Would it really have been that hard to say gouache?? ( I'm not entirely certain if the backgrounds for Sleeping Beauty were oil, gouache, or acrylic, but judging by how they look it's probably gouache)
I feel like the Disney execs went into Wish with a goal of "let's show everyone that all it takes to recreate Spiderverse is throwing the right filter over our default character design style!" and yep it didn't work, obviously. First, because a filter can't replace actual human brains that are trained to make deliberate design choices for evoking certain emotional responses. Second, because having a "default character design style" is what you do when you're planning out the next episode of a tv show, not a standalone independent project. Disney treats its animation department like a cinematic universe now, and they are sacrificing every bit of creativity because of this. They made Tangled and after that they were like "yep this is what our movies and our characters look like now, glad we got all that creativity crap out of the way for the rest of forever". It's sad because there are literally hundreds of thousands of talented young artists dying to work for Disney and bring new vision to the company, and Disney just has absolutely zero interest in anything that isn't a Tangled reskin.
I think "watercolor" is code for "untextured" cause the animation looks like it's the preliminary style you see in the bonus features where the extra textures aren't rendered. In the first scene with her friends I was shocked cause they straight up looked like they were the Sofia the First TV show quality where they have a more plastic and low amount of detail on faces. Compare it to Tangled which came out years ago and it's crazy how less good Wish looks compared to Tangled.
It's crazy cuz you can still create amazing textures with watercolor paint. Just look at scientific plant paintings and you'll see. They should've gone for cell-shaded 3D models, or better yet, made the movie with 2D animation. No one wants their 2023 movie to look like the Octonauts.
@@karathewolfsfanficchannel933 Yes! Watercolour paintings of plants! I follow a few botanical watercolour painters, and it is amazing how they can just recreate the intricate details in their subjects. And on the other side of the spectrum with loose style watercolour paintings, they can imply so much more texture then you'd think possible! And don't forget about the late-2010 abstract watercolour backgrounds that seemed to be everywhere. The whole idea is that such a simple background gave texture to an otherwise plain image. This part is from my personal experience, but default watercolour paper- the paper meant for watercolours and that most students are recommended to practice on first, has TEXTURE! Go to any Walmart of Michaels and the paper almost always has a medium to rough texture!
I think this shows just how disconnected Disney higher ups are from everything they’re making right now. At this point the company is a lot like their before movie intro, banking on childhood memories and the fact that they are such a big juggernaut. But they’ve gotten too big, bought out too many companies to keep track of projects properly and they are spreading themselves too thin. They’re focused more on making money and making sequels and live actions that never live up to and even seem to ruin the memories of the originals they come from. Wish was a chance for them to change direction, it was gonna be 2D animated with a better story plot, better written characters, and a more classic, cohesive that would have actually been an homage to classic Disney but they decided to make it all the things that would have made it basic, it almost seems like a parody of a Disney film. They had a chance to make a great new Disney movie but they chose not to for whatever reason. I just wish they would stop doing what they’re doing and stop putting so much effort into trying to bleed dry and make franchises out of actual good movies they’ve made then rejecting golden opportunities like the original Direction of wish. Pixar has been killing it because they have given chances to creative people with different stories to tell, they even made a good pairing for the Toy Story movies with lightyear (It was a good fun movie fight me😂) With wish being the flop that it was and marvel being a mess right now I hope they start seeing that they need to change whatever game plan they have because I still wanna work for them for some reason and it would be nice if there wasn’t a high chance of any great projects would be shafted in favor of Toy Story 29
If your focus is just on maming or just a saying "better" story or "better" characters, then you've already missed the point of a story to begin with. They aren't even willing to do some research it's just laughably bad. I just hope workers are being compensated for, which they definitely aren't.
@@kidamaroo It's a few classic Disney movies. Snow White, Dumbo and Sleeping Beauty are the big 3 names Ive seen mentioned about this movies artstyle direction by a few staff members in behind the scenes clips and their book. Problem is Dumbo, Sleeping Beuaty and Snow White have different artstyles. so no one wonder Wish is a visual mess, it's like juggling too many artstyles. (all 3 BGs are watercolor of somekind, but watercolor paitning can come in many visual styles based on technique and skills used, and what the overall vibe will be)
Lots of the earlier Disney animated films used watercolor backgrounds (Pinocchio is another one) - it's funny they mention Lilo and Stitch, because Chris Sanders (that film's director) intentionally had his artists use watercolors and has mentioned part of said decision was because Disney used to in their earliest works. Sleeping Beauty is definitely not one of them. Honestly, I'm under the impression from what I've seen that they simply had a filter on their backgrounds and had to make it sound like something with artistic intention.
The more i think about it, the more Wish reminds me of Chicken Little. It came out after other studios started to experiment with new technologies, Dinsey tried to hop in and do the same but it was apparent that they didn't have enough experience with them to compete with the other studios. One example i noticed in Wish is during the song You're a Star, there is a short sequence halfway through where a turtle goes down a small waterfall. The water under the turtle bends in a very unnatural way. It looks like a blanket folding instead of a river flowing. Dinsey gave us Moana 7 years ago, it's not like they don't know how to animate water. It's clear that they were trying to make the movie look simpler and stylizied, but maybe because of the lack of experience, or maybe even a rushed development, it just looks poorly made and unfinished in some parts.
That's because it doesn't have motion blur. They wanted it to be a combination of computer animated and hand-drawn, and the latter doesn't use motion blur.
To be fair, poster colors and gouache are just opaque watercolors. You can literally make your watercolor palette into gouache just by having a tube of titanium white. I do think wish doesnt look like watercolor nor gouache. The 3d looks very generic.
yeah when I use watercolors I usually use gouache too... sometimes even colored pencils for final touches. they could just have said "make the background look like traditional media" or something like that and we wouldn't be so mad lol 😂
@@PauloCazaresBelman WAIT WAIT SO THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE IS BECAUSE EVERYONE AGREED WITH HIM THAT HE WAS COOL AND "GROOVY" BUT HE ACTUALLY WASNT COOL AND WAS JUST A JERK
Wish saw what Nimona was doing with its art style, copied it, canned the Nimona movie, then threw away the instruction manual before reading through it completely
@@otterbread8200don’t want to be that guy but riot games didn’t do anything. Fortiche Studio has been experimenting in that 3D painted style for a while now (at least 10 years).
@@lefudj4236 i'm aware, but its riot games that wrote and produced arcane to be as mind-blowing as it was lol. fortiche studio's style and animation wouldn't have been given the spotlight it deserved if it wasn't for the quality of the writing it was paired with but tbf even then it was the insane animation of the cinematics that drew me to valorant lmfao
@@otterbread8200 that I completely agree with. Honestly Riot is just down to work with great studios everytime and it seems they have a great understanding of how to manage their ressources.
It's difficult to do watercolors and make them dark at the same time. It's not like it works well on black paper. Not to mention, Sleeping Beauty's art is more known for its geometry and high-resolution detail.
If they really were so deadset on doing a throwback to their traditional art styles, the least they could have done was fully commit to it and actually make a 2D movie again. Slapping a filter onto their CGI doesn't make them look any less dismissive of their hand-drawn animation. If anything, it just makes them look even more so.
I just watched Lilo and Stitch the other day - watercolors: bright, whimsical, colorful, perfect for Hawaii / Wish's background: dark, moody, lots of night scenes. Sleeping Beauty yes but not watercolor😅
they don't even know what "Water Colored" style look like! water colored has a light backgound, wet brush texture, and theres also a beauty in simplicity of single layer (or just 2 layers, NOT MANY) paint
I don't have any issues with the animators, what I do have a huge issue is with Jennifer Lee. She just come off as an oblivious person who has no respect for traditional animation.
I honestly love the look of 3D looking like 2D. But from watching the trailers of Wish, I knew that if you couldn’t even properly distinguish or see the water colour influence they said the movie has. Then it was already a visual problem from the very beginning. They might as well have made the entire movie in hand drawn animation. Coupled with Rotoscoping even. Not only would have this been a great callback to the very first Disney animated material as being hand drawn. But it would have been so effective in really making everything look traditional. You can literally just copy the art style from those illustrated Disney books, but make them animated too.
Artist here! He looks like he's actually using gouache paint, which works like a watercolor but it's much more opaque than traditional watercolors. She may be confusing the name, but really there's no excuse because the movie's style doesn't look like gouache, either.
I always found these televised interviews from professionals give unrepayable information. I think their way to geared towards the average viewers not inspiring artists, so they tend to be dumbed down & many make little sense, don't want to lose any one when saying something like key frames. I do think the format of unscripted interviews make for less informative statements, a carefully crafted script would be batter. Although Wish may have fallen short (want to stay positive), I am really egger to see where hybrid animation styles go next, especially with Disney being oddly slow to adopt it.
I mean its fine for them to not know art mediums since there not the artist or art directer. Lol should have interviewed the art directer, or atleast gave a prescripted interview with the correct info
@@titandarknight2698 I don't know, but I think it could help if the ceo knows a bit about art or animation, since it's them who takes all the final decisions
tbf gouache is a type of watercolor paint. disney used watercolor and tempera for their BGs (not sure on which type but I can agree Sleeping Beauty was probably gouache)
I’m convinced that the watercolor excuse is a lie, and they were trying to copy the Nimona art style. Because during the night scenes, it looks a lot like a slightly more pastel version of the Nimona art style. But during the day scenes it looks like an unrendeded pastel version of the Nimona art style. So… I think they were lying. I think they copied the art style of a movie they almost got cancelled and then didn’t give their animators enough time to animate that incredibly complex art style. Because I think Nimona took like…7 years to animate, not including the time they were shut down. Wish took 5. They just didn’t have enough time to animate it, and I feel really bad for the artists who I bet did want to do a new style, and I’m sure a decent amount of them at least enjoyed looking at the Nimona art style a little bit, but they didn’t actually get the time they needed to animate it properly.
(note: my capslock is for emphasis, I'm not yelling) not defending WISH but the old Disney backgrounds ARE watercolor just utilizes different ART STYLES. Waterclors look different depending on the type of paint (ie ink vs gouache), the style, the technique, brush size, brush hape, wet on wet, wet on dry, the paper ect ect. I'm not 100% sure what watercolors or tools Disney used for their BGs they probs had different kinds (ie the ones you see in older anime use something called Gouache) but watercolors can fast dry compared to acryllic which Disney needed for their schedules. however youre somewhat right, the ANIMATION as in the moving objects like characters, do not use watercolor, theyre done with some sort of ACRYLIC paint. Watercolor on the plastic cells would not cooperate properly obviously. The animation starts on pencil, as you showcased via pencil tests. then traced with black or colored acrylics, then fully painted with more acrillyic (and other painting mediums old school Disney was chock full of EXPIRMENTATION.) however the outline process was then replaced by the XEROX in the 70s, after Sleeping Beauty bombed. which Im not entirely sure what the outlines are made of. A type of graphite if i recall but I don't have a source on that so take it with a grain. They talk about the different artstyles seen in a few Disney backgrounds in Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston's book: The Illusion Of Life. A good read that throws Wish's artistic thought process (or lack there of) out the window and clearly shows the executives like Ms Lee and Bob Igor working on WISH have NO IDEA what makes Disney, Disney and what makes art, Art. WISH's animation is also a totally different issue imo its animated so weird its almost grotesque. too much squash and stretch compared to the more solid animation seen in the classic disney films the WISH staff are supposedly taking inspiration from (as in the silver and golden age of disney like Sleeping Beauty, not the 80s Renaissance, which imo WISH is copying). Ie Asha's mouth seem to just float all over her face whenever she makes a extreme expression, or one of Magnifeco's shocked exprsssion you showed here his mouth overtakes his entire JAWLINE. like its almost too squishy and stretchy. Its functional animation, it does its job but there's definitely something uncanny about it that no other 3D animation had issue with (yes inckduing the more cartoony stuff like the Incredibles or Hotel Transylvania). This overtly squishy animation can be an issue in 2D as well so it's not due to medium differencesfor those wondering. What you're describing for WISH's watercolor look is its ARTSTYLE not its ANIMATION. There's overlap but theres definitely a difference and no one talks about the actual animation which I have actual issues with...
I just re-read it, it seems they used something called TEMPERA. as well as watercolors cus they can be switched out if necessary. there's more to background design in Disney, and again its all expirementation, other mediums were possibly used besides watercolor. but the book claims Sleeping Beauty does indeed use watercolors or something like it. Chapter 10, Pages 246-249 talks about it, as well as the entire section on Backgrounds showcases the various styles seen in the films, but the end of the day they were all or mostly watercolors. This was all done to try to mimic the styles and multi-mediums found within the concept artists works, known as stylists, who had more varying medium usage such as chaulk, ink, pencil, oil crayon, oil paint ect ect. Watercolors in general are just as versatile as any other paint. it just all depends on the user and their skill and vibe theyre trying to achieve. there's also the effects department, talked about in a section after the Background artists. they probably play a role in how Backgrounds work too. they're sort of animators and background artists simultaneously depending on the shot. tldr Silver Age and Golden Age Disney (prior to the 80s so the Little Mermaid does not count here, thats Renaissance) was FULL OF expirementation of traditional media. Renaissance, including the Little Mermaid, began expirementation with 3D and digital coloring.
I agree with you, but just a friendly tip, if you want to use emphasis in a YT comment without needing to disclaimer that you're not yelling, put underline marks before and after the part you're emphasizing to make it _italics._ Just make sure to include punctuation inside the underline marks, otherwise it breaks the code like _this_. But otherwise, yea, modern Disney can't hold a candle to OG Disney simply because they rely way too much on CGI and quash the kind of creative out-of-the-box design and passionate artistry that elevated their older movies to timeless classics.
@@Dargonhuman huh! i never knew thats how you make italics on here. i usually use the bold but it usually doesn't work for me and bolds an entire paragraph. Thanks!
@@Dargonhuman as for CGI reliance I don't think that's an issue either, theres some pretty good 3D animation out there that is just as good as 2D without needing to mimic 2D at all (and of course the ones who do are also good! CG is a tool: 3D can look like cel shaded 2D, so relying on it I don't think is the problem) The whole point of animation is 3D motion in a 2D space. and even 3DCG still needs to follow the 12 Principles that originated from 2D animation. the *animation* is the issue for me, which has somewhat bothered me since the Renaissance era. I love them for sure, but not so much as I do the Silver Age stuff, the work of 9 Old Men just feels more solid to me compared to the Renaissance. I feel Wish is just an extremely worse case of like... Glen Keane's squashy and squishy animation style? Which is iroinc 'cus the whole gimmick was _Classic_ era Disney. The Renaissance is Classic in it's own right but the term itself refers to the Silver Age movies. Even the movies Wish were "inspired" by were also Silver Age (Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Pinnochio are what they mentioned), and yet the animation's character design and animation style (like _how_ they move) for the characters borrow heavy from Glen Keane who was _Renaissanc_ . Not to mention the BGs was so flat looking compared to the BGs of those eras and Wish's BGs were also 2D watercolor! It's one of the only 2D things that survived the Big Scrap during the movie's production. A 2D painting looked flat and wrong, that's just pure skill issue imo (or time constraints which is more likely). Like it looks worse than Tarzan 1992 who had a nice blend of digital 2D paintings on a 3D surface! (i forgot what the tool was called) Personally it's not a reliance on CG, there's nothing wrong with CG imo. it's Disney not being able to get over Glen Kean. He's amazing for sure and contributed to so much of Disney stuff but they can't get over him. And Frozen. EDIT: Fixed some typos and grammar.
For a long time I’ve felt that the end of traditional animation at Disney just led to loads of knowledge and talent being lost within that company. Every interview that comes out of Wish has confirmed that for me. First them claiming that 2d animation is too limited in camera angles and movement (from the same company that had James Baxter in their roster of insanely talented animators!!) , now we see they have no idea about the different properties of paints (not being able to see the difference between gouache and watercolor) this is something most art students learn at high school level or earlier… It honestly feel as if the Disney company resents and hates the medium that made them famous. I don’t get the sense that they really value the traditional art techniques that made their movies look so iconic at all, they’re just name dropping a beautiful looking movie as clickbait to get people watch their visually bland flop lol.
I wouldnt be surprised if the watercolor style was more of technicaly figurative way of saying the colors or something, but as an artist myself, what has really intrigued me in terms of visuals would be the 2d styled background which have potential to combine hand drawn animated characters, makes sense?
I may be looking at it wrong, but when the artist of sleeping beauty was shown painting, it looked as though he was using gouache which is a form of watercolor. It’s thicker and works a bit differently than regular watercolor paint, but it’s still partly watercolor. Now should she have kept reference referenceing it as watercolor when it truly wasn’t just that? No. And I agree with you with this whole video. Disney has lost its touch and creativity, and are trying to use things that are or were popular into films to get more money, instead of making their films with the magic they had before. Very sad.
Samurai Jack's art style was pulling from the same Influences of those periods. SJ pulled a lot from UPA's as well as all the post war minimalism that was going on in the 50s. SJ's biggest influence was Toei Doga's The Little Prince and the Eight-Headed Dragon but Toei has been greatly influenced from UPA's Magoo's Puddle Jumper.
I've always thought they meant the storybook intro to the movie. Not the actual movie. The pages opening and the pictures not being that detailed. Just bright colors and no line art or whatever. I'm not an art person
Even if we agreed that Disney wanted to do what they planned, the end product still looked really bad. It just looks like unfinished, half-rendered 3D that they didn't have time to fix, so they just hastily crafted an explanation that pretends that they did it on purpose. If you compare it to Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, where the creators intended for the style to look like paintings you would see in a fairytale book, you can tell they nailed it. Hell, you don't even need to know that to appreciate the distinct, gorgeous style of that movie. It speaks for itself.
Yea I can definitely see the inspiration from Sleeping Beauty in Wish's backgrounds, especially in the concept art. But the term "watercolor" is not accurate at all, lmao.
when they say watercolor they they dont actually mean watercolor the art of manipulating translucent colors and water to create different themes and textures )which you dont just use water for, you can also use salt, paper and dry paint), they just dont want to have to put in the work for finishing the rendering
I love that art style is really good, I just can seeing this concept animation is look just like mix of modern DreamWorks, old Disney fairy tale movies, Nimona (2023), Borderlands, Disney Junior, Spider-Verse movies, Enchanted (2007), Nintendo DS graphics, old 1930s-1990s watercolor-paiting 2D hand-drawn animation style to 3D, early 2000s Barbie movies, Tangled, Edmund Dulac, The Elder Scrolls IV, Lilo & Stitch, Sleeping Beauty, Eyvind Earl, and James Baxter.
If I'm not mistaken the backgrounds in sleeping beauty are made with gouache colors, not watercolors. They're close but they're not the same, from pigment to their base materials to achieve that texture and color. I imagine they said watercolors to simplify for the public the inspiration but it did a disservice to what technique was actually used. Maybe someone in the art department said "watercolor" to help higher ups understand the concept and it stuck like the pest lmao
As an artist... It is probably mix medium. Watercolor and Acrylic... I see what they were trying to go for. I enjoyed Wish as well as the art style. It looks like a story book with how the textures are laid out. But this is coming from an artist who's been doing this since 2014. I get it, Disney is not how it use to be and it does sadden me how much they've strayed from the traditional work. but times change and so do the methods and of course.. the people who run the Disney animation stuff, all change as well. That being said, Give respect to the animators and people who worked on wish regardless. It takes so much time, effort and mental energy for artists. Whether they are 3D or 2D artists. The story may not be that great, but it doesn't really have to be when its for little kids who aren't going to care.
They keep saying their inspiration was sleeping beauty’s “watercolor” backgrounds because they don’t want to explain how they tried to jack nimona’s style and failed after shutting down blue sky
But here's the thing that seems confusing : classical watercolor or aquarelle technique leaving out the whites of the paper as form of highlight, having very soft gradient shadows and soft edges is a COMPLETE different look. I don't understand why they referenced the animation to watercolor style. Maybe they wanted to achieve gouache style (similar to sleeping beauty). Gouache though is not watercolor/aquarelle. Both are visionally completely different. Yes, they are used with water, but that's about the only similarity. Gouache has strong contrasts, looks more graphic, but definitely has shadows, the graduation of shadows is just very bold, but there are definitely a lot of strong gradient shadows. If gouache is the look they were striving to achieve then it doesn't make any sense to use very even lighting. So probably in order to achieve the effect they were going for (hand drawn 3d) they would have needed to have a clear concept and consistently pull through. Either bold shadows with strong outlines maybe a bit sketchy outlines or gradient very soft shadows with very soft and almost invisible edges.
>"We've got a look like we've never seen before" Awkward moment when the movie looks just like every recent Disney film, just this time with a cel shading + outline filter
Hello, artist here. Without further research, it looks like Earl was painted with gouache which is a milk based paint famous fie its ability to be reactivated with water. While it can be thinned to a "watercolor like" state they can also used opaque, unlike watercolor which is always transparent to some degree.
The Wish backgrounds actually look nice, they just need more contrast. You can't just mimic a "watercolor style" because it had appealing results in the past, without recognizing what MADE it look appealing, so you can adapt.
Well to be fair, the paint used in the sleeping beauty (or commercial posters and illlustrations) is gouache, a water medium that is opaque. However, I totally aggree that the sleeping beauty art style is definetly not what I'm thinking of when I looking at the Wish art style...
Hi! I agree with what you're saying but Eyevinde Earle 100% used watercolor--specifically a thick, opaque kind of watercolor paint called "gouache." It is a very versatile and rich kind of paint, as well as being actually quite forgiving and easy to manipulate because the pigment uses water as a medium rather than oil or other substances. Wish was terrible in many ways, and Earle's art was indeed amazing (if you want more cool midcentury disney paintings check out the work of Mary Blair!) but you should probably be more careful when talking about the processes used in these films. Goache IS watercolor!
Im an artist and I think wish’s art style looks really good. (I heard the writing was boring though so I haven’t watched the whole thing) The style does look a little like the traditional style with the outlines, they probably just misspoke about sleeping beauty being watercolor or meant it in a different way.
The higher ups having a chronic misunderstanding of the fundamentals makes sense for how the movie turned out. Some say the plot is ai generated, with this kind of expertise I would believe it.
The lighting is also weird. They use a sort of a cel shading style. The unfortunate part is that cel shading is best effective under direct lighting. Sadly, there is a very... limited use of it for some reason, which has some of the shots looking so muddy or underlit.
this is proof that the higher ups not know what they’re talking about. It feels like more evidence that the higher ups really did stick their noses into production and messed things up, since they can’t even describe their own movie properly. I feel kinda bad cuz I’ve spoken to ppl who worked on the film. I wish the best for their upcoming films…
But you can't denied that the Wish background are inspired from sleeping beauty background! And i think they look beautiful!! It's a but weird with the characters in CGI but not horrible. It's just trendy to hate this movie. But it's not horrible. It's not a masterpiece but it doesn't deserve the hate it get
it doesn't make sense on another level; in the art book of Tangled, they go into how that was exactly their goal, translating the visuals of old 2D films into 3D. Tangled is absolutely gorgeous and they already had that research and style figured out, so i dont know why they didn't use that for building the style.
so it does make sense OP just didn't understand it and is using a press interview with a non-artist / non-technical executive that was conducted for marketing purposes rather than the design documents (which likely don't mention watercolor anywhere) the title should be "american executive does not understand their own product, gets huge bonus at end of each year anyways"
In all honesty, it's not the art style that I hated about Wish.... I actually LOVEd the character designs and seeing body-type diversity, not just skin color. I honestly hate the art style for the older Disney movies because they usually portray people as "ugly" who don't follow the beauty standards and all their villains look like zombies. It's purely the story of Wish that I hated, not the art style or animation. At first I found it kind of off-putting but I got used to it.
IDK, this just kinda feels like a gaffe based on "common knowledge" (i.e believing an incorrect assumption popularized by the mainstream, such as thinking that It's a Wonderful Life is a schmaltzy Christmas movie when it's a dark look into the life of a man that felt screwed over by life and only the last 20 or so minutes are actually set at Christmas) so it feels pointless to be upset about.
It honestly looks more like Sophia the First than Sleeping Beauty but they slapped an outline around the character models and haphazardly plopped them onto 2D backgrounds, and I feel like I'm insulting that show by saying this.
It doesn't even take an animator or an artist to look at Wish and figure out everything wrong with it. The "villain" actually comes off as more of the good guy, so not only do you have horrible writing but you also have an art style and everything else that isn't even fucking consistent. Like holyshit y'all have millions of dollars in budget and you can't just make a decent film?
They just want to sound like the spiderverse creators so they talking about “watercolour painting” 😂😂
lol
Don’t you dare compare wish to spider verse 😤
Would it really have been that hard to say gouache?? ( I'm not entirely certain if the backgrounds for Sleeping Beauty were oil, gouache, or acrylic, but judging by how they look it's probably gouache)
@@pixelzebra8440they’re not comparing the two. But talking about the fact that the creators want to sounds intelligent and creative.
I feel like the Disney execs went into Wish with a goal of "let's show everyone that all it takes to recreate Spiderverse is throwing the right filter over our default character design style!" and yep it didn't work, obviously. First, because a filter can't replace actual human brains that are trained to make deliberate design choices for evoking certain emotional responses. Second, because having a "default character design style" is what you do when you're planning out the next episode of a tv show, not a standalone independent project. Disney treats its animation department like a cinematic universe now, and they are sacrificing every bit of creativity because of this. They made Tangled and after that they were like "yep this is what our movies and our characters look like now, glad we got all that creativity crap out of the way for the rest of forever". It's sad because there are literally hundreds of thousands of talented young artists dying to work for Disney and bring new vision to the company, and Disney just has absolutely zero interest in anything that isn't a Tangled reskin.
I think "watercolor" is code for "untextured" cause the animation looks like it's the preliminary style you see in the bonus features where the extra textures aren't rendered. In the first scene with her friends I was shocked cause they straight up looked like they were the Sofia the First TV show quality where they have a more plastic and low amount of detail on faces. Compare it to Tangled which came out years ago and it's crazy how less good Wish looks compared to Tangled.
It's crazy cuz you can still create amazing textures with watercolor paint. Just look at scientific plant paintings and you'll see. They should've gone for cell-shaded 3D models, or better yet, made the movie with 2D animation. No one wants their 2023 movie to look like the Octonauts.
@@karathewolfsfanficchannel933 Yes! Watercolour paintings of plants! I follow a few botanical watercolour painters, and it is amazing how they can just recreate the intricate details in their subjects. And on the other side of the spectrum with loose style watercolour paintings, they can imply so much more texture then you'd think possible! And don't forget about the late-2010 abstract watercolour backgrounds that seemed to be everywhere. The whole idea is that such a simple background gave texture to an otherwise plain image.
This part is from my personal experience, but default watercolour paper- the paper meant for watercolours and that most students are recommended to practice on first, has TEXTURE! Go to any Walmart of Michaels and the paper almost always has a medium to rough texture!
Yeah thanks. The movie just looks really bad
@@karathewolfsfanficchannel933dont drag barnacles, peso, and kwazi down to wish's level, you scoundrel!
Fr, it's like a weird semi-textured 3D model, like it's half done but not enoght and I hate it bc it looks so uncanny for no reason 😭
I found this blender tutorial on how to do watercolor shading and it amazes me how they couldn't do that for this movie.
Can you tell me the name of the channel or video? Its not showing up for me
Could you send us a link to that? For a friend, of course…
@@munjister177 watercolor 💦😩😩
@@Youhaventwon ?
@@karathewolfsfanficchannel933 maybe this one? ua-cam.com/video/Da1rEkjThag/v-deo.htmlsi=b3tUB5Ji3pSBcg_Q
The President of Disney not knowing what watercolors are really sums up the current state of Disney
Spit out my fooken drnk mate
I think this shows just how disconnected Disney higher ups are from everything they’re making right now. At this point the company is a lot like their before movie intro, banking on childhood memories and the fact that they are such a big juggernaut. But they’ve gotten too big, bought out too many companies to keep track of projects properly and they are spreading themselves too thin. They’re focused more on making money and making sequels and live actions that never live up to and even seem to ruin the memories of the originals they come from. Wish was a chance for them to change direction, it was gonna be 2D animated with a better story plot, better written characters, and a more classic, cohesive that would have actually been an homage to classic Disney but they decided to make it all the things that would have made it basic, it almost seems like a parody of a Disney film. They had a chance to make a great new Disney movie but they chose not to for whatever reason. I just wish they would stop doing what they’re doing and stop putting so much effort into trying to bleed dry and make franchises out of actual good movies they’ve made then rejecting golden opportunities like the original Direction of wish. Pixar has been killing it because they have given chances to creative people with different stories to tell, they even made a good pairing for the Toy Story movies with lightyear (It was a good fun movie fight me😂) With wish being the flop that it was and marvel being a mess right now I hope they start seeing that they need to change whatever game plan they have because I still wanna work for them for some reason and it would be nice if there wasn’t a high chance of any great projects would be shafted in favor of Toy Story 29
If your focus is just on maming or just a saying "better" story or "better" characters, then you've already missed the point of a story to begin with. They aren't even willing to do some research it's just laughably bad. I just hope workers are being compensated for, which they definitely aren't.
Lightyear was fine on its own... All of its biggest issues stem from it NOT pairing well with the Toy Story movies.
You called that bucket of wet slop "Lightyear" a good movie?
Nah, I ain't hearing you out anymore, Disney suckup. Horrible take.
okay, raise them hands I will fight you.
Snow White was also a Disney movie that used watercolor background; which really should have been the biggest inspiration behind Wish
Is it possible she confused _Sleeping Beauty_ and _Snow White?_
@@kidamaroo It's a few classic Disney movies. Snow White, Dumbo and Sleeping Beauty are the big 3 names Ive seen mentioned about this movies artstyle direction by a few staff members in behind the scenes clips and their book.
Problem is Dumbo, Sleeping Beuaty and Snow White have different artstyles. so no one wonder Wish is a visual mess, it's like juggling too many artstyles. (all 3 BGs are watercolor of somekind, but watercolor paitning can come in many visual styles based on technique and skills used, and what the overall vibe will be)
Lots of the earlier Disney animated films used watercolor backgrounds (Pinocchio is another one) - it's funny they mention Lilo and Stitch, because Chris Sanders (that film's director) intentionally had his artists use watercolors and has mentioned part of said decision was because Disney used to in their earliest works. Sleeping Beauty is definitely not one of them. Honestly, I'm under the impression from what I've seen that they simply had a filter on their backgrounds and had to make it sound like something with artistic intention.
yea im wondering too
Watercolour was used in all the early Disney films... Snow White, Pinnochio, Dumbo etc but obvs definitely not Sleeping Beauty
The more i think about it, the more Wish reminds me of Chicken Little. It came out after other studios started to experiment with new technologies, Dinsey tried to hop in and do the same but it was apparent that they didn't have enough experience with them to compete with the other studios.
One example i noticed in Wish is during the song You're a Star, there is a short sequence halfway through where a turtle goes down a small waterfall. The water under the turtle bends in a very unnatural way. It looks like a blanket folding instead of a river flowing. Dinsey gave us Moana 7 years ago, it's not like they don't know how to animate water. It's clear that they were trying to make the movie look simpler and stylizied, but maybe because of the lack of experience, or maybe even a rushed development, it just looks poorly made and unfinished in some parts.
It was definitely rushed
That's because it doesn't have motion blur. They wanted it to be a combination of computer animated and hand-drawn, and the latter doesn't use motion blur.
I cannot believe that they made a sequel to chicken little in 2024
To be fair, poster colors and gouache are just opaque watercolors. You can literally make your watercolor palette into gouache just by having a tube of titanium white.
I do think wish doesnt look like watercolor nor gouache. The 3d looks very generic.
yeah when I use watercolors I usually use gouache too... sometimes even colored pencils for final touches. they could just have said "make the background look like traditional media" or something like that and we wouldn't be so mad lol 😂
It’s def got a storybook look. Lots of little textures and details. But it’s def not painterly.
@@PetiteMinina The problem isn't water color, it's water cooler in 3d thats the problem.
😂😂😂 this is so funny. Nobody in the company corrected her? At all!
"The emperor's new clothes"
@@MelvinMcVinci holdup, are you telling me that the emperor's new groove's name is a parody to that tale?!?!?!?! 👀
@@PauloCazaresBelman today I learned
@@PauloCazaresBelman WAIT WAIT SO THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE IS BECAUSE EVERYONE AGREED WITH HIM THAT HE WAS COOL AND "GROOVY" BUT HE ACTUALLY WASNT COOL AND WAS JUST A JERK
i cant believe i never caught that its one of my favorite movies just what is anything
I wonder what the concept artists we’re thinking lmao.
i think about afew years ago they where thinking “huh these designs backgrounds look great! hope they stay in 2D.”
Wish saw what Nimona was doing with its art style, copied it, canned the Nimona movie, then threw away the instruction manual before reading through it completely
That sounds like a conspiracy theory.
it all stemmed from arcane lol, riot games really set the bar with modern stylised animation
@@otterbread8200don’t want to be that guy but riot games didn’t do anything. Fortiche Studio has been experimenting in that 3D painted style for a while now (at least 10 years).
@@lefudj4236 i'm aware, but its riot games that wrote and produced arcane to be as mind-blowing as it was lol. fortiche studio's style and animation wouldn't have been given the spotlight it deserved if it wasn't for the quality of the writing it was paired with
but tbf even then it was the insane animation of the cinematics that drew me to valorant lmfao
@@otterbread8200 that I completely agree with. Honestly Riot is just down to work with great studios everytime and it seems they have a great understanding of how to manage their ressources.
It's difficult to do watercolors and make them dark at the same time. It's not like it works well on black paper. Not to mention, Sleeping Beauty's art is more known for its geometry and high-resolution detail.
man that geometry
If they really were so deadset on doing a throwback to their traditional art styles, the least they could have done was fully commit to it and actually make a 2D movie again.
Slapping a filter onto their CGI doesn't make them look any less dismissive of their hand-drawn animation. If anything, it just makes them look even more so.
they didn’t stylize it enough for it to actually look like a stylistic choice
I think what she meant was "we wanted to make traditional art look" but she just said "watercolorlook" which is such a wrong statement to make
in her dimension she thinks its watercolor 😭😭
I just watched Lilo and Stitch the other day - watercolors: bright, whimsical, colorful, perfect for Hawaii / Wish's background: dark, moody, lots of night scenes. Sleeping Beauty yes but not watercolor😅
If it’s based on classic Disney…why does it look like modern Dreamworks?
Not just modern Dreamworks, but TV-show modern Dreamworks.
they don't even know what "Water Colored" style look like!
water colored has a light backgound, wet brush texture, and theres also a beauty in simplicity of single layer (or just 2 layers, NOT MANY) paint
I don't have any issues with the animators, what I do have a huge issue is with Jennifer Lee. She just come off as an oblivious person who has no respect for traditional animation.
Thats all Disney execs, or any animation industry execs, at this point. Business men, not artists.
I honestly love the look of 3D looking like 2D. But from watching the trailers of Wish, I knew that if you couldn’t even properly distinguish or see the water colour influence they said the movie has. Then it was already a visual problem from the very beginning.
They might as well have made the entire movie in hand drawn animation. Coupled with Rotoscoping even. Not only would have this been a great callback to the very first Disney animated material as being hand drawn. But it would have been so effective in really making everything look traditional. You can literally just copy the art style from those illustrated Disney books, but make them animated too.
Artist here! He looks like he's actually using gouache paint, which works like a watercolor but it's much more opaque than traditional watercolors. She may be confusing the name, but really there's no excuse because the movie's style doesn't look like gouache, either.
I always found these televised interviews from professionals give unrepayable information. I think their way to geared towards the average viewers not inspiring artists, so they tend to be dumbed down & many make little sense, don't want to lose any one when saying something like key frames. I do think the format of unscripted interviews make for less informative statements, a carefully crafted script would be batter.
Although Wish may have fallen short (want to stay positive), I am really egger to see where hybrid animation styles go next, especially with Disney being oddly slow to adopt it.
you can tell the state of disney, a company that makes art, by the ceo who doesn't know the difference between watercolor and gouache
I mean its fine for them to not know art mediums since there not the artist or art directer. Lol should have interviewed the art directer, or atleast gave a prescripted interview with the correct info
@@titandarknight2698 I don't know, but I think it could help if the ceo knows a bit about art or animation, since it's them who takes all the final decisions
@@titandarknight2698 CEOs being the ones that make the big decisions
Should idk
Know about the thing maybe
tbf gouache is a type of watercolor paint. disney used watercolor and tempera for their BGs (not sure on which type but I can agree Sleeping Beauty was probably gouache)
"If WISHES were horses, Disney would ride"
LoL😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lol
The earliest Disney shorts, features like Snow White and Dumbo also used watercolors
I’m convinced that the watercolor excuse is a lie, and they were trying to copy the Nimona art style.
Because during the night scenes, it looks a lot like a slightly more pastel version of the Nimona art style.
But during the day scenes it looks like an unrendeded pastel version of the Nimona art style.
So…
I think they were lying.
I think they copied the art style of a movie they almost got cancelled and then didn’t give their animators enough time to animate that incredibly complex art style.
Because I think Nimona took like…7 years to animate, not including the time they were shut down.
Wish took 5.
They just didn’t have enough time to animate it, and I feel really bad for the artists who I bet did want to do a new style, and I’m sure a decent amount of them at least enjoyed looking at the Nimona art style a little bit, but they didn’t actually get the time they needed to animate it properly.
(note: my capslock is for emphasis, I'm not yelling)
not defending WISH but the old Disney backgrounds ARE watercolor just utilizes different ART STYLES. Waterclors look different depending on the type of paint (ie ink vs gouache), the style, the technique, brush size, brush hape, wet on wet, wet on dry, the paper ect ect.
I'm not 100% sure what watercolors or tools Disney used for their BGs they probs had different kinds (ie the ones you see in older anime use something called Gouache) but watercolors can fast dry compared to acryllic which Disney needed for their schedules.
however youre somewhat right, the ANIMATION as in the moving objects like characters, do not use watercolor, theyre done with some sort of ACRYLIC paint. Watercolor on the plastic cells would not cooperate properly obviously.
The animation starts on pencil, as you showcased via pencil tests. then traced with black or colored acrylics, then fully painted with more acrillyic (and other painting mediums old school Disney was chock full of EXPIRMENTATION.) however the outline process was then replaced by the XEROX in the 70s, after Sleeping Beauty bombed. which Im not entirely sure what the outlines are made of. A type of graphite if i recall but I don't have a source on that so take it with a grain.
They talk about the different artstyles seen in a few Disney backgrounds in Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston's book: The Illusion Of Life. A good read that throws Wish's artistic thought process (or lack there of) out the window and clearly shows the executives like Ms Lee and Bob Igor working on WISH have NO IDEA what makes Disney, Disney and what makes art, Art.
WISH's animation is also a totally different issue imo its animated so weird its almost grotesque. too much squash and stretch compared to the more solid animation seen in the classic disney films the WISH staff are supposedly taking inspiration from (as in the silver and golden age of disney like Sleeping Beauty, not the 80s Renaissance, which imo WISH is copying). Ie Asha's mouth seem to just float all over her face whenever she makes a extreme expression, or one of Magnifeco's shocked exprsssion you showed here his mouth overtakes his entire JAWLINE. like its almost too squishy and stretchy. Its functional animation, it does its job but there's definitely something uncanny about it that no other 3D animation had issue with (yes inckduing the more cartoony stuff like the Incredibles or Hotel Transylvania). This overtly squishy animation can be an issue in 2D as well so it's not due to medium differencesfor those wondering.
What you're describing for WISH's watercolor look is its ARTSTYLE not its ANIMATION. There's overlap but theres definitely a difference and no one talks about the actual animation which I have actual issues with...
I just re-read it, it seems they used something called TEMPERA. as well as watercolors cus they can be switched out if necessary. there's more to background design in Disney, and again its all expirementation, other mediums were possibly used besides watercolor. but the book claims Sleeping Beauty does indeed use watercolors or something like it.
Chapter 10, Pages 246-249 talks about it, as well as the entire section on Backgrounds showcases the various styles seen in the films, but the end of the day they were all or mostly watercolors. This was all done to try to mimic the styles and multi-mediums found within the concept artists works, known as stylists, who had more varying medium usage such as chaulk, ink, pencil, oil crayon, oil paint ect ect.
Watercolors in general are just as versatile as any other paint. it just all depends on the user and their skill and vibe theyre trying to achieve.
there's also the effects department, talked about in a section after the Background artists. they probably play a role in how Backgrounds work too. they're sort of animators and background artists simultaneously depending on the shot.
tldr Silver Age and Golden Age Disney (prior to the 80s so the Little Mermaid does not count here, thats Renaissance) was FULL OF expirementation of traditional media. Renaissance, including the Little Mermaid, began expirementation with 3D and digital coloring.
I agree with you, but just a friendly tip, if you want to use emphasis in a YT comment without needing to disclaimer that you're not yelling, put underline marks before and after the part you're emphasizing to make it _italics._ Just make sure to include punctuation inside the underline marks, otherwise it breaks the code like _this_.
But otherwise, yea, modern Disney can't hold a candle to OG Disney simply because they rely way too much on CGI and quash the kind of creative out-of-the-box design and passionate artistry that elevated their older movies to timeless classics.
@@Dargonhuman huh! i never knew thats how you make italics on here. i usually use the bold but it usually doesn't work for me and bolds an entire paragraph. Thanks!
@@stephanos6128 😊 no worries.
@@Dargonhuman as for CGI reliance I don't think that's an issue either, theres some pretty good 3D animation out there that is just as good as 2D without needing to mimic 2D at all (and of course the ones who do are also good! CG is a tool: 3D can look like cel shaded 2D, so relying on it I don't think is the problem) The whole point of animation is 3D motion in a 2D space. and even 3DCG still needs to follow the 12 Principles that originated from 2D animation.
the *animation* is the issue for me, which has somewhat bothered me since the Renaissance era. I love them for sure, but not so much as I do the Silver Age stuff, the work of 9 Old Men just feels more solid to me compared to the Renaissance.
I feel Wish is just an extremely worse case of like... Glen Keane's squashy and squishy animation style? Which is iroinc 'cus the whole gimmick was _Classic_ era Disney. The Renaissance is Classic in it's own right but the term itself refers to the Silver Age movies. Even the movies Wish were "inspired" by were also Silver Age (Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Pinnochio are what they mentioned), and yet the animation's character design and animation style (like _how_ they move) for the characters borrow heavy from Glen Keane who was _Renaissanc_ .
Not to mention the BGs was so flat looking compared to the BGs of those eras and Wish's BGs were also 2D watercolor! It's one of the only 2D things that survived the Big Scrap during the movie's production. A 2D painting looked flat and wrong, that's just pure skill issue imo (or time constraints which is more likely). Like it looks worse than Tarzan 1992 who had a nice blend of digital 2D paintings on a 3D surface! (i forgot what the tool was called)
Personally it's not a reliance on CG, there's nothing wrong with CG imo. it's Disney not being able to get over Glen Kean. He's amazing for sure and contributed to so much of Disney stuff but they can't get over him. And Frozen.
EDIT: Fixed some typos and grammar.
Snow White is watercolor
That makes all this make more sense lol! Idk how I forgot about Snow White
EE is and american legend, a folk hero. he rode on bike cross country and did a painting every day of what he saw
For a long time I’ve felt that the end of traditional animation at Disney just led to loads of knowledge and talent being lost within that company. Every interview that comes out of Wish has confirmed that for me. First them claiming that 2d animation is too limited in camera angles and movement (from the same company that had James Baxter in their roster of insanely talented animators!!) , now we see they have no idea about the different properties of paints (not being able to see the difference between gouache and watercolor) this is something most art students learn at high school level or earlier…
It honestly feel as if the Disney company resents and hates the medium that made them famous. I don’t get the sense that they really value the traditional art techniques that made their movies look so iconic at all, they’re just name dropping a beautiful looking movie as clickbait to get people watch their visually bland flop lol.
I wish there were more 2d movies
I wouldnt be surprised if the watercolor style was more of technicaly figurative way of saying the colors or something, but as an artist myself, what has really intrigued me in terms of visuals would be the 2d styled background which have potential to combine hand drawn animated characters, makes sense?
It looks like an Instagram filter that makes everything look like it’s on paper
The art style is actually a perfect combination of the unfinished animations you see in documentaries and the Marvels bad green screens.
Those backgrounds remind me of the beautiful backgrounds in King's Quest 6.
I may be looking at it wrong, but when the artist of sleeping beauty was shown painting, it looked as though he was using gouache which is a form of watercolor. It’s thicker and works a bit differently than regular watercolor paint, but it’s still partly watercolor. Now should she have kept reference referenceing it as watercolor when it truly wasn’t just that? No. And I agree with you with this whole video. Disney has lost its touch and creativity, and are trying to use things that are or were popular into films to get more money, instead of making their films with the magic they had before. Very sad.
Samurai Jack's art style was pulling from the same Influences of those periods. SJ pulled a lot from UPA's as well as all the post war minimalism that was going on in the 50s. SJ's biggest influence was Toei Doga's The Little Prince and the Eight-Headed Dragon but Toei has been greatly influenced from UPA's Magoo's Puddle Jumper.
I've always thought they meant the storybook intro to the movie. Not the actual movie. The pages opening and the pictures not being that detailed. Just bright colors and no line art or whatever. I'm not an art person
Damn. Not even Lilo and Stitch was shouted out by her. What happened there? That’s my childhood she just dismissed. Bruh.
Even if we agreed that Disney wanted to do what they planned, the end product still looked really bad. It just looks like unfinished, half-rendered 3D that they didn't have time to fix, so they just hastily crafted an explanation that pretends that they did it on purpose.
If you compare it to Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, where the creators intended for the style to look like paintings you would see in a fairytale book, you can tell they nailed it. Hell, you don't even need to know that to appreciate the distinct, gorgeous style of that movie. It speaks for itself.
The test footage they made with Asha in the Pinocchio background looked better than the entire movie.
Yea I can definitely see the inspiration from Sleeping Beauty in Wish's backgrounds, especially in the concept art. But the term "watercolor" is not accurate at all, lmao.
they’re so detached from the art behind their money making schemes they don’t even know their companies past works
disney not event knowing their own history is tragic
Don't forget Pinocchio's watercolor backgrounds!!
Eyvind Earl used gouache, which is a type of watercolor.
Disney has REALLY done it now!
when they say watercolor they they dont actually mean watercolor the art of manipulating translucent colors and water to create different themes and textures )which you dont just use water for, you can also use salt, paper and dry paint), they just dont want to have to put in the work for finishing the rendering
Wish versus the Doom Syndicate
Vs Madame Web
Well anyway I went and watched Lilo and Stitch again thanks dude
It would have been solo much better if they make a 2d movie
i mean i get the confusion since he used gouache but still a different paint style lol
Someone also said they wanted wish to in a ' POP UP' book style. I think the source was the art book
I love that art style is really good, I just can seeing this concept animation is look just like mix of modern DreamWorks, old Disney fairy tale movies, Nimona (2023), Borderlands, Disney Junior, Spider-Verse movies, Enchanted (2007), Nintendo DS graphics, old 1930s-1990s watercolor-paiting 2D hand-drawn animation style to 3D, early 2000s Barbie movies, Tangled, Edmund Dulac, The Elder Scrolls IV, Lilo & Stitch, Sleeping Beauty, Eyvind Earl, and James Baxter.
I mean Eyvind Earle used gouache, which is a kind of watercolor...
If I'm not mistaken the backgrounds in sleeping beauty are made with gouache colors, not watercolors. They're close but they're not the same, from pigment to their base materials to achieve that texture and color. I imagine they said watercolors to simplify for the public the inspiration but it did a disservice to what technique was actually used. Maybe someone in the art department said "watercolor" to help higher ups understand the concept and it stuck like the pest lmao
Couldn’t agree more
I Guess She Likes The Watercolor Style
As an artist... It is probably mix medium. Watercolor and Acrylic... I see what they were trying to go for. I enjoyed Wish as well as the art style. It looks like a story book with how the textures are laid out. But this is coming from an artist who's been doing this since 2014. I get it, Disney is not how it use to be and it does sadden me how much they've strayed from the traditional work. but times change and so do the methods and of course.. the people who run the Disney animation stuff, all change as well. That being said, Give respect to the animators and people who worked on wish regardless. It takes so much time, effort and mental energy for artists. Whether they are 3D or 2D artists. The story may not be that great, but it doesn't really have to be when its for little kids who aren't going to care.
pretty sure eyvind earle used gouache, a type of watercolor that is kind of similar to acrylic paint in the sense that it can be very opaque
Do you have the link to that pdf of the sleeping beauty backgrounds?
They keep saying their inspiration was sleeping beauty’s “watercolor” backgrounds because they don’t want to explain how they tried to jack nimona’s style and failed after shutting down blue sky
Please link the websites to Eyvind Earle’s work. Can’t find it anywhere
It looks like Eyvind Earle was using Gauche to paint his backgrounds, which is often confused with watercolors.
But here's the thing that seems confusing : classical watercolor or aquarelle technique leaving out the whites of the paper as form of highlight, having very soft gradient shadows and soft edges is a COMPLETE different look. I don't understand why they referenced the animation to watercolor style. Maybe they wanted to achieve gouache style (similar to sleeping beauty). Gouache though is not watercolor/aquarelle. Both are visionally completely different. Yes, they are used with water, but that's about the only similarity. Gouache has strong contrasts, looks more graphic, but definitely has shadows, the graduation of shadows is just very bold, but there are definitely a lot of strong gradient shadows. If gouache is the look they were striving to achieve then it doesn't make any sense to use very even lighting.
So probably in order to achieve the effect they were going for (hand drawn 3d) they would have needed to have a clear concept and consistently pull through. Either bold shadows with strong outlines maybe a bit sketchy outlines or gradient very soft shadows with very soft and almost invisible edges.
Please make a video about "Disney's WISH Colour Palette makes NO SENSE."
>"We've got a look like we've never seen before"
Awkward moment when the movie looks just like every recent Disney film, just this time with a cel shading + outline filter
The thumbnail and the style reminds me of a kids game 😂
Hello, artist here. Without further research, it looks like Earl was painted with gouache which is a milk based paint famous fie its ability to be reactivated with water. While it can be thinned to a "watercolor like" state they can also used opaque, unlike watercolor which is always transparent to some degree.
The Wish backgrounds actually look nice, they just need more contrast. You can't just mimic a "watercolor style" because it had appealing results in the past, without recognizing what MADE it look appealing, so you can adapt.
kinda reminds me of the Borderlands art style tbh
I think the biggest influence for this was early sofia the 1st
Well to be fair, the paint used in the sleeping beauty (or commercial posters and illlustrations) is gouache, a water medium that is opaque. However, I totally aggree that the sleeping beauty art style is definetly not what I'm thinking of when I looking at the Wish art style...
Hi! I agree with what you're saying but Eyevinde Earle 100% used watercolor--specifically a thick, opaque kind of watercolor paint called "gouache." It is a very versatile and rich kind of paint, as well as being actually quite forgiving and easy to manipulate because the pigment uses water as a medium rather than oil or other substances.
Wish was terrible in many ways, and Earle's art was indeed amazing (if you want more cool midcentury disney paintings check out the work of Mary Blair!) but you should probably be more careful when talking about the processes used in these films. Goache IS watercolor!
Want a good look at a painterly 3D style? Arcane
Im an artist and I think wish’s art style looks really good. (I heard the writing was boring though so I haven’t watched the whole thing) The style does look a little like the traditional style with the outlines, they probably just misspoke about sleeping beauty being watercolor or meant it in a different way.
The higher ups having a chronic misunderstanding of the fundamentals makes sense for how the movie turned out. Some say the plot is ai generated, with this kind of expertise I would believe it.
Snow White and Pinocchio also used watercolor.
I pretty sure they used poster colors or gouache or paint maybe 🤔 back then for sleeping beauty.
The lighting is also weird. They use a sort of a cel shading style. The unfortunate part is that cel shading is best effective under direct lighting. Sadly, there is a very... limited use of it for some reason, which has some of the shots looking so muddy or underlit.
is there a disconnect in disney with previous modern and the craft ? no of course not XD
The movie art style reminds me of Nintendo DS graphics
was the video originally going to be a youtube shorts video?
this is proof that the higher ups not know what they’re talking about. It feels like more evidence that the higher ups really did stick their noses into production and messed things up, since they can’t even describe their own movie properly.
I feel kinda bad cuz I’ve spoken to ppl who worked on the film. I wish the best for their upcoming films…
it is just me or does it look like a straight to DVD movie?
it looks light gmod full bright lighting
But you can't denied that the Wish background are inspired from sleeping beauty background! And i think they look beautiful!! It's a but weird with the characters in CGI but not horrible. It's just trendy to hate this movie. But it's not horrible. It's not a masterpiece but it doesn't deserve the hate it get
Ok, I'm trying so hard to be optimistic about this movie, maybe they were going for a 3d and 2d mashup ????????????????????????
im trying
it doesn't make sense on another level; in the art book of Tangled, they go into how that was exactly their goal, translating the visuals of old 2D films into 3D. Tangled is absolutely gorgeous and they already had that research and style figured out, so i dont know why they didn't use that for building the style.
Someone said it looked like the early (2000s) barbie movies
so it does make sense
OP just didn't understand it and is using a press interview with a non-artist / non-technical executive that was conducted for marketing purposes rather than the design documents (which likely don't mention watercolor anywhere)
the title should be "american executive does not understand their own product, gets huge bonus at end of each year anyways"
look like high poly plus no shading just smooth textures for me cus no shading looks not even good at that
Maybe it's just me, but Wish's animation look a bit like Sofia the First
In all honesty, it's not the art style that I hated about Wish.... I actually LOVEd the character designs and seeing body-type diversity, not just skin color. I honestly hate the art style for the older Disney movies because they usually portray people as "ugly" who don't follow the beauty standards and all their villains look like zombies. It's purely the story of Wish that I hated, not the art style or animation. At first I found it kind of off-putting but I got used to it.
IDK, this just kinda feels like a gaffe based on "common knowledge" (i.e believing an incorrect assumption popularized by the mainstream, such as thinking that It's a Wonderful Life is a schmaltzy Christmas movie when it's a dark look into the life of a man that felt screwed over by life and only the last 20 or so minutes are actually set at Christmas) so it feels pointless to be upset about.
It honestly looks more like Sophia the First than Sleeping Beauty but they slapped an outline around the character models and haphazardly plopped them onto 2D backgrounds, and I feel like I'm insulting that show by saying this.
It doesn't even take an animator or an artist to look at Wish and figure out everything wrong with it. The "villain" actually comes off as more of the good guy, so not only do you have horrible writing but you also have an art style and everything else that isn't even fucking consistent. Like holyshit y'all have millions of dollars in budget and you can't just make a decent film?
It looks more like the work of Edmund Dulac.