Why is this style not used more?
Why is this not popular at all?
Why is there only 2 movies that use them?
expensive
tedious
style over substance
>>68832146
It's called rotoscoping and it is used, just not for movies. The 2 movies that you are probably thinking of are the same director and it's actually been used in much more than 2 movies.
>Why is this not popular at all?
Why should it be?
Because there's no reason for it. It's a gimmick.
It´s a really expensive thing and it requires a lot of work.
Keanu reeves beat up linklater several times because it was such a slow process.
>>68832213
it's not expensive, can shoot a movie with a cellphone. combining special effects of CGI with indie level funding.
Not as tedious since it works will splicing and key frames. It's simple.
The movies it's famous for are usually really deep movies that disregard the style entirely.
>>68832261
This, but I think it worked really well for this movie.
>>68832261
I watched A Scanner Darkly today and I think it actually enhanced the movie a lot. Really fit well with the paranoid feel.
>>68832261
Rotoscoping is what made the golden age of disney... we use motion capturing now in movies for the same reason.
Well it's pretty odd. I can't imagine anyone really wanting to use it in the first place. Secondly it's tons of fucking work. Animation studios just want to do animation. Not color in people movies
>>68832146
That movie was such shit.
I mean, if there was a good movie that used it, I might be asked to care.
I think it has been used in a bunch of older animated features, like the Lord of the Ring movies, just not to the extent that Scanner Darkly did.
>>68832352
By why the hell is that it. What makes them so specially. It's really weird how OLD Scanner Darkly is....
Have you've seen Waking Life?
I think rotoscoping has more of a purpose in that one
>>68832362
you haven't seen Ralph Bakshi's "Lord of the Rings", have you?
lucky.
>>68832146
>>68832146
Its VERY labor intensive and kind of pointless the way they used it in A Scanner Darkly IMO. It just looked like a filter they put over live action footage. I like the movie quite a bit but it wasn't used very well. It's only really meant to be used to get realistic movements in animation.
>>68832327
I´m sure linklater saved a lot of money by shooting a scanner darkly on his cellphone
>>68832371
It's motion capture mixed with realistic animation. rotoscoping is what makes alice in wonderland look amazing. that's why people want to use it. It's not a lot of work, it's mostly just key frames and then the program can motion track it.
You and me can do it, it's paint by numbers.
disney used this technique for a long time in their golden age, until they switched over to cgi.
>>68832146
because it's gimmicky and stupid, like putting a photoshop filter on an entire film.
it also completely fails to take advantage of all the creative license animation allots as a medium. With animation you can get away with exaggerated movements and you can warp and bend perspectives and do some really crazy surrealist shit, but with rotoscoping you just trace reality.
>>68832421
don't even man, just because film makers made She's All That doesn't mean that all movies are shit.
>>68832495
you know everything you can do with CGI you can do with rotoscope.
I am surprised there are so many professionals here.
>>68832146
Tom goes to the mayor ripoff
>>68832327
>Not as tedious since it works will splicing and key frames. It's simple.
oh yeah, that's why it took more than 2 years to release scanner darkly I guess!
>Principal photography began on 17 May 2004
>official release: 28 July 2006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Scanner_Darkly_%28film%29#Post-production_problems
>>68832146
Probably because it looks like garbage. Reminds me of that hack Ralph Bakshi's movies.
>>68832728
What? Tom Goes to the Mayor is just slideshow photos with a mimeograph filter dropped on actors.
>>68832327
>>68832482
Oh boy. Rotoscoping is very time consuming. That's a fact. It's an incredible amount of painstaking work. Even in today's age of VFX, rotoscoping is used to a certain extent with mattes/keying, and you don't ever hear people say how much fun it is, on the contrary it's outright loathsome!
Scanner Darkley and Waking Life are animated off live action footage, rotoscoped. There is no "motion capturing" in the video game sense of the term.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eke5VnpNcNk
Disney did a lot of rotoscoping early on but abandoned it in favor of "live-action references". Ever notice that the animation for Snow White differs greatly to that of the dwarfs? It's because it was rotoscoped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWwO-h7ZSlw&feature=youtu.be
Some guy in /m/ or /tg/ made this movie using 3D models then rotoscoping over them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_CP4SuoTU
There's some amateur flaws, but the style is solid. Imagine clone wars series being done in this style.
>>68833064
(You)
>>68833510
I BET IT WAS REALLY EXPENSIVE AND TOOK A LONG TIME TO DO THIS GIMMICK
>>68832146
Looks like shit you dumbass and is best left alone for just 2 fuckin movies.
>>68833609
Such anger...
>>68832327
>deep
Jesus fuck
>>68833510
That is amazing
>>68832390
Waking Life is just one of the absolutely just fucking bullshit things I've ever seen. It's fucking embarrassing.
>>68833636
discussion on the subsconioness of dreams and one of the best recreations of philip k dick story. there's been a lot them, paycheck, minority report, total recall, blade runner, and all of them are shallow as fuck style over content.
>>68833649
>>68833569
Here's how he made it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0taAlZ_MxA
>>68833760
So what happened?
No one knows and it speculating that making computer splines of shitty homevideo quality captures is more expensive and tkes longer then any computer cgi movie done to date.
Rotoscoping by hand may take long... but we don't do that anymore.
>>68833760
>>68832390
It is a movie about philosophy. the visual medium doesn't really mean too much.
>>68833784
Philip K Dick was a fucking terrible writer, man. The best way to adapt his stories is to take the broad idea and adapt it in an interesting way.
>>68833807
OMFG, and look at how fucking amazing it turned out.
I take it back, maybe this is how a lot of anime is actually done. :/ but why isn't it in the west more. it's not like people don't enjoy CGI movies or Comic Book style
>>68832995
dude they had a software program that did the whole thing automatically. it's just basically photoshop filters done in batch to all the frames.
Movie sucked
The style was terrible to look it. It worked for the identity concealing suits: but otherwise just horrible.
>>68833839
May seem cliched and dated now only because his style is used much.
>>68833898
You really need to read his writing. People like this are hilarious. He was bad. Like, LIT 101 bad. Good ideas, though.
>>68833869
In the west we get shit like southpark, family guy, and the simpsons. Top billed shit with as little work put into them as humanly possible. People get to see that shit all the time. Then when they watch actual movies, the step up isn't much at all.
>>68832495
>it also completely fails to take advantage of all the creative license animation allots as a medium
What about that weird suit/mask thing where it warps faces
>>68833949
>weeb post
>>68832995
yet at only the 10th of the cost of a blockbuster movie. Think of what money could be made for anyone else doing that with real IP.
>>68832455
Basically this
In contrast, Waltz with Bashir used live action footage for reference and then added a lot in animation on top of that
It's pretty pointless if you're just going to use animation to just trace over every scene as it is in real life
>>68833898
>>68833938
>>68833839
Yeah, I tried several times to get through even 1 book, hell even an audio book and couldn't make it.
>>68832995
>2 Years to make a movie is a long time guise.
>>68833938
What was bad about it? Genuinely asking since I haven't read much of his work. I'm not too into literature, despite having stupidly studied it at university, but I enjoyed Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch when I was a young teenager. I think most of his work are just enjoyable entry level easy to read short novels that would appeal to teenagers the most.
>>68832146
There's no reason for it. And the stories you can tell with it usually have to be out there to match that style of kind of real kind of a cartoon.
It's actually cheaper to just get the actual actors in a room. Even if you need some CG for a scene.
Also I think it turns away some of the general pop who figure its a cartoonish story.
>>68833990
Try Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. It's interesting because it 1968, and yet the premise of his stories is something that you'd see in hollywood now.
so really, i don't find it weird when people can talk shit about lord of the rings because orcs and elves and shit seem so fucking done, even though the writer was using something not used much before.
>>68832552
but you can't do everything 2D can.
>>68834025
There's nothing it's form the 60's pulp fiction era, and people are expecting something like Shakespeare or Tolkien, not realizing it's the M Night Shyamalan elements that made him good.
people didn't do that back then.
>>68834025
He has almost no idea how to construct a plot or pace action, and his dialogue is really dry and bland. There's a part in Blade Runner where Deckard suddenly realizes he's in a replicant copy of police headquarters rather than the actual headquarters. And then he escapes in a few sentences.
He was really awful. I kind of like the concept of Mercerism from Blade Runner though, I wish that had worked its way into the movie somehow.
>>68832995
So basically the reason it took so long was because they hired a few local idiots instead of a large, experienced animation team.
>it takes too long
This is one of those thigns where the person saying this is projecting a great deal because they personally wouldn't want to sit there and animate something "frame-by-frame!"
>>68834084
LOTR is better written and paced than Blade Runner though, despite being a book about camping.
>>68834103
There is SOO MUCH that can still be explored that isn't being done. We finally have CGI that looks life like, and people would rather just plug that more. Why do 2D when you can have 3.5D!!!!!
>>68834145
>I want people to do a bunch of work for something with limited appeal
You don't understand anything, nigger
>>68834145
Yet, you can have multiple artist do the same film and come up with like 5 different films from the same project. The reason Scnaner Darkly took so long is they were trying to keep the budget under 10 Million. compared to BvS 250Million that's probably the reason it took so fucking long.
>>68834163
I fucking hate the Hobbit. Lord of the Rings was even worse paced in the start of the book, and the end of it. But well done between, which is to say IS A LOT.
>>68834200
Limited appeal because it's only ever been used limitedly. It's never been used for anything appealing since the old disney movies, and some anime.
What does /tv/ think of Waltz with Bashir?
>>68834202
> He wanted to keep the budget under $10 million so that he could have more creative control, remain faithful to the book, and make it an animated film.[5]
Evidently pouring lots of money into a project makes it start to lose its artistic merit.
>>68833358
About 400 man hours to do ONE minute of film! Holy shit... I would literally cry every damn day
>>68834303
looks like Archer...
>>68832146
because it was only ever one studio
>>68834303
really great film, better visual quality than ASD or waking life
probably the better film overall as well
I'm biased as a jew, though
>>68833938
no idea what you're talking about A scanner Darkly is an awesome book, maybe not as a sci-fi story but as a novel about drug abuse its really, really good and very true to life
>>68834403
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoshop
yeah Rotoshop is a proprietary graphics editing program created by Bob Sabiston. So maybe it's a copyright thing. But seriously, I miss this.
>>68832146
Because it's time consuming and ugly, so there's no point.
>>68832362
No, rotoscoping is what Disney used when they wanted to cut corners. Their good animation was all hand-done.
There's a reason the dwarves look 100x better than Snow White.
>>68834303
loved it. ending made me cry
>>68832146
Remember when that insurance company Charles Schwab did a bunch of ads in this style?
>>68833949
If only disgusting western pig shit looked as glorious as my nipponese cartoons.
>>68834535
same company
>>68834535
>>68834548
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN2WEwHRYKM
>>68833869
>maybe this is how a lot of anime is actually done
Literally no anime studio does this.
The one rotoscoped show that they did release, Aku no Hana was a fucking flop.
And for good reason, it looked like ASS.
>>68834596
Rotoscoping for poses is used quite a bit, but they never rotoscope the faces.
>>68834642
I figure, if just for reference.
![Pinocchio (1940) 1080p.Molpol.mkv_snapshot_00.17.34_[2015.07.09_22.08.09].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2ej8Vjd.jpg "Pinocchio (1940) 1080p.Molpol.mkv_snapshot_00.17.34_[2015.07.09_22.08.09].jpg")
Roto looked weird in films like Pinnochio were only the fairy had a strange natural level of detail and everyone else was simplified...
>>68834577
I feel like he was on drugs. Just saying. But, too bad this never took off.
>>68834013
Scanner darkly's post production took as long as any star wars movie in post prod. So yeah it was pretty fucking long for a movie of this scope.
>>68833510
This guy's animation is fucking terrible, but he puts so much work into the shading that it looks cool
>>68834303
Came here to post it. Good movie 2bh
>>68834792
At this time, Rotoshop is not available outside of the company, and currently there aren’t any plans to market it. The software was developed in order for us to make animated films, and currently that is still the plan.
Is how it was done with a budge of 10 Million.
The company isn't letting anyone use it.
answered my own question
/thread
>>68832146
Because it looks retarded
Because it's really fucking jarring and there's absolutely no point to it other than "look what we've done, aren't we fucking clever?"
>>68832146
The only thing I remember that was rotoscoped was Delta State
>>68832146
any other films that use this style will just be seen at copy cats
waking life isn't even fucking rotoscoped. looks like shit
>>68833839
>>68833990
>>68833938
>>68834123
Why do people always judge Dick on his shittiest works? I've never met a single person who can say VALIS was poorly written. That shit would be insanely hard to write.
>>68834596
Rotoscoping is used all the time in anime
Gundam Unicorn was basically nonstop rotoscoping and it ruined what could have been a great animation in my opinion
>>68836065
Three Stigmata is pretty great as well.
>>68835982
There was a whole series of commercials done like this for some investment firm I can't remember the name of.
>>68835027
Lmao
>>68836065
Dick being a "bad writer" is literally a meme by people who maybe read a couple of his books and no other science fiction
>>68836816
This. Popular meme in Reddit. Of course, no one actually knows what bad writing looks like because no one fucking reads books. Everyone is speechless if you ask them what's wrong with it.
I've read some of his works and it would be stupid to say that it was better or worse than any other popular sci fi writer. If you're reading fantasy books for the "writing" you need to reconsider your life choices.
>>68833949
GIRUGAMESH!
>>68836065
VALIS is my favorite book
I love you anon
