Re: animation concepts

["Adrian Wyer" <adrian(at)the-mill.com>]

porl.....answered.....without....dry sarcasm.........

gasp!

a

adrian wyer
head of 3d
milltv
adrian(at)the-mill.com
www.the-mill.com
t: +44 (0)20 7287 4041
f: +44 (0)20 7915 0551

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "porl" <paulp(at)al.com.au>
To: <XSI(at)softimage.com>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: animation concepts


> Frank Lenhard wrote:
>
> > Hey,
> >
> > i'm not sure if this is the right place, because ppl here tend to be
> > more technical involved ;) anyway i like this place more than
> > webboards so i i'll give it a try.
> >
> > i would like to hear about how you folks use xsi to animate
> > characters. not in terms of rigging but plain animation workflow.
> > so far i have my first babysteps behind me and created some
> > animations with xsi. now i start wondering in how i can improve
> > the speed i work in xsi and let the proggie do more for me.
> Hi Frank,
>
> I come from a purely 3d background, never having worked with feet-per-day 
> and timing sheets but for what it's worth here is my take on it.
>
> I have only ever used the mixer to transfer animation, to apply a speed up 
> or slow down to an existing animation or to blend between animations, 
> which it's great for. Unless there's something I've missed in being able 
> to key pose clips, adjust individual elements while sketching out the 
> inbetween animation curves without having to go back and forth with 
> applying this and freezing that then I wouldn't try and use it like you 
> want to.
>
> The "non-linear" workflow available to users of software animating 
> packages allows a completely different work method where the application 
> of the key poses *combined* with the sketching of in-betweens via the 
> animation editor can be a desirable and economic method, and a replacement 
> for the pure pose-to-pose technique. The key pose itself is no longer 
> sacrosanct anyway due to the potential of a variable camera, ie, the 
> camera changes and the key pose changes by definition and so that is added 
> into the mix. But what that does give us is an incredibly flexible and 
> open-ended workflow (but yes, with the implied complexity) only held in 
> check by our own discipline. So while we make sure those key poses are 
> there, and they hit their marks, beats, whatever, we are no longer 
> beholden to them. An analogy is that that of a pencil drawing where the 
> adjustment of animation curves and key poses is akin to the initial light 
> and fluid touches of a sketching pencil.
>
> My personal workflow for a general animation (there are obviously many 
> case-specific caveats that could be included here) is to sketch out the 
> gross movement centre (lets say the hips), holding it for the requisite 
> key poses, keying appendages as required as I go along, just enough to get 
> an overall idea of whether I'm hitting my marks. I've got the animation in 
> my head already so I'm just rendering it in 3d so to speak. Once I've got 
> the timing of the fundamentals down I know for sure everything else is 
> going to slot in after.  In some respects pose-to-pose can be seen like a 
> safety net to prevent costly mistakes from happening in the world of 
> linear animation. In the non-linear world I don't feel contrained to the 
> pose-to-pose method per se; strong poses and timing can still be 
> maintained with what is essentially a mix between straight ahead and 
> pose-to-pose.
>
> So while I'm not traditionally trained, maybe there's something in my 
> ramblings that might be of some use, and apologies for treading on any 
> sensiblities of trad animators who might be seething at my heresy.
>
> If none of it makes any sense then my conclusion is: Don't use the mixer 
> for that, it's crap at it.
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi


---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi