AS feature discussion - AS more than "Cut out" sty

[heyvern]

it has basic 3d object manipulation and you can use bone tricks for rotation and such, and I keep telling that I love it and that it is a great piece of software but do you listen, do you!

Yes we listen... but do you?

Basic bone "tricks"?! You call "bones" a "trick"? Bones ARE what make AS unique. Only AS has bones like that. Compared to other 2D applications Moho was the first to use bones this way... or if it not the first with bones at least the first to do it effectively.

Bones are not TRICKS. They are one of the strongest and KEY features in the program.

This is the way AS animates characters, and yes you can use switch layers for basic, no onionskin, frame to frame animation, but this is not the way the software was intended to animate.

Now, if someone still think that AS is not basically a cutout animation software, albeit a really good one and very intuitive and allowing many workarounds to go beyond the software limitations, please, show me the way, because I will be lost.

You use this global description of "cut out". You stick AS in it merely because YOU seem to think that "layers" and shapes on layers are "cut out". This is far from the truth.

For example:

This character construction falls into your "definition" of "cut out". I don't do cut out. Sorry. This is not a "cut out" character. It seems to look like one because all body parts are on LAYERS, forearm, hand, bicep, thigh, calf, head, fingers, torso, tail, stomach, etc, etc, etc.

Animation:
http://www.lowrestv.com/moho_stuff/larry8.mov
Cutout layout:


This LOOKS LIKE CUT OUT in CONSTRUCTION but the RESULTS ARE NOT CUT OUT.

All of my characters are built the same way. Body parts on LAYERS like CUT OUT. But the resultiing animation IS NOT CUT OUT STYLE.

This is the TECHNIQUE used in AS. This is the technique to build even smoothly animated characters. You use multiple layers and bone offset to create a character. This REQUIRES using body parts on separate layers.

In the image above the feet are on a separate layer. The forearms are on a separate layer... but they are NOT CUT OUT. They "flow" seamlessly into the calf or bicep due to how I CONSTRUCTED IT USING THE BASIC TOOLS IN AS.

Each part SEAMLESS connects to the next part. NOT USING TRICKS or "workarounds"... I use the FEATURES IN AS. The features intended to DO THIS VERY THING. And they aren't a "headache". They are cool and fun!


-vern

[GCharb]

Oh well, here we go again!

First of, great character, love it.

As for the bone tricks, I was not calling AS bones a tricks, they are what makes AS so unique. What I call a trick is a complex rig that works as a workaround for say a head turn, for me that's a trick. If for you it is a valuable production tool, then good, for me it is a trick.

As for cutout animation, in a traditional setup, like they used to have at, say HB, they had diffrent parts of a character on a bunch of diffrent celluloid sheet, then, the animator would switch those "layers" of cells on each frames to create the illusion of motion, you could have as many as a dozen layers of celluloids for one character, now, if you had 2-6 characters on a set, you could have ended up with as many as 50-70 cells on top of each other.

This is exactlly what AS does, I see no diffrence, you can use multi plane camera shots and the such. AS is a computer software that reproduce a very old workflow but in a nice and fast paperless way, which is awsome.

There are as many ways to animate as there are animators out there, but any type of animation can be categorized.

Hand drawn, puppet animation, like claymation, stopmotion etc. and cutout style, which btw is the oldest form of animation.

But, there are many flavors of any type of animation, I totally agree that AS has it's unique set of tools and workflow, but from a technical point of vue, it is cutout style!

Gilles

[synthsin75]

There are as many ways to animate as there are animators out there, but any type of animation can be categorized.

Hand drawn, puppet animation, like claymation, stopmotion etc. and cutout style, which btw is the oldest form of animation.

So to clear things up, which of those animation categories does 3D fall into???

If you can rationalize calling 3D cutout style, then I'll leave it alone. But I think that 3D could only be categorized as modern, computer-aided puppet animation (at least from your categories). So at the very least, AS could only be categorized as a cutout/puppet hybrid animation system.

What I call a trick is a complex rig that works as a workaround for say a head turn, for me that's a trick.

How long did you do 2D work? And you're not yet comfortable with the idea that any 2D depiction of what would be 3D characters and objects is an illusory trick. You seem to think that a complex bone rig is the only way to do a head turn in AS. You can do interpolated head (and all other) turns with actions, switches, or bones. With that many options for simulating FBF results, how can you stand by this cutout conviction?



This is done with a relatively simple bone rig that anyone should be able to setup and use. Granted it's more complex than your average skeleton, but probably less so than in 3D apps. And this is only a shortcut for the same results that could be attained with actions.

[GCharb]

Hello synthsin75

I saw your rig in a previous post, quite ingenious, but like I said, in a production set we'd never use something like that for 2D animation, we'd have someone draw the shot instead. 3D on the other hand, by it's nature, needs more complex architecture, you cannot compare 2D and 3D even though both uses basically the same animation principles.

2D we are used to, it uses known techniques that have been used all over the world for ages. 3D on the other hand is trickier, Pixar puts the bar really high, it is still in the land of exploration, new ways of making it look either realistic or cartoony get develloped all the time, either for games, tv or cinema, just look at the blogs on www.softimage.com.

2D is way more forgiving then 3D, because of that, generally speaking, 3D demands more technical skills then 2D, which mostlly needs talent and an understanding of motion mechanics or none if you do cartoony animations. I smell Vern coming down on the 3D bit, true, a certain 3d software, with a certain name is pretty easy to use, but it is still a bigger technical challenge then 2D animation.

Also, I merely named a few styles of animation for the sake of conversation , 3D is in a class of it's own, but you are close calling it a computerized version of puppeteering, but that would also be simplistic.

I have talked and showned AS Pro to peoples here at work, they liked AS features and simplicity, especially compared to some of the software we use here, some heard of it but never had a look at it, they liked it, but everyone agrees that these falls in the cutout category

We are talking about peoples who have been in the animation business for a long time, some even longer then I have, peoples who like me learned animation the old way then went on with the digital era.

The whole point of this conversation turns into something I have witnessed many times along the years, you love your software, you have a special connection with it, it's like a gf, the love of your life, I know, I've been there. Vern would say the AS and AM are the last animation software he will ever use, good for him. Me, I got rid of these feelings and went the way pros do, I use the tool that's right for the job.

I am pretty sure that if a new software, that is easy to use and that offers a diffrent way to do animation that suits Greykid style better, they'll ditch AS, sad, but this would be in their best interest.

None of the things you can do with AS have not been done before, often with better results, very complex characters build from dozens of parts then meticoulaslly animated by hands to achieve amazing character animations, the russian did many of those movies, the indians as well.

As long as 2D is concerned, you can bet that very little new techniques will come out for it in any period of time" There will be a stunning piece that will come out from time to time that will amaze us, aestatically and technically, but rare will those be.

In other words, AS Pro, or any other 2D software out there re-invented the wheel, they just make old techniques and principles faster and somewhat easier to use so we can create cartoons in a more timelly and affordable fashion.

AS offers an easier, more practical way of doing these animations, and peoples like Greykid and some others have proved that AS was an amazing tool, and it is.

At my present job, I worked with 3dsmax the first 3 years, took me all that time to convince my boss that Softimage was the way to go, had a better toolset and was tons easier to customize, we made the switch and now XSI is his tool of choice but we also use Maya and many other softwares.

I am looking at a setup for a project of mine, a 2D movie, got myself a grant to look it over and see if it can be done with resaonable amount of money, I need to find the right tools, for that I need to keep my head straight and see the contenders for what they are.

In other words, my looking and learning of AS is aimed at finding the right tool for the job, AS Pro is a contender but I need the right workflow for me. I am also contemplating a classical hand drawn animation for the project, at least for the bible.

Gilles

[synthsin75]

Well, I know for a fact that you haven't even tried out one of these bone rigs, as me nor Vern have released a full working model yet. You should really KNOW something about what you deem unusable in production before you just blow it off.

I'm going to quit this discussion now, as it is apparent that you like to opine about things you have no personal experience with. If you're stuck in a traditional 2D animation workflow, then by all means live with it. Don't try to convince everyone else that the first stone wheel still beats a pneumatic tire.

Overall, I'd call these kind of opinions either stubbornly clinging to old ideas or flat out lazy.

[Genete]

Just for put more wood in the fire:
Do you call this cut-out?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGMmxzZarBw

-G

[GCharb]

You should really KNOW something about what you deem unusable in production before you just blow it off

First of, I am not blowing anything, seems to me you are the one who's upset, which brings me to peoples getting attached to software and getting pissed off because someone says something they do not like about it, why not keep all that affection for loved ones, peoples I mean. Sorry, could not resist that one!

I have been in several small, mid sized and big productons, 2d an 3d, I am quite capable of knowing what is or is not useable, for me at least, in such environments.

As for me being stubourn or stuck in a traditional 2d environment or if you think you are the first one going for the 2.5D look, well, you are sadelly mistaken.

Here is a little clip I made some 10 years ago

rooster.mov 474kb

This is actually 3d turned 2D, was brand new then and as far as I know I was the first to push it, even made many tutorials on the subject back then, some are still seen as the defacto for that particular software. I have pushed the technology since.

I respect your opinions, I talk to you with respect, only ask you respect the opinion of someone who's probablly been there way way before you even had a look at that sort of technology. Do not judge someone you know nothing about, just like I do not judge you.

I have not tried those rigs, but I gathered some others on the forum, had a pretty good look, tried some of my own, with mixed success I must admit. My saying these are not useable in a big proiduction is that they take more efforts then actually drawing the shot, which is why I would not use them.

Btw, I am many things, lazy aint one of them

Genete

If this was only made with parts rigged together then animated then yes, I would say it is cutout, on the other hand, if it is a mix of cutout, point motion or frame to frame animation, then it is an hybrid of techniques.

Never said AS was cutout only, I am saying, and I always said throughout this discussion that AS is a cutout animation tool that allows workaround to bypass the cutout limitations and that is exactlly how I see it.

Gilles

[heyvern]

GCharb,

Answer only this one simple question:

What feature or change does AS need to make it NOT A CUT OUT PROGRAM? Please please tell me? How does it not be just a cut out program? What magical change would make it not fit that category? Take out the layers? Remove the bone feature? Remove layer rotation? 3D layers?

Is it more than removing features that would make this change?

---------------------

Your arguments and definitions of how things are "hybrids" or "cut out" don't follow any logic.

Cut out "style" is a style. It's not a programming definition. There is no "computer way" to do cut out. There is no all encompassing definition of what makes a program "cut out". It is the style that is in question. Not if legs and arms are on different layers.

The legs and arms of my characters are on different layers. Don't talk about the quality of that character... look at the smooth motion. That is NOT cut out by ANY DEFINITION. And yet it was fairly easy to do in AS. It doesn't even have a ton of bones.

If I hand drew each cell of an aniimation, but cut the bits apart into different pieces... that would be... cut out? Or cell? What? Each cell of a hand drawn animation is "cut out" from the background... you are splitting hairs.

Bone rigs are the staple of 3D animation. Three is no other way to do it. Anime Studio is unique in that it can use bones to animate in "2D". But even "2D" is an illusion. Hell, 3D is an illusion. People use 3D software to create cell style 2D animations. South Park is done with 3D software. The 3D software creates paper texture with lighting and slight dropshadows to keep that "cut out" look and feel. It's 3D software that can render absolute realism used to "mimick" a low end simplistic 2D technology.

There are no "tricks". You just do what needs to be done. Your arguments make no sense.

If you think a bone rig to move a body or face smoothly is a "complicated trick" or "workaround"... then... I don't know what you call "regular" cell animation? Is that a "trick"? Why is swapping out different arms and legs like HB NOT a "trick" or complex procedure? Oh because it's "cut out" which apparently is encoded in the universe as a physical law or something?

Cut out animation is a STYLE. ANY ANIMATION PROGRAM CAN DO CUT OUT AT A MINIMUM. That's the BASE LINE expectation for ANY animation application. Cut out is THE simplest and easiest form of animation bar none.

When you say that about AS you imply it isn't more capable than the lowest common denominator.

Yes, I'm a fan of AS. So what? You are still making incorrect and wild assumptions. Stating your opinion as if it were some kind of rule of animation written on stone tablets somewhere.

-vern

[GCharb]

Hello Vern

Sarcasm again, this is getting boring and a huge waist of time.

The whole industry calls AS type of animation cutout animation, I will go with them if you do not mind, so I'll keep calling it cutout animation with a twist and you can call it whatever you want.

Happy animating everyone!

Gilles

[heyvern]

The whole industry calls AS type of animation cutout animation

Show me proof of this. Show me quotes of the "industry" standard for "cut out" and how that applies ONLY to AS.

There is no "industry standard" that applies specifically to software defining it as "cut out". This is your personal definition. Don't apply the "industry" to something that is only in your head.

-vern

[F.M.]

GCharb, I remember that clip from the Animation Master forum!

[GCharb]

Hello FM, yeah that was fun stuff, it still is.

Gilles

[GCharb]

Hello Vern

This is definatlly my last post on this thread.

The 2D animation software leaders are Toonboom, Animo and Toonz. Those are used all over the world for dozens of movies and hundreeds of tv shows, those peoples define the 2d industry with tens of thousands of users across the five continents.

Animo does not allow the rigging of characters from several parts to be animated with fk and ik, it is solelly an aid for hand drawn animation, a great one I must add.

On the other hand, Toonboom and Toonz do, and both of them refer to that type of animation as cutout style animation, you can find cutout style animation clips on both sites and both have extensive documentation reffering to cutout style animation.

Toonboom has one available on their site, a nicelly done pdf called digitalPro_Cutout_Workflow_Guide.pdf which, as it's name imply, describe a cutout style animation workflow for Toonboom Digital Pro - 3000 USD. They use many characters form several tv shows to illustrate that document.

Toonboom is use by some of the greatest 2d animation studios out there, studios like Nickelodeon, Nelvana and many more, the same studios that make great cartoons like 6teen, Chaotic, Grossology and dozens more. All these are reffered to as cutout style animation.

Toonz not only has nice documentation about cutout style animation, but it also has an incredible workflow that incorporates 3d animations from 3dsmax and maya rendered with a fantastic 2d shader with 2D animation, cutout or not, produced in Toonz.

You want the truth, these beat AS Pro in every possible ways, except that they cost tons more and are not as fun to use, they are build for big time productions.

Now, if this is not the 2d animation industry, what is?

Also, TheTab, a still widely used 2D animation software also refer to the animation of a multipart character with a bone or bonelike hierarchy as cutout animation. Here is a link to a simple cutout tutorial for TheTab. Do not let the simplicity of the animation produced for that tutorial fool you, the software is quite flexible and also offers nice toolset.

Here is one for Toonboom Studio
Toonboom Studio Cut Out video tutorial

This is a bit ridiculous, by pushing this conversation you just bring to front that there are other solutions then AS, that AS might not be the best thing there is out there.

True, you can use bones to give animations in AS a sort of 2.5d look, which makes for great animations, yes you can do basic frame to frame animation with switch layers, but they we're not ment for that, which does not mean it is not usefull even though they do not profit from onionskin. Yes you can do point animation in AS, making for smoother animation, but so can you in any of the above packages. All of this does not change the fact that this is primarily a limited, cutout style animation software.

Most animation package can do more then their basic functionnality allows, look at A:M, best and easiest 3d character animation package as far as I am concerned.

Also, I do not get why you get so worked up with this. Cutout animation has been around for ages, hundred of years actually, I mean, the ancien chinese used to do it and most tv shows use it these days, nothing wrong with AS being a cutout animation software, with a twist.

Now, seems to me you are the one who knows nothing or at least very little of the animation industry and the tools that it uses, I suggest you get off your high horses and let peoples express their point of vues without pounding on them and trying to make them look like they know nothing or are complete idiots or making a huge thing of something that was actually very small to begin with.

Again, happy animating everyone!

Gilles

[mkelley]

Actually, the "truth" is that ToonBoom is about the most cumbersome piece of software ever invented (and I used production grade 3D software for decades in the industry so I know of what I talk about). It's needlessly complicated and overblown and the pipeline looks impressive only if you want to stiffle creativity.

Anyone who thinks software like TB is necessary for creating great animation has never read "The Illusion of Life" from two of the great Disney animators (or perhaps has read but not chosen to understand it). In it they go into incredible detail about how over the course of many decades Walt Disney experimented with different workflows and pipelines with the result they never were able to come up with the one production pipeline that worked any better than any other. What it really boils down to is this -- creating animation or any other kind of art is truly that, art, and can't be quantified or put into nice neat little boxes. Trying to automate or force a workflow for artists is about the same as trying to make a computer write poetry -- it can be done but it won't be pretty.

The fact that TB is used to create good animation is much more of a tribute to the human spirit to overcome any obstacle than it is an endorsement of TB. Heck, as others have pointed out here, people have created great animations using the most primitive tools in the world. It doesn't surprise me that people are able to overcome the considerable problems TB throws in their way.

I hope to God AS never becomes anything like TB, because ASP beats TB for the individual artist AND the group effort in every way possible with the exception of marketing. Those who believe otherwise have just been fooled but that's not anything new -- artists are not the greatest thinkers in the world and people who make business decisions generally have even less intelligence.

The real good news in all of this is that Mike can safely ignore this entire thread and continue making AS the best program it can be. Thanks, Vern, for moving this to a spot where it can die the death it deserves.

[synthsin75]

Okay look, I really do want to be convinced that AS is primarily a cutout animation tool (if only to end this debate). I took great care to review all of your links to cutout tutorials. There is one thing missing from all of these that is a staple of AS animation. All of these examples deal only with unchanging cutout pieces.

Now in the Digital Pro pdf, it does mention having to sometimes have certain pieces connected, in which case it refers to it as a mix of cutout and paperless animation. It is this definition of a paperless/cutout hybrid that would be the least AS could be called.

You see the difference is how AS seamlessly mixes the cutout and paperless workflows. Aside from being unique in its ability to manipulate cutouts using overlapping bone envelopes (not present in any other type of 2D 'bone' rigging), you can always adjust, or even decide to ignore the bone rig all together, and just animate the vector points in a paperless fashion.

Now pay attention here, this is directly from Toon Boom's documentation, which you've already claimed as 'an authority'. Unless you have other sources which define cutout to include the seamless mix of paperless vector animation, then I'll have to continue to disagree.

But please and truely, set me straight.