RGBXYZ

I’ll probably regret posting this in a few hours but the animation at Technicolon.com is some of the most trippy (innovative?, annoying?) CG I’ve seen in a while. Take heed of the warning at the front of the site: “PLEASE DO NOT WATCH THESE CARTOONS IF YOU SUFFER FROM PHOTOSENSITIVE EPILEPSY (PSE).”

[Note: The manifesto has been removed at the request of the filmmaker. He says it wasn't really intended to ever be put up on the site, so just enjoy the cartoons for what they are.]

(Thanks, Nathan Barley)


  • http://chuckrekow.com Chuck Rekow

    Ha, don’t regret posting this, Amid!
    But I’d like to take a swipe at answering the manifesto’s rhetorical question:

    Animation looks the way it does because the “cartoony” look serves the purpose of the artist. That purpose is mostly to entertain or tell a story. In a few short decades, the Disney took animation from a novelty to an entertainment/storytelling medium that could engage an audience for longer than an hour and even make them cry. That is an amazing feat for a series of drawn images.

    I admit there is room for all types of animation and the medium’s full potential has only barely been mined. But I don’t think there’s any shame in trying to create an appealing aesthetic or tell a story. This is what applied art does, and almost all art from Lascaux to Lautrec is applied art in some fashion

    In the realm of art-for-art’s sake, I applaud any exploration whatsoever, and if letting the computer take the reins provides some inspiration, that’s fine. But for me art and design always starts with a person (the artsist) and ends with a person (the viewer, or in some instances the artist again.) The final product has to resonate in some way with the target audience and the medium is mostly a means to that end.

  • Vincent Waller

    I think tha…………..huh? what happened?

  • SeanD

    Annoying… definitely annoying. This is very abrasive, and I don’t see how “aesthetic” even enters into it.

  • http://gagaman.blogspot.com GagaMan

    I’m not sure what to make of this. One side of my brain is liking the idea behind it (I’ve always found computer generated voices fun to listen to), but the other side is saying it’s arty nonsense.

  • http://trevour.blogspot.com Trevour Meyer

    It’s the Dire Straits “Money For Nothing” video in wackyland!

  • http://www.travisgentry.com Travis Gentry

    So who should I send my optometrist bill to again?…

  • Dogma Addict

    I think this is one of those conceptual art pieces that was best left in the mind of the guy who thought of it, beginning with a “Wouldn’t it be cool if I…” and ending with a “Yeah, that would be cool”, never actually going forward with it because the result wouldn’t be as interesting as the idea.

  • http://geritopiablogspot.com Gerit

    Now that I’m back in my chair and recovered from biting off my tongue during my seizure , I must say the art world is way overdue for a new movement driven by a real Manifesto! I wish our Mr. Technicolon well and many riots in Berlin due to outrage from his work.

  • david maas

    these actually remind me of flicker films by Paul Sharits and other…

    At any rate – thanks for posting. Manifestos are always interesting, and these films are oddly fascinating…

  • s!

    This is great. makes sense it came from berlin.

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Esn Esn

    Oh, please no. I could not watch that for more than 10 seconds.

    Here is a far more effective demonstration of embracing technology in animation:
    http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/354577

  • http://www.adamkoford.com Adam

    My eyes! My precious eyes!!

  • http://beesbuzz.biz/ fluffy

    I think my frontal lobe just imploded.

  • eli

    Not too innovative, “paperrad� did the same thing with better results already.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EOVBQ9002E

    Anyway, at least it’s not as unfunny and pretentious as the recent work of John k.

  • Todd

    Folks who are stopping after looking at the opening 20 seconds of flashing colors are missing the bizarre, loopy heart of these animations. The epilepsy-inducing intros give way to some slower, much stranger landscapes and dialogue that takes your standard Adult Swim-style absurdity and turns it sideways in an interesting way. I’m not sure I buy the manifesto’s attempt to paint it as much more than that, but definitely like the non-logical, glitchy direction the filmmakers are pointing to.

  • http://duck-walk.blogspot.com/ Marc Deckter

    This is awesome. I don’t understand how he made it, but I love to see these kinds of bizarre computer experiments. I’ll take this over Mocap explorations any day.

  • Donnie

    wow, behind all the blazing graphics these things actually have a kind of heart to them. very unique work..

  • Bentos

    Nathan Barley? As in TVGoHome?

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Esn Esn

    Todd, I’m sad to admit it, but you’re right. I gave up on them too quickly – the introduction just really turned me off because I absolutely can’t stand watching flashing contrasting colours. If I cover the screen with my hand during those sections, the rest is quite watchable.

    Episode 1 was “ok”, Episode 2 was actually fairly interesting.

    Against my own judgement, I’m starting to get interested in these things. It certainly looks like a lot of effort was put into them, and they trully ARE the most “computerized” films I’ve ever seen.

    I still prefer handmade films and soft colours, though.

  • Rob

    Wow, this is really a multi-referential-trash-fest … has anybody mirrored the mainfesto? … This is really far beyound anything I could expect of this day … Thanks a million, David :)