What is Digg?39 Comments
- PayneX, on 10/11/2007, -5/+28MUST i also listen?
- JasonMaloney101, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20A-Ha - Take On Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUod3jGQt0U - bradkovach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16You've gotta give credit. Frame-by-frame animating is time consuming. I couldn't do it, so I'm impressed!
- Elliuotatar, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16I can't believe people are hating on Cotton Eye Joe. Talk about no taste in music.
- InfamousX241, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Aren't all animations frame-by-frame?
- stiankarlsen, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15Incredible? No.
Kinda cool? Sure.
The song sucks big time tho. - scottauth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Can someone tell me at what point in that video the "incredible" part occurs? If you're going to make us listen to that song, at least post the flying lawnmower video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT60SkXN1UY - DenTPuzz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Good to see that 'traditional' animation is still thriving!
- Tr33fiddy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I swear, of ALL the music ever created why did they have to be inspired by THAT?!
- chopcow, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6The only similarities between this animation and "Take on Me" is that they are both sketched in pencil. This animation is much more impressive, since it was animated freehand, where as "Take On Me" was rotoscoped.
- igoratwork, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Looked awesome. I think the unfinished look was an artistic choice.
- bruinexmo, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9(adj) incredible, beyond belief or understanding
This animation is neither incredible, nor a "must watch". - RileyKA, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4But you did watch it. so the must watch tag did exactly what it was supposed to do, get hits on the video on youtube. Must Watch, maybe not. Impressive "hand drawn" animation set to "music" (if you can call it music), Yes.
- gopy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3@LanceWindu,
A lot of the animation seems to be in rough pencil stage. Usually when things disappear from frame to frame, its because nothing has changed for that part of the body since the frame before. I'm assuming certain parts were animated in layers, a common practice. So a frame would be fully drawn, but then lets say the next frame contains new facial animation, but the character's hat stays in place, they can use the same drawing from the hat layer, but that doesn't get put in until the next phase in the process.
To go along with that, some aspects could be animated on 2s (every other frame, which typically looks better to the eye) and faster moving things like the face at times animated on 1s. Same idea as before.
That is my take on it. I've taken an animation class and did some pencil tests before. Never took it any farther... - curme, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Your club in Knoxville predates the 1800's?
- joach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Rednex, I rember them! It was that Swedish ground that never wanted to admit they were Swedish.
- Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1 Ah,their just used to rap is all...Which is not music,it's poetry....Often very bad poetry.
- andergriff, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1HooooooWeeeeee, Uncle Jed!!!!!!!
- ihate2regist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2um... sorry?
- feebie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1because it is obviously rough spec animation, done in sketches rather than full finished and inked drawings.
- bradkovach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm a friend of the artist. There is a color version that she made for a DVD school project. It's a lot nicer, with less YouTube compression artifacts, as you can imagine.
- feebie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It is hard. Takes more planning and thinking than you think.
- feebie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You are quite mistaken. The animation is pretty incredible. It rivals that of contemporary animation gurus. Though it is missing many inbetweens, all of the keys and extremes are there, which tells me if this particular animator wanted to spend more copious amounts of time adding inbetweens, she could have. However, because it is rough in style and nature, it is quite forgiven that she didn't, and it adds to the sketched feel and look. The only thing that ISN'T incredible, as most people seem to agree, is her choice in music. Otherwise it is some pretty remarkable rough spec animation.
- apachedisco, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1FastZ
Pro-note:
Research before posting to avoid the Douchebag title!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_Eyed_Joe - Zankue, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yeah, really. I've always hated this song and always will. Putting animation to it doesn't make it any better
- LanceWindu, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Someone explain to me why the animation seems to have pieces of the bodies disappear throughout, as though the frames weren't anywhere near completed.
- bradkovach, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Compression artifacts, I imagine.
- PimmsONE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0quite cool
- admirabumblebee, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Frame by Frame... AND an animation? HOLY BLOODY *****! I've never heard of that before.
- defectDS, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Isn't this just... how a cartoon is made? WIthout the coloring? And with the mind-numbing song you dread anticipating at your uncles 50th birthday costume disco party?
... - FastZ, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I am from around Knoxville, TN where the club that spawned the song is located.
http://www.cottoneyedjoe.com/ - mentor972, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Yep, that's how they made cartoons back in the day. Not really that amazing. Everyone did it.
- metapop, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0ugh, horrible song. did someone dare you to use this garbage, or did someone delete every other song but that one from your computer?
- TheAkolyte, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2It's time consuming, not hard.
- diizy, on 10/11/2007, -13/+3"Where all my summer went back in 2004."
What a waste of a good summer. GET OUTSIDE.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is