Why is 3D so PD?
3D has no leg warmers so 2D is instantly superior
That top pic is creepy as shit.
>>83427173
It all depends on your budget, my dear child appreciator. If you have limited $, simple 2D will look okay, while simple 3D will look like shit.
2D is drawn by ex-Disney animators who have the science of small cute characters down to a damn science.
The 3D is just some small-time whatever country studio making generic 3D animation.
You do the math.
>>83427991
Whoops, redundancy.
>>83427173
>Less details
>Hair looks fack
>Face need more modeling
>Poor shading
>Bland Texture Fur
Budget
>>83427173
So much shitty CGI nowadays lads. Just look how much personality the bottom pic has compared to the top. It's just well drawn. In the top one the characters look soulless.
>>83430099
I think CG is becoming a killer for animated shows. Just render the characters easily, use extremely highpoly backgrounds that somehow make the framerate shitty,
>>83429302
Miraclous Ladybug suffers from cheap CG disease.
>>83427173
A better question is why do they look so human?
>>83430099
A still frame from a feature film looks better than a still frame from a tv series? I'm shocked.
I actually dig the new Alvin show.
Chipettes all have distinctive personalities in it and aren't just female versions of the boys.
Probably something to do with uncanny valley. No textures on the 3D and whatnot.
>>83431166
Yeah, but the motion is okay in the action scenes
I've been waiting for this thread.
>it's gonna be a punkalicious ride
>>83434751
>jaggies on a fucking pre-rendered image
laid off Disney animators in 1986 know animation
http://marmalade.rubberslug.com/gallery/inv_info.asp?ItemID=393447
>>83435740
fucking simon
>>83435873
Simon turns it up to 11.
>>83435116
>>83435349
>>83435615
>>83435740
>>83435896
Saw this again a little over a week ago, and I still enjoy it, even though the animation errors stick out to me more now (like where in Switzerland the girls trade a Chipette doll for a Chipette doll). Was a little surprised to notice Danny Antonucci's in the credits this time around.
>>83427173
Aside from the cheap lighting and modelling in your example, old 2D designs converted to 3D suffer from the same problem as overshaded fan art. You're dealing with information about shape and volume that you didn't have to with 2D, and being confronted with their structural flaws.
This is why cartooning styles have become simpler and rounder, eschewing old Disney and WB. Under realistic lighting conditions, the stylized exaggerations become too much. They're grotesque and doll-like.
>>83436074
I haven't watched the entire movie in years. All I remember is that the plot was fucking dumb.
>>83436566
I like the show, it just looks and feels like it was made 10-15 years ago.
That's part of the charm with it's plots, they are familiar and nostalgic slice of life because they feel like they come from the same time period as jimmy neutron.
Unfortunately the animation also looks like it came from jimmy neutron/
>>83436612
It was an excuse to have an around the world an 80 days type adventure.
Unfortunately it feels like it had bigger ambitions with this plot and settings than it was actually able to realize.
>>83436713
My first instinct was left, but on further examination definitely right, she'd be more vocal.
>>83427754
i like this outfit. need panty shot
Why the fuck do they make these godawful movies? I get so sick of cringing every time I see one of their godawful commercials.
>>83437385
>>83436800
Thank you. I'm relieved that someone besides me is turned on by the (however poorly animated) human girls rather than the tween chipmunks.
The animation is improved, just not as much as it used to be improved.
>>83437481
> human girls rather than the tween chipmunks
The human girls are presumably the same age.
The chipettes can be cute too though.
I'm intruiged with the fact that Alvin and the boys find the human girls attractive and see no problem with romantic interactions with them.
This is kind of odd.
>>83437678
eleanor thighs
>>83435740
>>83435943
>>83435965
And this is how I know I am a faggot.
>>83437639
>I'm intruiged with the fact that Alvin and the boys find the human girls attractive and see no problem with romantic interactions with them.
I see no problem with romantic interactions with these colorful, pouty CGI girls, either.
>>83437956
Yes, but you don't have a rodent dick, do you?
>>83437639
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1MEKL5_-3U
>>83437708
btw, the blu-ray is cropped widescreen
>>83438504
>ebid
is the master safe, or will we always have cropped?
>>83427173
This is why.
>>83438551
I don't know, but the DVD was fullscreen.
>>83435943
Holy shit. Theodore will be raped wearing that but Simon won't be because he calculated that outfit to catch massive numbers of cocks in his wanting holes.
Alvin will start fucking Theodore to avoid being raped himself but finds himself really getting into it and keeps at it back at home even as Theodore tries to dress uglier and uglier to avoid it happening again.
>>83438952
but is that fullscreen not cropped from the cropped widescreen?
>>83438965
did you stop to think about how incredibly gay that is before posting it?
>>83438976
I have both and the blu-ray has less picture than the DVD. It also comes with a new cropped DVD to display it in its "original exhibited" form. So, you see it like it was in the movie theater, but you can't see these pillars.
>>83439062
Oh rad, I guess that means they have it mastered somewhere with the full aspect ratio uncropped, so a later proper release is still possible..
>>83438997
>>83436747
Brittany, stop to be so lewd.
Is the 80's tv series any good/worth watching?
>>83439276
It's watchable. The animation got better in 1988 with the switch from Ruby Spears to DiC.
So how come they're human-sized (and just more human looking in general) in the 60s and 80s series, but are tiny furry animals in the live-action movies and CGI series?
>>83439420
Autism. They think if they look like real chipmunks, it will be more "correct" somehow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-aTbHsZJ9g
>>83439396
This is so 80s.
Because it rhymes you fucking idiot.
>>83436612
Penis no pls.
>>83439396
>>83437996
Bad Dragon still don't sell those.
>>83436209
Here I fixed it for you
>>83439396
>gotta go fast
>>83436381
This is just not true. The '80s chipmunks in particular are incredibly well-designed. The 3D chipmunks have a radically different design.
Pic related is closer to the '80s chipmunk design.
>>83442441Now add a bulge/
>>83435943
If he was a 12 or 13 year old human and dressed like that in the 90's he would be drowning in pussy. Like holy shit I cant even be mad at how much of a fuck he was when hes stylin that hard.
>>83438952
It was likely animated within a full frame because they were aware the movie would have a longer life on VHS and TV than in the theater, but it was probably shot and framed with the intention of being matted to widescreen for its original theatrical release. I think either way is valid and you could make a case for either one being the intended version.
No love for mermaid Jeanette?
>>83443291
I don't remember her being a mermaid.
>>83440460
Penis yes pls
>>83443324
It was one of the movie parody episodes. Even Eleanor got in on the mermaid gig.Spoilered for no top
http://www.ospreygraphix.com/html/Screens/Chipmunks/Sploosh/sc-chipmunks-sploosh.html
>>83439062
Not surprising. Transformers the Movie had a similar thing: animated in full screen, but theatricially shown in wide. Which really amounted to covering up the top and bottom a little. BluRay release is as it was seen in theatres, but not full screen.
I saw my brother watching this show and have to wonder how the fuck it was made?
>>83443802
She looks tanned.
>>83444813
Correction: Pretty much every single film made in the 80's and 90's would be shot in full frame and later cropped for the theatrical release, widescreen 2:35:1 films don't apply, same for 16:9 films that actually fill the entire screen, because something I noticed in most of these cropped films is that there are thin black bars on the top and bottom
>>83444931
That's because standard theatrical widescreen is 1.85:1, which is slightly wider than 1.78:1, aka 16:9
>>83444931
Most Renaissance-era Disney movies were made in the compromise ratio of 1.66:1, things were animated to fill the frame but with a 4:3 safe area in mind, they were slightly cropped for VHS and have since been shown with pillarboxing
on DVD and Blu-ray
Speaking of widescreen, was Bug's Life originally presented in 2:35:1 or I just downloaded a shitty rip of the film that crops it for no reason?
In the case of the Chipmunk Adventure, it's unlikely there's a microphone above their heads the director didn't want you to see.
>>83445163
According to Disney, 2.35:1
http://movies.disney.com/a-bugs-life
Could be revisionist history though, you never know unless you actually research physical theatrical copies.
>>83440897
All aboard the good ship loli pop.
>>83438952
>literally me
It's like the Chipettes said, "Papa don't preach. I wanna keep my baby.".
>>83445189
Unlikely, but still possible.
>>83445577
From what I've heard and seen, they had a lot of fun working on that show.
>>83436612
So did they only exist as an outlet for the artist's pedo tendencies?
>>83445743
The Chippettes were created so that there could be Chipmunk covers of women singing. They just ended up being better than the original because they had to give them more personality.
>>83445743
Dunno if you're aware but Chipmunks is about a grown man who "finds" three boys and becomes their "manager".
>>83445806
Also as an outlet for the artist's pedo tendencies.
>>83435740
forget the girls, thread needs more Alvin
>>83445743
and Janice Karman's girl power thing (feminist?)
>>83445852
>>83445832
The artists who designed the Chippettes had little to do with the movie, or so I've been led to believe. Selville's son, who at the time outright owned the Chipmunks, used the money he made from the then-ending television show to begin the production of the film. I don't think a lot, if any, people from the show actually were part of it.
Also, the Chippette's weren't the original direction either; it was an Older Chipmunk Girl, with a similar design to Brittany's but more 'Rock Star'. Blanking on her name right now though, not much came of her after her debut.
>>83445895
>>83436612
>dat loli chipmunk belly
M A R I J U A N A
>>83437678
all those panty shots
>>83446953
They either cared too little about exposing the character panties or they cared too much, I can't tell which.
>>83445824
I thought Dave was just some dude who got bored one day and fucked a chipmunk
>>83445852
>>83445895
>>83446079
>Suddenly
WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW
>>83443291
>>83449358
a cute-meganekko-little mermaid with seashell bra...all in a single pic
>>83449358
>>83449431
Can't tell if DFC
>>83436612
I need to stop going into these threads because I know I'm just going to leave with a boner full of guilt.
what's the deal with the cute tubby one
>>83449776
>>83449952
She's fat.
>>83450872
naa, she is an adorable little chubby.
>>83450872
you mean
THICK
>>83451446
I'm reluctant to draw porn of her because I know it'll end up something crazy I might regret eventually.
>>83437678
What childrens movie needs this many fucking panty shots god damn
>>83435965
Dang it anon.
I must know what the page says.
I need to know if I shiggy diggy
>>83454019
If I had to guess:
Be like the Chipmunks - if you have a choice, take a shower with friends.
>>83454351as nice as that would actually be sometimes there's also some shiggy diggy there
i was guessing more along the lines of "shower instead of bath"
Someone produce the source material
>>83449431
Where did you get this from? It looks like it was run through that kawaii site, but I'd like to know incase I can use it to retake that episode and future ones.
Fun fact: Brittany has called herself a "floozy" in her own dream
