[HN Gopher] Stop-Motion Movies Are Animated at Aardman [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Stop-Motion Movies Are Animated at Aardman [video]
Author : zdw
Score : 40 points
Date : 2023-04-03 18:08 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| jonhohle wrote:
| The missing "How" in the title is very strange. Is that an HN-ism
| (titles shouldn't start with 5w-how?) or did the submitter forget
| a word?
| CharlesW wrote:
| It's deleted on submission in (I think) an effort to combat
| clickbait titles. Submitters can edit and re-add the "How" to
| titles.
| tpmx wrote:
| "we didn't want any CG in the film"
|
| The fire/explosion effects look very CG though.
|
| They say they're compositing this through lots of layers of
| physical objects. Have a look at the fire-shaped cut-outs at
| around 7m11s. It seems like they are emulating the CG-animated
| look in a very roundabout way? Cause that's what kids are used to
| and want, or what?
|
| Edit: Just scrubbed through the actual short movie (Robin Robin;
| https://www.netflix.com/title/81058433). It has a more typical
| Aardman-look than what those clips in this video show.
| illiarian wrote:
| Modern puppetry cannot do away with CGI. The sets and the
| movement is too complex, the effects are too complex, too.
|
| In the very first seconds of the report you see a complex
| animatronic cat moving across a blue ackground that will be
| used to cut away scaffolding, stitch together different parts
| of the movie etc.
|
| What they mean to say, I believe is "we want to do as much in
| camera as possible, and use CGI as the last resort". That's why
| they specifically mention that snowflakes are hand-animated in-
| camera.
| tpmx wrote:
| Robotics-driven stop-motion isn't (generally considered?)
| CGI/Computer Generated Imagery.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Agree, nor do I consider masking/rigging-removal to be
| "CG". They're subtractive, not additive.
| steve1977 wrote:
| I wouldn't necessarily call digital compositing, retouching
| or VFX in general CGI. The result is of course a computer
| generated image strictly speaking, but the term is usually
| used for images that are completely computer generated, i.e.
| have no optical source in the physical worls.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I take their point: all the material used in compositing was
| filmed/shot. Digital compositing, while it feels a _bit_ like
| cheating seems like an acceptable nod to modern tech in order
| to have additional atmosphere (rain, fire, snow) that would be
| nearly impossible otherwise (or if possible, wildly ballooning
| the budget).
|
| And other recent films using 3-d printing to create the many
| varied faces and posed hands of the "puppetoons" is acceptable
| as well.
|
| When I watch the old "Rudolph" animated films I cringe a bit
| when they add the rotoscoped snow on top of the otherwise 3D
| animated figures/sets. Aardman seems to have struck the right
| balance.
| tpmx wrote:
| Watching the final product I agree, they balanced it well.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-03 23:01 UTC)