Semi-OT: Should cel animation stay alive?

[Philo & Gunge]

With today's high-tech and realistic computers to make movies. Standard animation is a dying art. Should it stay or should it burn from existance?

[J. B. Warner]

There will always be a place for traditional animation, I don't care what anyone says.

[Jaime_Weinman]

Aren't we talking about two different things? "Cel animation" is probably on its way out, in the sense that inking and painting on cels is an art that's not really being taught any more (The Simpsons and King of the Hill recently became the last shows to switch from cels to digital, largely because it's become so hard to find anyone to do cel animation). But hand-drawn animation isn't dead, and IMO will never die, because it offers something that computer animation just can't duplicate. So whether they create the finished product with cels or computers, the art of drawing characters in pencil and making those drawings move is not going anywhere.

[frizfrelengfan]

To me as a viewer, it doesn't matter whether a film is animated on cels or in a computer; the important thing is does it make me laugh, or does it get its message across. But computer animation is definitely ready for prime time. I'm sure that the great animators of the classic era would have made films that were just as good if they had had computers at their disposal.

That said, I can watch a cartoon like "The Dot and the Line" with its gorgeous, elaborate geometric shapes, and be amazed that it was not done on a computer.

[Kaleido]

Doesn't Studio Ghibli still avoid computers for all but the most mundane, time-consuming tasks?

Beyond that, traditional cel animation is dead except a few especially simple projects (read: usually aimed at the 2 to 5 crowd) that would actually cost more to color with computers than by hand. The advantages cel animation has over computer animation are usually minimal compared to how much more it costs.

But 2D animation dying? Never.

Big budget, 2D, American animation has been declared dead, but those reports have been exaggerated. And low budget 2D animation? There never was and never will be any danger of that ever going away.

[cbrubaker]

Studio Ghibli's only computer-done cartoon was "My Neighbors the Yamadas" (not released in US yet), but that was because they wanted the cartoon to be in watercolor style, and that might be tricky if done old fashioned way.

Anyway, while cel animation is dead (well, except for independent animation studios making cartoons for film festivals, oh and I believe some animation schools uses cels for cheaper cost), 2D animations is not dead. They still use 2d style in many newer TV cartoons. Most 2D cartoons in this time ever, is Simpsons, and South Park. The latter were originally made in construction paper cutouts, so that was very 2-D, and still is, with the exceptions of fire sequences.

[mbaker]

Should traditional animation stay alive, Heck yeah! I can live with the fact the computer coloring has replaced physical hand painting cels, but i think it's gonna take a while for computer coloring software to recreat the rich, dark earthy tones you get from handpainted cels. Hollywood needs to realize that no matter how a movie is animated, story is always first, and foremost.

[Matt Wilson]

What killed traditionally animated features was the lack of ideas that could sell to an audience. Lilo & Stitch was the only good idea Disney's had in 50 years. And the only decent execution of their BAD ideas was Emperor's New Groove, and only because Mark Dindal simply used his experience from Warner Bros and went with that subtle Dover Boys approach.

That the best idea Clements and Musker could come up with was "Treasure Island.. IN SPAAAAACE" should tell you how witless LA is.

The fact is, Pixar's movies have ALL been good ideas executed very competently, and Pixar IS fielded by artists. And 2D is certainly a part of the process (such as design and boarding), just not what you see in the final product.

Maybe if creators had more ideas like Lilo & Stitch and hinged less on fairy tale adaptions, we wouldn't be in this situation. The fact that so many people enjoyed Shrek is basically a summarization of the collective hatred that has arisen for that type of feature. All it'll take to get hand drawn animation back in the limelight are a couple of small ambitious studios with a good idea, time and money to make those ideas, and a decent amount of promotion to sell the movies to audiences. But the few ex-Disney studios I've seen so far are not up to this task.

As for television animation, shows will always be hand-drawn. Unless every show were go outsource to Gonzo, overseas CGI and domestic CGI TV shows are both pretty much out of the question.

Cels... cels are just primitive technology now. Digital ink and paint is the way to do it, I would say. I think a problem is color balance.. sometimes shows don't even seem to use TV safe palettes. If you think life is lost... that the often-shakiness of cels and somewhat imprecise camerawork is what gave the cartoons life... no... no. It's the drawings, the animation, that gives them life.