Comments on: ‘ParaNorman’: Stop Motion With The Canon 5D Mark II

By: Michael Dela Cruz

Michael Dela Cruz — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 05:50:00 +0000

Ultimate Animation!!! Thumbs Up!!!

By: David Krug

David Krug — Fri, 24 Aug 2012 08:59:00 +0000

I think you are right for the most part. Let’s not forget that buying multiple copies of used Nikon Ais glass is most assuredly cheaper then purchasing a pallet of L series lenses.

In any case, likely an upgrade from Laika’s last film, Coraline, which was shot (with a different DP) using various Tamron and Sigma lenses.

http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/February2009/Coraline/page1.php

By: jniz22

jniz22 — Fri, 24 Aug 2012 04:01:00 +0000

showing this to my grade 2 kids… We just beginning the year and we are talking about adding detail in our drawings…they are super psyched about this!

By: Nathan Hamler

Nathan Hamler — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 23:01:00 +0000

I’m guessing they’re using nikon AI-S glass not b/c it’s any “better” or “sharper” than EF glass, but b/c it’s manual focus….and the throw is very long and smooth on AI-S glass, so it’s perfect for cinema applications…

By: David Krug

David Krug — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:19:00 +0000

A couple things, the only stop-motion film I’ve heard of using a Red camera was actually Coraline, for Vfx plates.

With an estimated budget of around $50 million, I’m not sure that CGI would have been very much cheaper if they held themselves to the same standard of quality.

Last thing, I like how the press release mentions how the 5D works with Canon EF lenses, while providing photographic evidence that ParaNorman used Nikon glass.

By: David O'Connell

David O'Connell — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 16:23:00 +0000

To save an art form. Just because it’s cheaper doesn’t make it better. The same way with princess and the frog was animated instead of a Pixar film.

By: Nathan Hamler

Nathan Hamler — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:53:00 +0000

Dont get me wrong, i think it’s awesome…the process, the detail, all of it….but in the age of digital animation, isn’t it a little unnecessary??? I mean, why would a studio pay for this amount of labor, when you could tell the same story with CGI, and the audience wouldn’t know the difference…?? I agree you can tell a difference in stop motion/claymation vs. 100% CGI…that’s not the question…the question is why even DO stop motion when it’s prob far more cost effective to do CGI….??

By: Christopher Rich

Christopher Rich — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 15:48:00 +0000

So what you’re saying is that somewhere there’s a cut of Paranorman that’s in 5K 3D.

By: Adam Cross

Adam Cross — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 14:18:00 +0000

Aardman’s Pirates was shot using over 50 1D mark III cameras

By: Nicholas Gonzalez

Nicholas Gonzalez — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:36:00 +0000

Wonderful work!