Page 1 of 2

2D Animation or CGI?

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:53 pm
by Kaito-kun
Inspired by a debate between Reknoc and mtwinny in another, less interesting thread. Which do you prefer and why? The 2D, hand drawn style of animation in the style of the classic Disney and Ghibli films or the CGI that Pixar and modern Dreamworks films are associated with?

Myself? I prefer 2D animation. It always feels like more effort and talent has gone into something when it's been created with sketches and colouring than when it's been modelled on a computer screen.

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:24 pm
by Reknoc
2D easily. Even bad looking 2D can have a certain charm. Bad looking CGI just looks cheap. There's also a slew of crap CGI films like Avatar and everything Dreamworks make.

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:24 pm
by mazonemayu
2d hand drawn, the other thing has no soul

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:41 pm
by Quills on Wheels
I was thinking maybe Sprite movies should also be another option but they aren't official movies so never mind.

Meh... I do prefer CGI but I don't mind 2D either. I'm just a guy who watches something and doesn't comment about it much.

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:43 pm
by Matty
2D Hand Drawn anyday

Pixar stuff does look amazing, but as has been said, the hand drawn has had time & dedication put into it & even cheap stuff still has the appeal

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:30 pm
by Reknoc
Pixar really are amazing, but they're the exception not the rule. They obviously care a lot about their craft, and animation in general (I believe it was Pixar staffers that wanted to make Princess and the Frog). Whereas with Dreamworks they seem pretty happy to make cheap shit for thick kids.

Oh and let's not forget that CGI's current cancerous growth on the anime industry.

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:01 pm
by RWDebara
I enjoy both but my heart will always go towards 2D animation, you can see all the hard work and talent that goes into those films.

I do love CGI also like pixar films and the upcoming TinTin looks amazing.

Cool thing about pixar is that they do the entire film with 2D story boards thats animated and voice it themselves to show the actors how the film will be like instead of just giving them a script. Then they start building the world on the computer with CGI
Reknoc wrote: (I believe it was Pixar staffers that wanted to make Princess and the Frog).
They did, after Home of the Range failed at the box office in 2003 disney said they will no longer make hand drawn movies because they thought people lost interest. When Pixar was bought by Disney in 2006 they made John Lasseter and Edwin Cutmull the presidents of Disneys animation studio. They changed everything and made Princess and the Frog after Meet the Robinsons and Bolt. It did well enough that disney gave in and said they'll do one every 2-3 years. Last one they made was Winnie the Pooh.

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:51 pm
by Twinny
Well, looking at the results and previous post, I guess I'm beaten. But will say this:

2d animation is okay, it's just that all 2d animation, like us humans, isn't perfect all the time. Same goes for CGI; there are some CGI animations that can be done right and some not at all (and yet someone will say that I'm so wrong, I don't care).

God, all this because of something Sonic-related...

Let me hear it...

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:58 pm
by Reknoc
I don't even know what you're trying to say. We've already touched on 2D animation can be bad, however it can lend a certain charm to it. Bad CGI just looks cheap and ugly.
RWDebara wrote:I do love CGI also like pixar films and the upcoming TinTin looks amazing.
TinTin does look pretty good.

Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:47 am
by Gonic
I actually like both. I don't favour one over the other at all. It's amazing the step by step process each goes through to get finished.