Search form

What is the future of 2D animators?

65 posts / 0 new
Last post
What is the future of 2D animators?

Hi friends;
Do you believe that the 3D animation will rule the animation industry? So, what is the future of those who has spent their lifes drawing?

3D is going to be the main medium for quite some time Samuel. There is slight hope for traditional animation. Curious George came out this year, and I think it did ok at the box office. Also Disney's doing a reverse Alice in Wonderland kinda movie where a cartoon character comes into the real world. The begining part of the movie is traditionally animated by. Shoot, I forgot his name. He was a Disney animator and now has his own studio in Pasadena. Plus people are hopeful that with John Lassetter taking over Disney animation that he will bring back traditionally animated moives. Although there has been no fromal mention of that happening.

Aloha
the Ape

Wow, this from the Flash samurai. With much respect, Oh honorable one.....

I hope there is more than a slight hope for 2D. With shows like "ahem" Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends and "ahem ahem" Puffy Ami Yumi, I think there is a great hope. 2D has a great home with television and internet, and in the future, iPods and cellphones maybe. Features and videogames... yeah, that's 3D land.

But lets not ignore 3D's traditional or tradigital or stopmotion cousins. They're not chopped liver yet.... they're still there. And winning Oscars.

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

I'm the one they'll need to commit, because I think anyone holding on to the rails of 3D is in for a huge shock inside the next two years. And I would look beyond 4 or 5 major studios for my evaluation of the health of traditional animation. Include them, but look beyond...you never know what you don't ...

each era has its problems. back in the day there were probably issues with the studio system and now there is a problem with the lack of one which has cut out funding for shorts.

but maybe our expectations should change. maybe we have to look for artistic animation in advertising?

Wow, this from the Flash samurai. With much respect, Oh honorable one.....

I hope there is more than a slight hope for 2D. With shows like "ahem" Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends and "ahem ahem" Puffy Ami Yumi, I think there is a great hope. 2D has a great home with television and internet, and in the future, iPods and cellphones maybe. Features and videogames... yeah, that's 3D land.

:confused: Not sure if I'm being teased or not, but I'll take it as a joke :D

How my brain works is a bit screwy. When people ask about animation I first think Feature character animation, unless they say TV or web or something. So that's what I'm talking about.

I think 2D will have the foot hold in the TV market for some time. Mainly I think this is because 3D is so front end heavy in the production that it's hard for studio producers to see that they'll save money down the road. Flash has the same type of problem. Producers don't seem to get it that you'll need more time for 3D to develop the characters then model, and rig and texture them. They don't see that once thats done for all the main characters and sets, that you don't have to do it again.

I think Jimmy Neutron handled this problem briliantly. They got the movie first, then modeled, rigged and textured everything on a Feature budget, then used all that stuff for the series. Then all they had to do is do a few new sets and incidental characters for the episodes. Very very smart. I'd love to work on a Flash show with that set up.

And the future is now Chaos. I'm currently animating on a series to be viewed on cel phones. :)

Aloha,
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

I think that's fair, other-SL ...so long as you don't mean exclusively. A ton of war-related work during the second world war didn't kill the art element, in my opinion, it just created a lot of work that happened to have a common theme. And aren't commercials just softer propaganda? =)

All I meant was that I think that in previous eras there was more good work among the shlock than is the case today.

Thanks for clarifying. I think there was probably a greater volume of good work in previous eras (again, due to differences in production methods and structures), but I'd bet that the ratio between the good and the schlock was about the same.

Whenever someone says "they don't make movies like they used to," I usually respond "Sure they do - they make a few good ones and lots of forgettable ones." The good ones stand the test of time while the others fade into obscurity. When that happens, the good ones shine brighter, leading us to the faulty conclusion that all movies from that era were of that quality.

For example, when you think of Bogart movies, the ones that probably spring to mind are Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, The African Queen. Unless you're a huge Bogart fan, titles like Petrified Forest and Call It Murder probably never come up. Or for a more contemporary example, when I say Steve Martin, you may think The Jerk or Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. Chances are you're not thinking Bowfinger or My Blue Heaven.

Thanks for clarifying. I think there was probably a greater volume of good work in previous eras (again, due to differences in production methods and structures), but I'd bet that the ratio between the good and the schlock was about the same.

Whenever someone says "they don't make movies like they used to," I usually respond "Sure they do - they make a few good ones and lots of forgettable ones." The good ones stand the test of time while the others fade into obscurity. When that happens, the good ones shine brighter, leading us to the faulty conclusion that all movies from that era were of that quality.

For example, when you think of Bogart movies, the ones that probably spring to mind are Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, The African Queen. Unless you're a huge Bogart fan, titles like Petrified Forest and Call It Murder probably never come up. Or for a more contemporary example, when I say Steve Martin, you may think The Jerk or Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. Chances are you're not thinking Bowfinger or My Blue Heaven.

i think it also seems slightly worse now because like say film in the 70s and early 80s saw some revolutionary work by directors and actors who are no gods (or fallen gods in some cases)

a lot of this work inspired each other and others so it seemed like a movement of sort.

what we are missing now is a movement in films and animation. Unless you consider CGI as a movement :)

Me betting on it would mean I assign some sort of value to those odds. My only contention is that it was a possibility. Is it hard work? Does it take pushing beyond where one thought he or sheyou could? Of course...still can happen.

As far as your prediction, it would negate the whole point of animating. It doesn't say much about your knowledge or appreciation of the art and craft if you see it as replaceable in such a way. The closest things that would be relevant are cycles, dialing in of mouth and hand shapes (as a base and for continuity over the course of several artists...but even those are tweaked as necessary), and procedural animation, which keeps its own world where things would be impractical to try and key (Like in the upcoming game Spore)...Situational dependence and attention to detail destroys the chance of a robo-movie. Just imagine any movie that met with success, and try to figure out how it could've been developed with button-presses. And no one wants to lose money by not developing a movie with the potential for success. As far as traditional being done with menus...You're going to have to explain to me how that's even possible. That's a whole extra level of artistic involvement that's needed, meaning your choices of what to produce are all the more limited. Not to mention work that goes into things like backgrounds. That's like saying the future of feature films rests in the hands of people with copies of Lionhead's The Movies, or that old DOS-based cartoon maker with the Looney Tunes.

I think the reason why we don't have full animation, artistic animation for adults, work for animators in the US and Europe, etc., at least, not as much as some people would like there to be, is simple: The general public doesn't care enough, and the people who make the decisions don't care and aren't willing to spend the money that would be necessary to have these things.

I agree - the general public doesn't care. Nor should they. All they want is to be entertained for the money they pay. The form that entertainment takes is irrelevant. Similarly, the decision-makers put their money where it will make a return on the investment. They also don't care what form that investment takes, as long as it returns cash. That's as it should be - they're running a business, not acting as a patron of the arts.

It's why 3D has gone nuts - the few 3D movies out a few years ago were raking in cash, while the 2D offerings weren't. The reasons behind that are legion, but the surface reality is frequently as deep as many executives go.

Making a case based on artistry alone will never fly with a businessman. The case that needs to be made is how better quality animation will add to the bottom line.

The future of feature films rests in the hands of the same people it's always rested in: The guys with the money. I don't think they care about the art of animation.

I truly wish that I didn't have to write this. There are many things I'd rather write about the animation business, but they would be lies.

So no one's interested in talking about casting in plaster, huh?

Laurence

i think you have an overtly cynical way of looking at animation LF.

the future of film rests with the audience and not with the producers. you can create the most amazing animation and if its not what the audience wants to watch then it wont work.

Hee Hee

:confused: Not sure if I'm being teased or not, but I'll take it as a joke :D

How my brain works is a bit screwy. When people ask about animation I first think Feature character animation, unless they say TV or web or something. So that's what I'm talking about.

I think 2D will have the foot hold in the TV market for some time. Mainly I think this is because 3D is so front end heavy in the production that it's hard for studio producers to see that they'll save money down the road. Flash has the same type of problem. Producers don't seem to get it that you'll need more time for 3D to develop the characters then model, and rig and texture them. They don't see that once thats done for all the main characters and sets, that you don't have to do it again.

I think Jimmy Neutron handled this problem briliantly. They got the movie first, then modeled, rigged and textured everything on a Feature budget, then used all that stuff for the series. Then all they had to do is do a few new sets and incidental characters for the episodes. Very very smart. I'd love to work on a Flash show with that set up.

And the future is now Chaos. I'm currently animating on a series to be viewed on cel phones. :)

Aloha,
the Ape

I dunno... i teased you a little. :D All in good fun though buddy and with the greatest respect.

I think of animation as many parts that make up the whole, like slices of a pie. We're all in the same family but we're specialized... That's how my brain works anyway.

I don't know about producers. I got to meet some producers from Nickelodeon and they really didn't impress me much. I'm sure they'll get it one day.

Aaah! an animated series for cell phones! I'm trying to develop something like that for one distributor now. We're the Jetsons, I swear.

The Chaostoon

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

You said a chance of .1%. That is precisely a chance of 1/1000th, which is the same thing as odds of 1000 to 1 against.

Good job! I sure did. Except I didn't mean a numerical value, I meant a value judgement.

If we're talking about working in the animation industry, unfortunately, it doesn't just depend on you. It also depends on someone giving you a chance. In my judgement, these people are usually not looking for creativity, originality, imagination, and skill. They are looking for something they can use to make money. I wish it were different, but that's the way it appears to me.

It's not unfortunate that it depends on things outside of your control, it's just life. If you let other people's wills for themselves run your life, well you'd be just that....run from the outside, and that's a crazy miserable sleepwalker existence nobody wants any part of.

We'll just have to agree to disagree with regards to who gets hired. There is a definite screening process in place and crap work just doesn't get in. Speaking in relative terms here, but...I've seen plenty of shorts and movies with gorgeous work...they didn't happen to be gorgeous work by accident, that managed to sneak in. That work is there because as much as people care about money, they know they can't keep making money if the ideas are bad. They have a vested interest in hiring -talent-.

Not from my point of view it wouldn't. For me, the point of animating is to create art.

How would artful animation be created by clumping together templates?

There's a whole literature on the subject of computer graphics and animation. If you want to understand computer programming, you'll have to learn it yourself. I can't explain it to you standing on one foot, and even if I could, I wouldn't want to. If you want me to suggest something to read, I'll be glad to.

While that's snarky enough, it's oblivious to what I said. Flip the two fragments...I want to know how it's possible to reproduce traditional animation with a menu-based system, not how to create the system itself. As in, find a way around the fact that computers can't draw. So you draw some stuff beforehand, and work with that, right? It's a limiting factor. Incidentally, while I appreciate the helping hand, I've been programming off and on for eight years, I don't need lessons in logic.

The future of feature films rests in the hands of the same people it's always rested in: The guys with the money. I don't think they care about the art of animation.

I'll say it again...maybe if everyone had tons of money and self-produced, there'd be some revolutionary, incredibly artistic material out there. But for all the "evils" of the business and businessmen, you have to admit it's pretty remarkable what creativity is still able to eek through, no?

Hey Laurence, back in the late sixties they said the written word and books would be dead. Haven't really seen an accurate obituary yet. In fact with the internet it's more important from where I sit to be able to write properly and be understood. And I still go to bed with a good mystery every night in the standard old fashioned book form. It just fits into the routine better. Hard to read an ebook while laying on one's side in bed and watching tv with your other bit of conscienciousness.

I do agree with Ape on the 3d thing, you create the character, rig it and in the long run costs will be down, maybe that's why the rise of 3d in the animation business, the corporate finacial guys finally woke up to that, but doesn't mean 3d is going to end up an artform, in fact I think the public will get bored with it.

While books still hang in there, because they force some interaction on an emotional level from the user. If 2d animation can focus on that interaction, it may see a rebirth, but I for one I am tired of the usual Disney fare. It doesn't leave anything up to my imagination. The only 3d stuff I've enjoyed has been the Shrek films, but mainly because I am looking for the hidden connections between literature and old films, not because of the animation or technology.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

I do agree with Ape on the 3d thing, you create the character, rig it and in the long run costs will be down, maybe that's why the rise of 3d in the animation business, the corporate finacial guys finally woke up to that, but doesn't mean 3d is going to end up an artform, in fact I think the public will get bored with it.

I don't think the public gives a rat's patoot about whether something's 2D, 3D, or whatever-D. I think they care about not wasting their money and time on a lousy film. There are more than enough examples of both 2D and 3D films that have captured the public's imagination (Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Finding Nemo, Shrek), as well as ones that have failed to do so (Final Fantasy, Home On The Range, Thumbelina). In any case, I don't think the number of D's in the animation style had anything to do with the film's success or failure.

yes but the public is easily fooled to think that way DSB

like if people hear*2d ain't goodz no morez* from big studios like disney for example.

kinda of a brainwash thing,makes it difficult for smaller companies.blame the media.

yes but the public is easily fooled to think that way DSB

like if people hear*2d ain't goodz no morez* from big studios like disney for example.

kinda of a brainwash thing,makes it difficult for smaller companies.blame the media.

Maybe it's time folks became individuals and learned to "thinkz" for themselves.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

sigh.......

that will be the day when we all fly and eat strawberry candy in merry pixie land.

not everybody can think for themselves unfotunatly,we live in a world of politics and paris hilton:rolleyes:

*omgz 2dz is so deadorz 9"%"%* etc.....

that will be the day when we all fly and eat strawberry candy in merry pixie land.

not everybody can think for themselves unfotunatly,we live in a world of politics and paris hilton:rolleyes:

*omgz 2dz is so deadorz 9"%"%* etc.....

As long as the majority of consumers feel this way it will be this way. You are part of the problem.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

sigh.......

Its tiresome, isn't it?

I mean really, REALLY, tiresome.

Almost to the point where I want to say that if someone wants to find out what the industry is like, or where its going, to get into the industry and find out firsthand.

But that's the trick, isn't it?

"We all grow older, we do not have to grow up"--Archie Goodwin ( 1937-1998)

i don't know if quite understood what you just said,but eh?i'm part of the problem because i know how other people react to things?
riiiiiigght...

yezzzzzz, riiiiiiiight, as long as people like you model poor behavior and sanction or excuse it, it will continue.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

or people could just use search or a f**** sticky could be made.

I for one am tired of being told because Paris Hilton does so and so it's alright....bulll, she's one little twisted sh*t and I personally don't care what she does or thinks.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

haha phacker,you really know how go against someone on your team don't ya,ever since i first posted here,you've managed to twist posts into something else.

I haven't got a clue what your talking about,its like....if i said i know why people get drunk...because the want to have fun,it doesn't mean i support it,i'm just making a statement.haha i'm not gunna bother making a five page arguement with you (again)i don't understand how your head works seriously.

;) i've already made my comment to the thread posters question anywho.

i'm not gunna bother making a five page arguement

You dunt haft.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

I don't think it's as it should be. In the past, film studios were owned and run by people who wanted to make money, but they wanted to do so by making films. The same was true in the publishing business. The same thing has happened in both industries.

This is very true and I worked in a library for ten years in the 70s, it's amazing how discriminating kids can be and how they gravitate to books and stories that have real meaning in their lives. That was demonstrated when a fairly adult themed story became a blockbuster hit with middle grade school children: "The Outsiders", by S.E. Hinton, 1975.

I was in my twenties then, but that book made a lasting impression on me, and it has continued to grab the attention of new readers. But marketing wizards continue to try and sell pablum and stereotypical forumlas. It's sad really that our lives are continually manipulated by the advertising and marketing "geniuses".

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

I'm blinded by the beams of sunshine coming from your heart =)

not everybody can think for themselves unfotunatly,we live in a world of politics and paris hilton:rolleyes:

Not everybody can? Are you sure you don't mean, not everybody does?

I hope kids are still finding those stories/books, it would be sad if they were just gathering dust, and the kids of today are totally focussed on dribble and marketing gas. "Keep on truck'n".

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

Theres no wonder why newbies only post here a couple times and run off,everytime a repeat thread is made you people kick their ass.

So people are young,ask *unrealistic* questions...so?how are they supposed to know,they don't, thats why they are asking.jeez

At least try to be aware that not everyone knows everything about the industry,because if they did,the forum would have no posts don't you think?

skinny who the hell uses the search function before they make a post?:rolleyes: :confused:

but yeh like in an earlier post skinny i do agree with your sticky plan.

what is the future of 2d animators? i dunno,people will continue to do it as long as they want too,it would probably become more arty now,which is good,it will be better than all the commercial crap we get today.

Realistically if u want to be an animator in the next few years,your gunna have to learn some 3d,because thats the only way your gunna live,or at least pay the bills.

However,when something is rare its noticed more,i can't predict the future but i don't think its gunna be that bad for the 2d side.

ugh nevermind,thats what i get when I try to my opinion on this forum.

I don't think it's as it should be. In the past, film studios were owned and run by people who wanted to make money, but they wanted to do so by making films. The same was true in the publishing business. The same thing has happened in both industries.

This gets back to my earlier point - there has always been dreck. And it's always sold in larger numbers than "quality" work. For every thought-provoking book out there, there are dozens of romance novels. For every newsmagazine - Time, Newsweek, US News - there are scads of tabloids and gossip magazines. This is not a new phenomenon.

To bring this back to animation, this year's three Oscar nominees combined had a box office take about half that of "Madagascar".

I'm not saying we should throw in the towel and produce dreck. I am saying that while it's an uphill battle, it's not really a new hill.

Nor do I think they would have to act as patrons of the arts.
...

It would have to be a broadcaster of "quality" programming, or a regular broadcaster that funded it for reasons of prestige, or because of government regulations.

Maybe it's me, but these two statements seem to contradict each other. Funding for reasons of prestige is how a patron of the arts is defined. It was called "magnificence" during the Renaissance.

I think for an artist it has to be a question, of want to be "marketable", or stay true to you vision and create for the sake of satisfying your creative urges just for the reason, that it is something you have to say the way you want to say it. It probably won't make you rich in terms of cash, but I do think there other things more important.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

a sticky which says this thread contains all the threads about the future of 2d, 2d vs 3d would def save everyone a lot of time. because in the end the argument hasnt changed recently.

a lot of people when looking for info go to foras and search before they do post something. i got no probs with people posting its just that a lot of times people have heard the questions over n over.

It completely changes the meaning.

I care about young people, that's why I answer.

Again, that's why I answer. In fact, no one knows everything about the industry. I certainly don't. I don't even know where the entrance is.

Laurence

i know you care,but could u care in a way thats less *stop asking stupid questions* kinda way,the question may well be....but this is a forum cmoooooooon maaaaaaaaaaaan!

this ain't boot camp lol:D

yes but the public is easily fooled to think that way DSB

like if people hear*2d ain't goodz no morez* from big studios like disney for example.

kinda of a brainwash thing,makes it difficult for smaller companies.blame the media.

I don't thing the general public knows the difference. Most of the people I've talked to, kids and adults, have no idea what is 2D and what is 3D. More kids than adults know the difference. I think the people who need to think for themselves are the producers. They are the ones that read the 2D is dead statements from Disney and say, "yeah, 2D is dead. We should switch to 3D."
But most eyes glaze over when I mention 2D and 3D. The responce I usually get is, "so it's all done on computers now right?" That's usually the closest they come to understanding.

Like DSB said. If it's a good movie, then the public won't care.

Aloha,
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

yes but the public is easily fooled to think that way DSB

like if people hear*2d ain't goodz no morez* from big studios like disney for example.

kinda of a brainwash thing,makes it difficult for smaller companies.blame the media.

I don't recall ever hearing Disney (or anyone else) talking about 2D vs 3D in the mainstream media. We're all aware of it because of our interest in animation, of course, but by and large this level of detail goes unnoticed by the general moviegoing public.

If you want proof that "everyday people" don't care about how many D's were used in making a movie, you don't have to look any further than the sales figures for DVDs like Cinderella. Sold like gangbusters, and it's - gasp - 2D.

Say, someone should make a movie about gangbusters....I bet it'd sell like...like....well, I bet it'd sell well.

They need to make a word for that.

Well next he'll probably ask a question to the effect of which is better anime or american style animation. And follow it up with which is the best school to attend.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

Theres no wonder why newbies only post here a couple times and run off,everytime a repeat thread is made you people kick their ass.

So people are young,ask *unrealistic* questions...so?how are they supposed to know,they don't, thats why they are asking.jeez

At least try to be aware that not everyone knows everything about the industry,because if they did,the forum would have no posts don't you think?

So your solution is for us to answer the same questions over and over again because someone new to the forum doesn't take the time to do basic research before asking the repeat question? Can't speak for anyone else, but I ain't gonna waste my time doing that.

I don't mind people asking questions - I mind that they show up, ask the same question that's been asked dozens of times before, then are surprised that their thread doesn't generate any response or devolves into, well, what this thread has become.

You're correct; not everyone knows everything about the industry. But everyone can look around a bit when they're new on a forum and see if the info they want is already there. The question asked here is a fairly basic one, and the assumption should be that it's been addressed previously.

If not having to deal with basic repetitive questions means less posts on this forum, I'm O.K. with that. And I fully agree with lizard that a few sticky posts at the top would help tremendously.

Well next he'll probably ask a question to the effect of which is better anime or american style animation. And follow it up with which is the best school to attend.

:p :p

what about how can i set up a studio and
then how can i make money?

I think it was remarkable what Harman and Ising, Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, and some others were able to do under unfavorable circumstances. When I think about what could be produced with the wealth and technology we have today, and see what's actually being produced, it breaks my heart.

Apples and oranges. The examples you cite are short films, which are all but nonexistent in the major studios of today. Risks are easier to take when budgets are smaller and no one really expects a huge return from their investment, as was the case back then.

Personally, I don't think circumstances for Jones, Avery, et al, were as onerous as we've been led to believe. I think they had a rigid studio system they had to work within, but they figured out a way pretty quick to job that system and make it work for them.

For a thread we were all jumping on the poster about and willing to see erased, this has really turned into an idea raiser.

I don't recall ever hearing Disney (or anyone else) talking about 2D vs 3D in the mainstream media. We're all aware of it because of our interest in animation, of course, but by and large this level of detail goes unnoticed by the general moviegoing public.

I've seen a lot of press to this effect, both on normal news stations, Wall Street reports and just general spin. It's slowed down a little since the Tom Hank's Christmas film fiasco, which I still kind of like. But I know what everyone else here on AWN thinks of Midnight Express, so let's not go there.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

Hi friends;
Do you believe that the 3D animation will rule the animation industry? So, what is the future of those who has spent their lifes drawing?

3D is going to be the main medium for quite some time Samuel. There is slight hope for traditional animation. Curious George came out this year, and I think it did ok at the box office. Also Disney's doing a reverse Alice in Wonderland kinda movie where a cartoon character comes into the real world. The begining part of the movie is traditionally animated by. Shoot, I forgot his name. He was a Disney animator and now has his own studio in Pasadena. Plus people are hopeful that with John Lassetter taking over Disney animation that he will bring back traditionally animated moives. Although there has been no fromal mention of that happening.

Aloha
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

When I first came to AWN I spent hours reading the old posts, before I posted my first post, and look at me now....

I didn't have to ask the same old questions, I already knew the answers, but I had lots of new ones to ask. Tony and Larry were great, at that time Dan was pretty much just an invisible prescence.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

So your solution is for us to answer the same questions over and over again ......(followed by allot more type)

why?i mean...why be like this? the same arguement was on another forum,i think it was cgtalk,a guy said telling someone they can't post a repeat question is like telling people on a bus they can't have their conversation because someone already had that one last week.

anyway i don't want to start any debates,i just don't see why people can't be like ape above and try to be helpful.And if the question has been asked why not post a link to the other thread,oh whats that? cant be bothered?..exactly.heh thats how others feel too ,then we are back to square one.
;)

If u like why not make a thread to be stickied,if not,i'll start one right now.

DSB i'm not talking directly to you by the way.i mean everyone.

I agree. For me, and probably for a lot of other people, it's a question of being able to work at all, or at least more than for just for an hour here and there.

Laurence

Well I don't think there are any guarrantees out there anymore for any profession. You have to do what you have to do. Unless you have republican friends in high places.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

Also Disney's doing a reverse Alice in Wonderland kinda movie where a cartoon character comes into the real world. The begining part of the movie is traditionally animated by. Shoot, I forgot his name. He was a Disney animator and now has his own studio in Pasadena.

James Baxter is the elusive name. Here's a link to his studio page.

Pages