Support NeoGAF

[Verger]

Sorta inspired by this thread of the cancelled Jurassic Park cartoon, but also this thread about Anime, and this one about Cartoons.

But you all know. The once great "Saturday Morning Cartoons" have been long gone (really sad, those were something to look forward to each week) and I have no clue if there's any daytime cartoons anymore.

And of course, there's the fact that there is pretty much no Animation work done in the West, or in the USA in particular. Granted looking back at Cartoons and you realize that almost all of them were animated in Korea anyway. But it shows because who is going to want to become an "Animator" of 2D when there are no jobs available in the country.

For me it is most depressing when I go back to the old Disney animated classics. For the past 10 years there have only been 2 films from that studio using traditional animation (Princess and Frog and Winnie the Pooh) and the rest is all 3D/CG stuff. I know everyone now is in love with the 3D/CG craze, but I guess I'll be the old man yelling at the clouds and say aside from precious few films I find the majority of it drivel and too artificial.

I mean, of course nothing will ever top Disney's output in the 90's when they were banging out classics year after year with such quality it really is amazing:

1989 - Little Mermaid
1990 - Rescuers Down Under
1991 - Beauty and the Beast
1992 - Aladin
1994 - The Lion King
1995 - Pocohantes
1996 - The Hunchback of Notre Dame
1997 - Hercules
1998 - Mulan
1999 - Tarzan

But still, I have to say, it is sad that there is no real opportunity to foster talent in this art here in the States is very sad. I mean, of course I know people will point out Anime, but to be frank, even that is struggling now with Japan's economic woes continuing and most of the work being outsourced to Korea (and Japan also treats their animators like shit, or works them to death).

I have to wonder with all the focus on 3D, will 2D ever resurface? Or is it simply too expensive to ever be a profitable venture?

 

[AniHawk]

it's on cable television now and it's been pretty great.

 

[Sou Da]

They've cut down costs and changed tastes, so no you probably won't see too many high profile traditionally animated american stuff coming.

There's smaller traditionally animated american stuff still happening for tv though.

 

[Seesaw15]

2D Animation is alive and well on TV. And CG isn't a craze. Its here to stay.

 

[Pegosaurus]

It's a shame. My long term goal is to become an animator, and even though I like 2D and 3D, I would prefer to be a 2D animator.

If I ever come across a good amount of money it would be amazing to open a studio that focuses on 2D animation.

They're getting better at making 3D animation look like 2D though, so hopefully that will be perfected over the years and it will be a viable option.

edit: as others have said it is still doing relatively well on TV

 

[Trey]

America is really going to let the legend of Korra be the last high profile 2d animation release.

On a more serious note it's a shame how the format is dying. I can honestly say I much prefer 2d animation to 3d. Both have their place, but the color and composition of 2d animation will always hit my heart harder.

 

[Verger]

I mean, all the most "Modern" animated stuff I've seen lately just looks so...I dunno how to describe it. It just looks "cheap". I mean, I've often derogatorily referred to stuff like the "Comedy" cartoons as Flash animated trash, but I just do not see much "quality".

And yeah, I know quality animation is super expensive and work intensive, which is why even Japanese Anime suffers as of late (and again, mostly Koreans).

But I worry that actual "talent-wise" there aren't very many good animators left in the 2D scene. I'm talking about those who can draw at such a level of quality and proficiency of speed to make cels in such short order. It's a rare gift that few possess and I fear fewer and fewer will ever get such a level with so many now moving towards 3D Animation and computer-generated/assisted animation techniques.

 

[Pegosaurus]

America is really going to let the legend of Korra be the last high profile 2d animation release.

On a more serious note it's a shame how the format is dying. I can honestly say I much prefer 2d animation to 3d. Both have their place, but the color and composition of 2d animation will always hit my heart harder.

not if I have anything to say about it

also a lot of Korra's animation was outsourced to Korea iirc

 

[Brianimaniac]

it's on cable television now and it's been pretty great.

2D Animation is alive and well on TV.

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and are also animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

 

[Sou Da]

not if I have anything to say about it

also a lot of Korra's animation was outsourced to Korea iirc

Korea and Japan.

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and that are animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

Most assuredly the stuff they're talking about is outsourced to Korea anyways.

 

[Verger]

America is really going to let the legend of Korra be the last high profile 2d animation release.

On a more serious note it's a shame how the format is dying. I can honestly say I much prefer 2d animation to 3d. Both have their place, but the color and composition of 2d animation will always hit my heart harder.

Yep, maybe it is just me being an old man, but I swear I find the Disney classics possess such far far greater levels of both expressiveness and "charm" than almost anything output in 3D these days.

Even How to Train Your Dragon, which I feel is one of the best "3D/CG" cartoons I've seen, still just doesn't capture the "magic" I feel when I go back and watch Tarzan or Lion King. There's just something about them that feels more, I dunno, special.

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and are also animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

Exactly.

And as for cartoons. Come on, there's nothing that has touched stuff like Batman or Gargoyles in recent memory (I suppose everyone says Avatar/Korra was special though I never saw those), and I certainly haven't been convinced otherwise. And yeah, I also know those shows were animated in Korea/Japan. But I also know they had key animators here in the US supervising them so the quality would be great.

I cannot help but wonder of the level of "supervision" going on nowadays in the US, if there actually is any...

 

[DocSeuss]

Okay, so, what... what is stephen universe, or bob's burgers, or all that? Is that not traditional 2D animation? Like, I'm pretty sure Frederator is based in the US too.

 

[Trey]

not if I have anything to say about it

also a lot of Korra's animation was outsourced to Korea iirc

Mir did a lot of (great) work but somehow it still counts as western animation.

Nevertheless, I support your efforts.

 

[SalvaPot]

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and that are animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

To be fair, that level of animation is exactly what separates Disney of the others, how many other companies can you claim had made an animation feature with financial success? Not that many. And we are talking about Disney a company that did recycle some of its animation for a few of their films, why? Because making animation is expensive and time consuming.

 

[AniHawk]

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and are also animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

seeing how saturday morning cartoons and disney animated films were mentioned as part of the same thing, i don't think that was the point.

 

[Sou Da]

Okay, so, what... what is stephen universe, or bob's burgers, or all that? Is that not traditional 2D animation?

He specifically said 'In the West particularly'. SU is korean animated. BB is done in America but it's pretty stilted animation done in Toonboom I think.

 

[AniHawk]

i don't think production work has been done in the us on a wide scale in a really long time. like, since maybe the 80s and even further back. the people who do work at nickelodeon animation studios for instance are largely doing pre-production work like storyboarding, or post-production work.

 

[Verger]

i don't think production work has been done in the us on a wide scale in a really long time. like, since maybe the 80s and even further back. the people who do work at nickelodeon animation studios for instance are largely doing pre-production work like storyboarding, or post-production work.

Further back. Since the 60's they started putting great emphasis on outsourcing to Korea and Japan (mostly Korea).

Though again, I would argue that back then, they still had good quality traditional animators supervising and drawing out all the key frames and keeping an eye on what they were producing. And I have to really wonder if there are such quality people left in those roles, or even if those roles exist to begin with?

 

[Nachos]

I mean, all the most "Modern" animated stuff I've seen lately just looks so...I dunno how to describe it. It just looks "cheap". I mean, I've often derogatorily referred to stuff like the "Comedy" cartoons as Flash animated trash, but I just do not see much "quality".

That's because the vast majority of western animation is produced in Flash or Toon Boom, with shows like Family Guy using the latter to take the laziest and most cost-effective animation path possible. That's not inherently damning, though, because cartoons like Motorcity show you can still do a lot with the software, but there's a reason why a lot of the shows that do try more consistently are often cancelled or plagued by production delays. They just aren't economical.

 

[Verger]

That's because the vast majority of western animation is produced in Flash or Toon Boom, with shows like Family Guy using the latter to take the laziest and most cost-effective animation path possible. That's not inherently damning, though, because cartoons like Motorcity show you can still do a lot with the software, but there's a reason why a lot of the shows that do try more consistently are often cancelled or plagued by production delays. They just aren't economical.

Has Animation ever been economical? I mean, clearly it seemed like Warner Bros and Disney built empires on it, so they must have managed somehow. How did they handle the costs back then? Or did they go up?

I mean, traditional animation as a skillset is simple enough, you draw and draw, no software to learn and no tools aside from your pencils and it hasn't changed since the 20's/30's in that regard. I guess standards of living went up and salary's did too? But then again animators often lament they were never paid for the amount of work they put in (and well, that is especially true in Japan who again pays their animators utter shit)

 

[Sou Da]

That's because the vast majority of western animation is produced in Flash or Toon Boom, with shows like Family Guy using the latter to take the laziest and most cost-effective animation path possible. That's not inherently damning, though, because cartoons like Motorcity show you can still do a lot with the software, but there's a reason why a lot of the shows that do try more consistently are often cancelled or plagued by production delays. They just aren't economical.

Disney does some good work with Toon Boom with the new Mickey Mouse shorts.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

He specifically said 'In the West particularly'. SU is korean animated. BB is done in America but it's pretty stilted animation done in Toonboom I think.

Some Japanese anime are also outsourced to Korea as well, don't really see what it changes. It's voice casted, storyboarded, and prototyped in America so I would suspect it's still American.

 

[Sou Da]

Some Japanese anime are also outsourced to Korea as well, don't really see what it changes. It's voice casted, storyboarded, and prototyped in America so I would suspect it's still American.

I would still count it as American yeah, but the OP had specifications.

 

[SigmasonicX]

Well, at what point do you stop considering something "traditional 2D animation"? When they stop using pen and paper? But any modern process that used pen and paper would surely scan the paper into a computer for editing anyway. Is it not traditional animation if everything is drawn on a tablet? The difference in mediums is really more down to the preference of the artist than anything you'd be able to actually see. Plus, when used well, even Flash can result in some impressive animation (see parts of MLP / Motorcity), let alone computer programs specifically meant for animation like Toon Boom (see Wander Over Yonder / new Mickey Mouse shorts).

Has Animation ever been economical? I mean, clearly it seemed like Warner Bros and Disney built empires on it, so they must have managed somehow. How did they handle the costs back then? Or did they go up?

I mean, traditional animation as a skillset is simple enough, you draw and draw, no software to learn and no tools aside from your pencils and it hasn't changed since the 20's/30's in that regard. I guess standards of living went up and salary's did too? But then again animators often lament they were never paid for the amount of work they put in (and well, that is especially true in Japan who again pays their animators utter shit)

If you watch "Waking Sleeping Beauty", then for a very long time, Disney just made animated features out of obligation; they were losing money on each feature, and were getting profits from the parks and live action films. Even Walt himself lost a lot of his interest in animation in his later years.

As for the skill sets needed for traditional animation, computer programs make the process much easier; you can more easily correct mistakes, you can keep things on separate layers, you can store things more easily, you can have the programs approximate in-betweens (which you can then manually fix), etc.

 

[Verger]

I guess traditional 2D Animation for me is cel-animation. Basically drawing out all the frames on actual canvas, and not digitally. At least the majority of the work involved.

 

[Verger]

If you watch "Waking Sleeping Beauty", then for a very long time, Disney just made animated features out of obligation; they were losing money on each feature, and were getting profits from the parks and live action films. Even Walt himself lost a lot of his interest in animation in his later years.

As for the skill sets needed for traditional animation, computer programs make the process much easier; you can more easily correct mistakes, you can keep things on separate layers, you can store things more easily, you can have the programs approximate in-betweens (which you can then manually fix), etc.

Thanks for the info. I definitely wondered about that because I remember hearing that Sleeping Beauty was an incredibly expensive film to make, and it shows because you can see the quality of how much detail and fluidity they put into each frame.

I guess we're in a era when "traditional hand drawn" animation just isn't a thing anymore. I mean, I would venture a guess that the average viewer now probably may actually prefer 3D animation and CG to the old stuff, and may even view the old 2D stuff as "cheaper looking" (makes me sad saying that).

I guess I can only hope that at some point in the future it will "be back in style" again. Though I also wonder if there's any way animation could possibly return to being done mostly in the US again.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

It's not great or alive and well if you're actually talking about the quality of animation and not just "yes, there are things on TV that are good and are also animated". TV animation is super limited and cheap. The quality of the animation in a Disney feature is on such a different level it's not even part of the same conversation.

Goodness...
The absence of big-budget Disney-style traditional animation (which TV can't even support in it's current form) doesn't really determine the state of the technique, and to think so is incredibly myopic and naive.
Traditional animation is much more than what you see in The Lion King or Aladdin; it's a flexible technique, and there are plenty of incredibly appealing and believable ways to move a character or object despite the number of pages and budget you've got.
Honestly many modern 2D TV series feature very well-crafted movement/character acting considering what the western storyboard artist and the eastern animators have to deal with from a money perspective.

Edit: Also, there are plenty of Disney-loving professional animators out there who'd argue that some of Disney's most revered 2D work is over-animated (which I'd honestly agree with despite my immense appreciation of highly skilled renaissance-era veterans like Glen Keane or Andreas Deja)
Heck, many would argue that many of the "12 principles" are unique to Disney's style and aren't necessary for creating appealing and believable movement/acting.

 

[Shaanyboi]

I guess traditional 2D Animation for me is cel-animation. Basically drawing out all the frames on actual canvas, and not digitally. At least the majority of the work involved.

That is both forcefully limiting and incredibly expensive.

 

[Regulus Tera]

Theatrical is. Television refuses to die, but I give it another six years.

not if I have anything to say about it

also a lot of Korra's animation was outsourced to Korea iirc

Outsourcing animation to Korea has been going since the turn of the millennium, so I don't see why Korra gets the distinction here.

 

[Jorok Goldblade]

I mean, all the most "Modern" animated stuff I've seen lately just looks so...I dunno how to describe it. It just looks "cheap". I mean, I've often derogatorily referred to stuff like the "Comedy" cartoons as Flash animated trash, but I just do not see much "quality".

And yeah, I know quality animation is super expensive and work intensive, which is why even Japanese Anime suffers as of late (and again, mostly Koreans).

But I worry that actual "talent-wise" there aren't very many good animators left in the 2D scene. I'm talking about those who can draw at such a level of quality and proficiency of speed to make cels in such short order. It's a rare gift that few possess and I fear fewer and fewer will ever get such a level with so many now moving towards 3D Animation and computer-generated/assisted animation techniques.

There are a lot of tricks used to keep budgets down, and these tend to form the look of TV animation.

The tricks for "Limited Animation" are laid out pretty well here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWo5aUzJ4_c

Animation also tends to fluctuate framerate based on the needs of the scene or the budget:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_MDprx3tOU


Feature animation with a high budget tends to keep things on twos with fast action on ones, but TV often stays in the twos and threes range to keep budgets down. The "Flash" look isn't anything new- it all dates back to Hana-Barbara. It's just the realities of working on a TV budget.

 

[Regulus Tera]

I assume that when people talk about a cartoon looking like Flash animation, they are talking about how colours are uniform throughout a character's shape and not necessarily whether the animation is limited or fluid. Inked cels in the past gave the colours in a frame a certain texture that most digital animation hasn't bothered to replicate for the most part.

 

[Ratrat]

Bill Plympton!

 

[unholyrevenger72]

Here's what you do. You take a computer animate everything in a digital environment. Then use the computer to print out the cells for the hand drawn look.

 

[ugly]

Goodness...
The absence of big-budget Disney-style traditional animation (which TV can't even support in it's current form) doesn't really determine the state of the technique, and to think so is incredibly myopic and naive.
Traditional animation is much more than what you see in The Lion King or Aladdin; it's a flexible technique, and there are plenty of incredibly appealing and believable ways to move a character or object despite the number of pages and budget you've got.
Honestly many modern 2D TV series feature very well-crafted movement/character acting considering what the western storyboard artist and the eastern animators have to deal with from a money perspective.

Edit: Also, there are plenty of Disney-loving professional animators out there who'd argue that some of Disney's most revered 2D work is over-animated (which I'd honestly agree with despite my immense appreciation of highly skilled renaissance-era veterans like Glen Keane or Andreas Deja)
Heck, many would argue that many of the "12 principles" are unique to Disney's style and aren't necessary for creating appealing and believable movement/acting.

There is a difference, though. Disney animation is absolutely incredible - and that is a product of money. The kind of budget that informed Disney's golden era is simply not realistically going to be achieved as consistently as it was. There are are smatterings of great 2d film here and there, but the popularity has died too, or at least the market is deemed not worth investing in for companies, so a lot of those films don't reach a wide audience. Persepolis or The Illusionist look great for instance, but they're hardly house-hold names.

I don't think it's naive to be upset about the lack of high-budget Disney-esque releases. Perhaps a lot of modern TV is moving characters believably - but there is still a divide and clearly it's large enough for people to be commenting on or else we wouldn't have this thread. Traditional animation (in particular, pen & paper animation) has a definite beautiful and intoxicating nature which is simply not able to be reproduced digitally, and I say that as an accomplished flash animator. It's organic - it's literally straight from the human mind to paper. It's a wonderful thing and I think the dedication, sweat, effort and love required to deal with that medium translates and manifests as an innately beautiful thing. I really don't think digital 2d mediums of any kind are comparable.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

I don't think it's naive to be upset about the lack of high-budget Disney-esque releases.

Neither do I.
I said that I think it's myopic and naive to determine the state of the technique by the absence of big-budget "Disney School of Acting and Mime" style movement.
I'm not saying that the exaggerated stylized abstract graphic nature of traditional 2D animation paired with a crazy generous budget isn't uniquely appealing (it absolutely is), and I'm not saying it's naive to be upset about it's non-existent role in large scale modern film productions. (As an animator/animation student/animation buff I'd absolutely love to see more traditional or tradigital high-budget animated films out in the wild.)
Again, I'm only taking issue with the idea that the absence of that very specific unique-to-film (at this point in time) style determines how well the quality of 2D animation is doing as a whole.

 

[Seesaw15]

Traditional animation (in particular, pen & paper animation) has a definite beautiful and intoxicating nature which is simply not able to be reproduced digitally, and I say that as an accomplished flash animator. It's organic - it's literally straight from the human mind to paper. It's a wonderful thing and I think the dedication, sweat, effort and love required to deal with that medium translates and manifests as an innately beautiful thing. I really don't think digital 2d mediums of any kind are comparable.

What is your definition of 2d digital mediums because almost all of the films in OP's list are 2d/cg animation hybrids. I enjoy pencil and paper animation but this fetishistic reverence for the medium is crazy.

 

[ugly]

Neither do I.
I said that I think it's myopic and naive to determine the state of the technique by the absence of big-budget "Disney School of Acting and Mime" style movement.
I'm not saying that the exaggerated stylized abstract graphic nature of traditional 2D animation paired with a crazy generous budget isn't uniquely appealing (it absolutely is), and I'm not saying it's naive to be upset about it's non-existent role in large scale modern film productions. (As an animator/animation student/animation buff I'd absolutely love to see more traditional or tradigital high-budget animated films out in the wild.)
Again, I'm only taking issue with the idea that the absence of that very specific unique-to-film style determines how well the quality of 2D animation is doing as a whole.

Sure, I take your point. Only, I don't know how many people are going to be thinking about it from that angle, ie, the general health of the wider 2d animation spectrum, and I guess those decrying the state of modern 2d animation at large are using these high-budget films as a reference. It's hard not to, of course. They are incredibly influential and I think it's fair to look at them as a benchmark of sorts. Hand-drawn Traditional and Low-budget Digital shows (like toon-boomy cartoons) are entirely different beasts, and for the average Disney-loving consumer they are leagues apart, I'd say. Certainly for me if I'm looking at something like Archer or The Amazing World of Gumball - it's not what immediately comes to mind when somebody says 2d animation. Sure the health of 2d is alive and well, but it's almost like, if it has to live on in this compromising way, it's just a bit sad, you know? Unless there is more widely-known 2d stuff that IS more well known - I'd love to see it if it is around! (I'm not trying to challenge you, just being honest)

What is your definition of 2d digital mediums because almost all of the films in OP's list are 2d/cg animation hybrids. I enjoy pencil and paper animation but this fetishistic reverence for the medium is crazy.

Hey, it's sexy. There's a flair to it that can't be captured with digital techniques - I suppose it's similar to the vinyl vs mp3 debate or whatever. I love a great deal of digital 2d films as well. Perhaps I got a little over-empassioned there Call it for argument's sake.

I create digital 2d animation because it's convenient and easy. If there were traditional studios in my country I'd be there in an instant, no lie. "As we expect more of technology, do we expect less of ourselves?"

 

[Sidewinder]

Europe has some pretty damn good 2D movies, maybe not high end productions like the good ole Disney movies, but very enjoyable ones for sure:

- The Secret of Kells http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0485601/?ref_=nm_knf_i1
- Song of the Sea http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1865505/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
- The Illusionist http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0775489/?ref_=nm_knf_i3
- Michel Ocelots movies like Kirikou and Azur & Azmar http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0643664/?ref_=tt_ov_dr (kinda special style, guess not everybody likes it.)

 

[wsippel]

Traditional 2D animation is still very much alive, particularly in Europe, but is also very expensive, so it's almost exclusively used for ads, music videos and shorts.

 

[Herne]

One studio to look out for is Cartoon Saloon, who have been doing some very beautiful work. Take a look -

Secret of Kells

Song of the Sea

Their next film is being produced by Angelina Jolie, and is a step away from their previous two films which were based on Irish mythology -

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

not if I have anything to say about it

also a lot of Korra's animation was outsourced to Korea iirc

As was pretty much every cartoon in the past 30 years. Even Rugrats was outsourced overseas.

 

[Piers]

Independent films still thrive on 2D animation but the industry generally steers away from it in favour of budget, as you mentioned.
In job opportunities it's safe to at least have competent 3D skills as a back up.

 

[Verger]

There is a difference, though. Disney animation is absolutely incredible - and that is a product of money. The kind of budget that informed Disney's golden era is simply not realistically going to be achieved as consistently as it was. There are are smatterings of great 2d film here and there, but the popularity has died too, or at least the market is deemed not worth investing in for companies, so a lot of those films don't reach a wide audience. Persepolis or The Illusionist look great for instance, but they're hardly house-hold names.

I don't think it's naive to be upset about the lack of high-budget Disney-esque releases. Perhaps a lot of modern TV is moving characters believably - but there is still a divide and clearly it's large enough for people to be commenting on or else we wouldn't have this thread. Traditional animation (in particular, pen & paper animation) has a definite beautiful and intoxicating nature which is simply not able to be reproduced digitally, and I say that as an accomplished flash animator. It's organic - it's literally straight from the human mind to paper. It's a wonderful thing and I think the dedication, sweat, effort and love required to deal with that medium translates and manifests as an innately beautiful thing. I really don't think digital 2d mediums of any kind are comparable.

Yeah, this echoes my feelings pretty much.

One of the things I worry about, and I saw this in art school, was that there was little focus on actual traditional drawing compared to doing things with the computer. Sure there were classes devoted to it, but the vast majority of actual classes overall geared more towards the computer (learning flash or 3D animation), and the mentality and outlook of the students were definitely more towards not really caring much about traditional drawing and more about setting the keyframe/curves in Flash or Maya.

And I get it, good animation is super expensive, again it's also why Anime lately has been lacking overall, because Japan's economic crisis has cut back on the available talent that can work on those shows.

In addition, the state of TV especially is concerning because more and more people are no longer watching TV and are streaming, so the ad revenue has dried up (this has especially hit anime TV hard) and well, in the West I would venture a guess that most of the revenue to keep a cartoon going was hugely supplemented by licensing Toy Lines.

And that is the other sad fact of animation. There is a mentality, mostly prevalent in the West, that animation = kids stuff (again, Toy Line profitability could be a big factor here as well). I'm sure some will argue this has changed, but I do not agree to a great extent. And yeah, Anime isn't "for kids", but it's got its own stigmas in the West as well which is why it's niche/cultish still. I mean, Anime is targeted towards Japanese audiences first and foremost which is their prerogative of course, but a lot of their cultural mannerisms and sensibilities just aren't that appealing to the mass Western audience.

I'd love for someone to actually try and release a "not for kids" animation to mass market. As far as I can remember in my 30+ years alive, it has never happened (not counting South Park) in the west. And I don't mean something that's all violent and gory and "mature/adult" for the sake of it, but something not "family friendly" or at least not family-friendly for 13 years and below. I mean, the only Anime films that get some market releases in the West are Miyazaki's stuff, because it's Disney-esque.

 

[Divvy]

There is plenty of 2D animation being done in the west. I don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Verger]

Maybe by "the west" I should have specified the USA. Because here there's absolutely nothing good.

 

[Divvy]

I'd love for someone to actually try and release a "not for kids" animation to mass market.

Well there have been a lot of adult 2D cartoons lately. Archer, Rick and Morty, Bojack Horseman, etc... Far more than there have ever been. I agree it would be nice to see more adult 2D films though.

 

[Spinluck]

I really wish that so much of the work wasn't outsourced. I know it helps with the budget and schedule, but it's really discouraging for people wanting to become animators in this country (moving overseas might be an option). Computer animation is pretty much the only thing that most schools teach now. I remember some of the directors at Pixar (I think it was around when Brave came out) saying that some of their best animators can't even draw. That tells you need to know about the state of traditional animation. That's not to say those Pixar animators that can't draw aren't talented as fuck, animation is hard: tough business.

 

[thefro]

The situation's exponentially better right now than it was in the early/mid 80s when nearly all TV animation was crappy, Disney was a shell of itself, etc.

I really wish that so much of the work wasn't outsourced. I know it helps with the budget and schedule, but it's really discouraging for people wanting to become animators in this country (moving overseas might be an option). Computer animation is pretty much the only thing that most schools teach now. I remember some of the directors at Pixar (I think it was around when Brave came out) saying that some of their best animators can't even draw. That tells you need to know about the state of traditional animation. That's not to say those Pixar animators that can't draw aren't talented as fuck, animation is hard: tough business.

John K even outsourced with Spumco all the time.

My understanding is doing those extra frames in-between the poses, doing the coloring, etc is the easiest part of the process.

 

[Toxi]

The focus is on 3D CGI because 3D CGI does better with the kids. There is also a massive talent pool for 3D CGI animators in the US compared to traditional 2D animation.

There have been tons of great 2D shows in the past few years storyboarded, directed, etc. by American companies (Steven Universe is particularly great), but the majority of actual animation work has been outsourced for decades. Nearly every Saturday morning cartoon you watched had the animation outsourced.

My understanding is doing those extra frames in-between the poses, doing the coloring, etc is the easiest part of the process.

"Easiest"

Doing in-between frames is still hard work.

 

[Verger]

Well there have been a lot of adult 2D cartoons lately. Archer, Rick and Morty, Bojack Horseman, etc... Far more than there have ever been. I agree it would be nice to see more adult 2D films though.

Well yeah, it seems that the only "caveat" to have "adult 2D cartoons" is that they have to be Comedy or Crude/Toilet Humor shows. But I guess it's part of the model that works for budgetary animation and cheap talent.

I really wish that so much of the work wasn't outsourced. I know it helps with the budget and schedule, but it's really discouraging for people wanting to become animators in this country (moving overseas might be an option). Computer animation is pretty much the only thing that most schools teach now. I remember some of the directors at Pixar (I think it was around when Brave came out) saying that some of their best animators can't even draw. That tells you need to know about the state of traditional animation. That's not to say those Pixar animators that can't draw aren't talented as fuck, animation is hard: tough business.

Again what concerns me is that the fact that so much of it is outsourced now is that there is little incentive for anyone who wants to become an Animator to become one. Everyone needs to pay the bills and being a "Starving Artist" isn't really a healthy life. People should be compensated for good quality work, and it's a shame that has often not been the case in the industry (especially in Japan). So if there's so few people being educated in these fields, then you're going to have a talent gap and anyone who does have talent will go overseas where they can practice their craft.

The focus is on 3D CGI because 3D CGI does better with the kids. There is also a massive talent pool for 3D CGI animators in the US compared to traditional 2D animation.

There have been tons of great 2D shows in the past few years storyboarded, directed, etc. by American companies (Steven Universe is particularly great), but the majority of actual animation work has been outsourced for decades. Nearly every Saturday morning cartoon you watched had the animation outsourced.

Yeah, I realize this, but again I feel strongly that those good cartoons in the late 80's/90's and such were being overseen and produced by good talent with quality skills in the production houses here in the USA. Outsourcing will get you nothing of quality if there's no good talent driving it. And I worry that again with the focus on 3D CGI and the pool of talent mostly focusing in that area, there's little 2D Talent that can foster anything of creative quality left.