In- Depth post #2 ~~(~_~)~~ Things are not bad (yet).

Greeeeetings! Time for another in-depth post! (Well actually I’m typing this part three days after the first post was due but if you can’t tell that I’m a spammer from the pile of blogs I have lying around here you should). Enough chatting.

So I’ve had a meeting with Mr. Udell after school last week or so talking to him about the basics of storyboarding. It was… intimidating. There’s a lot of information. I definitely underestimated the power of storyboards and the amount of effort put into them. Well, I’m not here to teach you guys what storyboard is all about so I don’t want to talk too much about it. But basically it’s a snapshot of all the extreme actions in an animation and a rough estimate on how long they are going to last. By extreme actions, I don’t mean characters go on crazy roller coaster rides or skydiving, but rather the necessary actions needed to tell the story. Using Mr. Udell’s example, if I want to animate a person walking and slipping on a banana peel, I would only draw the steps that the person is taking or even less, the first step and the last step before he/she slips on the peel. I don’t need to draw every single tiny differentiation of movement in the storyboard, that’s basically animating the same process twice (which is not a pleasant thing to do). It’s somewhat similar to a comic where there is just enough action so the reader can understand what is happening, although a storyboard is usually not published nor include dialogues. Storyboards are meant to be a guideline, a rough idea of how a film is going to look while comics are solid, finished and polished ideas of a story that is, in my opinion, more dramatic than a storyboard.

So for the previous two weeks, I’ve completed 5 pages worth of storyboard as well as the timing board, but of course I’m only going to show you a tiny portion of it. I don’t want to spoil the story and all. Sorry for the poor quality of those photos, I promise my animation will look better.

img_20170122_141227-min

img_20170122_141344-minwin_20170124_09_59_33_pro

According to the estimation of my timing board, my animation is about 3000 frames or so which isn’t that much if I animate it by two’s. Which actually brings us to our next focus, How to Have a Beautiful Mind!! I know my fellow classmates might disagree (not beautifully, though) with me, but I think it’s a fairly decent book.

Disagreement and Difference:

For the meeting I had with Mr. Udell, he mentioned that I should animate by two’s so that I only have to make 12 drawings per second. However, from my experience and what I’ve learnt so far my opinion on the best way to animate is by one’s because it provides a smoother and more natural flow of motion. So there is a difference between our opinions. I acknowledged my disagreement and he said that it is true that animating by one’s is smoother, but animating by two’s is obviously a lot less work and it still works fine. Apparently this debate has been brought up between many great animators for decades (so does it mean that I’m a great animator too? Probably not). He stated that I should use two’s for normal actions and one’s for rapid movements, which I do agree is a good reconciliation for this topic. Maybe I shouldn’t be too ambitious on my first animation anyways.

In addition to that, we were talking about the exaggeration of motion in animation. In his initial opinion, he said that animators don’t really have to stick to the rules, they can play around with gravity and all. Which is true and I definitely agree. In fact, I just saw a meme a couple of days ago on this topic.

image courtesy to makeameme.org

He supported with the example of Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner, and I definitely agree that this is true. From this, I can see that he probably likes classic Disney animations, or at least knows some of them. I think that is where the initial “place” that Mr. Udell “came from”. Although this is absolutely just a guess and there is no evidence supporting that hypothesis. However, I did bring up a counterexample with Tim Burton’s film Caroline. Under this circumstance, the motion of these movies are much more serious and realistic compare to cartoons such as Wile E. Coyote. I was wondering if it was because Caroline was a stop- motion picture thus the movements of the characters are restrained by gravity. So I inquired about this difference and he said the exaggeration of movements in an animation really depends on the tone of the story. Which makes a lot of sense because Caroline is a much more serious film than Wile E. Coyote. Overall I really enjoyed this conversation and I look forward to having a session with him next week!

My blog just keeps on getting longer, what the heck. There were just so many interesting things to talk about aaaaaaaaaaaa. Some people complain about In-Depth but honestly there’s not a lot of work to do once you get the ball rolling. To me, I always have things to talk about. Hahaha well I should stop now because my classmates are probably going to complain again. See you next time!

I’ll end my blog with a different GIF this time.

gif courtesy to giphy.com

Comments

  1. Thanks for recognizing the value of this project. It has so many other benefits beyond doing something that you choose to do! Learning never stops for those who are passionate about life and living it to the fullest extent possible. You get out of it what you put into it. Your enthusiasm for your in-depth is evident.
    Mulder

    • Thank you so much Ms. Mulder! I think this project definitely weighs more than what we chose to do initially. This whole how to have a beautiful mind thing going to be super useful in the future since I’m sure people talk more and animate less (unfortunately and fortunately).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *