Version2: AICP

It might be old news to some of you, but this gem slipped right by my radar. Version2 did a beautiful job presenting sponsors at this year’s AICP show.


It’s amazing the pains studios will go through to create an analog look with software. I guess despite the incredible technical challenges digitally executing an analog style often entails, it’s still faster and cheaper than the old school methods. Not only that, making an oragami elephant is really, really hard.

I’ve heard so many analog animators complain about this truth, insisting that something gets lost when its all digital, that the work loses its soul or something. Side-stepping the debate about whether or not any commercial work has a “soul,” there’s no doubt that an analog process will suggest different solutionsâ€â€?and therefore different ideasâ€â€?than a digital approach. But the assertion that it’s superior somehow is a form of nostalgia and should, like all forms of nostalgia, be deeply questioned.

But then I guess employing an analog aesthetic at all is also a form of nostalgia, isn’t it?

Or is it?

It’s not as simple a question as it might seem. We’re surrounded by digital simulacra that we take for granted. Nearly every media production process that was once analog is now fully digital. We don’t make things with pen and paper anymore because we have toâ€â€?we do it because we want to.

And it’s in this wanting that I think a hidden nostalgia lies. We’re not quite comfortable, I think, with our fully digital lives. We have just enough memory of a pre-digital past that recalling stop-action animation and recalling childhood become one and the same thing. That’s the magical recipe for nostalgia. That’s the thing that makes us feel goodâ€â€?righteous, evenâ€â€?when we say, “Yeah, I did that frame by frame. Took me forever.”

Those who say CG oragami is nostalgic are essentially admitting that real oragami is a thing of the past that is somehow revered for both its place in history (whether this history is imagined or not doesn’t really matter) and for its “realness,” its dependence on actual paper and actual hands actually folding it. If CG oragami is nostalgic, in other words, then computer-generated imagery is devalued. It is “less than.”

The truth is, we can’t make up our minds how we feel about all this stuff. As James Murphy says:

“I hear that you and your band have sold your guitars and bought turntables.
I hear that you and your band have sold your turntables and bought guitars.”

Visit Version2’s site | Watch the AICP opener

Thanks to Self_90 for the link.

About the author

Justin Cone

Together with Carlos El Asmar, Justin co-founded Motionographer, F5 and The Motion Awards. He currently lives in Austin, Texas with is wife, son and fluffball of a dog. Before taking on Motionographer full-time, Justin worked in various capacities at Psyop, NBC-Universal, Apple, Adobe and SCAD.



dude you are the james lipton of motion graphics

Paul Ducco

interesting points. looks pretty hot to me. I also think it DOES lose something in the process, but it’s still a nice achievement.


i thought i was having deja vu until i realized this was totally posted before (by Tread on June 8th)
it’s an amazing sequence, it was nice to see it again.


Shit. I thought it was eerily familiar.

Thanks for putting up with my absent-mindedness. :-)


OuPS … Sorry about that i must have been sleeping on that one !
I guest Tread is on top with that one ! But still I like the comment
writen by Justin on It . Next call please!


great insights. i like eye candy as much as the next guy, but it’s refreshing to see someone go a little deeper. this site is and should be more than just a link dump.

as far as your comments, i think the problem with work that looks too digital is that it lacks the human touch that makes people connect on an emotional level. that doesn’t mean everything has to look like it was done in pencil or whatever, it just means that we have to see the human hand in there somewhere, which can be expressed in a number of very subtle ways.

for example, look at justin harder’s work- a lot of what he does is just turning things on and off, but the way that he uses a tool as simple as opacity keyframes is unmistakable. that’s what makes us connect to design on the most profound levels.

hope to see more posts like this in the future!


yeah, these are awesome points.

I like this piece, but if it had all been done by hand, stop motion, it would could have been a really amazing piece.


I cant believe everyone is so excited over a sponsors list.

Cool rendering style, and the concept works for transitioning
from one sponsor to the next in an entertaining way.


I have to be nice, because they give me work, but another great example is the spot XYZ Studios did for Honda. It was something of a backwards process – wirefrime render from Maya, printed out on A4 then redrawn with pencils and scanned back in.


There is a lot to say about the human aesthetic. I think SermonOfMockery makes a very valid point in establishing the connotation of the very concept that carries the piece ::: human emotion.

I think Final Fantasty : The Spirits Within, is a perfect example of this. IMHO. I did not like the movie because I could not get into the human drama that was taking place in this film.

Being an drawing minor at SCAD really opened my eyes to subtle movements in a person’s face when the experience specific emotions. While the animators of FF did a good job (and I sure as heck could not have done a better one) of emulating that, it still did not feel human.


Did you really just bring that shit Final Fantasy movie into a discussion about motion?

Comments are closed.