I have a soft spot for traditional animation. So here's a rant.
24 frames of animation per second.
Average kids show runtime is about 22 minutes.
24 x 60 x 22 is about 32k frames of animation.
Obviously not the same character in the same position over and over, but it was all hand drawn, so 32k frames of animation would take about 3-4 weeks to draw, 2 more weeks to properly film and animate. Add in an extra week to add in sound effects, foley and voice overs.
Not to mention that the ones on the left that I can recognize come from at least a few production companies. Rankin Bass, Funimation, 4Kids, WB Studios, Studio Canal, Nelvana Studios. Just to name a few.
The bulk of the animation however was done overseas. You'll find that there was a cabal of cheap to animate contract studios doing a ton of work on everything from GI Joe to The Real Ghostbusters and everything in between.
If it looks the same, or incredibly similar, it was by budget, not by design. Take Animaniacs for example. They changed looks from season to season. They were still on model, but they were done in a style taught by the studio that got contracted to make the bulk of the animation that was as close to model as possible.
With a computer, you still have to draw and animate, but the turn around time is way faster. I don't want to say it's better, because having a lot of PCs, drawing tablets, servers and a data center and such connected all day has to be quite a power draw, which might as well be akin to all the paper from the trees for the environmental footprint.
But I digress, the point of the rant was that you got really good at drawing a very specific way. Sort of like Disney. You go there with your art degree, and if you're lucky, they'll teach you to draw the Disney way, and you learn it. Same with Don Bluth, and several other instantly recognizable art styles. And even within Disney, there were style profiles that came forward from a few of the artists.
Tad Stones at Disney for example, and his specific style got used in Bonkers, Darkwing Duck, Mighty Ducks, and a few others.
People give CatArts and other styles a negative look because it looks like a kid could draw it sometimes. It doesn't have that professional quality look, compared to others. But then again, if that's the look they're going for, then they nailed it.
Keep in mind that King of the Hill, The Simpsons, The Head, Family Guy, and just about every original animation looked pretty shoddy, especially the early work, until someone came in and unformed the look and model of the characters.
It feels like in today's animation, there's a lot of off model work, even when it's a specific style that looks less realistic than others. And I think that might be part of the problem.
Filmation did re-use a lot of animation. Once a show got popular enough, they would re-use assets from other episodes and just time save a lot while keeping costs low.
I think they had to. They had a stable of six shows running at once at one point. Some corner cutting was necessary, even if I didn't like it as a kid. :)
I have a soft spot for traditional animation. So here's a rant.
24 frames of animation per second.
Average kids show runtime is about 22 minutes.
24 x 60 x 22 is about 32k frames of animation.
Obviously not the same character in the same position over and over, but it was all hand drawn, so 32k frames of animation would take about 3-4 weeks to draw, 2 more weeks to properly film and animate. Add in an extra week to add in sound effects, foley and voice overs.
Not to mention that the ones on the left that I can recognize come from at least a few production companies. Rankin Bass, Funimation, 4Kids, WB Studios, Studio Canal, Nelvana Studios. Just to name a few.
The bulk of the animation however was done overseas. You'll find that there was a cabal of cheap to animate contract studios doing a ton of work on everything from GI Joe to The Real Ghostbusters and everything in between.
If it looks the same, or incredibly similar, it was by budget, not by design. Take Animaniacs for example. They changed looks from season to season. They were still on model, but they were done in a style taught by the studio that got contracted to make the bulk of the animation that was as close to model as possible.
With a computer, you still have to draw and animate, but the turn around time is way faster. I don't want to say it's better, because having a lot of PCs, drawing tablets, servers and a data center and such connected all day has to be quite a power draw, which might as well be akin to all the paper from the trees for the environmental footprint.
But I digress, the point of the rant was that you got really good at drawing a very specific way. Sort of like Disney. You go there with your art degree, and if you're lucky, they'll teach you to draw the Disney way, and you learn it. Same with Don Bluth, and several other instantly recognizable art styles. And even within Disney, there were style profiles that came forward from a few of the artists.
Tad Stones at Disney for example, and his specific style got used in Bonkers, Darkwing Duck, Mighty Ducks, and a few others.
People give CatArts and other styles a negative look because it looks like a kid could draw it sometimes. It doesn't have that professional quality look, compared to others. But then again, if that's the look they're going for, then they nailed it.
Keep in mind that King of the Hill, The Simpsons, The Head, Family Guy, and just about every original animation looked pretty shoddy, especially the early work, until someone came in and unformed the look and model of the characters.
It feels like in today's animation, there's a lot of off model work, even when it's a specific style that looks less realistic than others. And I think that might be part of the problem.
And that's if they're always constantly moving. It's less if they're just standing around talking.
Filmation was notorious for this in the '70s and '80s, cutting corners whenever possible by having lots of dialogue, but little to no movement.
Filmation did re-use a lot of animation. Once a show got popular enough, they would re-use assets from other episodes and just time save a lot while keeping costs low.
I think they had to. They had a stable of six shows running at once at one point. Some corner cutting was necessary, even if I didn't like it as a kid. :)