In reference to this video (which just came to my attention today, sorry if it’s old news): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL6FYxIuJlA
Why would Disney use animation templates in this manner? How much time would it really save? After all, you’re still drawing different characters and backgrounds. Is animating that kind of motion really that difficult for an animator in that they would purposely just use old scenes again and again?
It saves you from having to do all the blocking and frame counts. If you’ve got a complicated dance sequence, you can just copy all the moves from Movie X to Movie Y, replicating them in other characters. You still have to draw everything, but you don’t have to do all the grunt work to figure out the timings.
ETA: It’s also especially useful if the thing will be set to music. If the music in both pieces is in the same time and tempo, you know the action will match the beat.
It’s interesting to note that most of the duplicates in the video come from the animated features made right after Walt’s death when the studio was somewhat rudderless. Disney died during production of The Jungle Book and The Aristocats and Robin Hood were the first features made entirely without his influence.
I’d have to concur with that. Other than the final but with Sleeping Beauty to Beauty and the Beast the movies referred to as templating (for lack of a better word) come from the period known as ‘sucking’ for Disney animated movies.
And the SB to BatB always seemed more of a homage than anything else.
Have they stopped that phase then?
In some of the clips, the animation is rotoscoped (Snow White for example). I can imagine them reusing the same live-action references for reasons mentioned by friedo. So in some instances, rather than being a direct copy from one film to another, they could have just been using the same reference stock. Of course, it’s still copying.
It’s generally agreed that The Little Mermaid was the turning point for Disney animation and the beginning of their Renaissance.
They no longer do any traditionally animated features, though, having acquired Pixar for the purpose of making CG films.
“This video is no longer available” – could someone summarize?
Actually, Disney is releasing a new feature this year, The Princess and the Frog, that is being animated using traditional techniques.
A few years ago Disney *did *announce they were dropping traditional animation and only producing CG features. But when they bought Pixar in 2006, Pixar’s creative lead, John Lasseter, was put in charge of the animation division, and he immediately revived the production of traditional animation.
I was able to access it through the link provided so you might try again.
Basically, it shows scenes from several movies in which characters are performing virtually the same actions (mostly dancing). The studio used a different background and animated new characters, but they’re doing the same steps to the same beat. In one case Snow White dancing with the dwarves is replaced by Lady Marian dancing with her animal friends (who are short and therefore fill in perfectly for dwarves).
>How much time would it really save?
Tons. For high-quality animation like Disney produces they would most likely need to hire dancers, choreographers, film crews, etc to get several takes of various dances. These dances would later be used in the rotoscoping process.
Instead of hiring dancers and choreographers they just reused their existing stock of dancing film for rotoscoping or just as a reference. Afterall, these are just kids movies and duplicating dances really doesnt matter. It look, what, 50 or 60 years before anyone really noticed?
[offtopic]I’ve found that quite often, when youtube says that a video cannot be found, hitting refresh will bring it up. Some sort of bug in their software, I suppose.[/offtopic]
Live-action actors were used initially to perform the sequences. Then the animators would use those motions as a template. Every business in the world reuses designs and templates where applicable, no?
I think I’m almost as impressed with whoever put that video together as I am with the templates he discovered. The images and the music work very well together.
“It’s still really Pixar. It’s still really Pixar.” That’s what I utter to myself and hope and pray every time a CGI movie opens with the Disney fireworks and castle. I have a very hard time tolerating modern Disney movies, but Pixar has always been absolutely supurb. So far, though, so good. We watch “Bolt” last night, and despite the lack of Pixar branding, it was still a Pixar film.
Yup, that worked. (It being Disney, my first assumption was that the mailed fist of a lawsuit threat had come down on the compiler.)
Yeah, that was very cool.