dermotmoconnor's Comments
Well, speaking as one who worked on hand-drawn animated features (for Don Bluth, 1988-1993):
Anyone (not saying this of the poster) who thinks that the animators got some kind of free pass has NO IDEA what they're talking about. We routinely used live action footage as reference - and it was brutal at all times.
The animator has to re-draw the entire scene, replacing original characters with completely new models. The only save is in staging, which guarantees an appealing composition and timing - but from the point of view of drawing, it's a long and tedious process.
I never liked working with live action reference, and using an earlier drawing would have about as much appeal from a creative angle. I don't know any animators in the traditional world who would want to be handcuffed in this manner. In 3D, the nearest analog would be MoCap - a style of animation that's very frustrating to work with.
Even a non-animator artist can try a simple test: print out a single frame of any Disney film, then place a clean sheet over it. Now, draw a different character over the original, matching pose for pose. It's even more fun with a backlight.
Now, imagine the fun you'll have when you're rolling a stack of these things, 5 drawings at a time - flipping between two versions of key#1, #2, #3, #4 and #5, etc.
And people wonder why animators like to drink.
Anyone (not saying this of the poster) who thinks that the animators got some kind of free pass has NO IDEA what they're talking about. We routinely used live action footage as reference - and it was brutal at all times.
The animator has to re-draw the entire scene, replacing original characters with completely new models. The only save is in staging, which guarantees an appealing composition and timing - but from the point of view of drawing, it's a long and tedious process.
I never liked working with live action reference, and using an earlier drawing would have about as much appeal from a creative angle. I don't know any animators in the traditional world who would want to be handcuffed in this manner. In 3D, the nearest analog would be MoCap - a style of animation that's very frustrating to work with.
Even a non-animator artist can try a simple test: print out a single frame of any Disney film, then place a clean sheet over it. Now, draw a different character over the original, matching pose for pose. It's even more fun with a backlight.
Now, imagine the fun you'll have when you're rolling a stack of these things, 5 drawings at a time - flipping between two versions of key#1, #2, #3, #4 and #5, etc.
And people wonder why animators like to drink.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Haha! That's funny!
Wild animals were put on Earth for our amusements - read genesis for proof!
Wild animals were put on Earth for our amusements - read genesis for proof!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Wow! Even the psychopathic Alex from "A Clockwork Orange" had more respect for Beethoven than the human vermin who wants to sell Ludvig's skull for some filthy lucre.
Hopefully he'll get a visit some night - from the local droogs, out for some ultra-violence and a little in-out.
Hopefully he'll get a visit some night - from the local droogs, out for some ultra-violence and a little in-out.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@ sixsigmasuck,
"if you’re so concerned about alleviating overpopulation, feel free to volunteer."
I'm sorry, but this is an infantile response. The fact is simple: we have already overshot the carrying capacity of the biosphere.
I really don't know how to reach people like you - what can be said to break through the walls of deception - please read my previous post, and follow the links. Asinine comments about suicide really aren't going to move any of us forward.
It's time to get serious, and grow up.
"if you’re so concerned about alleviating overpopulation, feel free to volunteer."
I'm sorry, but this is an infantile response. The fact is simple: we have already overshot the carrying capacity of the biosphere.
I really don't know how to reach people like you - what can be said to break through the walls of deception - please read my previous post, and follow the links. Asinine comments about suicide really aren't going to move any of us forward.
It's time to get serious, and grow up.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Wow - so many logical fallacies! Where to start?
Tridion posts a comment critical of the Green Revolution - and is all but labelled a racist. If a motley collection of ad hominems is the best you've got, then sorry.
The earth has a carrying capacity of about 1,000,000,000 humans...that was the human population prior to the industrial revolution. Since the mid 19th century, population has soared, and is heading towards 9,000,000 by 2050. Increased food = increased population. By boosting food supply, you do indeed feed more people - who then have children, who then need even more food.
And so on. Skin colour is irrelevant.
Modern agriculture uses soil as a sponge for Nitrogen based fertilisers. Those fertilisers are created through the Haber-Bosch process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process#Synthesis_gas_preparation
This process requires NATURAL GAS, a fossil fuel. This gas is finite. North American Natural gas production seems to be heading off a cliff:
http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/27/61031/618
Our agricultural system converts oil and natural gas into food. Were we forced to switch to organic agriculture/horticulture overnight, we would indeed starve, by the billions.
Nevertheless, the current agricultural systems are wreaking havoc - through nitrogen run-off, which creates massive oceanic dead zones, to carcinogenic pesticides which bioaccumulate in the food chain.
The real problem beneath this is a financial/economic system based on the necessity of exponential growth. As long as we are forced to grow or die, we will continue to head towards the cliff predicted by the likes of Ehrlich. Only the arrival time will vary. For an illuminating 1 hour video on this topic, there is none better than this well known lecture by Albert Bartlett:
http://www.guba.com/watch/3000053112
Now, before the silly ad hominems (which I'm not sticking around to read), let me just add the following:
I am not a racist.
Albert Bartlett is not a racist.
Paul Ehrlich is not a racist.
We're just people concerned with the issue of over-population. You can have as many kids as you like; just don't be shocked if they inherit an ecological wasteland.
They won't thank you for it.
Tridion posts a comment critical of the Green Revolution - and is all but labelled a racist. If a motley collection of ad hominems is the best you've got, then sorry.
The earth has a carrying capacity of about 1,000,000,000 humans...that was the human population prior to the industrial revolution. Since the mid 19th century, population has soared, and is heading towards 9,000,000 by 2050. Increased food = increased population. By boosting food supply, you do indeed feed more people - who then have children, who then need even more food.
And so on. Skin colour is irrelevant.
Modern agriculture uses soil as a sponge for Nitrogen based fertilisers. Those fertilisers are created through the Haber-Bosch process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process#Synthesis_gas_preparation
This process requires NATURAL GAS, a fossil fuel. This gas is finite. North American Natural gas production seems to be heading off a cliff:
http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/27/61031/618
Our agricultural system converts oil and natural gas into food. Were we forced to switch to organic agriculture/horticulture overnight, we would indeed starve, by the billions.
Nevertheless, the current agricultural systems are wreaking havoc - through nitrogen run-off, which creates massive oceanic dead zones, to carcinogenic pesticides which bioaccumulate in the food chain.
The real problem beneath this is a financial/economic system based on the necessity of exponential growth. As long as we are forced to grow or die, we will continue to head towards the cliff predicted by the likes of Ehrlich. Only the arrival time will vary. For an illuminating 1 hour video on this topic, there is none better than this well known lecture by Albert Bartlett:
http://www.guba.com/watch/3000053112
Now, before the silly ad hominems (which I'm not sticking around to read), let me just add the following:
I am not a racist.
Albert Bartlett is not a racist.
Paul Ehrlich is not a racist.
We're just people concerned with the issue of over-population. You can have as many kids as you like; just don't be shocked if they inherit an ecological wasteland.
They won't thank you for it.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Grow up. That, or develop reading comprehension.