Re: Peanuts! Feature film by Blue Sky
Posted: 21 Mar 2014, 15:57
I add my "+1" to this.Just because squash & stretch (or any animation "principle") can be over-used or used poorly doesn't mean it isn't good when used correctly.
TVPaint boards for technical support, requests and discussions about animation.
http://tvpaint.net/forum/
I add my "+1" to this.Just because squash & stretch (or any animation "principle") can be over-used or used poorly doesn't mean it isn't good when used correctly.
slowtiger wrote:I'm with Paul here: I feel the approach of Bill Melendez was completely appropriate with these characters. But I'm used to it, I had my share of eastern european animation and lots of experimental stuff, so for me limited or even jumpy animation is completely normal. Someone grown up with only a diet of Disney might react differently.
(Fun fact: There's a scene in one of the first films where all characters dance in a school auditory. Each character has a distinct style, each is just a small loop. But these loops are still spread over the net today (as GIFs), each of them as illustration for a personality type.)
Elodie: Ugh, I never saw these - something completely different from the original! (One of the boys wears a yellow sweater with a Charly Brown Zigzag line!) That short handdrawn bit at the title card looks really nice - but my guess is that they couldn't find enough animators to handle this style well enough, and/or didn't have a suitable software to do this. And of course "handdrawn" is more expensive than digital puppetry.
But I expect this to change because of Ernest and Celestine, which uses a similar "broken" line approach still on a budget (with Flash!), and the next movie of that kind will be in TVP.
Yes, mainly animated in flash. For the coloring process, it's Digital Graphics secret.Really? Ernest and Celestine was drawn with FLASH!?
I have a recurring idea/dream: many 2D animators are getting older (this is why 2D is thought to be "old school") and perhaps some are retired. Perhaps some are in a comfortable place financially. Why can't we 2D animators come together to create a great full-length 2D animated film just for the fun of it and the love of animating? (Of course a well-written story would be essential to this endeavor.) The objective would be to make an excellent 2D animated film without the need for immediate financial gain. So the problem wouldn't be money - at least not millions of dollars.The problem is just money + the fact that many producers are just ignorant and think 2D is "old school"
I think it was, but I cannot be sure. Too bad, there was a Peanuts conference in Annecy, but none of us could attend it, since it was on the first Mifa's day, at 9 amThere are a few moments of drawn animation starting at the 00:11 sec mark - through - 00:20 . Does anyone know if this was done with TVPaint ?
(because earlier on in this thread Elodie mentioned that some drawn effects elements in the teaser trailer had been animated using TVPaint)
So ... I am afraid when you heard my region voiceover version (it will televice every early morning from next month).neonnoodle wrote:However the rest of the artistic style is very pleasant to look at. It's odd for me to hear the dialog in French
Just as Tintin, Asterix, et al sound weird to me in English, Charlie Brown sounds very strange in French!
Perhaps Mr. Martino would like to means a part of Charlie Brown's monologue.slowtiger wrote: During his presentation in Berlin Steve Martino clearly said that face expressions and other stuff were done in a 2D program, but I can't remember if he mentioned TVPaint by name.