Films are 24fps. I can’t say that frames weren’t removed in the making of the gif, but for sake of argument if we assume they’re all there, the gif is roughly 4 seconds long, so there would be around 96 frames there.
While true, with hand drawn animation it’s slightly different as not every frame is drawn (usually). Disney films looked so good because they were done “on the two’s” instead of the industry standard of “on the three’s” - meaning that Disney films had a drawn frame for every 2 fps instead of every 3, or 12 drawn frames per second instead of the normal 8. Your brain interpolates the rest of the between frames, but this is why Disney looks so much more smooth.
Another great example is Akira, which was done on the 1’s and 2’s. That it has 12 to 24 hand drawn frames per second makes the visual quality difference really visible when compared to other movies.
So how many frames is this, do we think, just for this clip…
24fps, nearly 3 seconds long, so somewhere near 72 frames total, BUT… these animations were done on 2’s - meaning every other frame. https://businessofanimation.com/why-animation-studios-are-animating-on-2s/
Films are 24fps. I can’t say that frames weren’t removed in the making of the gif, but for sake of argument if we assume they’re all there, the gif is roughly 4 seconds long, so there would be around 96 frames there.
While true, with hand drawn animation it’s slightly different as not every frame is drawn (usually). Disney films looked so good because they were done “on the two’s” instead of the industry standard of “on the three’s” - meaning that Disney films had a drawn frame for every 2 fps instead of every 3, or 12 drawn frames per second instead of the normal 8. Your brain interpolates the rest of the between frames, but this is why Disney looks so much more smooth.
Another great example is Akira, which was done on the 1’s and 2’s. That it has 12 to 24 hand drawn frames per second makes the visual quality difference really visible when compared to other movies.