Why?

[Simon Edmondson]

Opening Three shots of current short.

Any Feedback welcome.

simon

 

Why_S1.mov

 

Why_S2.mov

 

Why_S3.mov

[Rodney]

Intriguing thus far.

 

The shadows are doing something strange in the first video, making it look like the character is walking next to a wall with a painted background on it. The flashing between trees (on the mountains in the background) I'm sure you are already aware of...

 

In the 'stating the obvious' category: (i.e. what appears to be obvious to me so far)

Viewing these videos in order the story I pick up so far is that of a man on his way to deliver flowers to a woman. It appears the woman sitting on the bench is the likely recipient for the flowers... I guess we'll know soon enough!

 

In the third video (with the woman rising from the bench) she does three very mechanical movements from sitting to standing, to turning, then to preparing to walk greet or otherwise do something. Blending that second part so that she isn't performing a military-style 'right face' would seem to be more appropriate. Without knowing her intention for standing up and turning I'd be guessing to say much more. To my way of thinking she should already be turning as she rising from the bench rather than wait until she fully completes the standing up motion.

 

So far so good!

 

 

It kind of goes without saying but I tend to state the obvious fairly often... I do wish these characters had ribcages of some sort.

They are just short of being representatively real but the reason for their diminutive midsections still baffles me.

It's not so much that the midsections themselves... it's that there isn't anything else in their design that echos/grounds that particular feature.

[Simon Edmondson]

[Rodney

Thank you once again for your response. I've tried to address your suggestions regarding her getting up from the bench in the accompanying clip.

 

Standing_Turn.mov

 

The flashes amongst the trees were a "happy" accident. I don't know what caused them but, it was appropriate, as Lightening comes into it later on. I've changed the clouds and got rid of the sky dome, replacing that with more cartoon type clouds ( tested the idea couple of weeks ago )/ I'll try to post a still later.

The other figure is walking along besides a hedge with the trees and mountains beyond that. I'm glad they read as mountains. I had lowered the camera view to avoid the landscape between the hedge and the tress in the middle ground but, if you think its more appropriate to include that depth cue I can try it to see how it works.

Thank you for your help.

 

Regards

Simon

 

[Rodney]

If that is indeed a wall then you might want to change the color of it or distinguish it in some other way from the grass/ground.

As it is it creates the illusion of his shadow being projected into the distance (I'd say several hundred meters) to the base of the trees.

Something that adds to this is the parallel lines/tangent of the top of the wall and the base of the trees.

The only real depth cue is the guy's shadow and it reads as if the entire background is on a horizontal plane approximately one foot away.

Of course that is where the wall is but... there is nothing to keep us from percieving the depth above that receded back to the mountains.

I know there are mountains and trees represented but due to lack of depth cues it could be paintings of mountains and trees.

 

If you decide to keep all the parallels you could gain a lot simply by darkening everything above the wall and lightening everything on this side of the shadowed character.

 

As it is by itself it does not appear that there is any wall next to the character... just grass receding into the distance with an odd shadow falling into the distance as well.

 

I haven't had time to analyze your new standing up animation but at a glance it looks much more smooth of a transition.

My thought is that once she commits to turning her head should continue (and look toward where she is going... or the area of interest) while her body continues standing and turning. This is an age old animation principle of the head leading the turn. If we could see her eyes (i.e. if it was a close-up) we would see her eyes lead the turn before her head. This provides an element of anticipation as well.

[Simon Edmondson]

Rodney

Thank you for your feedback.

I will modify the hedge straight away. I had a render going through overnight with the new clouds.

The standing action will be done this evening.

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Revised Hedgerow, lighting and camera angle.

simon

 

S1.mov

[robcat2075]

that hedge needs some more vertical element to its appearance to clue us into the fact that it is there.

 

One solution for the standing problem is that she doesn't have to turn a full 90° . She can swing her right leg slightly toward him and stand to that then drag the other leg over. She doesn't need to have here feet aimed directly at him.

[Rodney]

I believe the classic solution to the problem would be to have the camera move slightly to enhance the perceived perspective.

 

For instance, if the camera started slightly higher and then tracked downward while advancing (zooming) in slightly... following the character... that might give us enough change in perspective for us to 'see' those objects that are otherwise hidden. For one thing it would easily allow us to see the effect of the shadow on the hedge row.

 

This is an interesting/related view of the age old illusion/issue that plagues filmmaking best demonstrated via a spinning wheel with evenly spaced support columns or a fenceline where each of the slats of the fence look exactly the same. Where there is no perceived change there is no perceived depth or motion.

 

Another solution would be to exchange the hedge for a series of rectangular shaped bushes.

[Simon Edmondson]

Robert and Rodney

Thank you for your responses.

 

I've modified the hedge further and changed the camera angle,

 

 

 

Here are two large renders of the view and below a small render of the scene. The view is more readily identified in the stills perhaps ?

I haven't, as yet, introduced a tracking shot as it was only a very short take.

 

S2.mov

 

Once again, any feedback welcome.

regards

simon

[robcat2075]

When I looked a those shots I had no idea there was hedge there until I saw Rodney mention it in the comments. I just saw that as a coloration of the ground plane.

 

 

Here's a simplified example of the problem. In the top version the lines are ambiguous as to what contour the represent. They could all be lines on the ground plane or they could be representing edges of a vertical wall like in the middle or bottom view. The vanishing lines are the same in each one , but the contour lines running up and over the shape tell us exactly what the shape is.

 

 

The hedge needs some very obvious detail to clarify it. Rodney's suggestion to break it into several bushes is a good one.

 

 

Also... if you narrowed the shoulders on the female character, I think that would help a lot to make her more feminine. Make them narrower than the hips.

[NancyGormezano]

The hedge needs some very obvious detail to clarify it. Rodney's suggestion to break it into several bushes is a good one.

 

Or perhaps have a little bird or butterfly fly-in and land on the top of it to give us a clue that it is a 3D hedge, separate from the far background imagery?

[Simon Edmondson]

I modified the hedge into lots of separate bushes, rather than one continuous bush.

Is this any better ?

 

I'll have to give the shoulder narrowing suggestion some thought tomorrow.

regards

simon

 

[robcat2075]

I modified the hedge into lots of separate bushes, rather than one continuous bush.

Is this any better ?

 

 

Yes! That's clearer and more appealing.

[Simon Edmondson]

Yes! That's clearer and more appealing.

 

Robert

Thank you for your help.

I'm re doing Scene one which should show it to better effect, when the walking figure casts a shadow on and over the bushes.

 

On a related question,

Both figures have the 2008 rig installed. If I re model the blue figure to make her shoulders narrower, would that necessitate re installing the rig from scratch or could I just move the shoulder joints ?

regards

simon

[robcat2075]

Both figures have the 2008 rig installed. If I re model the blue figure to make her shoulders narrower, would that necessitate re installing the rig from scratch or could I just move the shoulder joints ?

 

I don't know enough about the 2008 rig to say. You might ask in one of the threads for that rig for an expert answer.

[NancyGormezano]

I'm not an expert in 2008, but you would NOT have to reinstall everything.

 

However IF you reposition the geometry bones (and depending on how you reposition them), then most likely as well, some of the control bones for any of the arms/shoulders, would have to be repositioned. AND probably more than likely, you would have to revisit (edit relationship) some of the control poses/relationships for the arms just to make sure that the controls were "snapping" to the right place. ie that the offsets for the compensates were zeroed or were correctly offset.

 

If things aren't working after repositioning the geometry bones, the places to look in the relationship folders would be in the ARMS relationship folders, as well as in the basic setup relationship folder for any arm bone mentions and the constraints that are imposed on them.

 

I've just uploaded an image showing potentially the folders to look at for the right arm only (you would do the same for the left side). I have isolated all the parts of the 2008 rig for myself, and have deleted any auto-balancing type features, so your folders will look a little different (& will include the other body parts) - hopefully you get the idea.

Edited February 3, 2013 by NancyGormezano

[Simon Edmondson]

...

I've just uploaded an image showing potentially the folders to look at for the right arm only (you would do the same for the left side). I have isolated all the parts of the 2008 rig for myself, and have deleted any auto-balancing type features, so your folders will look a little different (& will include the other body parts) - hopefully you get the idea.

 

Nancy

 

Thank you very much for that. I will see what I can sort out tomorrow. Been a little busy with the green paint today !

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Revised version of S1 with new hedges, camera view.

Feedback welcome.

regards

simon

 

S1.mov

 

Ps

Its rendered at 1080, this was converted to 640x480 to save file size.

[NancyGormezano]

Definitely reads better.

 

I must admit I wonder why the hedgerow is so thin in width? I think I would prefer it thicker. But I too, like Rodney, find the design of the mid section of your characters strange. So I'm guessing it's a conscious design choice/preference.

[Wildsided]

That guy has definitely got the funk.

[Simon Edmondson]

Nancy, Dan

Thank you for your feedback.

I've revised the female figure

a 3/4 view

Top

 

front

 

And how it looks in action. This is the same movement as Friday, just the setting has changed. The movement is to be worked on this afternoon ( painting things green over the weekend ).

Simon

 

S3.mov

 

New figure on right in all images.

[Wildsided]

She's definitely smoother than she was before Simon.

 

P.S

 

I didn't mean any criticism with my previous comment. I just meant the guys had a spring in his step.

[Simon Edmondson]

She's definitely smoother than she was before Simon.

 

P.S

 

I didn't mean any criticism with my previous comment. I just meant the guys had a spring in his step.

 

Dan

Thank you for your reply.

I didn't take it as a criticism. I wasn't sure quite what the 'funk' was ( I'm an old git, so not up to date on such things ), but got the gist of it.

I was trying for the Double Bounce walk in the Richard Williams, 'Animators Survival Kit' book, ( pages 119-120 ). Hadn't tried it before and liked the effect.

 

The reasons for the figures being the way they are ( aside from my lack of modelling skill that is ) partially stems from a book by George Maestri, were he suggests using stick figures, or at least very simplified, because any errors are more immediately apparent with them. At this stage of the learning process that is definitely a good thing. The other reasons are just a reaction to the full bodied, photo realistic, I see in all the comics and, I like to keep things as simple as possible. I should add, learning a lot about modelling too. although it might not look like it !

 

When these shorts are rendering overnight, I use the time to develop a project I'm working on, provisional title, " Charlies Birthday". That will be more realistically styled figures and settings. I'm hoping the animation lessons learnt with these shorts will feed into that. Had terrific fun over christmas making the first rough storyboard for it (300+ drawings ). Trying to revise it now.

regards

simon

[Bruce Del Porte]

Great starts!

 

On the double bounce walk, you may want to add a little head bounce

On the waiting on the bench, you may want to add a weight shift from the hips as she turns he head

 

 

I like the characters and I like the world

 

Bruce

[Simon Edmondson]

Great starts!

 

On the double bounce walk, you may want to add a little head bounce

On the waiting on the bench, you may want to add a weight shift from the hips as she turns he head

 

 

I like the characters and I like the world

 

Bruce

 

Bruce

Thank you for your suggestions.

I will try to adjust the walk and the weight shift tomorrow. Busy with other things today and working out the next part.

I read a book on stop motion recently and the author, Barry Purves, was celebrating what he called the 'flawed process', because you had to get it right first time. He thought the ability to continually revisit and revise in CG was not a cause for celebration. I don't think I agree with that. Certainly at my stage of learning.!

regards

simon

[Rodney]

Barry Purves, was celebrating what he called the 'flawed process', because you had to get it right first time.

 

The goal in animation certainly would/should be to get it right the first time.

CG does allow directors/producers/what have you to tweak in ways that with hand drawn and stop motion animation would not be even remotely economical. Therein may lie the primary popularity of CG among producers. They can tinker at almost any stage with the plan.

 

More than anything though, the difference (in time) seems to be made up for in the planning stage.

If you only have one go at it to get it right, the tendency is to spend a lot more time in the planning stage, then execute that plan with minimal deviation from that plan.

 

This is no doubt why few people tend to spend adequate time planning when animating with CG. They think they can adjust it/tweak it/fix it on the go and so skim over those important elements of planning. In most cases this leads to considerably more work and rework. (RE: The old adage, 'those who fail to plan, plan to fail'.)

 

What is rather telling is the fact that those most successful in any effort are those who plan their projects carefully and then execute that plan.

This is what is so successful about people that graduate from Cal Arts and other places known for producing Directors; they teach people how to establish and then follow production plans (i.e. they know the process of directing the execution of a plan). Then if something goes wrong in execution/production, they can look back and learn from the flaws in that plan. More ideally, before production even begins they can spot the errors, omissions and out-of-budget expenses in that plan and (attempt to) correct them.

[Simon Edmondson]

Barry Purves, was celebrating what he called the 'flawed process', because you had to get it right first time.

 

...

 

More than anything though, the difference (in time) seems to be made up for in the planning stage.

If you only have one go at it to get it right, the tendency is to spend a lot more time in the planning stage, then execute that plan with minimal deviation from that plan.

 

This is no doubt why few people tend to spend adequate time planning when animating with CG. They think they can adjust it/tweak it/fix it on the go and so skim over those important elements of planning. In most cases this leads to considerably more work and rework. (RE: The old adage, 'those who fail to plan, plan to fail'.)

...

 

Rodney

Thank you for your comments. The Purves comments were in a book from AVA in their Basics series. I am presently reading another in that series, this one on scriptwriting. The author, Paul Wells, states that, perhaps the dividing line between animation and live action films, comes in that animation is preplanned thoroughly before production, and live action tends to be assembled in post post production. I'm trying to learn the lessons you outline, with my animation projects and preparing them in more detail before they are started. The difficulty is that of knowing what you need to know before you start, only experience provides that. That and the help and advice of others, here and elsewhere.

regards

simon

[Rodney]

The difficulty is that of knowing what you need to know before you start, only experience provides that

 

You've certainly hit on a key element there.

Experience is exactly what is needed and yet it takes time in the trial and error stage to accumulate that experience.

That's why sayings like PIXAR's 'Make mistakes faster' seem to resonate so deeply.

It's important to try and try often and to take risks when they are appropriate to take.

 

That is one thing we want to encourage here in this forum.

Folks have purchased A:M... they want to create their characters, stories, effects with it... the should do exactly that!

 

The best way to do that is to jump in and make lots of mistakes. Those mistakes will translate to the learning that comes from experience.

It's only detrimental if we keep making the same mistakes over and over again while expecting some other outcome than what we've repeatedly experienced.

[Simon Edmondson]

The difficulty is that of knowing what you need to know before you start, only experience provides that

 

You've certainly hit on a key element there.

Experience is exactly what is needed and yet it takes time in the trial and error stage to accumulate that experience.

That's why sayings like PIXAR's 'Make mistakes faster' seem to resonate so deeply.

It's important to try and try often and to take risks when they are appropriate to take.

 

That is one thing we want to encourage here in this forum.

Folks have purchased A:M... they want to create their characters, stories, effects with it... the should do exactly that!

 

The best way to do that is to jump in and make lots of mistakes. Those mistakes will translate to the learning that comes from experience.

It's only detrimental if we keep making the same mistakes over and over again while expecting some other outcome than what we've repeatedly experienced.

 

Rodney

I make lots of mistakes, all the time but I'm trying to learn from them as I do. My background is originally in painting and the 'fine arts' ( as opposed to applied arts I suppose ) and a lot of the time it was about exploring what the materials could do in an open ended way. i'm trying to keep that but acquire a more systematic approach to the development process. I animate until about 21:00, then sit there drawing for "Charlie's Birthday" while the days animation renders through. The techniques used in this short ( and others ) should apply to CB and I can plan it more effectively. Hope so anyway.

 

The old adage of, "if you don't learn from your mistakes you are condemned to repeat them" applies really !

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Basic keys, no subtleties of finger or face setups, trying to find out if the basic body language works before going for the details.

Any feedback welcome.

simon

 

revised S3

S3.mov

 

Scene four

 

S4.mov

[3DArtZ]

before I go on to my though, I have not read through the entire thread... but just looking at the latest video... It still looks ruff like you mentioned. I think the interaction between the 2 in the S4 movie is very robotic and could be made a bit smoother...

what do I mean? Like if you were to approach someone with flowers and they put their hand up to stop you, you probably would not move your body backwards like if she used "the force" to push you back... you would probably stop and maybe your head and face would take care of the reaction... like the head goes backa dn the mouth and eyes open wide. so if that were the case the camera would possibly change to close up of the guys face from behind the the girls shoulder or something.

But... that being said, using smart camera angles and cuts the animation you have created could probably be used and a very similar effect would be achieved to what I had mentioned.

 

Mike Fitz

www.3dartz.com

[Simon Edmondson]

Mike

Thank you for your observations. The reaction on the male is a bit strong I agree but I was trying to amp it up a bit so I could cut back on later work. I wanted to make sure there was no ambiguity about what was taking place. I've modified the female hand gestures and movements. Just noticed I forgot her eye and mouth movements so will do those later today.

 

Any critical feedback welcome.

simon

 

S4.mov

[TheSpleen]

your doing it right Simon.

[Simon Edmondson]

your doing it right Simon.

 

Gene

 

Thank you. I'm working on her walk now and will post it later today. Hoping for a complete contrast to his as he was arriving.

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

First draft of her walk away. No facial or finger movements yet. The male will be added later on today.

Any critical feedback welcome.

simon

 

S5.mov

 

PS

It was rendered at 1080HD, this is a VGA conversion to keep the file size down.

[Simon Edmondson]

Revised S5 with Ray being animated. Revised Winona walk as her hand was penetrating her hip and thigh at times. This is a shaded version rather than a final quality toon render. Still awaiting the finesse points like fingers and facial settings.

Any Critical feedback welcome.

regards

 

PS

It was rendered at 720HD, this is a VGA conversion to keep the file size down.

 

S5.mov

[Simon Edmondson]

Revised Winona walk ( again ! ) to try to get more hip rotation and smoother action.

Any critical feedback very welcome.

regards

simon

 

Why_S5.mov

[NancyGormezano]

Revised Winona walk ( again ! ) to try to get more hip rotation and smoother action.

Any critical feedback very welcome.

 

Why_S5.mov

 

 

First thing I notice is that there is some slipping along the path and her stride length seems too short. The walk still looks a bit stiff, but the hips are definitely loosening up! I don't see any counter rotation of the upper body/spine/torso to the hip motion. I like that you are trying for foot placement that is more feminine (narrower in line, rather than masculine wide)

 

I am not detecting much of a passing pose?

 

I am not sure if you are trying to perfect a generic female walk, or are you also trying to build in some storytelling, acting with this shot, along with some personality of the character?

 

Perhaps this tutorial by Keith Lango might help in another viewpoint in understanding walks. I love keith's teaching style. He says there is no such thing as a perfect walk, and any walk can be developed from 5 blocking poses, focusing first on the lower body (hips, feet) to get the basic locomotion, along with some upper body posture. (The arms, face etc are layered in later for the specific storytelling):

 

1) heel plant

1.5) hips down, forward (approx 2 frames later),

2) passing

2.5) hips up, forward (approx 2 frames later)

3) other heel plant

 

After getting poses 1, 2, 3 - one would adjust the stride length and stride speed, then add the poses 1.5, 2.5

Next add rotation of hips, and counterrotation of upper body (exact opposite of hips).

 

Maybe show us your 5 poses from the side, and front without scenery, and we might be able to offer more helpful suggestions, opinions in a generic way.

 

Tell us about the personality of Winona, the situation of this shot (what is she thinking, feeling, communicationg) and maybe our suggestions can get more specific for this shot and this character.

[Simon Edmondson]

Nancy

Thank you very much indeed for the advice. I shall work through the Keith Lango piece tomorrow.

What I was trying for with her walk, was a recognisably female walk, self confidant, sure she's got the upper hand. It was to be a contrast of personality from the double bounce walk of the male earlier. Trying, by contrasting the styles of movement, to get a narrative going visually. I wanted it to read without using dialogue and sound so that, when they are added, it enhances rather than carries the narrative ( hope that doesn't sound too pretentious ? ).

 

I asked some people here what they thought was going on, and the response was "She's telling him to "bugger off", which is a stronger version of what I was trying for. Mike Fitz thought it looked as though she was trying to use the force so, I tried to alter the hand gestures to change that.

 

I was trying to use the ideas in the Richard Williams book. He suggests using a centre line and have the feet step over the line to the 'opposite' side.That would be the opposite of the "Mr Macho" type, were the males struts along feet widely spaced. There is a fair bit of contra rotation in the upper body but, evidentially, not enough. She is only taking small strides, 40cm I think, I set the guides in the chor to space it out, then set the extremes steps, followed by the in betweens. Trying to be more deliberate in approach I suppose.. Will try to post some stll shots of the key frames tomorrow.

Thank you for your help once again

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Tried to post shots earlier, seemed to have messed that up so, here goes again.The walk is over a 16 frame sequence. This is the second step.

I set the contacts poses at 16 and 32, did the passing pose at 24 then went back again to set the step forward at 20 and the step up at 28.

 

Then went back into the timeline to off set the joint movement so they overlapped and were on separate frames. The interpolation was then smoothed.

 

Its not on a action cycle but key framed all the way through using guides to get the step distance equal. The steps were set to 55 cm. Correction 30 cm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the first three seconds of the walk.

 

Winona_Walk.mov

 

Any critical feedback welcome. Thank you for your help.

regards

simon

[Rodney]

Watching with great interest.

 

Mike Fitz thought it looked as though she was trying to use the force so, I tried to alter the hand gestures to change that.

 

I'm not so sure it was the hand gesture as much as his movement backward that was suggesting 'the force' had been used to compel him backward. Upon seeing his movement I too was wondering what type of power was being used. The trouble in gauging that of course is in us not knowing what you know of the story. For all we knew... 'a force' might have been used. With your feedback suggesting that the intention was more of a rejection and him as if to say, "No thanks dude" his sudden movement backward (twice) does seem too exaggerated. It doesn't read as a rejection and reattempt as much as a blast of unearthly energy propelling him backward.

 

I won't comment on the walk cycle because it looks like you are well on your way to fine tuning already.

 

Over all I like what you've got going.

Every time you post, your animation seems to become smoother, more accurate and natural.

All this practice is paying off for you!

[Simon Edmondson]

..

 

Over all I like what you've got going.

Every time you post, your animation seems to become smoother, more accurate and natural.

All this practice is paying off for you!

 

 

Rodney

Thank you very much for your kind observations. I thought the jump back reactions were a bit strong but I was trying to make them that way so I can scale them back at a later point in another piece.

The idea was that he was bopping along, all excited about meeting "his girl" then, was taken aback by the rejection, and the 'dear Ray' not waiting for him on the bench ( although that might go yet ).

I hope the animation is improving, getting lots of practice, though needing lots more. Have spent the afternoon reworking the walk in the light of Nancy's observations. Its going through now, so may post later, if there is time before going to bed.

regards

simon

[NancyGormezano]

This is the first three seconds of the walk.

 

Winona_Walk.mov

 

Any critical feedback welcome. Thank you for your help.

 

Hi Simon - sorry to take so long to get back to you. I am not a walk cycle expert (I was actually hoping Robert would critique, silly lazy me - heh heh), but 1st, easiest thing I notice is that your passing keyframe does not have the foot angled down - so it gives the impression that Winona walks very flat-footed, and she appears pigeon toed (foot/toes turned in towards line of walking, rather than slightly out). Could be a stylistic choice on your part?

 

If you are intending for Winona to walk many cycles in 1 shot, then I think you are making a lot of work for yourself by not creating a reusable walk cycle action for the bottom half of her.

 

Perfect your walk (in 2008 rig: using the body null, pelvis, foot controller, heel, torso controller) in an action by just doing the 5 major keyframes (8 keyframes for a cycle for both sides), each on sequential frames (8 frames total). Change the spacing of the keyframes if you like a tad to make some things snap or take longer (expand to 12-16 frames total?).

 

You would then only have to change the amount of time that the walk cycle takes in the chor, and you could use the cycle for all different paces, and layer the face, arms, hands, head in the chor for your acting choices.

 

In my QT example - I used Robbie (2008 rig) and did 1) a walk cycle that has only 8 frames, and then 2) changed the timing slightly for making the passing phase take a little longer, for a 12 frame cycle

 

From left to right in the QT (total 96 frames):

 

1) character using 8 frame walk cycle, taking 8 frames/cycle in the chor, repeat 12, and only the head motion is added

2) 2nd character is using the 12 frame walk cycle, taking 12 frames/cyle, repeat 8, with head, arms, hand motion added

3) 3rd character - 12 frame walk cycle, taking 24 frames/cycle, repeat 4 - head, hand, etc added

4) 4th character - 12 frame waljk cycle, taking 48 frames/cycle, repeat 2 - head, hand, etc added

 

I've uploaded the project, and it includes 3 chors. The one that generated the QT movie, and 2 others where Robbie (& the walk cycle) is put on a path, and ease is used to compensate for the changes in time (how far Robbie gets on the path). You could render those chors to see how that looks.

 

Also, take a look at how the default settings are set for the Robbie model in the pose/relationship sliders and ON/OFF poses.

 

Also, notice how Robbie is CP weighted, and that there are NO smartskins. I took a look at your Winona model (from the project you posted awhile back), and I suspect you will have trouble getting what you want if you don't CP weight it similarly.

robbiecompareupperh264loop.mov

Walkcycles.prj

Edited February 28, 2013 by NancyGormezano

[Simon Edmondson]

Hi Simon - sorry to take so long to get back to you. I am not a walk cycle expert (I was actually hoping Robert would critique, silly lazy me - heh heh), but 1st, easiest thing I notice is that your passing keyframe does not have the foot angled down - so it gives the impression that Winona walks very flat-footed, and she appears pigeon toed (foot/toes turned in towards line of walking, rather than slightly out). Could be a stylistic choice on your part? ...

 

Nancy

Wow ! Thats a lot of work from you. Thank you very much indeed. I don't think the description Lazy is at all appropriate...

 

The pigeon toed effect you describe, was less a stylistic choice, than following the guidelines in the Williams book I mentioned. I'll post a scan of the relevant page later on I'll certainly look at the project setting you kindly posted in some detail. I don't have a lot of experience using CP weights or smart skin so the models are evolving as the project goes along. I didn't use an action cycle but, will in future. It was partly to see if I could do it and partly because I watched a cycle tutorial that suggested it could become too mechanical if used extensively. The variety you create in the project is very impressive.

regards

simon

[NancyGormezano]

The pigeon toed effect you describe, was less a stylistic choice, than following the guidelines in the Williams book I mentioned. I'll post a scan of the relevant page later on

 

In my 2001 edition, the angling of the foot for a feminine walk, is shown on page 157. I tried to create the walk cycle in the QT using that sort of "tightrope walking type style" with feet angled slightly out, approximately 10 degrees (rather than straight ahead, or pointing in), to look more like the normal example. I did not try to exagerate the angle as illustrated for a fashion model, stripper or ballerina. I am not aware of a page that shows a pigeon toed example? (pointing inward towards the walking path line).

 

I didn't use an action cycle ... It was partly to see if I could do it and partly because I watched a cycle tutorial that suggested it could become too mechanical if used extensively

 

Yes it can be, and it can get boring to watch too many cycles of ANY walk in 1 shot (with same camera angle)...that's why it's better to layer the acting choices for the upper body (head, arms, hands, face, etc) independantly, and asynchronously, when the character is walking for any length of time. The mechanics of the legs & swiveling torso can repeat ad nauseum, but viewer will be (should be) distracted by the story-telling upper body.

[Simon Edmondson]

Nancy

Thank you for your continuing help. It is much appreciated.

I am going to have another look at the walk later today. In the meantime, could I ask about the CP weighting you mentioned earlier ?

I opened the project you posted, and started to look at the way the CP's were weighted in the Robbie Model as suggested. Is there a way to list the way the values are distributed or , is it a case of selecting groups and choosing the "Edit CP weights" dialogue, then transferring those onto the new model

I've done some work with weighting before but with limited success.

regards

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Going to revise the weighting next, after building the scene for the next shot, in the meantime, here is a test for the current shot, after learning about cookie cut decals. I preferred the look with non toon settings but that would be too big a jump in this short. Maybe next time.

Any feedback welcome.

simon

 

Toonclouds.mov

[Simon Edmondson]

A higher res frame that shows the rain.

And a glitch I've just noticed. Drat !

simon

[Simon Edmondson]

Higher res, toon render, version of S7. The rain shows in this one.

Any feedback welcome.

simon

Why_Scene_Seven.mov

[Simon Edmondson]

This may yet be scene 8 but unsure yet.

Any feedback welcome.

simon

 

640x480 conversion from 1080 HD

 

S8.mov