It's so simple, it's magic what it can achieve!

Never ruins it for me. I love movie magic!

You are right! It's the same as knowing that a painter uses brush and paint to make amazing pieces of art. It doesn't make it less wonderful, on the contrary, it makes it even more incredible.

great observation

Wow 🥺

True, software such like Toonboom makes it hundred times easier

Yes!!! I was trying to remember where I had seen it. I loved watching how it all came together. This just doesn’t happen anymore. I know it’s a lot of hard work and hours being out in and we have the technology to make it easier but there’s something missing in all the newer animations…

Akira.

@@funkworthrollin4959 good point, the anime industry actually managed to establish itself as a "not for kids" market, at least in Asia. My point was not that adult animated movies don't exist per se, but that aggressively advertising animation as "cute and funny films for children" shoved the genre into rigid frames which restrict artistic freedom of those who want to tell complex stories using this medium. In the West you typically have to dumb down your concept and force it into a form of "a cartoon show for kids" to get any good exposure. Artistic adult cartoons do exist in the West, but they're usually left forgotten forever after about 100 people see them at a couple of obscure small festivals. This is the problem I'm talking about - that the media of animation is being forcefully restricted to kids market, when it could be so much more.

It's Walt Disney, simple as that

@@iamchriswick “Old school” Walt Disney.

no cussing, no lying

Back before everything had to be a conflict.

Not talking about the conpany. That's is literally Mr Walt Disney.

Classic!

if I had that job, I'd go home and beat my wife senseless every night

@Norm Meunier I would still give my wife the back of my hand. Why? Because she over cooked the roast, boi Am I so angry.

@@georgemoraleswork Definitely not funny...

@@Sparkfist83 stop Karen, don’t go complaining to KZfaq’s manager

@FROMIS_ EVENTS_ I suddenly remembered in horror... the time CARTOON NETWORK started showing live-action movies. Yikes x2.

Yeah

@@RraMakutsi can buy skill?

I’d be down to do the work

@@RraMakutsi Walt started with less then nothing. Learn something will you.

@Miles If one day your coward of a God decides to show his face, I for one will punch him so hard he'll end up back in heaven.

Get your shit together Alan.

"i was moving it the wrong way dick im taking it back now." He said it with such little effort or emotion that it seemed almost like it took effort to do it like that!

Complete with voiceovers lol

That's how you can tell those are the actual animators lmao

They also sound like the cartoons they make.

Exactly what I was thinking

Im pretty sure marvel actually used videos of Walt Disney as inspiration for Tony Starks father in the movie, Correct me if i'm wrong but i swear i remember reading it somewhere a few years ago.

Stark was inspired by disneys presentation of tomorrowland

100%, Howard Stark has Howard Hughes’ engineering ingenuity and Walt Disney’s personality.

Tony, on the other hand, is all Hughes.

I sense our culture has been steadily losing the subtle art of effective communication

in reality i cant imagine modern disney/pixar's animation process is that interesting. alot of it is tedious work and mouse clicking at a desk, all while staring at ugly, unfinished models. then there's the node work and digital file organizing, which if you ask me isn't really jaw dropping. part of why is so explainable is because it's all physical slates and panels; it's alot harder going in depth on something abstract as texture work or hair physics. if you do want to check out a good modern version of this, vox news always goes in depth on pixar movies anytime their released and explains the subtle achievements they're still making in animation today.

Maybe it's an in-joke, it happens at the exact moment Disney says "come closer" (Mickey gets farther away)

@@futurestoryteller creative theory!

he's just v i b i n g

It's a miss-splice of the film.

Might also be something that happened when this million year old clip has been digitized, mangled, ripped and splurted into KZfaq.

For the normal setup shown at the start it was indeed, I guess you could do transparencies with the multiplane too, but it was probably better looking to paint it to glass straight, dunno maybe it sticks well or cleans better, plus no need for 2 layers to trap dust (like, if it was transparency on top of glass).

That makes it amazing

The animation back then much more fluid and squashy. The characters were beautiful too. But since cartoon only for tv, animators didn't got enough budget. So cartoons today look like rock

Not better or worse than today or back then, stop saying this crap.

@@steamboatwill3.367 Characters animation of the past were clearly superior, it's a lost craft.

@@pablol1069 ) no, it's the same, look at Cuphead or any new animated shows, it's still there.

Digital ruined a lot of stuff and there is a reason a lot of stuff went back to hand painting and hard work THOUGH the multi-focal is done digitally or via CNC these days it really was great in its day. Now the best work seems to be a mix of digital and real so some parts became faster while other parts remain as laborious. Even some simple effects in the animated films from Tim Burton in the 1990's had real effects, and very hard work, done and most people love them today.

@@generalawareness101 Are you saying digital isn’t “hard work”? As a digital artist I can’t say that’s correct.

@@StrangePerson69 agreed, I suck at digital art. I'm much better with physical materials, but digital art is cheaper and there's no clean up afterwards. So I'm trying to learn.

@@StrangePerson69 I agree it's still hard work but today's technology has made things a lot easier. That isn't a bad thing of course. The problem today is because technology has gotten so advanced, it's relied on too much. The thing about an old classic Disney movie is that a tool like the one displayed here was done to improve the quality of the movie, to add to the overall experience. There's still an amazing soundtrack, voice work, writing, etc. Today the work in visuals is put in to keep from putting effort into anything else. Imagine if the only thing people liked about Bambi was the layers. Sure, that's a lot of work, but for what purpose?

Ofc we are amazing...imagine there are still people who belive the evolution theory as a fact 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️or that we came(due to atoms coming together🤣🤦‍♂️) on this earth just like that! No motive for our life or feelings! I would like to see monkeys doing that(movies and stuff) today or in million years🤣🤦‍♂️ God help us all keep our sanity! #nothing_is_a_coincidence!

yesssss

"DOTA 2, RESPECT AND CHESS."

Were

HEAVENLY FATHER/HIS SON, JESUS , WHO made us and gave us these talents is even MORE AMAZING. Just acknowledging THE TRUTH. 1/3/2021. Can you believe it ...2021. I pray THIS year is better than the last. 2020 will go down in infamy. Hau’oli Makahiki Hou ( Happy New Year ) from Hawaii, everybody. GOD bless you

Very interesting indeed. In the early 90's I attended training as an imagineers first starting at Ringling School for Art and Design in Sarasota Florida and then later working at Epcot. It was in this training I discovered this technique. Later I used the frame by frame to create animation to create the illusion of video online. I used Swish program before it was flash media to create movement and the layer production and key frames allowed for realistic illusions of actual video. I used action scripting to link up QuickTime and wav sounds. But it was Walt and his imagineers and this technique that pioneecred the way for later innovations. Thank you for posting this content.

@Miles If all wrong is forgiven, why repent?

@@tony_w839 Sup! I think what Miles means is that God loved us so much that he decided to forgive us our sins, even though we could never deserve it or could get rid of our sins by our own. But we need to believe that Jesus died and that God raised Him from the dead and that he is Lord though, to receive His grace. However, when Jesus died on the cross, He did it once and for all, so this gift of grace would then be available for us all! Yes we will have to believe in Him, but basically He made this sacrifice even before we could make a decision, and thereby defeated sin and giving us the option of forgiveness even before we could ask for it! Amen! And that is how much God loved the world so He gave his only son for us! I don't think Miles' saying it to judge anyone or you, but I think he is saying it because that he hopes that people will receive His Grace and he believes that God truly loves all of us and not at least you! I myself am a christian, and I am so happy and I truly believe in the power of Jesus' name and I try to live my life for Him every day :) and I hope that you and more people will get to know him! :) So I pray for you, and everyone else here! Jesus I pray that your power will manifest before these people and Tony, and that they will find that your love and grace is so beyond the world for them and that it is all that they need, amen! Then again, maybe it's not necessarily related to Disney's awesome cartoon inventions, but I didn't start the topic! ;) I love the world of Walt Disney, and I surely love God! God's blessings guys, from Sweden

@@TheAaromaniac you may need to read up on the definition of facetious. As that was very obviously a comment in jest and didn't warrant such a lengthy reply. The fact of the matter is people don't like being reminded of death, nor being told what they need to do in life. I understand the sentiment, genuinely I do, but this is the kind of thing that turns people off and gives them a bad impression of Christians. It may be meant in good faith, but it comes across as sanctimonious and abrasive to most. Nothing you can do about that aside from accept it and move on unfortunately. Hej från Stockholm 👋

*most. Some exceed this, it's relatively niche and rare though.

@@awesomeferret Which ones are the one that do exceed this?

@@amechismallwood7242 just about anything Hayao Miyazaki is involved with, there are others but I can't think of any off the top of my head at the moment.

@@awesomeferret Thank you.

Este comentario denota una visión de las cosas tan cerrada y cesgada por el tan común y equivocado pensamiento del "antes era mejor".

Don't talk about my moms yo

@@pj9368 aye sometime he rhyme quick sometime he rhyme slow

Disney co. under Walt Disney was a real imaginative studio. He risked it all (flirting bankruptcy) multiple times - "Snow White," their first animated feature, and "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," their first live-action feature are good examples. The primary motivation was entertainment, second was making animation a viable medium for not just motion pictures, but for entertainment for all ages. Third was money. Roy, and the following interim Chairmen didn't push the company as hard (which, was kinda smart) but saw a great decline in funds from lack of gripping & box office succeeding films. Michael Eisner ballooned the company into a mega-corporation, investing wisely into merchandise, television, cruises, theme parks, etc. The Disney renaissance saw a rejuvenation of creative output, because IMO money wasn't the only focus - even if it was a higher priority by this point. Eisner's tendency to needlessly raise theme park prices and milk franchises dry with over-saturated direct-to-video/dvd sequels weren't positive, although made the company more money. Bob Iger runs Disney co. like a bullying monopolistic black hole - buying up anything and everything he can, often with little regard for what he's taking in. At the time, the Pixar buy-out was seen as a positive. But, under the old agreement/contract, Pixar COULD have outsourced animation to ALL studios. Now they're exclusively Disney's pet. A lot of their CGI breakthroughs and innovations have been sheltered to just Disney films - and that's unfortunate. Various subsidiaries, like Marvel Studios, Lucasfilm, and now 20th Century studios have had their creative output altered into a more homogenized beast; pushing out the same product again and again with little difference. What's worse is that these movies have begun to splinter the franchises' fans irreparably. Bob Iger's Disney has only one goal; money. He leaves the creativity and innovation to the smaller studios under their control; often completely unchecked and left to self-govern. It stinks, but it works from a corporate perspective. "Avengers: Endgame" is now the highest grossing film of all time, and I'm sure that makes the board of directors happy. But, from a creative standpoint, it's been absolute suicide. I can't see this lasting much longer. With film output getting increasingly mixed reviews over the past few years, I can't see the box office grosses continuing to stay so high. The "live action remakes" are Iger's direct-to-video sequels, and it's simply not sustainable. The Disney co. is walking a thin line rn. It'll only take another buy-out to bring down the hammer of Government intervention. The 20th Century Fox purchase was Iger testing the waters, akin to Hitler annexing small European nations. Eventually, poland will come, and TWDC will face problems. SO sad to see it turn into this. Even with its flaws, I used to LOVE the Disney company. Loved the films, the shows, the media etc. Not anymore. They've become bloated, and quality & entertainment have taken a backseat to money. That's not completely unsurprising, but still sad. I wish it could get back to how it was under Walt's direction. Apologies. Rant over.

Yes, somehow they flubbed, and that spec you see at 1:50 is actually Mickey's face.

@@TheDylandProductions fuck

as a CG artist myself. boi is that statement inaccurate

No... the engneers did hard work... Disney and the animators did dick-all for anybody.

@@RraMakutsi Yeah not like they created the paintings and drawings that would appear in the films or anything

No, real hard work is doing a 10 hour shift on a building site in the pissing rain. This in comparison is something you do for fun at the weekends.

@@eclecticjon1019 You could simply ask for attention, you know.

@@papayer Do you copy and paste that reply to everyone who comments on the Internet?

He didn’t pioneer this. He stole this invention and the title for first animated feature from Lotte Reininger who predated Snow White by 13 years.

Don't forget iwerks.

Walt Disney was a racist asshat... he paid good engineers gobs of money to accomplish what you describe. What's your point?

@@RraMakutsi how was he racist?

@@joebrewer4529 Read a history book... hell, even a quick google search for "Walt Disney racist" (which would take less time to post than your comment) reveals much about the man.

Voyager II still going strong to interstellar space!

On what grounds would you say that? That's actually pretty hard to argue from a technical standpoint, there are plenty of modern 2D animated features that took way more work than anything Disney did 70 years ago. Even clichéd stuff like Spirited Away and Lion King. There are just too many examples of quality animation. Quality 2D animation may have been more common back then but saying that nothing has matched it is, from a technical perspective at least, laughably false.

Exactly like a magic trick. Excellent analogy.

What "transatlantic accent"? Walt Disney was born in Chicago and spoke with a plain American accent.

You might have meant “midlantic” accent but WD didn’t have one. Cary Grant and James Mason were prime examples of that midlantic vocal delight.

@@kjamison5951 transatlantic and mid atlantic is the same

He doesn’t have a mid-Atlantic accent, it’s just because the sound quality isn’t that good, due to the fact that this is from 1957.

Trying to sound smart and informed. Only to prove yourself the opposite. Pathetic.

lol

Exactly!

@@RogersPhotographyGuilford "Exactly" in what way? When did Photoshop claim to invent the concept of layering?

This has nothing to do with layers. Layers were invented much earlier than even the multiplane camera. They just used transparent cellulose sheets for that, like in the first example. The multiplane camera invented animation layer separation, which would be useless for a still image software like Photoshop.

@@gayusschwulius8490 it was only a joke :P

Wow how did u even notice that . U would make a great critic

That One Green Froggy It was actually invented in the 30s. The multiplane camera was first tested on the short film The Old Mill in 1937.

It's actually much easier to do now. Everything that this machine is doing can be done in software now. This multi-plane effect is still used to create parallax but now the backgrounds are layers in software rather than being pushed around in a machine, it's a virtual camera.. This exact look can still be achieved and much cheaper.

Bambi was released in 1942 but production began in 1939.

@@juhokestila7367 Thanks.. just checked out the short film after your comment. It's freely available on KZfaq if anyone wants and a delight to watch.

disney cant afford it, doesnt have the money to do it. no?

Chinese-Made Products are terrible.

I agree

I wish that we still had that spirit in the products we produce

This was on TV on Sunday’s a filler during the wonderful world of Disney in the 70s and in the movie theaters before a Disney cartoon there are a lot more.

I love and miss these educational 'behind the scenes' shows that they would do, today most of what they show seems to be more of the 'reality' based shows.....

What are you talking about. It's 64 years old. Almost as old as me. But if you look up a process called "rotoscope" you'll see that what Disney did was just reinventing the wheel. Giggle, pun intended. ..

@@michaelshultz2540... He's referring to upload date.

It's amazing how digital just can't capture all the nuance and depth of analog, even to this day. There is a quality of depth and realism that just gets lost once digital shortcuts are taken - even with the extremely advanced level of digital technology today. This is true for everything from music production to animation to FX in movies. It's all the subtle aspects that sit right on the edge of our perceptual awareness that come together to create this effect. And, because of this, you can take something like a purely analog film taping and convert it to digital format while mostly maintaining that effect, even though so much information is being lost in translation. Of course, it will never have the depth of seeing it in the actual film format. There is just no way to simulate it digitally. Not yet, anyway. One is confined by the limits of our perception while the other is confined by the limits of technology.

@@neonsashimidream1075 I think analog and digital are a different beast entirely, both with their own strength and weakness. I really feel that the depth and quality of a work depends on the creator itself.

@@neonsashimidream1075 Bruh what are you talking about I've seen incredible matte paintings done with photoshop, nuke and maya. Of course, this way is cool too since it was the original way of doing it. I respect both a lot

It was 1957. He didn't want to confuse the children watching it at the time.

Why didn't they just use an already invented process of rotoscopeing? Leave it to Disney to reinvent the wheel at great expenditure!

@@michaelshultz2540 They used rotoscoping on occasion, but it has flaws. For on thing, it's basically cheating. Rotoscoping traces over existing footage to capture motion. Second, rotoscoped animation looks different from frames drawn from scratch or from a reference. It looks too real against a cartoon, where motion is usually exaggerated.

After Effects is just another tool, like this one. Do you think people back then were saying this isn’t real animation because it’s not all on one plane?

There is no "true" art. All art is art because it's completely subjective. Also, why would you want to go back to this clunky and time consuming mechanical method? The techniques and artistry needed to make animation haven't changed, but the tools have made doing the same things more efficient. Please stop gatekeeping based on some "good old days" nonsense.

You dont know how much work is put into modern animations to

@@createdbynemanja3431 not that much tbh

Unfortunately that's overshadowed by their passion of churning out product to sell, the fastest, most inexpensive way possible.

Computers dont necessarily remove the magic, think Pixar. These are just Disney's choices not convincing you. And also me. But it seems like it convinces everyone else :/

Well animation ain't cheap.

You mean 1:50?

That’s not a glitch the animator must’ve gotten the wrong Mickey Mouse walking transparent and placed it there but it’s also either maybe a mix up maybe it’s not in order the Mickey Mouse’s

I mean 2d still exist

Chutiya hain. Sale....Jo mehnat se nahi sikhte.....

And film it vertically.

I hate tiktok

And we call them fucking people

ok boomer