Study of Stop Motion Animation Appeal In The Era Of Digital Technology?

Question

FYI:
Stop Motion Animation (e.g:THE HAUNTED HOTEL, JAN SVANKMAJER'S, etc... those are older stuff n more recent stuff will be: WALLACE AND GROMIT, CORPSE BRIDE, CHICKEN RUN,... )

Digital Technology means as in 3D animation
e.g: all those PIXAR stuff (toy story, ratatouille, etc), SONY IMAGEWORKS' stuff (chubb chubbs, etc)

I'm doing research on this topic, for my paper. Please, Would you share some thoughts, like if you think that it (Stop Motion Animation) HAS SOME CERTAIN APPEALS? (for example, some people like the jerkiness of it).
Stop Motion Animation is an old stuff, has been used since long long time ago, and is the base of 3D animations, but it's now still quite popular, as you can see, Tim Burton's animations on cinemas.

3D animation is more advanced, and can be graphically amazing, whether it can be stylistic, or hyper realistic.

Maybe you think that stop motion animation is not good stuff (i, myself prefer 3D to it) but can you share some thoughts, like why some people still like it, watching it, as my paper leans more towards stop motion.

Answer 1

Ray Harryhausen once wrote (and often said) that he preferred stop-motion precisely because its look indicated a step away from reality, a step into the borderline of fantasy, as it were.
Much as I am amazed and pleased with what didgital technology is capable of, it too has a "look", and when it is overused, can be distracting to the point that I can no longer sit back and enjoy the film's story or other values, but merely think to myself, "hmmm....digital...(with the possible exception of The Lord of the Rings)--Nearly full-digital productions, ala "Sin City" or "Sky Captain", take advantage of this, but in the final analysis, they're novelties. Pixar, so far as I can tell, is the only studio that can bypass all my objections by virtue of solid storytelling and good movie-making.
When you get down to it, nothing beats reality, despite the industry's being able to let you watch Bogart interact with, say, Brad Pitt, or dinosaurs stampeding after Jack Black & Co...the mind knows...
In the sense that stop-motion is the photographing of actual physical objects, it has, at least in that sense, more validity to the mind than any digital creation.
I like 'em both, when they work in conjunction with the other components of the movie-watching experience. That's always the real deal.

Answer 2

Create Animations Like Pixar - http://3dAnimationCartoons.com/?yGcO

Answer 3

Umm, properly if u like that stuff then a 9 out of 10... presonally i dont. whether it replace into good, like tehre wasnt any errors. I recommend, errors like the guy being at one corner then a 2d later hes on the different ingredient. You timedd each and every thing prefectly. 9 out of 10!

Answer 4

Hello there mate,

First of all, I think that to make a comparison between 3D animation and stop-motion is a little bit awkward: while computer-generated animation belongs to the realm of fine arts & graphical art, stop-motion is closer to the world of sculpture. Therefore, if I may, I will answer an extended version of your question, i.e., why is, so to speak, "classical" animation is needed in a world where "graphically amazing" and "hyper realistic" methods of 3D animation are available.

My answer is quite simple: animation, whether two-dimensional or stop-motion, is a legitimate form of art--like literature, poetry, painting, sculpture, theater, cinema etc. Being such, animation has its unique methods for producing emotion and expression. 3D animation, in spite of achieving the highest level of proficiency, is devoid of such unique methods, since it is mostly computer-generated, and does not allow for a real human touch during the process of its creation.

It is true that 3D animation allows one to depict reality in a way that classical animation never can, but a work of art's level of realism has seldom been a necessary criteria for quality in the history of arts. I am not trying to diminish the importance of computer generated art--it has produced some marvelous results--but I do wish to stress out that, as a form of art, 3D animation is quite limited in its expressional repertoire, in comparison with classical animation. Be it a goblin, an animal or a human, a 3D character is always restricted to the very narrow boundaries of its medium, i.e. super-realistic touch, polished feeling, no room for variety of materials, etc.

But again, this is of course my personal perspective on the matter.

Here are some terrific examples of the great potentiality of classical animation:
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkdklcGbojc
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJYkpKS6R5U
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4U_xk6CKI0
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl1X2BUK-o8
5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDuaTKmRRyY
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyVVVZanMqA
7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efzuhYjD88Y&mode=related&search=
8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG-FziMRum0