Shaka Zulu wrote:
Temis the Vorta wrote:
But if the next series is CGI animated, it's not going to fall in the uncanny valley because that just doesn't work at all. The effect is too creepy and remember, five year old kids need to want to watch it.
Who says that five-year old kids have to see it at all? Also, the animation on Star Trek: TAS
was based in reality and wasn't 'cartoony', and it was a success-so how do you square that?
As for the so-called 'uncanny valley' look of this cartoon (Aurora
), it's a one-man operation using what that one man (Tim Vining) could get his hands on, namely the DAZ Studio program (which I wish more professional animation studios would use instead of the same cartoony look popularized by Pixar, Dreamworks PDI, Blue Sky, and Sony), and working his ass off to get it done with voice acting by his wife Jeanette Vining as Kara Carpenter and also by himself.
It seems that the Japanese are the only ones who can appreciate realistic-looking characters in animation, which is why anime is at the top of the animation world (and growing) while North American animation is stuck in a childish netherworld.
Who says 5 year old will see it? The network that is going to buy the show. In the US the only market for animated shows are adult comedies and shows aimed at children(even if adults watch). Pretending that the US will suddenly adopt Japanese tastes and accept and adult animated drama is just wishful thinking.
And while the TAS may have been based on reality the whole concept of the uncanny valley is that there is a valley in the believability graph just before the image becomes lifelike that it makes it harder for people to accept. TAS is so far from that valley point that it has nothing to do with the discussion. If you don't know what the uncanny valley is, then I don't know why we're even having this debate.