Raf Anzovin
-
Posts
90 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Raf Anzovin
-
-
We knew it might be coming, but none of us expected it this soon.
As I write these words, Steve Anzovin is dying of cancer and kidney failure. He has only a day or two left.
He asked me to say goodbuy to everyone for him. I know he enjoyed running the Anzovin Studio store immensly, and being part of this community. We're going to try to keep everything running normally for the most part, but anyone who's ordered CDs in the last week or so may see some delay in shipment.
--Raf Anzovin
-
What way you order it doesn't make any difference to us--we just linked to the page where it's being sold. But thanks for the thought!
--Raf
-
Can I set up pose sliders for the fingers in addition to being able to roll the handles of the finger bones?
Once the control rig has been added, you can add whatever additional sliders you want.
If I feel that the pelvis and body bones in the control rig are too small, can I scale them larger in the model window? (will this mess anything up?)Yes, just make sure they're pointing in the same direction. How big they are doesn't matter.
Can I put the heel IK control going straight back rather than having it diagonal?Yes.
--Raf
-
Oh, yeah, there are all kinds of pass throughs and wierd stuff in the movie at this point--we're just getting to the point where most of the animation is done and we can focus on the details. The vibrating trees, BTW, are caused by rendering a bone dynamics simulation through Netrender. We'll have to bake the tree animation first before we do final renders on those shots.
--Raf
-
Rigs
in A:M Rigging
Simple, easy blending between FK and IK is key. IMHO, the best way it was ever implemented was in the late lamented Raf v3 rig, where you could just pull the hand bone off the arm and it would automatically become an IK goal. However, I'm one of the few people for whom that actually 'clicked,'
and so it was changed to pose-slider blending in the later Setup Machine rigs. Which is still better than the on-off switch of the Hash rig.However, lately I've been using the Hash rig a lot, and have come to admire its simplicity. A little really does go a long way...
Ah, but we never did remove it. While we haven't made it as obvious in the TSM rig (because that isn't how most people like to do it) you can still pull the hand off and use it in exactly the same way. You just need to hit the n key to move so you can move the hand control despite the fact that it's chained to the arm bones.
--Raf
-
Grab the upper arm control bone and translate it up and down.
-
Move the arm controls up and down. They're tied to the shoulder rotation.
--Raf
-
Constraining the gun to the hand control bone would be the easiest way to do it and should work fine. However, if you want to switch between IK and FK while keeping the gun attached, you'll have to constrain it to the hand geometry bone.
If you want to drive the motion of the arm with the gun instead, constraining either the IK or FK hand control bones to the gun should work fine.
--Raf
-
Well, the easiest thing to do would be to set him up normally.....and then just don't use the hand control.
The chest armor could go to spine 5 or spine 4, depending on how it's shaped. Generally, whichever spine bone is closest to it.
--Raf
-
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you all about this stuff...I've been very busy lately, and I was in New York for the Robots premier recently. (I'll post my thoughts on that in a week or so when everyone else has had a chance to see it).
Raf, have I mentioned lately how great your directing and animating skills are?Thanks, Martin!
BUt there is one little tiny section tht has been bothering me from the begining.And it's a nit pick only cause I'm able to watch this over and over again.
The guy in the red does the jump spin move, while backing the man in black up against the left side ofthe screen. The man in black swings the sword at hip level and the man in red ducks the sword edge.
This part seem very very forced to me, like niether one of these guys would be able to do or would "reaction" wise choose to do during a fight.
Keep in mind this might just be the result of me watching this so many times!
If I made this would I fix it, NOPE. But I'm wondering Raf, if this is something that you thought about during the choreographing of the Sword fight.... difference between things being forced in or looking natural in motion?
That was something that was quite often on my mind, actually. I think in this case it just comes down to different eyes. To me, that move does look natural. Just a difference in opinion.
I think what my question was, how do you flesh out the action? Is it all story boards, or are you actually doing the manuevers yourself or a combo?A remarkable amount of it is just made up on the spot. I didn't have a very good plan for this shot, only a general idea that they had to end by facing off with each other. The animation method I employed here is pretty similar to the technique that Shamus Culhane talks about in his book "Animation, Script to Screen." I started at the begining and I did what seemed natural. Then, of course, there's the whole process of refining what's been animated and getting comments from other animators, which is essential to giving it a polished feel. But the basic movement was done with a streight-ahead keyframe method, without reference to anything else.
Wow Raf!, That animation is amazing. I especially like how you give each character there own style of fighting. That makes the animation much more beleivable!Thanks! The styles also rely very much on what kind of weapons the character's use. Black is a rapier fighter, so he does a lot of quick stabs and cuts less often. Red has two curved swords, so he tends more twards spinning moves and big swipes. That's changed a bit from what we originally intended. Originally, Red was supposed to be more like a broadsword fighter, but that didn't really feel natural with his design.
Not to derail this thread but ...I was really enjoying the discussion between Dimos and Raf. Are you guys gonna continue the conversation elsewhere?
Yup. Now that I've got out from under all the stuff I was busy with, I'm starting a new thread in the OT section.
--Raf
-
Hmmm....well, you might try "paste mirrored." I don't know if that will flip constraints--never tried it myself for that purpose--but it's worth a shot.
--Raf
(edit: never mind, I just realized that, even if it does sucessfully flip the constraints, it almost certainly won't flip their targets correctly.)
-
-
BTW been following this thread. Great animation! and I am looking forward to the making a short DVD.
One question on the DVD. Do you have someone shooting video at your studio through out the production process? It would be interesting to see you guys hashing out productions ideas,problems, brainstorming and what not documentary style. To give an idea of what actually went into the production.
Yup, we've been shooting a lot of our meetings and sweatbox sessions.
Right now it's looking like, rather then a DVD, this is going to be a book, which will come with a CD including the documentary we're making from the footage we're shooting.
--Raf
-
Dimos;
I think we're basically both saying the same thing, just from different angles.
It really would makes sense to do this because then the character acting would be very consistent throughout. One of the problems I have noticed in CG film in general is that character acting really differs from sequence to sequence. I remember that some of the artists on one the films I worked on tried to convince the CG production folks that this is a better way to keep things consistent but they wouldn't bite. In traditional animation when we had character teams, it wasn't only to keep drawings consistent, in actuality it was more so to keep acting consistent. Drawing were always re-drawn by the clean up department to keep the drawings as consistent as possible. I do not see why it can not be done in CG animation. There is a way. As far of size of teams that shouldn't matter too much. If there is any major interaction between multiple characters than the animator who's character takes precedence in the scene would animate the entire shot. That animator would have to then visit all the appropriate supervising character animators for feedback and the director would resolve any conflicts in the scene. It was done this way traditionally and worked out well (minus a couple of hurt egos from time to time).You know, it really would. I think I'm going to try doing it this way the next time I do a short and see how it works.
I do see it slowing things down a bit--having to constantly pass shots back and forth between animators has got to make everything a little more time consuming. (After all, the animator has to polish one character in the shot till the director approves--then hand it off to another animator for the process to start all over again). But I imagine it would still be more then worth it for consistancy of acting on a feature. Also, I'm guessing that there are little spontanious acting bits that are likely to grow from this kind of colaberation by animators that never would if only one animator works on each shot.
If you have a script an idea i suggest you start pitching it. If someone out there likes it (with the money and or resources), the money will come in for you to "prepare" yourselves. DON'T WAIT FOR IT TO COME TO YOU, GO OUT THERE AND FIND IT YOURSELVES.Ah, but doesn't that start the whole vicious cycle all over again? Money people like my ideas, money people give me money, money people own my soul?
Then they get to suck all the life out of my project like we were just talking about.
But.....there may be other ways......
And I DON'T feel like I have to go do it RIGHT NOW, or I'll somehow lose the chance. The next ten years are going to be a very exciting time for animation. Things are going to be possible that were never possible before.
I'm only 23. I'm at the begining of my career. Nobody ever did anything great by rushing into it at top speed.
I've seen some people get into features who--and this is just my opinion--kind of regret that they did. It took something they really enjoyed doing and turned it into a nightmare that they could barely control. To direct an animated feature--to direct a great animated feature--takes the kind of artistic control of a Brad Bird. It takes time to develop that control, that consistent vision.
P.S. We seem to have similar ideals for animation. Now I am definitely a fan.Thanks! I have a whole lot of ideas about what could be done with animation, but I don't think this is really the right thread for it. Perhaps we should create a thread in the OT forum?
--Raf
-
Waiting on some issues with Hash....but progress is being made. Steve Sappington is being very helpful!
It's at the top of our list.
Steve (Anzovin)
Anzovin Studio
-
If you have a spare moment, read this:
Never Wait
Hmmmm....interesting. Just by complete coincidence, Terry Rossio happens to have been one of the co-writers on The Road to El Dorado--although what he and his writing partner came up with originally was apparently much better then what found its way to the screen.
In any case, I don't think I'm waiting in quite the way he means. He's not suggesting you should strive to do things when they are not yet possible, but that you should sieze the opportunity when it does arrive. A certain amount of pragmatism is neccessary if one is not to wear oneself out with quixotic quests. There's plenty to do in the meantime.
--Raf
-
No need to blame the animation process, it's just Hollywood. When there's that much money at stake, no one wants to take any risks. Hence the insane belief that 20 writers are better than 1. If no one sticks their neck out, no heads get chopped off.
You got it exactly right.
Unfortunately, that's largly what I meant by "animation process." To many, those practices have become inextricably linked with the making of animated films--and the ironic thing is that some of them, committee storytelling included, do have roots in the way the old Disney studio operated. So they can sometimes look like wisdom handed down from on high. I think it worked for Disney because he was both a guiding creative force, and he owned the whole thing, too. He could, personally, keep a handle on the madness.
I don't want to sound confrontational, but that's BS. You're in as good a position as you'll ever be. You've got more connections and resources than most people, actually. You wanna do something about it, do something. Your responsibilities will always be there--you can't "out-wait" them.Don't worry, nothing confrontational about it. I do have more connections and resources than most do, it's true--but still nowhere near what would be necessary to get into features. Not yet.
Start writing a script.Well that, I can do. Whenever feature animation does become feasible for us, I plan to be ready.
--Raf
-
What do you mean by having kinematic constrains for IK on the legs? Couldnt I just like attach the leg bones to their parents and turn off LOCK IK. Or do I gotta use a IK Constraint?
There are two kinds of IK you can use in A:M. There's the automatic IK that just lets you pull around bones quickly. This is usefull but it doesn't react to anything else you do--ei. it won't let you move the body around while keeping the feet planted in place. It only calculates IK while you are actually manipulating the bones.
For feet that stay planted in place, you need a Kinematic constraint, which will allow the IK to be calculated constantly. Use the Kinematic to attach the legs to a bone or null, which you will be able to move around to animate the feet indipendently of the body.
--Raf
-
In Traditional Animation, for those of you who are unaware, most times an animator usually animates one character. That way the character remains as consistent as possible throughout the flick. Miguel's team I believe had about 20-30 (if not more) animators working on him, not including Cleanup Artist (or Final Line Artist as they were pegged at Dreamworks).
I've always wondered about applying this idea to CG. It seems like it would add another layer to the acting to have each animator focus exclusively on one character throughout the film. Unfortunately, it's not cost effective. By contrast, the entire animation team on Robots was just a little over 30 people.
Thank God for Pixar's storytelling because it forced the rest of the folk in animation to catch up in that department. As far as artistry I believe that all studios that have put out a animated feature have something special about there work. I don't believe that one studio out ranks the others in design, animation or imagery, because all of them have developed their own intriguing looks. And that's what it's all about, diversity!Yeah....I'm continually frustrated by all the cool things that could be done with animation and just aren't. Pixar is great--but they're just one studio. They have a certain style, and they won't depart from it to try something drastically different. And they seem to be the only people with a real grasp on story.
In the animation industry, we constantly hear the mantra "story, story, story." Only, it doesn't seem to make the stories any better. People agonize over them for months, and they're still weak.
I have this sneaking suspicion that the "animation process" everybody uses just plain doesn't work. That it hasn't really worked since the days of Walt, who could pull it together, probably, just from sheer force of personality. It's a relic from sixty years ago, and today what the feature animation industry needs is really simple. It needs to hire some really talented writers with individual voices. And then it needs to listen to them.
Hmmmm....that ended up being a bit more of a rant then I intended it to. Some day, I hope I'll be in a position where I can do something about this.
--Raf
-
Well, if it makes you feel any better, Paul, I wasn't born knowing how to rig. (No born geniuses here, unfortunately). I spent something like six months playing with rigs before I really figured it out. The real difference is that, unlike most people, I LIKE rigging, so I was willing to spend a lot of time on it.
The best advice I can give you is to have patience. Rigging up a character from scratch in six hours when you've never done it before would be a feat indeed. Even people very experienced in rigging often take a couple of days, at least. It will take you more time then that to get the hang of it.
Everyone's advice here is good: start with something simple--maybe just put the bones in and leave them alone for eveything but the legs, which should have Kinematic constraints for IK. This won't be a particularly elegent rig, but it will be usable. And you can build up from there.
--Raf
-
We mess up, you save money.
We've got some misprinted CD-ROMs that we'd like to move outta here, so we're offering a special deal.
If you order the "Green Bundle" on our store site for $199--
http://www.rafhashvideotapes.com/grrenbundle.html
(no, "grren" is not a typo, it's a "Yahooism")
--you will get the same discs as in our Training CD Bundle for $229, but some of them may have the greenish labels. The data is all the same, it's just the discs have a green cast.
The Green Bundle includes:
QuickStart 2, Secrets of 2003, Model a Face, NLA, Rigging A Face, Mastering Materials 1 & 2, Animate a Face, and AM in Live Action CD-ROMs.
Note: This product is not downloadable.
Questions? steve@anzovin.com
--Steve
Anzovin Studio
-
Can we see a final still render of a shot or two?
Pretty soon.....we're close to having some shots completely done.
1. There was so much happening so fast it didn't register the first time I viewed it.True.....but I'm going for that frenetic fighting look. Similarly, you can't always pick out every move in a Jackie Chan or Jet Li movie. I don't really expect everyone to be able to register every move the first time they watch it--it should still be able to put over an overall sense of the kineticism of the fight.
Also, a full soundtrack helps a lot.
2. Black jumped to avoid them (the swords) but was facing the wrong way for the second swish to be able to see it comming!Yes, well, Black has two secrets. One is that he's not really right-handed. The other is how he does that. Men have died trying to find out.....
I still don't get how you got that look. It's looks like 100% ambience with shadows.It's all toon rendering without lines, and with different shading gradients. There actually aren't any shadows.
P.S. To the folks that liked "The Road to El Dorado".....Thanks! I had a small role in that and I am pleased to see it is still enjoyed. Makes up for the hard work and time we had putting the film together. Much appreciated.Cool. Although I was never a big fan of their storytelling, I thought Dreamworks Animation had a very interesting style going there for a while before they switched to all-CG. What did you do on Road to El Dorado?
I like the way that the red guy's (gil grissam to me XP) coat moves when he jumps and lands. Very nice!Thanks! If this project was bigger, we'd probably do some kind fo simulation for that, but at this size it works to just do it by hand. Sometimes, animating little secondary things like that is a lot of fun.
--Raf
-
And here's another near-complete shot. Like the other, it's a work in progress: still a few pass-throughs, temp background, and incomplete facial animation. But lots of swordplay.
-
The original Setup Machine did it in a very similar way. There have been a lot of improvements with v2 (stretchiness, for instance), but the basic principals are the same.
--Raf
Training Series
in Anzovin Products
Posted
At the moment, we're just too swamped with production work! I'll see what happens if we ever get a break.