Friday, March 24, 2006

internships

I'd like to start posting a series of stories about internships I've experienced before getting hired at Anzovin. Most are pretty straightforward but I have some neat stories to share about interning for Faith Hubley, and also with her daughter Emily Hubley. I'll hopefully get to that this weekend.

Meanwhile, Anzovin is going well. I feel as if I'm slacking off too much though. Working so hard for such a long time has made me feel kind of lazy in my approach to work. I really need to shake that. Today I only got in a good couple hours of worktime. Which really is pathetic when you think about it. It's all about attitude. I only had a couple of hours to go to work on Monday (as I was going on vacation) and because I *had* to, I animated from scratch, a shot that I had been futzing around with for a few days the previous week. And it turned out MUCH better. I also had video reference to work with at this point which can also help remarkably. It's all about attention to detail and choosing interesting details to pay attention to. ;) Tomorrow I promise to focus entirely on animation and spend very little time on the internet. In fact, the goal of this blog entry is to prevent me from writing it tomorrow during the workday. ;)
~Cristin

Labels: , ,

Saturday, March 11, 2006

what's next?

I've found myself with a scary little trend going on in projects lately... Each of the past three projects I've worked on required more work in less time at higher quality than the previous project. Again, this had nothing to do with Anzovin Studio requirements... it was all client dictated.

We've worked on three very time intensive projects at the studio lately. The first, which I can name, was Stolen Smells, a short bit we made for the Behind The Lions show on PBS. (See Image) It was a first for the studio in that it was TV quality animation. We've been doing DTVs and game cutscenes which require much higher quality and therefore a slower rate of animation. We needed to animate about 20-30 seconds a week (each animator) at a low character animation quality. I'm proud to say that the animation supervisor chose me to set the animation style of the film. So I went out and studied a couple of shows: Spongebob, and the Fairly Oddparents. I was really drawn in by the animation on Spongebob which was much higher quality than I expected, so I ended up focusing just on that. They use a great combination of limited animation that *doesn't ignore* the principles of animation. In fact, they quite succesfully stick very strongly to the principles in order to make the limits work. I ended up coming up with a style that was very very similar to Spongebob (so sue me I only had a week to do this ;) ). It relied almost entirely on bounces in the upper body to keep the character alive. The characters would sort of bounce out their dialogue and bounce between major poses. We even got to play around with still holds in 3D because of the 2D render style which ended up working rather nicely and also saved a lot of time on animation. But again, this limited style only worked because we all made sure to stick to the principles of overlap, ease, squash & stretch, follow through, etc, etc...

That should be on TV sometime in the Spring I think. I'll be sure to post a link to it as soon as it's allowed.


Anyway, after that project was the one you've seen me mention here in "30 seconds O fun" and "twitch" where I had to animate about 20-30 seconds a week at near feature quality. At the time I thought things couldn't possibly get any more challenging...

Until the very next project. ;) Last Wedsnesday I was given a 28 second sound clip. The deadline was yesterday! That's 10 days including the weekend in the middle although I didn't work nearly as much over the weekend as I should have. It wasn't too bad until the crunch near the end when I had to do 20 seconds of lip synch (it's a nonstop dialogue shot) in one day. Oh well, alls well that ends well. And I finally got to sleep last night. ;) I can't say the same for the poor render watchers. I'm actually very proud of how it came out, regardless, and I'll probably be fixing the animation in the future since I feel it has a lot of potential and we can re-render it in house. I should be able to post it soon as it's screening at E3 this coming week. I'll look into that.

This time I promise not to expect something easier to come along next. *looks warily around*

~Cristin

Labels: ,

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Prolific Pixar



So the following statement was posted in a 'favorite movies' thread on an *ahem* (world of warcraft) *ahem* forum that I often read...

"any of the movies made by pixar... Ice age, finding nemo, monsters inc, lilo n stitch... etc"


Ice Age isn't too surprising. It *is* a CG film. But Lilo? Aiee! Geeks these days!

I suppose I should be amused that Pixar creates excellent traditionally animated films in their spare time.
~Cristin

Labels:

Thursday, March 02, 2006

thoughts on different methods of animating

I've been having this discussion with a former animation professor of mine about 3 different methods of approaching a shot: layered approach, blocking approach, and extreme blocking approach (for lack of a better name). I thought I'd post that here since I learned a bit in writing it in terms of analyzing my approach. I've put some comments in [brackets] to clarify stuff that was just assumed in the email...

Someday I'll write this out with examples and better detail to make it a much easier to follow tutorial.

LAYERING
[This is the easiest method and best for beginners, though as you get more experienced, you'll find it takes much longer and is less effective than blocking.]

This is what I assume you teach your students, particularly the beginners. Where you animate the base bone throughout the shot first, in I'm guessing a straight-ahead manner. [So you animate a 7 second dialogue shot with just the base body bone bouncing around first.] And then layer in different body parts. [So the head is involved next, and then the arms are layered in, for instance.]

I always use this for walks and runs though I wouldn't be surprised if some people block out walks and runs. But damn, that'd be hard. For most acting and some action shots I stick to the blocking method.

[The problem with a layered approach is that it doesn't allow you to see if your poses are working until you're done. Because the poses aren't there until you're done. The director also can't really critique your work until it's almost done, prompting a lot of possible re-animation and wasted time. It's a handy method for walks and runs though because it simplifies these very complicated actions into something much easier to grasp.]

BLOCKING
[This is the method that seems to be used by most professional animators, including myself. The key thing is that this is the fastest method for those working at studios where you don't have as much time as a place like Pixar, to work on your shot]

You have a 7 second dialogue shot. In your acting, the character maybe hits 3-4 major poses to hit the major acting points. And then a bunch of smaller subtler poses like settling out of a major pose or hitting a similar smaller pose like bringing your hands up before bringing them down and out. So you put in all those poses using stepped keys. And you pay attention to every body part in every pose. Nothing is forgotten. This way you're forced to keep everything alive in an intelligent way. If you don't, the blocking won't read as well and won't be as 'alive.' (Now you go get director approval and do some fixing/refining). Next, I'll also tend to put in a small amount of inbetweens and I always put in the holds now too. It can get kind of tricky to put in holds when your motion is stepped because you can only see they're there in the keyframes in the graph editor and not in the motion itself. I recommend putting all the holds in in one sitting, once all the poses are set in stone. Otherwise it can get really confusing. Then you spline the whole thing and get a semi-floaty mess, probably with a lot of spline overshoot that needs fixing. But if you had put in the holds it doesn't look half bad, especially after fixing the overshoot stuff. And you've very quickly done most of the work allready AND gotten director approval on it.


CRAZY OH MY GOD EVERY FRAME BLOCKING (this really needs a title)
[This is the method that seems to be catching on a lot at Pixar, and likely at other studios working on high quality feature animation. It involves taking blocking to the extreme by blocking the inbetweens to the point that you have stepped keys on almost every frame or every other frame.]

Do the same as in blocking, but don't spline it. And include some settle in every hold (on EVERY body part), instead of just making it a flat line hold. Go through each pose and act it out over and over, finding what each body part does subtly, and including it as a piece of inbetween blocking.

So far, it seems like the only way to make this work is to still have each pose occur all on the same frame. Let's say you want to do some subtle inbetween motion of what an arm is doing. So you block that in. Then there's some subtle thing you notice the body doing. But it really occurs a couple frames later when you act it out. But if you block that in a couple frames later, your blocking is suddenly hard to read. Because there's a little arm jerk and then a little body jerk and then suddenly the next major pose. So my conclusion so far is that you need to put those inbetweens on the same frame as eachother and overlap them later in the blocking process or when you spline them.

See, this is where it got complicated and difficult. So I'd love to see how someone else does it...

But if you stick with it and spend a lot of time on making it all work with this method, you will be forced to pay attention to details that are probably left out with just a normal blocking approach. And a lot of potential for great animation opens up there, if you can make it work.
~Cristin

Labels:

Powered by WebRing.