Why is rotoscoping and motion capture perfectly acceptable when

>>2921019
The Japanese don't even like rotoscope.

Uh, no. Rotoscope looks awful 90+% of the time. Especially in that retarded faggot show you just posted. It's fucking disgusting.

>perfectly acceptable
No it's not. it's pretty jarring to look at.

File: scanner2.jpg (43KB, 700x394px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 700x394px

>>2921019
what do you mean by acceptable? everything is "acceptable." especially in media if they're going for a specific thing that's damn near impossible or very time consuming to do it in a rigorous traditional way, the industry makes shortcuts because projects can't have 4 year development times. it's a waste of money.

just trace if that's what you want to do no one is stopping you. it's a matter of what you want to achieve it art.
just don't be bootyblasted when you run in to a wall because you haven't developed other skills in art.

I remember hearing that there were some scenes in Akira that were rotoscoped. Only as a way to emphasize movement or combat. Idk I have never seen it, but I just heard someone talking about it one day.

I'd say, as long as it's tasteful and not too "uncanny valley" then it's good.

Thinking about it, it would be kinda cool to see an anime where people can become "transcendent" and are animated via rotoscoping. or like a different dimension, or something.

File: torepaku04.jpg (129KB, 550x856px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 550x856px

>>2921029
>>2921030
I don't mean that people won't dislike it, but no one gets as riled up as they do with tracing.

Take the anime Yuri on Ice, the rotoscoped scenes were really jarring specially from episode 3 onward, everyone was like, "yeah it looks janky but they have to save money one way or another."

But when people realized some of the images in a sort of slideshow they did for one of the endings were traced everyone lost their shit.

File: 1355466521274.png (446KB, 625x541px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 625x541px

>>2921019
Rotoscoping generally looks like shit. If you mean acceptable in the "you're not a fucking hack" way, then it's because people who rotoscope actually go and shoot actors and then rotoscope it.

Look, if it's your photo, you can trace it all you want. Tracing is only a problem when you trace someone else's work, i.e. you are Greg Land or the like.

>>2921044
Yeah the japs seem pretty serious business about tracing. Prism was canceled over it.

>>2921044
I guess it's just a personal taste thing. do you think it shouldn't be discussed?

>>2921044
Standards can be shifted around based on who you're selling to. Rotoscope is like the blacksheep of animation. If you're saying that studios should be held in same regard as individuals.... well that's something else entirely, innit?

>>2921046
I guess you're right, as long as you aren't plagiarizing there isn't really a copyright concern. Would it be different if you purchase an image of a stock photo website?

>>2921049
Yeah, to go to a stock photo website and look for an image that looks similar to a drawing... it takes a lot of dedication to say the least.

>>2921053
No, I think it SHOULD be discussed, I'm wondering what the train of thought is and where to draw the line, because most rotoscoping is very blatant.

>>2921054
>Rotoscope is like the blacksheep of animation.
I've never really read of any big figure in the industry denounce it the way artists denounce tracing, I'd like to see that though.

it's a low skill, looks bad, if you have a trained eye you can tell it's a trace and the person laying down the lines doesn't have skill to work from imagination and construct his own lines. simple as that. it's like asking why a baker "loses their shit" when someone says kit kat bars are the best dessert.

>>2921019
I think people accept it because the term rotoscope implies tracing, so it isn't like the people doing it are trying to hide the fact they were tracing, they're being upfront about it.

Rotoscoping and mocap - Referencing your own material. Capturing movement is the goal. Time saving.
A tool for production.

Shitty Illustrative tracing. - Referencing things that aren't yours. Goal is covering up lack of skill.
Not for production.

They're not equivalent at all. Regardless of how you think rotoscoping looks as an end product, it's a good tool for animation that needs the requirements it excels at. Speed of production, accuracy of movement.

>>2921030
A scanner darkly... man this movie was amazing, the stylistic choice of rotoscoping fit it perfectly...
BUT, rotiscoping is a heavy choice to make and rarely looks good. It worked because it fit the movie, wouldn't have for another...

>>2921097
>Shitty Illustrative tracing. - Referencing things that aren't yours. Goal is covering up lack of skill.

Well, say you take your own photos and trace those in order to meet production goals for a project. I still think a lot of /ic/ would shit on that. Plenty cry about photobashing.

>>2921159
That's because they're unemployed

File: donaldhillary.jpg (1MB, 1824x872px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1824x872px

The end product is ultimately whats most important.

Fuck the method.

Rotoscope, trace, mocap your heart out. Whatever you need to do. If you are good your end result will show it.

File: IMG_20160919_215154.jpg (1MB, 2583x2280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2583x2280px

>>2921208
Continued

The only reason this thread exists is because people are insecure and see the art world as host to a zero sum game. Anyone better than you devalues your work and makes you feel like shit.

This is only true if you are trying to make what other make in the first place.

Stop giving a shit about if your technique or method is socially acceptable.

Youll see how insecure artists are by how quick they are to pounce on faux pas. Anything to boost their self esteem.

Again... Do whatever the fuck you want. If you are devoted to your lifes work it will be evident. Your finished work will speak for itself.

If it sucks it will never be because of your medium, tools, method, etc. You made it suck all on your own. The effect of good art is immune from technical analysis.

Stop thinking about this shit altogether.

>>2921208
>>2921220
>The end product is ultimately whats most important.

True, but the shortcuts aren't just looked down on for no reason. Generally doing things the hard way will get you better results in the long run.

>>2921240
>Generally doing things the hard way will get you better results in the long run.

This isn't entirely true, as it depends on your definition of what "better results" are. In the world of illustration, it is to your total benefit to be able to work faster. The less time you can spend creating great work, the more money you can make. When it comes to tracing photographs - no one gives a flying fuck as long as the end result looks good, was done relatively quickly, and doesn't infringe on anyone's copyright.

File: no tools only rules.jpg (2MB, 3112x2060px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3112x2060px

>>2921046
did someone say greg land?

if it gets you to the top its fine. most people only care about the finish product anyways, but jealous pretentious artists such as our selfs get mad and piss off because of it.

>>2921457
weeeeeeeeeew

>>2921019
the truth is, all the best artists use ANY means possible to get to their desired result. they're just good at covering their tracks....
>Great artists steal.

>>2921019
No one in animation sees shameless tracing rotoscoping as acceptable. Just a bunch of idiots that can't draw take it seriously.

>>2921457
Disgusting

>>2921019
>rotoscoping
>perfectly acceptable

How out of touch are you? Did you completely miss the controversy the anime you posted as example sparked online? Japan fucking HATED it and it was ridiculed relentlessly to the point where it became a meme on /a/ and 2chan.

>>2922019
The truth is, certain shortcuts are simply not particularly useful for good artists as they have a diminishing return. A bad animator can rotoscope and get what he thinks looks like a passable result, but a great artist can't rotoscope and get a great looking result.

Same with tracing. Sure, if you're a shit tier beginner, tracing will somewhat make your work look better, but the more skilled you are, the more tracing would actually make your work look worse because your skill is above merely copying reference 1 by 1.

>>2921021
nips rotoscope all the time. How do you think they animate robots and space ships?

To all the people saying rotoscoping is not acceptable, I would have to say that people only hate it if it's done badly. I personally dislike it but if it's done properly then most normal people don't mind. Disney for example rotoscoped a lot of their human characters for their films or I think that high school dance scene in space dandy was also rotoscoped (I could be wrong on this one) and no one cared, instead people were praising it. Oh and Max Fleischer's cartoons also come to mind, he rotoscoped a lot of shit but it was done well so no one complained.

>>2921019
It's not. Many animators hate it. And it's hard to make it look good.

Look at Robert Zemeckis' animated films. Characters move way too much, but still look lifeless.

File: alice-wonderland7.jpg (141KB, 880x685px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 880x685px

>>2921019
Rotoscoping in animation isn't supposed to be just plain tracing. It's more of a reference for movement. When you trace, you're ignoring pretty much all the principles of good animation and end up with shitty too-real looking animation like your pic related.

>>2921159
in my imo even tho i don't personally like the look of photobashing i understand it's place in the industry and it's goal (quick pipeline for brainstorming photorealistic ideas). goal ain't to make somethin pretty, goal is to get an idea out on paper and rapidly iterate a design before the hundreds to thousands of hours it will take to properly create it in 3d in a way in which it can be used in engine. it's reference material for 3d modelers essentially

>>2922383

I can think of a few cases where some OPs looked rotoscoped and it was obvious and looked too uncanny.

>>2923106
This, essentially rotoscoping used to be cartooning while following reference. Even that came out sloppy so animators found themselves using less and less reference frames and manually inbetweening the rest.