I'm a new user posting to the forum for the first time. I'm an animator pursuing a position in CG. One thing I have encountered is that there seems to be a lot of work for "realistic" human motion.
I'm wondering a couple things.
1) what would be a good exercise for showing "human" movement beyond walk cycles
2) are the models that are available for free like: http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/209842/intType/7/stgCHSource/Popular acceptable? Do you need a super articulated human to show "human" motion.
I'd be curious what others thoughts are on this trend and any examples of animation showing great human acting/motion.
Realism and animation - difficult. The two want careful balancing, that's for sure.
Take movies like Prince Of Egypt and Ghost In The Shell. Those two are so realistic in terms of characters and animation that, frankly, I don't see why they animated them in the first place what with the special FX technology available these days.
Then you have films like Shrek. While I enjoyed it (-and I'm sure I will enjoy the sequel-), I think the entire theme of the movie practically screamed traditional animation. Sure, they pulled off some nifty 3D stunts in it but to my mind, an animated movie spoofing fairy tales and the treatment fairy tales get in classic animation would've worked just as well drawn instead of rendered; it might even have enhanced the comedy in some parts what with the majority of the cast being extremely cartoony anyway. Sticking to the old-fashioned medium and going crazy with its conventional topics would've enhanced the whole 'this is all wrong but it's all the more hilarious for it'-feeling.
Treasure Planet - a borderline case to my mind. A combined 2D/3D movie with highly realistic characters yet with a colourful cast of cartoony aliens as well. Even B.E.N., a 3D creation, was a lot more cartoony than some of his hand-drawn colleagues in that one. All in all, it was rather realistic but I think it has quite a couple of 'redeeming' qualities in terms of animation. (It happens to be one of my favourite animated movies.)
I think 'realism' is not a criteria determining the quality of animation at all, the whole point of animation being to create characters that look and move differently. If animation is all about realism, it sort of defies its purpose in my opinion. Of course, realism isn't a total no-no. In right measure, it can enhances the cartoonieness of situations and characters it's juxtaposed to very effectively.
:D
Hello, welcome to the forums.
Real or cartoon- it doesn't matter- what folks want to see is a thinking, breathing character, which can clearly communicate emotions.
The character should have weight and should move fluidly.
Thanks.
Larry
web site
http://tooninst[URL=http://tooninstitute.awn.com]itute.awn.com
[/URL]blog:
[U]http://www.awm.com/blogs/always-animated
[/U] email:
larry.lauria@gmail.com
here, here!
Speaking of that, I'm working on a "Photoreal" project where the character is a 3d actor applying for a role in a live action film and the juxtaposition of the rendered aspects with the live action environment is actually one of the things that makes it funny. The character is photoreal but he's got cartoon proportions and movement.
When we get it done I'll be sure to share.
Ender
I must agress wit Larry.
I've had many teachers tell me the same thing. If you can do it in live action whay do it in animation.
I see animation as an artform. A tool in which and artist can express his/her emotion, pov or just say something that they feel they have to say.
This is one of the reasons that i really like japanese animation. They don't seem to have the same thinking. Yeah sometimes their animation suffers because of their budget restraints but they still tell beautiful stories that could just be live action.
Now with the advancements in the special effects, visual effect and cgi. The argument could go that why do animation at all when it could all be done live action.
Wendog as far as your original questions i'm afraid i don't have an answer for them.
http://lionelordaz.com/
http://lionos.blogspot.com/
Hurts to be new! Congrats for speaking up!
Realistic human motion really only means that you have the keys from traditional animation and the talent of 3D programs. You want to incorporate things like timing, anticipation, follow-thru, weight, balance, etc. in your work. If you learn the basics from traditional it will help you with that realistic motion in CG.
For example, you could have a great piece of animation with all the traditional things done well, but a single foot stays planted for too long. It just screams fake, it draws a person's attention away from the story. And keeping people's attention on the story, not the animation, is the point of what you're asking about.
You wanted some good exercises to show human movement. Try anything that shows weight and balance - lifting something from the floor and putting it up on a shelf that's higher than the shoulders for example. Or how about someone seeing something, bending down to pick it up and then having to recoil/jump back for some reason. What will make it more human besides these things is having a simple story to it - otherwise, it's just a piece of animation (not human at all.)
You can use those models you are talking about, but you don't need to. You can use a low-res, cut-up model that you do yourself (as long as it's rigged well) because it's not the model that makes it "human"-like. It's the animation/story of the piece you choose to do, and the incorporation of the traditional elements to blend it all together.
Off the top of my head, realistic stuff - there's this one piece I saw once a while back of a guy pulling a flower out of the ground - David Walden, I think... - not all of it was human, but there were pieces of it that were elegant. Also check out Keith Lango's pieces.
Remember, you are looking for human "movement", not human models! If when you watch it, you are in the story and not distracted by the animation itself, you've got what you're looking for.
Erin ;)
------------------------
The only thing that is truly yours - that no one can take from you - is your attitude. So if you can take care of that, everything else in life becomes easier. ~unknown
Re-reading my post and the other replies, I'd like to clarify that conveying emotions, flow etc. realistically isn't what I meant by 'realism'. Nor did I mean to bash computer animation for its 'realistic' look. I was referring to techniques like rotoscoping - acting references are totally OK, of course, and motion capturing works for many CG characters but I think there's an important difference between imitating life and copying it, especially in animation.