Animation Notes

[Rodney]

Much of my focus these days is with hand drawn animation but it all tends to blend and further complement the study of animation.

 

For instance, some folks spend a great deal of time sculpting physical models (maquettes) as an aide to visualizing their characters and objects in order to make drawing them (from any angle) easier. Even animators who draw their characters should have a 3D computer animation program. Of course I recommend Animation:Master because... with splines... modeling is an extension of drawing.

 

 

This was primarily an exercise in trying to model this character quickly. It would have been wise for me to sketch out a few drawings to rotoscope with.

If continuing with this character I may begin again with only the basic shapes that will be used when drawing the character.

That would be a fun rigging exercise and would still be quite useful when drawing the character.

[itsjustme]

He looks great, Rodney!

[NancyGormezano]

Very interesting model! Nice! You should post more of your work, more frequently.

 

For instance, some folks spend a great deal of time sculpting physical models (maquettes) as an aide to visualizing their characters and objects in order to make drawing them (from any angle) easier.

 

Awhile ago, I bought a 2D (basic hand drawn cell-type) animation program, because I thought it would be useful & quicker to use, to make rotoscopes for poses, timing in A:M.

 

Wrong. I am finding it is easier, faster to just use A:M to flesh out poses, timing. If anything, I would use A:M to provide rotoscopes for the 2D program, if I ever wanted to do hand drawn 2D....

 

And if I did want to do 2D, I would probably more do a cut-out type of animation, in which I would use A:M anyway, rather than any of the other vector type 2D animation programs with what appears to be awkward layering, awkward scripting, awkward rigging. They seem to resemble A:M in many ways, but they don't do 3D, and seem to make doing simple things hard.

[Rodney]

Thanks!

 

I've found that when planning things out nothing quite beats good 'ol pencil and paper.

When on the road it's easy to whip out a sketchpad and draw or sketch whatever captures the attention.

No worries of whether the power will go out or the batteries will fail.

 

There is of course a significant barrier to hand drawn animation besides the actual time required to be put in drawing; an investment anyone serious about hand drawn animation will have to make. To do it right (by current standards) one must invest considerably before the pencil even touches the page. (Of course you should keep drawing every day!) There are supplies to purchase, the tools of the trade; pencils, paper, sharpener, eraser (and with all the variations of each of these... you will find some work better in than others in different situations).

 

The big ticket items are what will likely stop most aspiring animators in their tracks; peg bars, light tables, animation discs and field guides and if you are really serious about this, a nice big animation desk.

 

That isn't the end of the production however, at this point you may have invested several thousand dollars but you've barely began to animate. Don't forget you'll need to scan those drawings (or video/film them), time/re-time them if necessary... and color them. Gone are the days of painting cels on the backs of acetate but the underlying process remains there much the same. Digital tools fit into the workflow easily here.

 

It is in the area of traditional animation's obstacles where programs like Animation:Master really excel. We don't have to convert something to digital if it's already there. Coloring every frame in series of thousand in an animated sequence is as easy as picking one color and applying it there. Don't like the color? Change it and see the change applied everywhere.

 

So for $79 a program like Animation:Master fills the gap of several thousand dollar investment in traditional animation equipment. A:M is the multiplane camera, the light table, the video tester, the coloring system, the pegbar, field guides and animation discs ...and A:M is a whole lot easier to maintain!

 

So why not use pencil and paper with A:M? Rhetorical question. Of course we can.

In the initial planning stage... it's hard to beat good 'ol pencil and paper to work things out in sketches, doodles, thumbnails or diagrams. The human brain excels at solving difficult problems and is easily scalable. Whatever is needed for the task at hand. Once the plan is solidified and the drawings have served their purpose most can be filed away without even being scanned.

 

 

 

...meanwhile back in A:M.

 

Here is an image created via A:M's compositor using one EXR rendering of the 3D model. From there the image was applied to a one patch rectangle multiple times with normal map, diffuse, color etc. set on each image. Then in an action two lights are added (one blue and one red) and adjusted to taste. The resulting image could be further relit, blurred, applied back to the model as a decal or used elsewhere in the production. At this point it mostly serves as a lighting test. It is also a means to discover where changes should be made in the model's mesh.

 

Edit: Here's me imagining art direction from Nick Fechter, the creator of 'Eze':

[brainmuffin]

When I took my animation class last year, someone did an amazing hand drawn piece using the free software Pencil. I put it on my tablet pc, and was making some interesting progress with it when my tablet screen developed a dead spot.

 

But if I were going to make a hand drawn short, that's likely the route I'd go. I bought my tablet for $200 reconditioned, and now I'll have to put a new screen in it, which might be another $100. But with that, Pencil, and maybe photoshop or gimp for more advanced ink & paint, it would give the same experience of hand drawing everything, without the expensive equipment, & time consuming camera rendering...

[Rodney]

And if I did want to do 2D, I would probably more do a cut-out type of animation, in which I would use A:M anyway, rather than any of the other vector type 2D animation programs with what appears to be awkward layering, awkward scripting, awkward rigging. They seem to resemble A:M in many ways, but they don't do 3D, and seem to make doing simple things hard.

 

A problem I have with programs currently tailored to 2D is that most of the features that will be required can only be found in the top of the line versions of the product. Many initiates will only discover this fact after investing in the basic product without that feature set. While there are upgrade packages I find this 'hobble-ware' approach frustrating. I have no issue with companies reserving expensive features for clients willing to pay, but a little more truth in advertising would go a long way.

 

One thing that initially attracted me to A:M was that it's creators made no attempt at a hard sale. After seeing all the weird ads, the hyperbole and the promises from other products you knew weren't real, there (rather understatedly) was A:M. If you were so inclined it was available... if not... thanks for your time and have a nice day. I really liked that sensibility. I like it even more today.

 

It's hard for any program to capture the imaginary. It's hard for us to put what we are imagining on paper. Here we've entered the realm of pre-visualization where we work with only partial thoughts and uncompleted ideas. If we can better know how reality relates to our imagination it will be easier to translate those thoughts into physical and virtual manifestations of those ideas. This is even before we have opened a computer program... before we have put pencil to paper... back to the original thoughts that flow through our imagination.

[Rodney]

using the free software Pencil. I put it on my tablet pc, and was making some interesting progress with it when my tablet screen developed a dead spot.

 

 

You've illustrated a major obstacle in the production pipeline of digital arts that budget-wise I would classify in the category of 'maintenance fees'.

The program itself may perform wonderfully but without the required hardware... without the monitor/screen... without the power to keep the system running, we go quickly from high speed performance to thumbing for a ride on the animation freeway. With hand drawn animation the basic underlying system is inherently more reliable and sustainable... more durable... up to the point of 'filming'; in a traditional case that of converting imagery into a communicate-able analog/digital media.

 

So we must factor maintenance of all the required systems into our basic production calculations for a proper comparison.

This maintenance fee is often dealt with on-the-fly as systems die, but appears much easier to recover from in the case of pencil and paper.

Storage of physical and virtual products are of course a whole other consideration.

 

The digital maintenance fee appears to be roughly the same regardless of how the production is initiated.

Either way a similar film making system must be maintained.

[jakerupert]

I find the software Vern is using, Anime Studio Pro 7

at 179,-€ is quite worthwhile for 2 D and even to work together with AM on certain aspects.

 

Sometimes I am thinking, if I would have invested all the time, that I put

into learning and experimenting with AM into just drawing a movie like

Bill Plympthon did, maybe I would have had it finished by now?

 

Oh, well ............