What do you think about rotoscoping? Is it legitimate cartoonery?
>>153014047It's fine, sometimes animation looks weird when it's fully rotoscoped, but if you do some tweaks afterwards it usually looks okay.
I don't like how it looks most of the time
>>153014047The earliest animation was literally drawn over real life pictures of a horse, so if anything it's the most legitimate form of cartooning.That said, I do feel like it can be used as a crutch at times, and at other times it just makes me question why they didn't just film shit instead.
>>153014047I have huge respect for bakshi as a creator but i dont know why he had such a hard on for badly looking rotoscope shit later in his career. This movie is fucking ass because of it too.
>>153014206Could be a similar case to Zdzisław Beksinski getting really enamored with 3D CGI, where an artist gets enamored with an artstyle they haven't trying working with before, and even though it doesn't look good, they're more in it for the simple joy of trying something new.
>>153014047No, it's not animation./your thread/your life
>>153014382>>153014177Stfu
>>153014047Not a fan.
>>153014382Wasn't Fleischer Superman rotoscoped?Alice in Alice in Wonderland as well?
>>153014101would you consider it tracing?
>>153014047>Is it legitimate cartooneryAs opposed to fake cartoonery? The only issue is that sometimes it looks like shit / is done poorly but the same can be said about literally everything so whatever.
>>153014047>What do you think about rotoscoping?It looks awful and is unimaginably restrictive. Only talentless hacks use it.>Is it legitimate cartoonery?Is tracing a legitimate art form?
>>153016307>Is tracing a legitimate art form?Yes.
>>153016407Better than AI I guess
>>153016578Still shit.
>>153017929At least it doesn't have dead fish eyes and plastic doll texture
>>153014047I think it looks cool in Bakshi's films and I find it to be a funny gag in Smiling friends. Beyond that I don't care for it.
>>153014047It’s a good way to make a good enough cartoon movie on a budget without infinite retakesThis movie doesn’t get enough credit for its timing direction or character performances because the art is wonky and I think that’s a bit of a shame
>using it as a guide for regular animationThis can be good. Many Disney classics are stealth rotoscoped to some degree, they just know when to use it and when to make changes.>using it as lazy tracingLooks like trash.
>>153014047there was (is?) a time and place to use it to assist with certain kind of difficult shots...and even then HOW you use it can produce good or very fucked up looking animation...to that end it looking cursed can be very funny.and to use it the way they did for this movie is like the most perfect example of how NOT to use rotoscoping.
>>153016237Sure, but there's a difference between tracing clipart or someone else's art and tracing something you took or made yourself.
>>153014247>Zdzisław Beksinski Man I miss him. Died way to soon. Shit way to go for a brilliant man
>>153014047When it’s done well. In Lord of the Rings? It looked middling for most of the runtime, and downright bad at about 30% of the scenes, especially during Helms Deep.
>>153015559How the fuck would you rotoscope flying around, leaping tall buildings in a single bound, outrunning a train, etc? Drawing a consistent sequence of poses with an on-model, realistic human figure is not impossible. Animators back then really were that good.
>>153018521>>153018829Yeah, the rotoscoping ended up looking like a bad filter over a cheap live action movie. Compare it to Cinderella (1950) which all human movement was was rotoscoped from soundstage filming.>>153018904>leaping tall buildings in a single bound, Rotoscope a man doing a standing jump and then extending the arc. >outrunning a trainRotoscope a man running and then animate it as passing by a train.
>>153018967Reference is not rotoscope. Rotoscoping is done with tracing. Every example in your reply is not rotoscoped. You can have the same timing and movements as a reference, and still not be a rotoscope. The music video for Minnie The Moocher by Cab Calloway starring Betty Boop has a rotoscoped ghost. Disney movies (despite their high fidelity to their reference footage) are not rotoscoped. Ralph Bakshi movies like Fire and Ice are rotoscoped.
>>153014047It can work in certain contexts but you essentially sacrifice things like the advanced lighting and texture of live action and the exaggeration, squash and stretch and speed of animation. Funnily enough Mocap (the 3d version of rotoscoping) is great as long as you have someone clean it up Properly.
>>153014047If old artistic masters drawing over traced images using a mirror is considered high art I don't see how applying a similar principle to cartoons is any less. The method isn't the problem, it's the application.
>>153018989No, many of the early Disney films did involve some rotoscoping. Snow White, Prince Charming and the Evil Queen in Snow White and the Seven Dwarves are noticeably rotoscoped which is why they standout so much from the rest of the film.
>>153014047Most classic Disney movies were rotoscoped so if you think it's not valid, neither is Snow White and the rest of that shit.
>>153014047Frankly it's in the same category as puppet rigs for me, in that it's value comes directly from how well you can hide it. If you can tell a piece of animation is rotoscoped, it's bad rotoscoping. You're putting in just as much work just to doll up rotoscoping as you would with traditional animation, so it comes down to strictly being an artistic choice, rather than a cost saving measure like people usually tout it as.
>>153015487Homo
>>153014047Yeah I'm cool with it. Takes a certain level of skill to make rotoscoping look GOOD
>>153019081Snow White wasn't rotoscoped. But it did heavily use live references.
>>153014206I think getting screwed over by given low budgets was a part of it.
>>153014047No, it's fucking hideous.
>>153018149
>>153020333With all that barefoot runnin' around, those shouldn't be so spotless...
>>153020333Man's bottom half.
>>153014047I wonder what's the point? Why bother with the animation medium at all if you are just going to hire actors, pay for costumes and set them in front of a camera and make reels in the first place. Does it really make anything look more impressive to see someone wobbling around at 24fps? Nothing looks any more amazing than a typical actors in costumes movie anyway. The Balrog is clearly some guy wearing bat wings. Why animate it?
>>153014047Depends on how it's done. The hobbits and some other characters were rotoscoped. The balrog and the orc armies were literally just guys in costumes with some tinting and the eyes painted over. Fire And Ice was most all rotoscoping and made LOTR look like amateur night.
>>153014047Garbage.
>>153014047KINOOOO
>>153014047Eh, I could take it or leave it.
