To make the walk in place figure move in time with his steps I use the translate layer tool and nudge the figure 4 times for every key frame. You may want to experiment with that as to how many to use. It may depend on how you have scaled your figure. I first copied and pasted the 30 frames over several times. Then nudged with the (apple or command and right arrow key) for each key frame. Don't know what the nudge keys are for a PC.
Here is the flash file.
http://homepage.mac.com/rplate/Sites/Sidewalk2.swf
AND...
the Anime Studio file in case you want to see how I did it.
http://homepage.mac.com/rplate/Sites/Sidewalk2.zip
Here's HOW to make him move.
Moderators: Víctor Paredes, Belgarath, slowtiger
rplate,
the rotoscoping proccess gives you a very realistic animation and the result is fantastic. You put a video in a layer under Anime Studio and trace every frame... Long work, not so easy to do sometimes, but good result.
But,... Don't you think that going this way you loose some freedom in the animation? It is so perfect that any manual variation on it could be badly discovered by the observer and corrupt the final result of the animation.
the rotoscoping proccess gives you a very realistic animation and the result is fantastic. You put a video in a layer under Anime Studio and trace every frame... Long work, not so easy to do sometimes, but good result.
But,... Don't you think that going this way you loose some freedom in the animation? It is so perfect that any manual variation on it could be badly discovered by the observer and corrupt the final result of the animation.
-
animations4you
Sorry to say to me it does not seem perfect. To me the floor must be a bit slippery - because his left foot does not stay in place. Or perhaps I am wrong? Or perhaps this is the intent.
But compared to what you can learn about walk cycles this guy does not lift his feet high in the air. Animating walk cycles is about exaggeration often!
http://animations4you.blogspot.com/2007 ... ernet.html
What is right or wrong can be discussed - but I believe this walk cycle is good in the right milieu. But now we cannot see the surroundings and we do not know the intent of the narration - so it is hard to say something. But perhaps you can do a walk cycle like this without any rotoscoping.
And as I tried to say in another post - perhaps walk cycles do not have the highest value. I believe it is the narration. Your intent having highest value. Do you want to hypnotize the spectators or do you want them to get free? Being able to stand outside the narration.
Googling on Brecht and narration you can find this one:
Bertolt Brecht - MSN Encarta
Brecht's narrative style, which he called epic theater, was directed against the illusion created by traditional theater of witnessing a slice of life. ...
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761 ... recht.html - 38k -
I believe Brecht also has something to tell animators. I believe Disney is more sophisticated than most ones believe. Disney has for sure studied Brecht and done the opposite... Good walk cycles are good!
But there are a lot more to think and feel about my I believes.
But compared to what you can learn about walk cycles this guy does not lift his feet high in the air. Animating walk cycles is about exaggeration often!
http://animations4you.blogspot.com/2007 ... ernet.html
What is right or wrong can be discussed - but I believe this walk cycle is good in the right milieu. But now we cannot see the surroundings and we do not know the intent of the narration - so it is hard to say something. But perhaps you can do a walk cycle like this without any rotoscoping.
And as I tried to say in another post - perhaps walk cycles do not have the highest value. I believe it is the narration. Your intent having highest value. Do you want to hypnotize the spectators or do you want them to get free? Being able to stand outside the narration.
Googling on Brecht and narration you can find this one:
Bertolt Brecht - MSN Encarta
Brecht's narrative style, which he called epic theater, was directed against the illusion created by traditional theater of witnessing a slice of life. ...
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761 ... recht.html - 38k -
I believe Brecht also has something to tell animators. I believe Disney is more sophisticated than most ones believe. Disney has for sure studied Brecht and done the opposite... Good walk cycles are good!
But there are a lot more to think and feel about my I believes.Genete,Genete wrote:rplate,
the rotoscoping proccess gives you a very realistic animation and the result is fantastic. You put a video in a layer under Anime Studio and trace every frame... Long work, not so easy to do sometimes, but good result.
Seeing some of the work you have done with bones makes me think rotoscoping is easy in comparison.
You and Vern use more BONES than I do vector points. And, that's just to move a hand or head.
I admire your ability to do that but I can't get my head around the bones thing. It seems every time I try, my whole figure distorts in someway. Besides try doing a front or walk away with bones. Bones have their limitations as well.I don't have to trace every frame completely when rotoscoping. That's why I use groups. Often times all I do is move the head as a group or rotatate a foot as a group. The tools in AS make rotoscoping less of a task. Rotoscoping in AS is not about tracing, it's about moving points around. Tracing would be so much easier. The only real tracing is done in frame zero. After that it's planning how to move the points and hope you have enough points to do the job as you get further along in the animation.
The figures I have put on the forum are simply for the convenience of those who want to use them. I made the first one in response to Draw_Girls need. Is there any difference to what I am doing (for free) and what Cartoon Solutions does for money?
http://www.cartoonsolutions.com/
Those that want to pick it apart for flaws can download it, fix it, and upload it back to the forum.
The slide on the left foot is because I probably should have nudged 5 places instead of 4. That's why I said experiment and see what works.
Cheers
Sorry for the missunderstanding. If I would remembered your previous posts (Star Trek series) I would have taken account that you do is point motion and not tracing. Anyway the video frame is in a layer below the vector layer, isn't it?I don't have to trace every frame completely when rotoscoping. That's why I use groups. Often times all I do is move the head as a group or rotatate a foot as a group. The tools in AS make rotoscoping less of a task. Rotoscoping in AS is not about tracing, it's about moving points around. Tracing would be so much easier. The only real tracing is done in frame zero. After that it's planning how to move the points and hope you have enough points to do the job as you get further along in the animation.
I admire your work. As well as you say that you can't go ahead with bones I cannot go ahead without bones
. It is only individual prefernces on the workflow.But you did not response about the freedom (and the reusability) of your work.
I could spend same time than you making a very complex bone rigging but I can obtain a character that can be easily used muliple times and every time is a different animation. You are more rigged in this way than me because after all your work do always the same motion. Sincerly I dont want to scorn your work. It is enourmous and have a lot of hability. But bones (conbined with actions and or switch layers) are always more productive than point motion exclusively.
I have done one in Draw_girl thread. It was only the skeleton, but, hey!! let me finish the hand first!!!Besides try doing a front or walk away with bones
---
Off topic: This kind of discussion about what is the best tech to do somethig gives to this forum and to AS a very high value. I've learned a lot reading and participating in this kind of discussions.
---
Regards
Genete
Man! When you say it like that it sounds insane!rplate wrote: You and Vern use more BONES than I do vector points. And, that's just to move a hand or head.
It is a bit of a chore. The main reason I do it is for flexibility... and laziness.
I played with GI-Joes (the big ones) as a child. I love the "puppet" aspect of posing characters with just a few control bones even if the set up is difficult (my 3D background). I admit to being overly obsessed with bone control.
-vern
Another solution besides bone manipulation and point motion is bitmap manipulation, of which I see too little on this forum.
Concerning rotoscoping: I was thought that if you animate too realistically, so much so, that it is hard to distinguish from live-action, why not do live-action and manipulate the imagery with video editing tricks? Animation should have a missing element in it, that allow the viewer to complete the picture. The more the viewer is engaged in the scenery (the more the viewer has to fill in the gaps), the more entertaining an animation becomes.
IMO animation should not become identical to computer graphics imagery, as you can see in live-action movies. The added "clumsiness" of a draftsman drawing from memory, with an established model at hand, gives extra personality to the scene. This is not possible when combined with life-action, because there, animation and real people have to match up. So, actually, not having live-action gives you more artistic freedom.
I believe Fleisher Studios used rotoscoping in their animation, because skilled draftsmen was hard to get, and using this technique allowed them to use less skilled draftsmen as a shortcut. However, don't be fooled, those "less skilled draftsmen" could probably draw circles around most of use on this forum. They just weren't skilled at drawing animation.
I'm not against rotoscoping as a tool, but I think that, finally, you should only use it as a reference, and try to draw from memory, to lose some of the quality of live-action, and win that back by taking advantages of the viewer's imagination.
Just a thought.
Concerning rotoscoping: I was thought that if you animate too realistically, so much so, that it is hard to distinguish from live-action, why not do live-action and manipulate the imagery with video editing tricks? Animation should have a missing element in it, that allow the viewer to complete the picture. The more the viewer is engaged in the scenery (the more the viewer has to fill in the gaps), the more entertaining an animation becomes.
IMO animation should not become identical to computer graphics imagery, as you can see in live-action movies. The added "clumsiness" of a draftsman drawing from memory, with an established model at hand, gives extra personality to the scene. This is not possible when combined with life-action, because there, animation and real people have to match up. So, actually, not having live-action gives you more artistic freedom.
I believe Fleisher Studios used rotoscoping in their animation, because skilled draftsmen was hard to get, and using this technique allowed them to use less skilled draftsmen as a shortcut. However, don't be fooled, those "less skilled draftsmen" could probably draw circles around most of use on this forum. They just weren't skilled at drawing animation.
I'm not against rotoscoping as a tool, but I think that, finally, you should only use it as a reference, and try to draw from memory, to lose some of the quality of live-action, and win that back by taking advantages of the viewer's imagination.
Just a thought.
Genete wrote...
But you did not response about the freedom (and the reusability) of your work.
I could spend same time than you making a very complex bone rigging but I can obtain a character that can be easily used muliple times and every time is a different animation. You are more rigged in this way than me because after all your work do always the same motion.
Thought I'd have little fun with you.
It only took me 10 minutes to change to a new character.
You just have to think outside the box.
Check this out... http://homepage.mac.com/rplate/Sites/Outsidebox.swf
Why it's... it's Lenny Hahaha!
Thanks for your input.
Yes, I import the movie and it is under the layer while I rotoscope it.
WOW! I love the point motion roto stuff. That Trek test was really cool as well, but this has a nice flow to it. I would love to see some total scenes.
----
Terrence Walker
Studio ArtFX
LEARN HOW TO Make YOur Own Animated Film!
Get Video Training to Show You How!
Terrence Walker
Studio ArtFX
LEARN HOW TO Make YOur Own Animated Film!
Get Video Training to Show You How!
Well here you go artfx.artfx wrote:WOW! I love the point motion roto stuff. I would love to see some total scenes.
I have three of the figures walking at 3 different angles across a room.
Here's the flash site...
http://homepage.mac.com/rplate/Sites/acrossroom.swf
The flash movie does not loop so you have to reload the page each time to see it again.
AND...
Here's the Anime Studio file for whoever wants to see how it's done.
http://homepage.mac.com/rplate/Sites/acrossroom.zip
By the way I made extra work by telling you to use the nudge for each keyframe. SORRY... that''s the hard way. Just drag the layer from one side to the other. DUH! What was I thinking?
To make the figure walk toward you just go to the end of the walk cycle and scale the layer bigger. Easy stuff. I'm having so much fun!
You do have to cut and paste the walk cycle as there is only one cycle in the samples I put up. I think I have about eight cycles in this one.