The Princess and the Frog Discussion - Part II

[Elladorine]

Also, I don't think that rotoscoping is an "evil technique" that taints the art of those who use it when is used creatively and effectively. I don't understand why you feel i 'accused' or 'offended' the disney artists by suggesting they used some type of rotoscoping. I still think they were great masters of the craft and using rotoscoping for some sequences was a wise choice that helped make their films better.

I completely agree with that, in most cases it's simply reference material (and once again, why I've been pointing to the other thread that's been linked). Even the most highly-seasoned professional artist uses reference material and I don't understand why people consider it evil, cheating, offensive, or not "real" animation.

Every time an animator rotoscopes, Animated Jesus cries.

Because if Jesus was an animator, he'd have never rotoscoped anything.

[Jules]

First things first ...

Great post Dusty! I've been yearning to know the truth about Disney and rotoscoping for a very long time. Unfortunately you find people in the animation industry itself sometimes mistakenly claiming that Disney has used the rotoscope multiple times. The first person who comes to mind is Miyazaki, whom I quite clearly remember talking about the rotoscoping in Cinderella during an interview. I also recall a featurette from the Heavy Metal DVD in which the filmmakers try to justify their using the rotoscope for the film's climactic ending, one of the guys finally spluttering "Even Disney does it!". Yay.

Wow, I can't believe how uptight people are getting about the rotoscoping, as if it's some evil thing.

I don't think it's evil, nigma, but I do dislike its being used. Just like mo-cap, it's an admittedly unimaginative application of animation. What do you think?

Every time an animator rotoscopes, Animated Jesus cries.

That makes me wonder ... how many times has Jesus been animated in a major animated film? The only one I can think of at the moment is the stop-motion animated film, The Miracle Maker.

Oh, and isn't that discriminatory to other religious faiths? What about animated Muhammad, and animated Buddha and, er ... animated Lasseter?

He must have crucified himself by the time Titan A.E. was released.

If you don't like Titan A.E., then what do you think of Atlantis? *slinks away and pouts*

[Escapay]

Every time an animator rotoscopes, Animated Jesus cries.

That makes me wonder ... how many times has Jesus been animated in a major animated film? The only one I can think of at the moment is the stop-motion animated film, The Miracle Maker.

There have been animated Jesus films aplenty, but usually not by major studios. We have a VHS with the entire Jesus story animated, but we have yet to find on DVD. I remember during Easter season when our Wal-Mart had a slew of animated Jesus DVDs, Jane and I would look through them and go, "No, that's not our Jesus."

Oh, and isn't that discriminatory to other religious faiths? What about animated Muhammad, and animated Buddha and, er ... animated Lasseter?

Well, it's no different from Disney fans unaware or willfully ignorant of other animation studios out there.

albert

[Elladorine]

The first person who comes to mind is Miyazaki, whom I quite clearly remember talking about the rotoscoping in Cinderella during an interview. I also recall a featurette from the Heavy Metal DVD in which the filmmakers try to justify their using the rotoscope for the film's climactic ending, one of the guys finally spluttering "Even Disney does it!". Yay.

But Cinderella did indeed use rotoscoping, just not to the level of tracing or outright photocopying that some studios have done. As I said in my most recent post, the live-action that was shot and printed into photostats were reference material and was not directly traced. When animators directly trace live action, you get something that looks incredibly unnatural and stiff, as seen in Heavy Metal and some of Bakshi's work. Since the characters are exaggerated and caricatured, the movement must be as well for it work, and that's something that can't be found in live action to trace from.

I don't think it's evil, nigma, but I do dislike its being used. Just like mo-cap, it's an admittedly unimaginative application of animation. What do you think?

When live-action's used as a refence, it's all good. When it's traced? it's awful and it shows. As I was saying earlier, all artists use reference material. This is what I said in the other thread (I'm wondering if people are going back to look at it at all): http://www.ultimatedisney.com/forum/vie ... hp?t=23441

I think people use the term "rotoscope" rather loosely.

It initially defined the direct tracing of live-action photography frame by frame in order to achieve a more realistic look for animation. Take a look at the Fleischer Studios's work for clear examples of this first definition (i.e. 1930's cartoons featuring Koko the Clown and Cab Calloway). However, many artists realized that direct tracing often looked stiff and unappealing as even the action of cartoon characters (and not just the characters themselves) need to be caricatured in order to feel convincing.

People eventually adopted the term to define direct referencing of live-action film (or even other existing animation) frame by frame when animating. I recall a Peanuts special where they explain how they photographed a dancer's routine specifically for "Flashbeagle." While they referred to the technique as rotoscoping, clearly they could not fit Snoopy's short, round anatomy over the girl's tall, slender figure and directly trace it. Instead, they had photostats made up of the dancer and the animator referred to them for free-handing Snoopy's poses for each frame.

Also keep in mind that cartoon characters (even ones that are semi-realistic like Cinderella) generally have much different proportions than real people anyway, so tracing over live-action isn't really an easy option. I can't say I can recall *any* Disney film where the characters were directly traced from live-action even when "rotoscoping" was involved.

[Flanger-Hanger]

If you don't like Titan A.E., then what do you think of Atlantis? *slinks away and pouts*

I do like Titan A.E., but it uses lots of rotoscoping like the Don Bluth films before it.

[tsom]

I still think this film might offend the Christian crowd because of the use of voodoo (especially by the "good" Mama Odie), and that snake isn't going to help. But they'll be determined to hate this film anyway, so why worry?

I don't think so. I'm a Christian, and I don't hate it nor offended by it. If Christians are offended, then they are just being difficult and nitpicky. I mean, it's a fairy tale made by Disney, so magic and stuff like that is expected. Once more, Mama Odie is sort of the fairy godmother and is using her powers for good.

[ajmrowland]

I still think this film might offend the Christian crowd because of the use of voodoo (especially by the "good" Mama Odie), and that snake isn't going to help. But they'll be determined to hate this film anyway, so why worry?

I don't think so. I'm a Christian, and I don't hate it nor offended by it. If Christians are offended, then they are just being difficult and nitpicky. I mean, it's a fairy tale made by Disney, so magic and stuff like that is expected. Once more, Mama Odie is sort of the fairy godmother and is using her powers for good.

I'm a Christian, andf I'm about as offended by that as I am by Harry Potter, which is nuts.

As for the Rhotoscoping, I don't mind it being used a little. It's when It's used a lot that I mind. The animators should be able to inject themselves into the characters, and Rhotoscoping should be limited to humans.

[nomad2010]

familiar villain pose eh?

[ajmrowland]

The pose is really the only thing similar.

And I love Carrey's performance in that film.

[JDCB1986]

I still think this film might offend the Christian crowd because of the use of voodoo (especially by the "good" Mama Odie), and that snake isn't going to help. But they'll be determined to hate this film anyway, so why worry?

Is there anything Christians aren't offended by ?

And when it comes to Disney movies... I think people have made it a game to come up with as many things to complain about as possible. It's annoying... but the only thing you can do about it is to not keep the ridiculous complaints growing by talking about them all the time.

[totallyminnie86]

If the secondary characters were removed that poster would be perfect.

My thoughts exactly. Its sort of distracting to have them there, in particular Facilier looks a bit out of place to me, he takes away from the glowing ambiance of the rest of the poster. His location on the poster is so pronounced, It looks kind of clunky, like they photoshopped him in on top of it at the last minute At least the other secondary characters blend in to the scene a bit, Aside from that, the colors and general aesthetic of it is lovely!

[nomad2010]

I still think this film might offend the Christian crowd because of the use of voodoo (especially by the "good" Mama Odie), and that snake isn't going to help. But they'll be determined to hate this film anyway, so why worry?

Is there anything Christians aren't offended by ?

And when it comes to Disney movies... I think people have made it a game to come up with as many things to complain about as possible. It's annoying... but the only thing you can do about it is to not keep the ridiculous complaints growing by talking about them all the time.

honestly i don't think that was right to say. although i really don't think the voodoo aspect will offend them. i think they will just see her as the fairy godmother of the story. that's what she is basically anyway.

[Neal]

I wonder if Disney Movie Rewards will have this poster ?!

That would be awesome! I got The Lion King, Brother Bear, Nemo, WALL-E, Incredibles, and Ratatouille posters.

Love them all!

I missed out on Little Mermaid and was sad.

[ajmrowland]

The poster's the exact sort of thing I would love to do with the profession. I'm a geek for blue, but that's just Gorgeous.

[UmbrellaFish]

I knew DisDuster and I agreed on something! But I'm going to stop talking about rotoscopping. I think there is a very fine line between the usage of referential footage and the technique of rotoscopping.

That's the last I'll say, I swear.

Anyways, maybe I'm looking at the poster too closely... but that's CGI! Just look at Dr. Facilier's teeth and hands!

[Sotiris]

Anyways, maybe I'm looking at the poster too closely... but that's CGI! Just look at Dr. Facilier's teeth and hands!

That's not CGI, it's just clip-arty.

[PrincePhillipFan]

Is it me, or does anyone else fall more in love with Naveen every time they watch the trailer?

I know I certainly do. To me already he seems a lot more likable for me than the heroes from the early 90s features. Something very endearing about his pompous yet sweet personality.

[Siren]

I still think this film might offend the Christian crowd because of the use of voodoo (especially by the "good" Mama Odie), and that snake isn't going to help. But they'll be determined to hate this film anyway, so why worry?

Is there anything Christians aren't offended by ?

And when it comes to Disney movies... I think people have made it a game to come up with as many things to complain about as possible. It's annoying... but the only thing you can do about it is to not keep the ridiculous complaints growing by talking about them all the time.

Here here! Though I'd probably say its more likely to be specifically the more radical Baptists groups...they usually cause the biggest stink.

Notice how I don't say ALL Baptists. I have plenty of Catholic, Christian, Baptist friends who like Harry Potter and stuff. There is always some group though that has to raise a stupid stink.

[Jack]

We can add Facilier to the stock of classic skinny Disney villians with pronounced head coverings, including the Bowling Hat Guy!

[Disney's Divinity]

This is just opinion, but I don't mind the poster at all. Tiana and the frog both look cliparty themselves, so the inclusion of the side characters doesn't bother me. The poster seems like it can't decide if it wants to be a kind of magical teaser or a clip-arted group cover. Either way, there's a certain mystique to the poster that isn't ruined by the side characters to me. The swamps are turning out more beautiful than I expected.

I don't think so. I'm a Christian, and I don't hate it nor offended by it. If Christians are offended, then they are just being difficult and nitpicky. I mean, it's a fairy tale made by Disney, so magic and stuff like that is expected. Once more, Mama Odie is sort of the fairy godmother and is using her powers for good.

Well, I think the difference between Mama Odie and the normal Fairy Godmother is that, while the earlier fairy godmothers are ambiguous (and could be construed as heavenly sent), Mama Odie's powers come from voodoo. I know many people, namely those who boycott Disney, will just use this as an example of Disney's questionable "morality," when Disney shouldn't be a force of moral guidance in the first place. (as an unimportant side note, I'm a Christian and also unoffended personally) Though I guess this is a good example of why Disney films have always tended to be not overtlly religious in the past, so as to not alienate any of its viewers. But there's also the question of many people that'll most likely cry racism, as she is the first fairy godmother figure who would be considered an actual witch (not to mention the fact that they would be criticized for stereotyping blacks as voodoo users). Still, we haven't seen the film yet, so maybe the source of her powers goes thankfully unstated in the film.

sotiris2006:
Crazy ol' Escapay!

Disney's Divinity:
He's always good for a laugh.

What the...?