[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/3/ - 3DCG


View post   

File: 170 KB, 1280x720, 1428730966326.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
471269 No.471269 [Reply] [Original]

ok dear animators.
I would love to do old style disney animation and I think is the peak of 2D animations.

But since I'm just one guy, I can't do something using 1940 methods, so I need to look up limited animation.

I started to look up, anime, pegs, tweens.

So I wonder, what are the limits of limited animation?

Can you make something as good as traditional animation with limited animation?

Of course anime is the answer, but even anime is too expensive right now for me.

I discovered you can mix limited cut out animation in some parts (like torso and face and limbs) and use traditional in the expresion, hands and hair and skirts, and even then, reusing layers of animation (some frames of individual hands, fingers, strands of hair) and use smart of tweening.

Does anyone use this hibrid?
What would be the limit of this technique?

>> No.471270

You're a fledgling animator. Do 5 second clips, then ten second clips for the next year. Spend as little or as much time on each as you want.

>> No.471275

>>471269
>But since I'm just one guy, I can't do something
And this is where you're wrong, and this is where you've already defeated yourself.
You should probably not bother if you don't think you can do it.

If you think the 1940's version of animation is the best, just fucking make it.

>> No.471298

Alright, I'll explain it now.
>1940 Animation
You'll first create a scene which is very detailed when compared to your character as you will need to be animating him or her and it saves time if she isn't fully painted like the scene but is instead just some basic shadows, highlights and colour.

then its essentially just animating the frames, to do this correctly you'll need to make a start frame, middle and end frame then you'll just slowly fill in the gaps untill you've got a animation that flows.

>> No.471305
File: 343 KB, 350x219, CmGr7.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
471305

>>471269
If I'm reading this right, you're asking about creating assets of a character, then just animating them using tweens?

Loads of people do this, it's a lot like using a puppet. The result could either look super shitty, or can come out quite well.

I'm pretty sure the show Archer, uses this method. I've seen an episode, and for a little bit I thought it was cell shaded animation, but it's actually using premade pieces.

If you want to get a animated disney feel though, the only way to go is using frame by frame and drawing by hand.


Of course, if this isn't what you're talking about, then my bad.

But in any case, if you want that fluid, 1940's Disney feel, frame by frame is the way to go.
A lot of it has to do with overemphasizing the movements and inertia. And learning to draw is probably a good starting point as well.

>> No.471309

>>471305
I meant a cutout animation but the hands and hair having hundreds of symbols (traditionally animated).

>> No.471311

>>471305
Realistically though you need a team to do what's referred to as Disney 1940 ITT.

It's only fun doing animation like that if you're that one m4st3ranim8or masturb8or guy (pretty sure that's what they were called in the 40's)
who draw the key-frames and have your small army of tweeners render out the inbetweens for you.

The reason we don't see a lot of good animation like that is that it's to costly to produce compared to alternative methods.
Expecting one guy to do it is asking a lot.

>> No.471312

>>471305

Not OP, but Ive always wanted to draw, but man I am so shit at it that I wonder if drawing is some kind of talent only certain people have or it can be learned.

Can you learn to draw through the internet? Dumb question tho

>> No.471313

>>471311
This.
I made this thread to see what are the limits of cutout and tween animation.

>> No.471315
File: 56 KB, 480x480, IMG_20140924_091507.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
471315

>>471313
>>471311
True true. No doubt it's pretty costly to do on a large scale. Nowadays frame by frame is usually just storyboarded, maybe some keyframes, and outsourced to Korea for a lot of the animation.

But that's not to say you can't to frame by frame solo. Maybe not a massive animation, but loads of flash animators use frame by frame. Really it comes down to the skill and how fast you can animate while still retaining quality. Even a hobbyist can do a ~5 min animation with enough dedication. It might take a long time though (again depending on their skill). Really though, as far as I'm concerned, the only limit is how much you want to invest time wise on the animation, and when you want it finished.

>>471312
Yeah I've always wanted to draw as well. I've been taking classes at my university for it. Really I don't know about online tutorials, as that's not really showing you how to draw, just how that artist draws. In my classes, our professors usually just set up a still life, and we just draw it. No instruction, just the parameters of what we're going to be using, and how we should go about drawing it (like crosshatching/blending/etc). The most important part of drawing is learning how to see effectively, and training yourself to be able to reproduce that on page
>"this shadow should be concave, so denser shadow in the middle."
>"I need to make a round edge, where are the highlights?"

You develop your own skills that you can transfer to imaginative works.

So my suggestion is to just practice on still life (composed scenes of objects. shit could be whatever you find around your house). With enough practice you'll get to a point where you understand how light/shadow works, and be able to reproduce it wherever you want.

Sorry for that wall of text. I'm not trying to sound like a professional or anything, just giving my personal experience.
>pic related: Something we drew after about a month in class. I couldn't draw for shit before we started.

>> No.471425

bump because /3/ haven't answered with the best tween/cut out animation ever.

>> No.471430

>>471311
>The reason we don't see a lot of good animation like that is that it's to costly to produce compared to alternative methods.

Actually, its distracting to look at and takes away from the story. Like when they did it on Family Guy that one time