Ahhhh, the summer was so nice, relaxing, travelling, having fun with family and loved ones.. Well now its time to get back to work! Pixar just finished its internship with 12 animation interns who did an amazing job. So much was learned, not only by the interns but by fellow animators. Its always inspiring to see what new interns can do and how they come up with good ideas. As I prepare to go back to school and teach again, what I am most interested in doing is trying to not only teach the core principles, but also prepare the students for more complex assignments. Acting, pantomime, thought process and so forth. In talking to one of the interns that came from California College of Art, I asked him what were some of the things that prepared him for the internship. He thought that knowing the principles of animation backwards and forwards is key. Also having a basic understanding of how spline editors work and the whole process of 3d animation as opposed to 2d was important. Things like layering and polish. All in all, it was the students ideas and acting abilities that ultimately got them into the internship, of which most received a job from this experience. In looking to this semester, I think its important to develop those principle muscles, but always be thinking about the core ideas. What will be entertaining to watch? What type of characters will be fun to animate? What can the new blood bring to this medium? I wish everyone an exciting new year of learning!
I wanted to bring up the topic of Planning and how I approach using reference to do that.
The first thing that I would like to bring up is that there are MANY ways of planning a shot, but the 3 main ones are recording reference, sketching thumbnails, and watching reference.
Watching Reference: This is less about planning, and more about getting an idea about your subject matter. Getting information about your subject, doing your research, tremendously helps the planning process. If you research what your subject matter does or doesn’t do, you won’t make those mistakes and put them in your animation, only to realize it not correct and have to take it out later. Some scenes are hard to act out this way.
If I had shot where Remy would crawl up a sewer pipe or run across a table, I wouldn’t go record reference for it. If our Rats walked on 2 legs instead of 4 legs than maybe I would. But they generally don’t.
I could thumbnail it out. But as I’ll mention later, that’s not my style. So instead I will watch LOT’s of reference. This way I can get a feel for what the Rats move like, and try to mimic that feeling in my shot.
Thumbnails: Thumbnails are a great way to explore a shot. We can use thumbnails to quickly try out poses both Body and Face. This allows us to roughly see the shot and get a sense of where it’s is going to go. You don’t want to spend a lot of time on your animation only to realize that where you were going with the shot isn’t going to work. Below are some thumbnails that Stephan Gregory had done on cars. It shows a good example of exploring the expressions for the shot.
Generally thumbnails are not something that I personally explore much. I occasionally do use thumbnails,…but my personal drafting skills are pretty horrible, and so I feel more comfortable either quickly posing in the computer, or recording reference.
Recording reference: This is something that I use quite a lot. Why? Well….the first reason is that I love acting out my shots. Not to say that I wouldn’t do that with thumbnails, but it’s really a state of mind thing.
Now I don’t want to take reference, and then Copy what I recorded exactly in the computer. That would look too rotoscoped, and we have motion capture for that. Reference is more for about getting my ideas down so I don’t forget about them. I can also refer to it at anytime as I work on my shot. I like to look at it to see my general timing and ideas. It’s like a mirror that I can pause myself in.
Second, I like being able to play my dialogue on a loop, and record myself acting to it right then and there. I usually have a general idea of what I want to do. BUT sometimes if I’m not sure what I want to do…. I just start my dialogue on a loop and start acting to it. I just want to see what my body does on the fly; what my acting chops are on the fly. This is some of the most natural performances you will get, because it is as unplanned as it can get. It can also however be some of the worst, because it’s not planned and maybe my acting chops aren’t up for the “Make it up on the fly” routine. But as far as I see it,….it sure doesn’t hurt to try. There might be something that I do that I will keep for later.
After I try several unplanned takes, I start thinking about my planned idea. That general idea that I was talking earlier about….this is where I really start to flush it out.
Now sometimes with a planned idea you get yourself in a rut. While it’s great to have a planned structure for a shot, sometimes that structure becomes a prison. No matter how much I record myself, I keep doing the same things over and over and over again. I can’t do anything else.
So what do you do?
Well,…..take a break. Come back and try it again later. Maybe that break will be enough to get the idea juices flowing again.
Say you always start in a particular pose….try a new one. If you start with a new pose, it might force you to take your acting in a different direction.
Pull a friend in and ask them to act it out. You might be surprised how they approach it.
Now this next part is a very important part for me. I like to set up my acting room as close as I can to the room that is represented in my shot. So if there is a table in my shot, I make sure there is a table when I’m acting things out. If the character is holding something, make sure you are holding something when you are acting out your shot.
The reason I like to do this is to have more of my imagination work towards my Acting, and not trying to remember what is in my scene. I want all my brain power to focus on the acting. If I have to keep reminding myself that there is a table in the room, then I am doing something wrong. Having similar props in your reference will keep your acting true.
It’s like when actors have to act on a green screen, or on a set. Everyone is going to choose the set, because it’s there! They can use it! Work with it, or against it….whatever. It is also very important to keep your character in mind. If you are animating a Large character, and you are a small person and Acting like a small person,…your reference won’t be very useful.
Take for example the Captain in Wall-E. He’s a large guy. I’m a really small guy. I wanted to get into my character more (the Captain), so I requested a pregnancy suit. You know,…the kind that people wear so you can get an idea of what it feels like to be pregnant. If I could wear this while acting out my shots,…I could get a real sense of the weight that the character feels. All of a sudden, picking up a cup isn’t as quick. Or getting up off the chair isn’t so easy.
I remember when I was animating my Mike Wazowski test, I printed out a picture of Sulley’s face (this is who Mike was speaking to in the dialogue) and taped it way up high in the acting room. The reason I did this is to make me act UP to someone. Mike Wazowski is much shorter than Sulley, so I wanted to make sure my acting reflects that. Again,….I just focus on the acting, I don’t have to think to look up, I do it automatically.
Below are a couple of examples of me doing reference. OKAY,…this is me putting myself out there. It’s a little embarrassing, (At least there aren’t any real emotional shots) hope it’s worth it.
The First applies to a shot I did in Wall-E where Auto is trying to grab the boot from the Captain. In order to get a better feel for the movements, I asked a fellow co-worker to help me out. I asked Tom to keep the boot away from me, while I really try to grab it.
REMEMBER you can click the “Watch in High Quality” button. I would recommend it for the Confession Scene.
WALL-E Ref:
The second is a little thing I did after Cars for the Rascal Flats. It was Mater introducing the Band when they went on tour. This shows how I still do reference, even though I am animating a Tow Truck. In my original blocking I did present the Rascal Flats to the side like I do in my reference. However, since we did not know what they would be coming out of, the decision was made to just have Mater go forward toward the crowd. This was also very difficult to animate because of the Ratio Constriction. I didn’t have much room to play with on the sides. So I tried going toward and away from the camera more often, so it didn’t seem like Mater was just standing in 1 spot. I also don’t have reference for the beginning of the shot, because I knew what I wanted to do with that part already.
Cars Ref:
Cars Shot:
The third reference is for a Class I did for Animation Mentor. If you are a student of the school, you might have seen my lecture series where I show how I Polished the shot. Again, I recommend watching in High Quality.
Reference:
Shot:
You can see the reference I took. There wasn’t much exploring because I knew what I wanted to do. See how I use the table and even tied my hands together with string to simulate handcuffs.
The last is just a picture of my using a scarf thing, to help me with the shots of Ego and his scarf.
What is it about animation that moves us so much? Why do I love one scene in a movie and feel less strongly about the next? What is it about the animation of those scenes that speaks to me, and how can I incorporate those things into my work?
Some time ago I decided I’d try to boil down my process into a simple set of broad principles. And while these aren’t as specific as the fabled 12 or 20 or however however many principles from whatever list you subscribe to, I feel that for myself, they’re a pretty good start at understanding what I look for in animation. Everyone needs their own set of criteria; these are mine. It’s by no means a complete list, but anything else I can think up thus far I’ve found I can slip under one of these umbrella categories.
My five in order of importance, least to greatest (at this point in my education anyway):
DESIGN — or perhaps another word for appeal. I hate putting this guy at the bottom of the list, really I do. But in the shower this morning I decided that’s just how the cookie crumbles. Imbuing a character’s image or motion with a solid sense of graphic design, making it appealing, is no doubt of great importance. It makes the scene easy on the eyes and intriguing to look at. It’s also one of the hardest things to put your finger on in any graphic medium. What makes a Milt Kahl drawing so damned appealing? You can go into lengthy mathematical discussions about proportion, straights against curves, arcs and arrows, you name it. But I defy anyone to come up with a formula that explains how to draw (or pose) appealing dogs, or apes, or puppets, the way Milt, or any other great animator can. As important as design is though, it comes in behind:
PHYSICALITY — The audience’s belief that a character lives and breathes starts in the belief that a character moves right. Every great animated film or scene conveys a set of rules that govern the characters and objects which reside within it. The world of My Neighbor Totoro has different rules than Pinnochio’s, which has different rules than that of The Incredibles. But each film’s characters move and behave in a way that’s consistent with their peers. This is not to say they all move the same (cardinal sin, if you ask me), but that in their own way they obey the rules of the same world. It’s important, no doubt. But not most important. Next up is:
ENTERTAINMENT — Even if an animated character lacks a sophistication in design or a sense of weight in his surroundings, you can get away with it if it’s entertaining. It’s another hard one that’s hard to explain in simple formulas. And one that many artists and studios are only too often seduced by. These scenes and films seem to cry out, “love me! I’m gonna entertain you!” You know the animation I’m talking about. The stuff that leaves a sour taste in your mouth, and a sense in your gut that you’ve been taken advantage of. Nevertheless, a scene that’s entertaining will linger in one’s memory longer than the next. That’s important, and not just to your reel, but to the audience’s sense of satisfaction after having sat through your film. The right balance is key. Pick your battles, but do not under any circumstances allow it to supersede:
CHARACTER — The illusion of life, as it were. And only #2 on the list? Sit tight. By this I mean, are the thoughts going through your character’s head consistent with their place on that character’s arc in the film? If I, the audience can’t make out what exactly is going on in that character’s head, and understand why he or she feels that way, forget it. You’ve lost me. Will an impartial audience member be shaken out of their suspension of disbelief by your scene? Are you substituting cliche for subtext? This is the point where “entertainment” will start to elbow its way to center stage if you let it. It’s so tempting to squeeze as much out of a scene as you can, but you cannot let it get in the way of your character’s clear, rational thought process, and you certainly can’t let it interrupt numero uno:
STORY — no surprises there. The single most important criterion that you must not let suffer under any circumstances. More important than any character’s consistency, more important than any scene’s entertainment value or appeal, if you fail to convey the story point of a scene, you fail to tell the story. And that’s really what this medium is all about: telling a relevant story that will affect an audience. It’s the whole reason animation and indeed movies themselves were invented in the first place. An audience must be able to follow the story. And this is where showing your animation to your peers is vital. You can find ten different people that will give you ten different opinions on your animation’s appeal, but if half of them can’t understand what’s going on, you’ve got a problem on your hands.
So I’m sure many of you disagree with the set of criteria here, and probably with the order of importance I’ve decided upon, but hey, that’s what the comments section’s for! Happy animating….
In 3d animation, every detail can be seen. It is those small details that add a layer of complexity to our work and I wanted to talk a little about what interests me when I am trying to get that in my work. First off, not every scene calls for the smallest facial twitch. Sometimes many scene are basic and money spent on tiny details is lost. It is in those close ups that you want to add the proper amount of detail. I remember being an animator on a bugs life. John Lassiter wanted us to look at a film clip of two different eyes blinks on flick. One was a standard eye blink. It looked much like a camera shutter opening and closing. Not much ease out, the timing was the same and in general, when seen at such high rez, looked mechanical. The next example was a shot Mark Oftedahl did. The blinks he did were beautifully timed. The sides dragged , the shapes changes. They were perfectly polished and looked fleshy. Nowadays, this type of stuff is much more in the main stream of high end 3d feature animation, but back then it really opened our eyes (no pun intended). So what is in effect left in the realm of facial animation? Where can we push too? What improvements can we make? I think some of the answers lie in subtle animation. Yes, we work in a medium of exaggeration, but also one that lets us layer in detail. Of course, some of the examples I want to give are from the world of live action. Lets do a little action analysis of some of these clips…
First, lets just look at some of the “controls” our face has…
Interesting clip…. That one made the rounds in the department…
This next clip from “There Will Be Blood” Shows a lot of facial details that really add to the acting and intensity of Daniel Day Lewis’s performance. Its the stuff he does between his lines that draws you in. How he pushes his lips up, the changes and micro expression. Its a great movie to watch for acting as well as everything else.
That’s all for now. Look for some more stuff coming soon.
Here’s a scene from the Robert Altman film, The Player. I had been thinking about this post for a while and after reading Gordon’s latest I thought this would be a perfect extension of his point, but more related to dialogue as opposed to pantomime.
Watch Grant (the British dude) pitch part of his movie idea to Tim Robbins, a studio executive. Robbins’ performance is equally as interesting for all the subtext going on but I won’t spoil that for you. Here we’ll examine the texture of Grant’s performance in his body acting while he’s talking. Normally I wouldn’t advise hitting beats so “on-the-nose” as he does, as it tends to flatten a performance: why illustrate with the body exactly the words the character is saying? And certainly if all he had done was hit the obvious poses, the scene would be boring, or even worse, annoying. I want to talk not about the poses he hits, but what he does in between them that makes this scene so entertaining.
Take, for example, the first close up scene of Grant as he explains the car accident investigation. An animator would find it very easy and tempting to skip right from the “brakes have been tampered with” to the pose for “murder.” But Grant makes it interesting and convincing by doing a hilarious anticipation before the line. I broke the beat down into the five keys I’d pose for his action:
1) “brakes have been tampered with”
2) eyes close, head up
3) head down, hands up
4) hands hit down: “it’s”
5) head up to look at Tim Robbins: “murder”
(You’ll probably note that he actually hits a slightly different pose for “murder” before arriving and holding at the one I picked.)
Now he’s not just illustrating the line, he’s added a whole new urgency to it, and subtext that reads “no if’s, and’s or but’s, it’s murder!” And he’s broken up the action by having his hands follow his head as a second accent. He’s also acting within poses very economically; long holds with subtle texturizing movements. He’s covered all the principles! This whole scene is chock full of such juiciness (including preceding lines I cut for time). Look at the antic for the running action or the dramatic pause before “there’s not a dry eye…” And these are extreme examples; in animation even a two frame eye antic *before* your body antic can help show thought process and make a scene more entertaining. Bottom line: characters thinking = believability. Believability = entertainment.
Ahhhh, the summer was so nice, relaxing, travelling, having fun with family and loved ones.. Well now its time to get back to work! Pixar just finished its internship with 12 animation interns who did an amazing job. So much was learned, not only by the interns but by fellow animators. Its always inspiring to see what new interns can do and how they come up with good ideas. As I prepare to go back to school and teach again, what I am most interested in doing is trying to not only teach the core principles, but also prepare the students for more complex assignments. Acting, pantomime, thought process and so forth. In talking to one of the interns that came from California College of Art, I asked him what were some of the things that prepared him for the internship. He thought that knowing the principles of animation backwards and forwards is key. Also having a basic understanding of how spline editors work and the whole process of 3d animation as opposed to 2d was important. Things like layering and polish. All in all, it was the students ideas and acting abilities that ultimately got them into the internship, of which most received a job from this experience. In looking to this semester, I think its important to develop those principle muscles, but always be thinking about the core ideas. What will be entertaining to watch? What type of characters will be fun to animate? What can the new blood bring to this medium? I wish everyone an exciting new year of learning!
