Honestly I expected a bigger difference after 14 years but that video is in really shit quality either way
video is too low res
Even in potato quality like this, you can tell that the skin textures of the characters look far more natural here. The skin is probably the part of the original that's aged the least well; the characters look a bit waxy, with the exception of scenes where they're lit by warm firelight (the cave and the volcano).
Video quality is closer to the time where the first Incredibles was made smh
Little bit higher quality
Its the nuances that really hold their own. Theres so many more small movements and subtle gestures, those are what really make the difference, not just the render quality.
The character design is also a whole lot softer
Yeah, this isn't official footage since the quality for The Incredibles 2 is so damn low. It's not really doing this any justice.
But I saw the IMAX double feature and it was so cool that it picked off literally where the last one ended so you could really experience how different it looked. The first thing I noticed was how much better the hair was. We've come so far and it's so damn cool.
I remember that one of the featurettes on The Incredibles DVD mentioned that the hair animation they had for Violet was a breakthrough... And look at how much better it looks now!
The lighting's the biggest change IMO. 3D characters no longer default to a plastic/metal exterior, but have actual skin. Body animations look pretty similar overall, but faces are much more expressive today.
Incredibles was Pixar’s first film with human lead characters instead of supporting characters (Andy, Andy’s mum, Boo) or supporting antagonists (Sid, Al, the Dentist). They’ve since done eight films with either human lead characters or a greater emphasis on human supporting characters (Ratatouille, Wall-E, Up, Toy Story 3, Brave, Inside Out, The Good Dinosaur, Coco). IIRC Pixar took on Incredibles at that time as they wanted to push themselves to make a movie with human main characters and each of those films since helped them with developing their skills at animating humans. Compare Merida, Riley or Miguel with Andy in the first Toy Story.
Probably the best thing about Pixar making sequels is seeing how far their tech has come when they revisit old characters. I can’t wait to see how the Toy Story gang look in Toy Story 4 next year considering how much Pixar’s tech has advanced in the last 8 years.
The facial features and animation was great, compared to the first Incredibles. Lots of movement and emotion in their expressions. I'm sure working more with human characters over the years has helped with that. That was one of the big things I noticed after watching Incredibles 2.
Wow, now the bottom one looks like one of those "unfinished VFX" videos.
My thoughts exactly.
The biggest improvement is the hair technology.
I recently re-watched the first movie and the hair was almost distracting.
It was the first animated movie where they could do stuff like hair and water reasonably well, that's why they show it off.
Back in the day, there really proud about the kid's hair animation when he's running.
Yeah, I didn't mind the rest of the animation but the hair is so distracting when watching it.
Saw this last night. The top video is heavily washed out and nowhere near what the movie actually looked like. Those whites are as bright as the sun in this one.
Never heard that one before.
ICE of you to drop by!
Enough about you wife.
They went and gave Tony a whole damn makeover.
I would guess that's also big different in team size between the two movies. I would guess Incredible 2 team is 2-3 times bigger with better tools and better training with them than the first team enjoyed. We also don't know how much time was involved in doing each scene. Incredible 2 probably had more time overall to work on the scene.
I know it's a lot of speculation but i would not throw shade on incredible 1 just because some "magic technology" happened. It almost never technology, technology doesn't do better art, it allows you do to better art but it doesn't mean that most people would be able to.
I think it's both. They probably have a much bigger team, but animation technology has definitely improved in the last 10 years as well. 10 more years and I'm confident we'll be able to make completely realistic animation if we choose to.
Subsurface scatering is the biggest difference for me. It makes them look a lot softer and adds a glow to their skin.
Definitely. Having just rewatched the original a few times in anticipation of the sequel, the skin constitutes the biggest distraction for me. The movie still holds up well, but the characters look a bit waxy or plastic in the original, whereas in the sequel the skin tones look much more natural.
The glow makes a big difference; the only scenes in the original where the skin looks mostly lifelike are the ones where the characters are in proximity to a source of warm natural light, like lava or a fire.
The newer looks more "manga like". Cuter by enlarging the eyes and smoothing the skin.
Almost all the characters between the movies look exactly the same except for Tony.
What I wouldn't give to see the original redone at the technical level of this new animation. The first film still holds up decently animation-wise, but the sequel brings everyone to life so much more vividly.
So, bloom and depth of field?
It doesn't look worse but that's a credit to the first movie. So far ahead if it's time as far as animation is concerned. Every slight hair movement is animated perfectly.
Wow first one looks so much better, but I think it's more due to the art style.
News & Discussion about Major Motion Pictures
Teen Titans Go! To The Movies
Mission: Impossible - Fallout
Disney's Christopher Robin