How is traditional animation superior to 3D animation?

How is traditional animation superior to 3D animation?

Attached: TraditionalAnimationDumboPrancing18-10-10-.gif (720x480, 191.5K)

It isn't perfect. There's a bit of humanity in it that you just don't see in 3D

Attached: gandalf.jpg (650x320, 41.29K)

It isn't. No type of animation is superior, cope.

Rotoscoping can get fucked though. It's not animation at all.

SPBP

What the fuck is going on here? Why is Gandalf crying?

fpbp

It's not, really.

It's all about art DESIGN.

> Sir Ian Mckellen broke down and cried whilst filming The Hobbit because he had to film with just a green screen instead of actors. He said " This is not why I became an actor."

Allows for more nuance and flexibility in character acting.

Because 3d animation sucks.

>How
in every way

But why?

Soul vs no soul.

I will note that there's no reason you can't put soul in 3D animation. Traditional animation basically forces the matter. Even Korean artist sweatshops make mistakes.

3d is way faster and you can get the same quality if you work hard enough

I like it more.

I mean with enough prep time, Sure. Otherwise you have to fix it in post.

What do you even fix in post?

I’d be upset too if I was stuck in green hell

3D animation has not been sufficiently perfected enough to look appealing instead of slightly uncanny.

2D can look distinct.
CG let’s you reuse and adjust assets while slightly adjusting them.
There’s also the issue where characters all look the same.

I don't really give a fuck if one form of art is better than another. I just like lots of different animation styles and methods. They're all fascinating and unique. I think it's a damn shame how rail-roaded commercial animation is, but that's the nature of adapting an art form to commercialization I suppose.

Attached: 6A2E2E20-020C-44D1-AE65-BDC23B8B2EF4.jpg (1242x1232, 252.94K)

So like...I guess I kinda get the idea of the green screen (even though it's also stupid) but why did they not just give him an actual gun?