides while minimizing the shortcomings. All-in-all, very interesting stuff; I look forward to seeing more.
This is a new trailer for Marvel's upcoming and highly anticipated film Iron Man 2. Overall, I'm really looking forward to this film, and the trailer does a great job of showing viewers what to expect without giving away too much. Most notably, the visual effects seem to be a step up from the original film, quite an accomplishment considering the excellent effects of that film. During work on the first film, director Jon Favreau worked extensively with Industrial Light and Magic to combine rubber and metal versions of the titular character's armor with digital effects.
I found that last bit of trivia to be interesting because it marks a step in visual effects towards a path that combines old with new, traditional special effects with newer digital effects. This will allow special effects artists to make the most of the strengths of both sides while minimizing the shortcomings. All-in-all, very interesting stuff; I look forward to seeing more.
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/should-avatar-be-considered-for-best-animated-oscar
This article by Brad Brevet questions whether James Cameron's latest film Avatar merits consideration for this year's Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. Brevet quotes Academy regulates on what constitutes an animated feature: "An animated feature film is defined as a motion picture with a running time of at least 70 minutes, in which movement and characters' performances are created using a frame-by-frame technique. In addition, a significant number of the major characters must be animated, and animation must figure in no less than 75 percent of the picture's running time." The takeaway question Brevet poses at the end of the article is: When is CGI no longer considered visual effects and when is it considered animation?
Having not seen the film, I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but if advance reviews and comments about it are any indication, I say yes, Avatar does indeed deserve to be considered an animated feature. Although it makes use of motion capture technology (as do some of the films being considered for Oscar contention), reactions to the film's groundbreaking and extensive use of CGI indicate that it has crossed the threshold between "visual effects" and "animation". If the studio does submit the film for consideration, however, then the Academy might want to be a little more specific in their definition of animation.
This article by Brad Brevet questions whether James Cameron's latest film Avatar merits consideration for this year's Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. Brevet quotes Academy regulates on what constitutes an animated feature: "An animated feature film is defined as a motion picture with a running time of at least 70 minutes, in which movement and characters' performances are created using a frame-by-frame technique. In addition, a significant number of the major characters must be animated, and animation must figure in no less than 75 percent of the picture's running time." The takeaway question Brevet poses at the end of the article is: When is CGI no longer considered visual effects and when is it considered animation?
Having not seen the film, I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but if advance reviews and comments about it are any indication, I say yes, Avatar does indeed deserve to be considered an animated feature. Although it makes use of motion capture technology (as do some of the films being considered for Oscar contention), reactions to the film's groundbreaking and extensive use of CGI indicate that it has crossed the threshold between "visual effects" and "animation". If the studio does submit the film for consideration, however, then the Academy might want to be a little more specific in their definition of animation.
http://www.brainstream.com/custom-playing-cards.php
This is an article for Custom Playing Cards, a service that allows you to print your own photographs on playing cards. For the most part, I think this is a very interesting service. Playing cards have changed a lot since their conception thousands upon thousands of years ago, far more than some people may realize. They have become a staple in the artistic consciousness, used for a wide variety of games, magic tricks, and more, and now they can be personalized. This marks a growing trend in design becoming a more personal thing. In the past, there was always somewhat of a disconnect between designs and their audiences. Now, people can see more of themselves in design, and that's going change the way we look at it for a long time to come.
This is an article for Custom Playing Cards, a service that allows you to print your own photographs on playing cards. For the most part, I think this is a very interesting service. Playing cards have changed a lot since their conception thousands upon thousands of years ago, far more than some people may realize. They have become a staple in the artistic consciousness, used for a wide variety of games, magic tricks, and more, and now they can be personalized. This marks a growing trend in design becoming a more personal thing. In the past, there was always somewhat of a disconnect between designs and their audiences. Now, people can see more of themselves in design, and that's going change the way we look at it for a long time to come.
http://www.gamespy.com/articles/994/994234p1.html
This is GameSpy's list of the six "most pointless game controllers" ever made, which offers up a somewhat humorous analysis of just that.
What I noticed about nearly all the controllers in question is their unnecessary complexity. They tend to feel gimmicky and pointless.
The moral of the story, in essence, is that sometimes, simple is better. With simplicity, you can build from the ground up. If you have a simple baseline to work with, you can build off of that and come up with something special and original. And that's one of the best qualities any designer can have: the ability to create something new and exciting out of something simple.
This is GameSpy's list of the six "most pointless game controllers" ever made, which offers up a somewhat humorous analysis of just that.
What I noticed about nearly all the controllers in question is their unnecessary complexity. They tend to feel gimmicky and pointless.
The moral of the story, in essence, is that sometimes, simple is better. With simplicity, you can build from the ground up. If you have a simple baseline to work with, you can build off of that and come up with something special and original. And that's one of the best qualities any designer can have: the ability to create something new and exciting out of something simple.
Some people seem to think that just because a particular work is bad, that it's inherently not worth watching. Well, I have to disagree with this sentiment and would like to point out that a lot of works in all media considered "bad" can be enjoyable not despite their badness, but because of it. Enter the classic phrase "so bad it's good".
One of the most interesting things about works that qualify for "so bad it's good" status is that sometimes, works deliberately go out of their way to achieve such a distinction.
This is where I'm a little on the fence. Should works focus solely on entertaining audiences, even if it does do by being "so bad it's good", or should integrity come into play as well?
This is a tough call for me, but if I had to decide, I would say that entertainment is the primary purpose, and if a work has to resort to "so bad it's good" tactics to accomplish that, that's just fine.
One of the most interesting things about works that qualify for "so bad it's good" status is that sometimes, works deliberately go out of their way to achieve such a distinction.
This is where I'm a little on the fence. Should works focus solely on entertaining audiences, even if it does do by being "so bad it's good", or should integrity come into play as well?
This is a tough call for me, but if I had to decide, I would say that entertainment is the primary purpose, and if a work has to resort to "so bad it's good" tactics to accomplish that, that's just fine.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GeorgeLucasThrowback
Now for another entry on the TV Tropes Wiki, this time describing the "George Lucas Throwback", which refers to works that reach back to simpler times while updating for modern production values. Named for George Lucas, best-known for such throwbacks as the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises, if particularly successful, a "GLT" can fool audiences into believing that it is an entirely original work as opposed to a throwback.
The concept of a throwback is interesting because it toys with the idea of acknowledging past works while simultaneously "keeping with the times". The most successful throwbacks manage to accomplish both. In fact, in a way, designers everywhere do throwbacks all the time. Since it's virtually impossible to come up with something 100% original, the true mark of a good designer's ability is their ability to combine old with new. To reach back to simpler times while having enough "new and improved" qualities to remain relevant for modern audiences.
Now for another entry on the TV Tropes Wiki, this time describing the "George Lucas Throwback", which refers to works that reach back to simpler times while updating for modern production values. Named for George Lucas, best-known for such throwbacks as the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises, if particularly successful, a "GLT" can fool audiences into believing that it is an entirely original work as opposed to a throwback.
The concept of a throwback is interesting because it toys with the idea of acknowledging past works while simultaneously "keeping with the times". The most successful throwbacks manage to accomplish both. In fact, in a way, designers everywhere do throwbacks all the time. Since it's virtually impossible to come up with something 100% original, the true mark of a good designer's ability is their ability to combine old with new. To reach back to simpler times while having enough "new and improved" qualities to remain relevant for modern audiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)