purwinc@linden.ulowell.edu (Charles Purwin aka root) (08/14/90)
Recently Disney has an animator program to do graphics for 'toons. It is released for the Amiga currently. Also, from my own experience i have made some shorts with an ibm and a custom draw program (my own) and dumped this to tape (this was done in cga graphics ) it came out okay, remember that the computers have amuch higher resolution so when you put it on tape it looks decent. Some of the stuff in "The litte Mermaid" were done this way.. charles
hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) (08/16/90)
In article <24107@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> kml@mosquito.cis.ufl.edu (Kevin Lahey) writes: }In article <16960007@hpislx.HP.COM> gvg@hpislx.HP.COM (Greg Goebel) writes: }>[ talk about cartoon pap of yesteryear :-) ] }>(Also interesting "puppetoons" like FIREBALL XL-5 and SUPERCAR, which were }>ingenious in a limited sort of way ... will current computer-animation work }>like TIN TOY lead to similar "computertoon" series?) } }I was wondering about this myself. I can't claim to be totally up on the }latest and greatest in computer graphics, but it seems like it is possible }to animate relatively simple characters in near real-time. With some sorta }high-level language to specify motion, perhaps you could crank out some }stuff relatively cheaply, as long as you can put up with a relatively }low level of detail. I think we've a way to go before that happens. "Tin Toy" took two years and two million dollars to make. It could only be done as a cutting-edge research project. (Question: What happens when you hire the top talent in the computer animation field and give them all the time, money and equipment they want? Answer: Tin Toy). I can't see any for-profit animation studio investing that level of resources in a three minute short. It'll happen eventually, as equipment gets cheaper and more sophisticated, but don't hold your breath. -- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@ttidca.tti.com) Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp(+)TTI Illegitimis non 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 450-9111, x2483 Carborundum Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun | philabs | psivax}!ttidca!hollombe
mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney) (08/23/90)
In article <19149@ttidca.TTI.COM> hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) writes: > I think we've a way to go before that happens. "Tin Toy" took two years > and two million dollars to make. It could only be done as a cutting-edge > research project. (Question: What happens when you hire the top talent in > the computer animation field and give them all the time, money and > equipment they want? Answer: Tin Toy). I can't see any for-profit > animation studio investing that level of resources in a three minute > short. > > It'll happen eventually, as equipment gets cheaper and more sophisticated, > but don't hold your breath. That sounds suspiciously like a major studio mogul saying "you can't make a movie for under ten million dollars". A computer generated 'toon doesn't have to have the level of realism that Tin Toy aspires to. It has to relieve the drudgery in creating a 'toon, allowing the artist to be more creative (try more and different ideas) in roughly the same amount of time. Is the present state of the art up to it? Perhaps. Are the "top talent in the computer animation field" interested? Doubtful. Who would want to be associated with Desktop Cartooning? Brian McElhinney "If a squirrel farts in the woods, does it smell?" mce@tc.fluke.com --From ZEN FOR AMERICANS, by me.
dave@imax.com (Dave Martindale) (08/24/90)
In article <1990Aug22.212806.10856@tc.fluke.COM> mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney) writes: > >Is the present state of the art up to it? Perhaps. Are the "top talent in >the computer animation field" interested? Doubtful. Who would want to be >associated with Desktop Cartooning? Cartoonists? Seriously, if you provide tools that allow traditional cartoon-type animators to produce films faster, more easily, and more cheaply than traditional techniques, they will use them. Right now, the capital cost of computer equipment, scanners, and film recorders is still rather high compared with the cost of a pencil and paintbrush, and that's the biggest hindrance. The 3D-object realistic-rendered animation of Tin Toy and its ancestors is not the only style of animation, you know. Maybe you need "top computer animators" to produce that style, but there are many other styles and many other talents in animation. And "computer animation" has room for quite a few different styles and techniques.
spl@cs.nps.navy.mil (Steve Lamont) (08/24/90)
In article <1990Aug23.192633.9673@imax.com> dave@imax.com (Dave Martindale) writes: >In article <1990Aug22.212806.10856@tc.fluke.COM> mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhinney) writes: >> ... Who would want to be >>associated with Desktop Cartooning? > >Cartoonists? > > ... Right now, the capital cost of computer >equipment, scanners, and film recorders is still rather high compared >with the cost of a pencil and paintbrush, and that's the biggest hindrance. The materials required for traditional animation may be, in and of themselves, relatively inexpensive. However, the *labor* required to paint each of the individual cels is quite expensive. In fact, so expensive that very little of the "animation" (and I use the word advisedly) that you see on TV Saturday mornings is done in the US any longer, but produced in cartoon factories in the Far East. I believe that much of that is now done by computer, as well. spl (the p stands for pining away for Chuck Jones...) -- Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- (408) 646-2752 (subject to change at random) NPS Confuser Center / Code 51 / Naval Postgraduate School / Monterey, CA 93940 "You're okay," said Honeysuckle. "The dogs like you." - Charles Bukowski, "How to Get Published"
bobl@pro-graphics.cts.com (Bob Lindabury) (08/25/90)
In-Reply-To: message from mce@tc.fluke.COM > That sounds suspiciously like a major studio mogul saying "you can't make a > movie for under ten million dollars". A computer generated 'toon doesn't > have to have the level of realism that Tin Toy aspires to. It has to > relieve the drudgery in creating a 'toon, allowing the artist to be more > creative (try more and different ideas) in roughly the same amount of time. That's exactly what Disney Studios does these days. They do alot of pencil testing and some motion tests on computers. There are several other companies that also use various PC's for animation roughs. > Is the present state of the art up to it? Perhaps. Are the "top talent in > the computer animation field" interested? Doubtful. Who would want to be > associated with Desktop Cartooning? Actually, Disney IS associating themselves with Desktop Cartooning. Disney just released software for the Amiga called "Disney Presents The Animation Studio". Comes complete with Disney drawn cartoons of Donald Duck and others that you can load and run in real time on your Amiga. Of course, these animations are for people to learn animation and for working out moves and such but not for final output as (from what I understand) it only supports low resolution output. Still in all, Disney is a pretty heavy hitter when it comes to "toons" and they are certainly associating themselves with this product. Says alot for the Amiga as I've heard of no plans to make this available on other platforms. > Brian McElhinney "If a squirrel farts in the woods, does it smell?" > mce@tc.fluke.com --From ZEN FOR AMERICANS, by me. -- Bob ________ Pro-Graphics BBS - It's better than a sharp stick in the eye! ________ InterNet: bobl@pro-graphics.cts.com | Pro-Graphics: 908/469-0049 UUCP: ..crash!pro-graphics!bobl | CServe: 70347,2344 ARPA/DDN: ..crash!pro-graphics!bobl@nosc.mil | Amer. Online: Graphics3D ___________ ____________ Raven Enterprises - 25 Raven Ave. Piscataway, NJ 08854
uad1077@dircon.uucp (08/25/90)
>In article <1990Aug22.212806.10856@tc.fluke.COM> mce@tc.fluke.COM (Brian McElhi nney) writes: >> ... Who would want to be >>associated with Desktop Cartooning? I've always felt that Desktop Animation, or Desktop Cartooning if you prefer, will turn out to be business presentations that are as finished as, say, the weather, or a popular science program etc., are today. That's the only way you'll get a) the quality software companies interested in animation (ask a Wavefront sales manager and he'll gleefully show you a graph of bugs vs. time - only the last time I saw it it went the wrong way:-() and b) a sufficient volume to get costs down. THe danger in comparing desktop animation to desktop publishing is that is it a lot easier to produce awful looking animation than awful looking typesetting (adn look how easy *that* is). Programs with safeguards in to protect amateur animators from themselves will be the *real* challenge. No wonder Pixar is restricting themselves to selling a renderer. -- Ian D. Kemmish Tel. +44 767 601 361 18 Durham Close uad1077@dircon.UUCP Biggleswade ukc!dircon!uad1077 Beds SG18 8HZ United Kingd uad1077%dircon@ukc.ac.uk
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) (08/27/90)
In article <4087@crash.cts.com> bobl@pro-graphics.cts.com (Bob Lindabury) writes: >Actually, Disney IS associating themselves with Desktop Cartooning. Disney >just released software for the Amiga called "Disney Presents The Animation >Studio". Comes complete with Disney drawn cartoons of Donald Duck and others >that you can load and run in real time on your Amiga. Of course, these >animations are for people to learn animation and for working out moves and >such but not for final output as (from what I understand) it only supports low >resolution output. Not true, Animation Studio does support Hi-Res output and includes dithered fills to increase the apparent color palette selection beyond the 16 colors normally associated with Amiga Hi-Res. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mark Thompson | | mark@westford.ccur.com | | ...!{decvax,uunet}!masscomp!mark Designing high performance graphics | | (508)392-2480 engines today for a better tomorrow. | +------------------------------------------------------------------------- +