But smoothly rotating views need an astronomical effort in 2D animations. These things would happen nearly automatically - as side products - in 3D because 3D models can be rotated to any possible view with no extra effort. One car is also scaled during its motion, but none of the moving items change it's viewing angle nor perspective. But it's just easier in a vector app and a dedicated animation app.Įverything shown in your example can be made by moving in a multitrack video editor flat 2D items which are layered. vector based v raster based, than what specific tool may have been used.Ĭan you create something like the cars in Photoshop and then animate them? Sure you can. Typically it's more about the nature of the tools, i.e. Simply using the same tools won't ever get you the same results. What you use to create either the vector drawing or animation is up to you. I'd say they are 2D vector drawings (Inkscape, Illustrator, Xara, CorelDraw) then moved to some animation software (Animate, After Effects, Premier, Final Cut, iMovie). That's not happening in the video.Īs for what was used to create this. If it were 3D animation then the scale and perspective of objects would be changing as they are animated. No different than drawing a box in a 2D app and making it look like it has depth.
They appear to be drawn in 2D software utilizing some perspective to give a sense of depth, that's all. Sure the cars look like pseudo-3D but that's just their appearance. It's not altering the objects themselves. The animation itself consists of simple position tweening. To me, it looks like 2D drawings which are then animated. Contact the creator for a definitive answer.
0 kommentar(er)
