Skip to main content
Movies & TV

Return to Question

Tweeted twitter.com/StackMovies/status/682567614577643520
Fixed link (hopefully)
Source Link
Catija
Catija
  • 26.6k
  • 2
  • 112
  • 114

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

added 30 characters in body
Source Link
user23604
user23604

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

 

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

 

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?

Source Link
user23604
user23604

Why was the art of old animated films sketchy?

The art of the moving characters (not static backgrounds) of old animated movies such as The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967), and The Aristocats (1970) were sketchy. The line work of the animation was left rough, instead of crisp and smooth as seen in animated features of earlier and later animated films.

What was the reason for this? Was it technical limitations of animation technology of the time? Was it some artistic trend (if so, is there a name for it)?