4 ms·

I don't think the problem is 2D vs 3D. It's trying to put in as little effort (read: money) as possible. It's completely possible to make stunning 3d animation,

by Doxin 1y ago

I don't think the problem is 2D vs 3D. It's trying to put in as little effort (read: money) as possible. It's completely possible to make stunning 3d animation, but that takes effort hollywood largely isn't interested in putting in. Take Arcane for example. It's 3d animation but it's gorgeous. It's art. Studios switching to 3d are a symptom of not putting in enough effort, not the cause of it.

the_af 1y ago
> It's completely possible to make stunning 3d animation I completely agree, but that wasn't my objection. My objection is that I miss 2D, which is seldom picked by major studios anymore, because I love 2D, not because I think all 3D is bad. Arcane indeed looks wonderful. As do the latest works by Sony animation, like Spiderverse or K-Pop Demon Hunters! > Studios switching to 3d are a symptom of not putting in enough effort, not the cause of it. What's interesting is that, as mentioned by TFA -- based on interviews by Pixar employees, former and current -- 3D can be more expensive in terms of time and effort than 2D. This surprised me, I always thought 3D was picked because it was easier to work with, but Pixar employees argue otherwise. So I guess it's only badly done 3D that's easier? Like, my daughter was watching Disney's "The Adventures of Puss in Boots" (2015. A show, not a movie) and holy crap was it bad -- terrible models, terrible animation, terrible everything. Or something Skylander... Skylander Academy? Awful, minimum effort, cheaply done. I wonder if these things wouldn't look better in 2D. Or maybe they'd be just as crap.
- Doxin 1y ago
  I've heard it described as 3d having the effort front-loaded: you make models that need to look good from ~all angles, but then you can basically play with them like dolls. 2d on the other hand has the effort more spread out: you don't need to do much up front, but you need to do a drawing for every single frame. I can see how 3d would be worth it, even if more effort total, if you expect to make sequels. I think another issue is there's too much design by committee going on, too much aiming for "sure things", too many studio notes. Not enough trying to make something good. It's hardly surprising that if you don't aim to make something good you won't make something good. That's not a dig on the animators etc involved, I'm sure they are giving their best but they are operating in a system that does not have as goal to make art.

by Doxin 1y ago

the_af 1y ago

> It's completely possible to make stunning 3d animation I completely agree, but that wasn't my objection. My objection is that I miss 2D, which is seldom picked by major studios anymore, because I love 2D, not because I think all 3D is bad. Arcane indeed looks wonderful. As do the latest works by Sony animation, like Spiderverse or K-Pop Demon Hunters! > Studios switching to 3d are a symptom of not putting in enough effort, not the cause of it. What's interesting is that, as mentioned by TFA -- based on interviews by Pixar employees, former and current -- 3D can be more expensive in terms of time and effort than 2D. This surprised me, I always thought 3D was picked because it was easier to work with, but Pixar employees argue otherwise. So I guess it's only badly done 3D that's easier? Like, my daughter was watching Disney's "The Adventures of Puss in Boots" (2015. A show, not a movie) and holy crap was it bad -- terrible models, terrible animation, terrible everything. Or something Skylander... Skylander Academy? Awful, minimum effort, cheaply done. I wonder if these things wouldn't look better in 2D. Or maybe they'd be just as crap.

Doxin 1y ago
I've heard it described as 3d having the effort front-loaded: you make models that need to look good from ~all angles, but then you can basically play with them like dolls. 2d on the other hand has the effort more spread out: you don't need to do much up front, but you need to do a drawing for every single frame. I can see how 3d would be worth it, even if more effort total, if you expect to make sequels. I think another issue is there's too much design by committee going on, too much aiming for "sure things", too many studio notes. Not enough trying to make something good. It's hardly surprising that if you don't aim to make something good you won't make something good. That's not a dig on the animators etc involved, I'm sure they are giving their best but they are operating in a system that does not have as goal to make art.