What happened to quality hand drawn animation? CGI is probably

it makes more money.

that's it.

Hand drawn = cartoons for children

cgi = sophisticated technology for all ages

(or at least that's how the public sees it.)

File: ebf575e221bd5d86b914ff3babaa0bf7.jpg (536KB, 1777x1000px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1777x1000px

>>89625282

it's not the tool, it's the user, seek for talent.

Just because disney doesnt do 2D animation anymore it doesnt mean it's gone.

>>89625331

all it needs is to awe the audience to the point "holy shit this is better than CGI!" and 2D will return.

someday.

CGI isn't less effort anon. Please do some research or lurk more or something.

If you're looking to franchise and get that big boom that will print money with sequels you want to do 3D.
3D assets are easier to recycle than 2D

>>89625391
>Being able to create models for characters and rig them for animation so they can be used in multiple scenes in which that character is featured in without having to start over
>Having to draw every single appearance of a character from scratch and draw every single frame of animation

CGI is a lot easier to produce, anon.

>>89625464

and in ten years the movie will look like shit.

meanwhile 2D ages like wine.

>>89625498
I agree wholeheartedly. Just thought to correct the good anon.

File: Dead.jpg (103KB, 673x999px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 673x999px

>>89625282
>>89625376
It's dead for good.

>>89625810

>sophisticated movies for narrowed audience

gee, i wonder why

>>89625282

As someone who's worked in both it's a yes and no situation.

If you have like a short five minute skit or a one off that you'll never come back to, hand drawn is better, especially if you're using a tablet and can do your work digitally. There's a lot fewer steps to it since you have to just design, storyboard, key, breakdown, inbetween, cleanup, color, and you can pretty easily get a small number of people who can do most of that in their skillset.

With 3D you need to design, model, texture, rig, storyboard, previs, key, breakdown, inbetween, light, render, then composit. But you can reuse the first three steps and maybe reuse animations and processes you've developed. Once you have a fully rigged character you can believably just deploy some stock animation and nobody will notice since you can change the camera angle and lens and nobody will make the connection. Or if you have two characters with a similar build, you can just take the rig skeleton and transpose it and do both at once.

In theory a good animated movie doesn't actually have a cost or manpower difference, since the advantages of each usually cancel each other out at that length. But Disney likes to do a whole lot of experimental work in it's own lab and each film is essentially just a test for increasingly high graphical fidelity. Dreamworks usually develops in the opposite direction, and invests in the ability to just randomly generate more and more assets to drive costs down. Most of the others are usually just playing along with whatever's popular.