Cheat better? much better?

[human]

I haven't been experimenting with animation lately because I've been so occupied with building up a storyboard.

However, it's a sign that I am still grimly committed to animate that I have just started brainstorming about how I can become a better cheat at animation.

(I think I actually would like to become the world's greatest cheat.)

In other words, I would like to know the shortcuts that experienced animators use to tell a story with the least amount of difficult animation.

I am assuming that those of you who work in the field know lots of tricks/shortcuts/cheats, call them what you will, and moreover, you know when they really don't detract at all from the ultimate goal, which is great storytelling.

Also, I am assuming that the most difficult animation work involves the interaction of "fully animated" characters viewed in a medium shot--head, body, limbs, the whole two yards (= 6 feet).

I've never studied film theory, so I may be a disadvantage here, but here is the cheatsheet I've just composed.

Can you give me your comments?

======================

AN ANIMATION CHEATER'S APPLIED FILM THEORY

Some possible tricks to convey the story with the fewest fully-animated medium shots of interacting characters

A. Alternative fields of view
1. Extreme longshots, where character detail is minimized
2. Extreme facial closeups, minimizing the need for head and body animation but capturing emotion
3. Extreme closeups of hands or feet to convey action or emotion
4. Overhead camera view to look down upon action

B. Partially obscure the characters
1. In windows, doors, or natural crevices
2. Using foreground objects (including other characters)
3. Obscure 3D complexity using 2D silhouetting (or focus on a shadow which follows the character)
4. Pan the character out of camera view during the animation
5. Introduce fog, darkness, or even blazing whiteout

C. Alternative compositions
1. Use the setting, without characters, to convey as much story and mood as possible
2. Focus on objects which convey the point symbolically (a candle, a clock, a weapon, a sunset, a wall)
3. Use sound or music to convey the meaning rather than a view of the character
4. Use voiceovers to convey the story with a slight distancing, avoiding lipsynch

D. Alternative timing and cutting
1. Extreme fast cutting
2. Extreme slow motion
3. Static views when the character is frozen in a given emotion or thought
4. Scenic montages

[JCook]

I like your list of "cheats." I wouldn't call it cheating, though, I think of this as film making. I think these things you've listed are pretty commonly used techniques in film making. You could think of them as being "economical" methods. The old saying is, "a picture is worth a thousand words," which just means that even a still picture can tell a huge story, or a huge part of a story. I've seen stories illustrated on TV only using illustrations, no animation. Look at Ken Burns's documentaries, with his use of still photos, where he pans and zooms in and out (by no means a technique that he invented, but he did make it famous); they tell volumes, with narration over them, of course, but no moving pictures. It's certainly not cheating, and in fact, involves quite a bit of work, especially in the planning stages, but also in execution. I think you could add sound to your list of techniques (that's what they are, really). Narration, music, sound effects, all these can make still pictures, or minimally animated scenes explode with meaning. Of course, I think sound is probably the hardest part of the process, but can really make an animation come alive.

I've really enjoyed the artwork and the little clips you've posted, and I think your style would lend itself to animation very well. I'd love to see more of what you've done with it.

Jack

[FCSnow]

I COULD WRITE A BOOK (but I won't)

I studied Cinematography in college which has helped me greatly when I'm storyboarding. What you call Cheats are nothing but the words in the language of film. What you still need is the grammer, how to put the words together. Here are a few more words:

ESTABLISHING SHOT: Use at the beginning of a scene to give the viewer a idea where and when this is happening.

FADE IN/OUT: Use to denote the passage of time.
LAPDESOLVE: Also use to denote time passage, usually a shorter peroid.
JUMP CUTS: A sudden change in location and/or time. Must be used with the Establishing Shot or you risk losing your audience. Fades and Lapdesolves have fallen out of favor today and the Jump Cuts are in vogue.

POV: Point Of View where the camera sees what the character sees.

You mentioned CLOSE UP: Used to increase the drama of a scene. (I love this one, film students learn this in their first year, then drop out, go off to make ugly porn films with Close Up stuck in thier heads)

RAPID CUTS: A series of shots use to increase the tension and dramtic effect. The time between shots starts out slow and increases over time. (If you've ever seen Dressed To Kill, the dircector uses this in the finial scene)

There are so many more. I would suggest take a class in college, if you can find it. Very few colleges offer it today. But there are always book available.

F.C.Snow

[cribble]

Cheating looks cheap though. I hate to say it, but you can tell when someones done it, unless they're real good at sort of covering over those obvious cheats (a3 i'm totally against, and it makes me cringe).

Though i must say, i am a cheater when it comes to person projects. I just want to get things done and out there quickly. The cheap sometimes adds to stylistics maybe!

[human]

...I wouldn't call it cheating, though...
Of course, I think sound is probably the hardest part of the process, but can really make an animation come alive.

Hey Jack,

Of course you and I agree. The problem is that I used such a provocative label for the same thing you mean. Needlessly, since the rational content of my message ought to be useful enough to stand on its own. Bad habit. Bad human, bad.

I agree with you about sound. Who was it -- George Lucas -- who said that sound is more than 50% of a picture?!

[studiojer]

One thing that always identifies the difference between experienced and unexperienced animators is economy of movement, which oddly enough could be considered a "cheat" as well by certain people. I've seen many animations (both on the internet and broadcast) which are obvious that the animator thought they needed to have the character (or set pieces, or camera) moving...constantly. This is common both in CG and 2D.

Essentially one has to think about movement like they would were they acting: if there is no motive to move, then by all means don't make the character move. (I've seen a lot of animation lately with characters who are doing head turns, moving their arms all over the place, and all the while there is no point to the movement. Some animator broke their back for nothing.)

Another is to master the art of movement and hesitation. If you look at a person making any major move (say for example a head turn in conversation) they will not draw out the move over a second or more. Often times the action can be accomplished in as few as 6 frames (on a 24 fps timebase) to look silky-smooth, and even faster if one wants the quick Simpsons/Family Guy style. Long story short, move from place to place quickly, and when you get there, rest on it.

Last but not least (and this one is a cheat) if you are doing cut-out style animation (or even in traditional animation through AS/MOHO) you don't necessarily have to animate every piece of a character at the same time-base. Often I'll animate the hands of a character on the twos or threes, while the arms moving said hands are moving at full speed. If you ever pause Fox television animation, you'll realize that often in hand gestures they will re-draw the hand once in a 6 frame movement, but the overall smooth movement of the gesture sells the simplified hand motion.

[human]

Essentially one has to think about movement like they would were they acting: if there is no motive to move, then by all means don't make the character move.

...Often times the action can be accomplished in as few as 6 frames (on a 24 fps timebase) to look silky-smooth... Long story short, move from place to place quickly, and when you get there, rest on it.

Aha.

I was beginning to suspect some of this.

Thanks -- it helps.

[BunyanFilms]

I find it often a great exercise to get some favourite films (or shows) and turn off the sound and just what the grammar of the visuals. You definitely tune into the movement (or lack of) especially in dialogue sequences. Check out the visual rhythm of the film.

[human]

I find it often a great exercise to get some favourite films (or shows) and turn off the sound and just what the grammar of the visuals. You definitely tune into the movement (or lack of) especially in dialogue sequences. Check out the visual rhythm of the film.

Good advice. I'll do this.

The only caution is to add is not to get brainwashed by the staging or blocking of long-form feature films:

viewtopic.php?t=9357&highlight=minimize+blocking

That's an important lesson.

[heyvern]

There is a website that I forget the name of...

anyway they do "spoofs" or reinterpretations of famous films but they are done in 60 seconds with cartoon rabbits or hamsters or something like that.

What makes them so interesting and pertinent to this discussion is that the pacing is very fast and content is boiled down to the least amount of elements needed to tell the story... and the story is maintained. very effectively maintained... and very very funny.

If I find the link I will post it.

-vern

[jahnocli]

This is 30 second Bunny Theater