help with my extremes

[aidanani09]

Hi every one I was wondering if someone can help me with extremes I have seen dons tip on extremes but he has his extremes every other frame? I thought it was the highs? I'm a bit confused on where to put my extremes so if someone could help me I would be extremely thankful.

Thanks for the help.

[jeremyhopkins]

It'll probably be easier to think of extremes in the sense of the drawings that are essential to tell the story. Where you place your extremes is a personal choice depending the shot requirements and your skill as an animator. Ideally there is no formula where an extreme should be placed or timed. Don usually breaks his scene down to 4's which means each drawing is held for 4 frames and for it to be fully fleshed out, it'll be broken down to 2's(each drawing held for 2 frames) when it's fully inbetweened.
If you need more help, do you best with the knowledge you have right now, post some thumbnails or a pose test of only your extremes and ask for feedback. Without seeing your work, it's difficult to know how to help. Good luck!

[C. Siemens]

I had trouble managing my animation through placing extremes, too, but Mr Hopkins is right. If you start with those few drawings getting the main idea of the scene across you give yourself something at which to 'aim' with the other extremes. One you've nailed those content-defining (or storytelling) extremes, the remaining extremes can be:

- whenever a pose is stretched to its limits
- extremes marking the start of a moving hold (slowing into an extreme as described above)
- overshoots
- anticipations
- important contacts of body parts
- etc.

In short, the basic idea behind planning the scene is starting broad and then getting more and more specific as you add extremes with which you further break down what happens.
Here are some notes by Glen Keane (http://www.animationmeat.com/pdf/featureanimation/Glen_Keane_Animation.pdf) which cover his whole approach to planning his scenes, you might find that helpful, too. (Be sure to check page 7 of the pdf document on which he talks about how many extremes to place.)

I have found there are precious little 'laws' to how you approach your stuff. Take other animators' approach as a guideline and pick out the methods that suit your way of working best. You may be able to develop your own method out of that.

Good luck.

[Rodney]

The following may provide some additional insight to Jeremy and C. Siemens responses. I'll try to keep my focus on Don Bluth words and definitions:

The animator's poses of the characters are referred to as "Extremes" or "Keys". The word extreme is generally preferred for "ruff" drawings because cleaned up extremes are referred to as "Keys" later in production.

If animating on 8s the animator may create drawings for frames 1, 9, 17, 25, 33, etc., or every eighth frame, leaving 3 drawings to be done "inbetween" the extremes. Note: Depending on the action/activity being drawn in the sequence it may be animated on 2s, 4s, 8s, etc. (the timing will dictate so consider using a metronome to establish the timing/cadence/beats per minute)

Each extreme will have the animator's timing chart at the upper right side of the drawing and there may be more than one timing chart per extreme. These timing charts describe the drawing positions necessary to create smooth motion and intensity between the extreme drawings.

Commentary: This is fascinating to me as it reveals how we can locate the extremes in other animator's drawings. If they've worked as described above, every drawing with a timing chart on it *should be* an extreme.

Without the key drawings (the extremes) we can't properly proceed with animation. We'll be lost or at least still searching for the storytelling drawings we need... and we'll certainly have no extremes to inbetween.

Here we can see the importance of thumbnailing or roughing out our storytelling poses/drawings in the exploratory phase. Thumbnailing, ruffing out drawings and even viewing reference material helps us identify the extremes/keys we need. All other essential drawings (breakdowns, inbetweens, held poses etc.) must naturally flow into and out of these extremes.

Animators should number their drawings at the lower right corner of each page. These numbers tell us how many frames will be exposed on the exposure sheet. We should circle the key drawings so they can be found easily.

Note of possible deviation (i.e. I'm not sure Don favors these): Some animators use color to differentiate between the extremes, breakdowns/passing positions, and inbetweens. The standard appears to be:

Black (The primary animator's keys poses and breakdowns)
Blue (Someone else's ruff inbetweens)
Red (Trace backs to previous drawings)

If we are animating everything ourselves coloring is unnecessary.
(As I believe he animates most of his work himself this may be why Don doesn't need to use this method of color keying)

Sorry if I've strayed off subject!

[Rodney]

Ohh... directly related to that last part about using assistants...

Sometimes an animator will mark the drawing numbers at the upper right. It is then the assistant animator's responsibility to make sure that the drawings are marked correctly at the bottom right and that the extreme drawings are clearly legible and close to the approved character model design. The assistant must get approval from the animator for any changes to the extreme drawings.

Note the bold text. The extremes are that important!
They are there for a reason.

[macprofilms]

Richard Williams Animation Master Class Notes
Taken by Dave Bailey


The Richard Williams Animation Master Class was an incredible experience. Mr. Williams is a very personable, entertaining and competent teacher. The three days were crammed full of theories, examples and entertaining stories. This gray haired balding gentleman would race across the stage, jump about or crawl on all fours in the effort of getting the concepts across. I made over 40 pages of notes and sketches. Although the class is geared toward traditional cell animation most of what is discussed is applicable to CG.

Just a small disclaimer, most of these notes are my interpretation of what Mr. Williams said. Also most of my notes are in the form of crude quickly drawn examples. Without the sketches some of what is noted below is not as easily understood. If there is something that is not clear or you just don't agree with let me know and I will try to clarify as best I can. Dbailey@pixinc.com

Note: any reference to timing is based on 24 fps

"Sophisticated Use of the Basics" -- Animation Master Class by Richard Williams

What is animation?

Change is the basis of all animation
There are two types of animation; Morphing and the type that gives the illusion of life.
Animation is all in the timing and spacing
You must show where the weight is, where it is coming from and where the weight is going to.

KEY FRAMES - are the story telling frames (The story board drawings)
Frames where the character makes contact (heel strike pose, touching an object, etc.)

EXTREMES - are the where there is a change of direction. They are NOT Key Frames.

BREAKDOWNS are the middle or passing position.
On breakdowns always add an extra bit of movement -- almost anything will work.
Don't go from A to B. Go from A to Z to B

Methods of Working:
1) Straight-Ahead - Just start and see what happens. (Creative but lacks control)
2) Pose to Pose - (Lots of control but restricts creativity)
3) The "Best" Method - A combination of "Pose to Pose" and "Straight Ahead".

Steps to take before animating:
1) Before working turn off all other stimulus --"UNPLUG"
2) Write down what you want to do
3) Act it out
4) Work out the timing
5) Then animate

The "Best" animating method
Step 1 - Do the KEY frames (the story telling poses)
Step 2 - Do the frames that have to be there (the contact frames)
Step 3 - Do the breakdown poses (passing/middle poses) Don't forget to add that extra bit of action.
Step 4 - Do Straight Ahead Runs of different parts in hierarchical order
Testing along the way.
(Hips first followed by legs then arms then head. Drapery is always last)

GENERAL GUIDES & TIPS

The human eye can not see (comprehend) an action done in less then 5 frames, for an action to be readable it must be done in 5 or more frames.

The way I under stood this to mean was that the 5 frames could include the anticipation of the movement. For example a character could be held in a 5 frame anticipation and be off the screen in the 6th. The use of ease-in or ease-out would also be included in those 5 frames.

Mr. Williams also stressed that all the things he was teaching were general guidelines and theories and one should always have the courage to break the rules. Experiment and test often, the only thing that matters is if the final animation works!

Never exit the frame in less than 5 frames.

On in-betweens don't animate in a straight-line use curved paths

For fast/hard impacts, skip the actual impact frame. Go immediately from action to reaction.

A character should never take off or land on both feet at the same time.

Blinks frequently happen on a passing pose.
There are generally two frames between the open and closed positions of an eye during a blink.

WALKS & RUNS

On a walk only one foot leaves the ground at a time
On a run both feet leave the ground for at least 1 frame and the character is always down on the passing pose.

Always create your heel strike poses first.

A normal walk is on march-time - a heel strikes the ground every 12 frames
A Hollywood cartoon walk heel-strike is every 8 frames
A stroll heel-strike is every 16 frames
A normal run heel-strike is every 8 frames
Heel-strikes on the fastest run possible occurs every 4 frames (this only works for small characters)

OVERLAPPING ACTION
Overlapping action is action that does not happen all at once.

I changed the word "breaking" to "bending" in the line below while taking my notes. It helped me differentiate between "A successive breaking of joints" - (breaking up the movement of an articulated object) and "breaking a joint" - (unnatural bending) Both concepts are used for the same purpose of getting smooth curvaceous movement. The whole idea of the broken joint is that it is unnoticeable to the eye, so, yes it can be used for realistic animation.

A successive bending of joints limber up movement -- It's an unfolding action. If twinning is happening, think about what parts can be delayed.

Another example of overlapping action is delaying the movement of loose fatty tissue (Jowls) behind the quicker moving muscle and bone (skull).

COUNTER ACTION
A counter action is where one part moves in the opposite direction to counter the weight and thrust of another part.

BREAKING JOINTS
The unnatural bending of joints to obtain curvaceous movement with straight line segments.

If the successive frames with broken joints are less than five and less then the number of frames with non-broken joints the distortion will not be noticed.

To really add SNAP to a movement put one "crazy" position the frame before the extreme position.

The word "crazy" was Mr. Williams' but I think it's a bit misleading. It is not an extreme. It is a slightly out of joint position a frame before the Extreme. After the extreme you would ease into a held position.

He gave the following example: (Please pardon my crude diagrams)

The example he gave was an arm making a pointing motion. Starting with the arm bent at the elbow (V), hand pointing up. On the end frame 7 the arm is straight out (---), hand pointing forward. On frame 6 the hand is close to its final position but the elbow is broken in a reverse bend upward about 20 degrees (^-). I would not really call frame 6 an extreme more like a semi out of place in-between.

DIALOGUE


Consonants must have 2 frames to read - steal from the preceding sound if needed.
Hit the mouth accent on the vowel.
Vowels need 2 poses an accent pose and a cushion pose.
Pop the mouth open on vowels with an accent pose and immediately ease into a cushion pose
"Boil it down" - Keep the mouth movement simple.
Form the words (watch singers)
Lift the head 3-4 frames in advance of the modulation.
Upper teeth are anchored to the skull.
Women usually show upper teeth only.
Men (50/50) show upper or lower teeth only a rare few show both.
The tongue is hooked at the back of the lower jaw, not stuck in the throat
Never in-between the tongue, always snap it from one position to the next.
When giving dialogue a character should be progressing (or regressing) somewhere.
Get the body action right then add the mouth.

Break up the action and the dialog - do one thing at a time! For example talk then point or point then talk

Animate dialogue on level sync, then in post, test delaying the voice audio by approximately 2 frames to see what works best.

[aidanani09]

Wow that's a lot of info :D this is going to be truly helpful. Thanks for the help :) I should get my extremes up by to night or tomorrow so you can look at what I am doing.

Thanks for the help

[Rodney]

Richard Williams Animation Master Class Notes
Taken by Dave Bailey

Thanks for that. :)

Following Richard Williams is a real treat.
He is a certified (and certifiable!) genius.
Not only does he know a heck of a lot about animation... he's entertaining.
He uses examples that tend to sink in.

But (more importantly) what do YOU think about all of that?
How have you interpreted and incorporated these into your approach to animation.

In my opinion Richard Williams particularly excels in the mechanics of animation. By this I mean to say he has dug deep into the technical aspects we will encounter in the manipulation of objects as we attempt to bring the illusion of movement and life in otherwise static drawings. This can especially be attested to by those who have followed after him. Those that have studied under Richard Williams tend to be very 'technically' proficient.

Case in point, Richard Williams has said:
There are two types of animation; Morphing and the type that gives the illusion of life.

When I first read this in his book I balked a little.
Perhaps I have a broader definition of 'type' that is faulty here but there appears to be a tertiary type of animation that doesn't fit well into either of these two types; Path animation. If anything it appears to me to be a larger set than 'that which gives the illusion of life'.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that perhaps Richard Williams might consider path animation as tracking or tracing movement and therefore would not strictly classify it as animation? If that is the case then is 'path animation' a misnomer that should more correctly be labeled 'path movement' or arcs? I'm not sure here. The paths themselves are essentially tracking every movement of whatever is being animated. Paths are the evidence of changes observed through space in relative time.

The "Best" animating method
Step 1 - Do the KEY frames (the story telling poses)
Step 2 - Do the frames that have to be there (the contact frames)
Step 3 - Do the breakdown poses (passing/middle poses) Don't forget to add that extra bit of action.
Step 4 - Do Straight Ahead Runs of different parts in hierarchical order
Testing along the way.
(Hips first followed by legs then arms then head. Drapery is always last

But if this is the "Best" animating method... where do we put the extremes?
Where do we draw the extremes if they are not Keys?
Do we even need to always draw the extremes?

I perceive that No we don't... not always. And if we want to emphasize the contact (rather than soften it) we generally won't if the extremes ARE the contact frames.

As he says:
For fast/hard impacts, skip the actual impact frame. Go immediately from action to reaction.

EXTREMES - are the where there is a change of direction. They are NOT Key Frames.


Extremes then become the furthest extent or boundaries of the action that is to take place. Consider for instance the extreme right or extreme left... the closest, the farthest... the extreme extremes. The limits of our an imaginary character or situation.

Methods of Working:
1) Straight-Ahead - Just start and see what happens. (Creative but lacks control)
2) Pose to Pose - (Lots of control but restricts creativity)
3) The "Best" Method - A combination of "Pose to Pose" and "Straight Ahead".

For me both Pose to Pose and Straight Ahead methodologies (and therefore the combination of both as well) are subsets of Path animation. This can be attested to by following the objects as they move through time and space.

On in-betweens don't animate in a straight-line use curved paths

I assume it's must be rather important to know what is at the ends of these curved paths before we proceed with our in-betweens. (Note: We may not know where the curved paths end but we DO know that wherever they are they cannot be found outside the margins of our most extreme extremes. If they do we surely must have misjudged our extremes and will need to recalculate them again.

I don't know about anybody else but thanks to you (and Richard Williams) I'm getting a whole lot closer to understanding the nature of those rather elusive yet extremely important extremes.

[Rodney]

Doh! You posted while I was typing.

Thanks for the help I should get my extremes up by to night or tomorrow so you can look at what I am doing.

Looking forward to it! :)

[C. Siemens]

But if this is the "Best" animating method... where do we put the extremes?
Where do we draw the extremes if they are not Keys?
Do we even need to always draw the extremes?

I've made the experience that it's easy to overcomplicate things for oneself when trying to squeeze all the drawings into stiff categories. In the end they're all drawings, whether you call them keys, extremes, breakdowns or inbetweens. What's more, they're all exposed for roughly the same amount of time, too.

I keep telling myself:
- Extremes tell what happens
- Breakdowns tell how it happens
- Inbetweens tell how fluid it is

Not even these 'categories' are set in stone, though. I liked how James Baxter said in his Animation Podcast interview that to him there are no real inbetweens, they're 'other drawings'. He's right because so much can happen on inbetweens that's not just mechanical drawing work that such partial drawings are almost like 'secondary extremes'. 'Other drawings' can be worth just as much as 'main drawings' because in the end they all build a performance.
Where and how many extremes you place is determined a lot by experience. There are no rules in animation that will minimize the amount of mistakes one makes starting out so there's no need to cling to too much stuff that will just avert concentration.
As Mr Bluth said, the only way to get the bad drawings out is by drawing a lot. There's fantastic advice at the bottom of that quote.

[Rodney]

there are no real inbetweens

Apologies for cherry picking one small part of your response. I enjoyed reading it all!

I understand what you are saying but I think this perspective is from someone who already fully understands and has gained a mastery of timing and in-betweening. To someone who has assimilated the concept of where all the drawings should be... sure... they are separate drawings. They'd have to be. But some of us haven't yet gained that level of mastery.

the only way to get the bad drawings out is by drawing a lot.

I can completely agree with this... we can't help but learn after seeing our own (repeated) mistakes. But if we keep making the same mistakes... are we really learning from them? Can we arrive at the right drawing every time by accident? Can all of our drawings be a 'happy mistakes'? I don't want to draw bad drawings and don't think we need to draw 50,000 bad drawings before we crank out one or two worth keeping.

The reason I find it hard to subscribe to statements such as 'there are no real inbetweens' is that doesn't match my experience (mine is a layman's perspective). I've seen 'real in-betweens' demonstrated in the real world. There have been thousands of artists whose job it was to draw those things. What were they thinking. Don't they know there is no such thing!

There must be some reason why the process of in-betweening has been easy to ship overseas where artisans and craftsmen can calculate these middle drawings and the results can be predicted. Is there a reason cheap labor can perfectly calculate where the lines of a drawing should be laid based on a specified timing?

Can't the quality and placement of these farmed out drawings be easily verified by anyone who can interpret it's timing chart to see where those drawings were suppose to be? I believe they can be.

I keep telling myself:
- Extremes tell what happens
- Breakdowns tell how it happens
- Inbetweens tell how fluid it is

I like the simplicity in this but confess I don't understand what it means.
I'd like to know more about these.

A possible interpretation (please feel free to redirect me!):

Extremes tell us what is happening because we can clearly see in them some expressive symbol or activity?

Breakdowns tell us how something is happening... like knowing how a character is going from get from point A to B not directly but rather in an interesting way by going through yet another point Z? (or... when called for directly from A to B)

Inbetweens determine fluidity through the stacking up of images to slow things down, and the removal of images to speed things up?

Inquiring minds want to know this stuff! :)

[aidanani09]

Hi I'm almost done my extremes....well I say that I'm about half way through :D any way does anyone know what program I can use to scan my frames and make a pose test. I was thinking of using DigiCel Flipbook but is there a better one to use??

[C. Siemens]

Hi I'm almost done my extremes....well I say that I'm about half way through :D any way does anyone know what program I can use to scan my frames and make a pose test. I was thinking of using DigiCel Flipbook but is there a better one to use??

Well, Monkey Jam (http://www.giantscreamingrobotmonkeys.com/monkeyjam/download.html) is a free pencil test program. It's very basic, though, doesn't even have camera controls. It should do just for simple pose tests, however.

I can completely agree with this... we can't help but learn after seeing our own (repeated) mistakes. But if we keep making the same mistakes... are we really learning from them? Can we arrive at the right drawing every time by accident? Can all of our drawings be a 'happy mistakes'? I don't want to draw bad drawings and don't think we need to draw 50,000 bad drawings before we crank out one or two worth keeping.

First off, I'm in my 4th year of TV animation, how 'professional' you'd like to think of that is up to you. I call it 'professional' because so far I successfully pay my bills with it, not so much because I think of myself as that much of a 'pro'.

Don't worry, about 25,000 bad drawings should do. Kidding!
No, you can't do it all by accident. I like to think of drawftsmanship like building muscle. Someone scrawny can lift 200 lbs but someone well-muscled can do it faster and even tackle 300 lbs. If the scrawny guy keeps at the 200 lbs, the scrawniness will eventually disappear and make the 300 lbs possible. By that I mean by doing it a lot you eventually get the basics down pat and can start building on that.
Sure, you won't learn anything from repeating your mistakes. You learn from spotting and avoiding them and that takes practice. It has nothing to do with luck and everything with conscious observation.

The reason I find it hard to subscribe to statements such as 'there are no real inbetweens' is that doesn't match my experience (mine is a layman's perspective). I've seen 'real in-betweens' demonstrated in the real world. There have been thousands of artists whose job it was to draw those things. What were they thinking. Don't they know there is no such thing!

Well, you can look at the 'other drawings' as just an accumulation of lines on paper which somehow fit between the lines determined by the extremes. In my understanding that's what Richard Williams means when he talks about morphing.
Or - you can understand inbetweens as a continuation of motion of mass through space. You don't see the lines making up an arm, you see the arm and in your head understand how its mass behaves on its way to another position. That's what you draw, not lines inbetween the lines of extremes.

There must be some reason why the process of in-betweening has been easy to ship overseas where artisans and craftsmen can calculate these middle drawings and the results can be predicted.

The reason is that in most such cases the poses and animation are very simple and unsophisticated. It's animation tailored to speed, to minimise mistakes and misunderstandings between departments by getting rid of detail and subtlety in the design and acting. (Also, the living expenses in those overseas countries tend to be lower than in America or Europe, meaning lower wages for the workers over there, less cost of hiring them for clients.)
When I was an animation intern briefly working on a German animated feature that was partly animated and inbetweened in Korea, they had a black board up in the cafeteria of the German studio. On it they'd put up the most amusing goof-ups the Korean studio sent back every week. I once saw a character turnaround that was messed up so badly I could immediately tell whoever did it didn't think of the character as mass in space - they thought of it as just an accumulation of lines on paper.

Quote:
I keep telling myself:
- Extremes tell what happens
- Breakdowns tell how it happens
- Inbetweens tell how fluid it is
I like the simplicity in this but confess I don't understand what it means.
I'd like to know more about these.

Well, I'd say you pretty much got it right.
One of the first and most basic things I learned from one of my earliest animation instructors, Larry Lauria (http://www.awn.com/tooninstitute/lessonplan/resume.htm), was that motion needs at least three frames of film. Beginning - middle - end, extreme - breakdown - extreme. If you want to animate a character lifting his arm, draw him with his arm up. That drawing tells you what happens - a guy will end up with his arm in the air. Where does he star? With his arm down, so you draw that. Now you have two extremes. How does he get from one to the other? Draw him with an arm in a middling position, that's how it happens, it's the breakdown. You can be creative with that, too - you could draw the arm dead in the middle, you could draw the elbow higher than the hand, the hand higher than the elbow, with his hand balled into a fist, etc. Then you fill the space between those three positions with as many 'other drawings' as you think are necessary to make the animation last a certain while. They add duration and fluidity but they adhere to the drawings that come before and after them, the extremes and breakdowns.

[Rodney]

I'm going to try to keep my focus on the subject of Extremes but am very interested in the other themes running through this topic. Hopefully we'll get the chance to explore them more.

First off, I'm in my 4th year of TV animation, how 'professional' you'd like to think of that is up to you. I call it 'professional' because so far I successfully pay my bills with it, not so much because I think of myself as that much of a 'pro'.


As success is mostly a personal measurement I'm just happy to see you've had a good measure of success with animation. To be able to do what you love doing for a living... (count your many blessing) ...that's a wonderful place to be!

My own path has taken me somewhere else than I originally thought it would lead and as much as I might occasionally wonder how things could have been different, I'd be a fool to change a thing. Our experiences and relationships make us who we are and the paths they chart for us help determine who we will someday be.

What I find particular interesting here is that our own little discussion echos what goes on with the various perspectives of those with professional experience. They all do pretty well for themselves but in many things they often don't agree. I find much of it is a matter of interpretation based on personal experience. Take for instance:

Eric Goldberg (who studied under Richard Williams) defines an Extreme thusly:

Extreme: A key drawing or pose that is the most exaggerated or dynamic point of a particular action.

There is learning potential when we compare Eric's words with those of Richard Williams (i.e. we can learn a lot through examination of the gap between these expert opinions). Note: It's a happy accident that here we are drawing figurative in-betweens from real world perspectives.

Compare this with Dave Bailey's interpretation of Richard William's understanding of an Extreme:

EXTREMES - are where there is a change of direction. They are NOT Key Frames.

More strickly (from Williams' book):

Take the example of the swinging pendulum: The extremes are where there is change in direction - the ends of the action where the direction changes.

or/and

The main drawings or extreme positions came to be called extremes and the drawings in between the extremes were called the inbetweens.

This echoes back to our discussion thus far but I find Richard Williams considering every drawing between these extremes to be first and foremost in-betweens... but some of those drawings in between are more important than others. (Note: Here we catch up to where Baxter gets his understanding that there are... strictly speaking... no in-betweens... every drawing is its own very own important drawing)

He goes on to say this concerning an example where he demonstrates three inbetween drawings between two extremes:

We're going to make tremendous use of this middle position later....

That single middle drawing in-between the extremes we find animators will often refer to as the breakdown drawing (or passing position).

Now we come to the difference between extremes and keys.
Richard Williams claims (on page 58) that how to go interestingly from one key drawing to another is what the rest of his book (from page 59 thru 342) is all about. The distinction between a key and an extreme must be pretty important then.

According to Richard Williams the keys are the storytelling drawings (those frame numbers that will be circled on the xsheet). These keys are the drawings that show us what is happening.

Note that there is a difference... a slight but I believe important gap... between Richard Williams's take here and your breakdown of the terminology under consideration.

You've stated:

I keep telling myself:
Extremes tell us what happens

It may be a somewhat trivial differentiation but in Richard William's parlance the drawings that tell us what is happening aren't the extreme drawings. To him those are the keys. (Recall: the Keys are circled on the xsheet but the Extremes are not)

I'm learning here... in the gap... ever so slowly.

It should be noted that I don't always think Richard Williams sticks to his own definitions strictly. He'll break the rules to fit his requirements. He too is a fallible human learning machine capable of adjusting his perspective as needed. Knowing where to make these distinctions is the quintessential hallmark of professionalism.

[C. Siemens]

OK, the terminology can be a problem, that's why I tend to look at all drawings as 'just' drawings when it gets a bit much. Keeps a body from going nuts. ;)

I agree with Goldberg's (and to an extend Williams') categories most - you start with storytelling keys which are the most important changes in the scene, like changes of mood, main poses and general position. The extremes are all the other changes that occur, like anticipations, little gestures etc. With breakdowns you define the paths between extremes, describing arcs, overlap, follow through and basically everything that in some way adheres to the changes starting with the extremes. The inbetweens determine duration and fluidity.
I'm inclined more towards Goldberg's approach because he's less technical and sometimes less convoluted than Williams. To me he is Williams in a more intuitive, manageable form. Although they basically say the same things.

In the end only personal experience can determine the way in which somebody animates. Some months ago I explained Goldberg's use of breakdowns to a long-time colleague. My colleague said, 'Well, can't you just treat breakdowns like extremes since they contain such important information? It's what I do.'
And I can't argue with that approach because the guy puts out more footage than I do. It works for him.
Now, he doesn't produce more animation because he treats breakdowns like extremes, he gets done more because he often works more diligently than I do. However, this goes to show that overall the categories are a system for organising the drawings you'll have to do. It can give you better oversight and control. You get the broad things right first and once you know you needn't worry about the big picture that much anymore you go in deeper and deeper.

[Rodney]

The best part for those of us hanging out here in Don Bluth's forum is that Don Bluth is certainly a master of animation. Not only is he approachable he's also a wonderful instructor. We haven't yet delved very deeply into his take on all of this.

What I like perhaps most about Don's approach is the essence of simplicity in his instruction.

So let's let Don speak for himself!

Video Tip: The Extreme Drawings (http://www.donbluthanimation.com/tips.php?c=2&t=92)

We can almost measure the gap between Don's definition and practical application and those perspectives we've discussed thus far. That's one way we can adjust (enhance?) our own perspective on drawing (and reigning in) the extremes.

[C. Siemens]

Sorry, I can't comment on that since I'm not allowed to view the video.

[macprofilms]

These are a few of my extreme drawings for Mad Madam Mim that I have been working on.

[macprofilms]

A few more.

[macprofilms]

And finally

[Rodney]

Sorry, I can't comment on that since I'm not allowed to view the video.

Membership does have its privileges. :)
Here again I pick on definitions... everyone is allowed to see the video but not everyone takes advantage of that privilege by becoming a Don's Club member.

Having said that, there are really no surprises in that short video, just good solid application of the fundamental animation principle of drawing extremes. I may be wrong here (and perhaps I should ask this question via a Wednesday Seminar) but I rarely recall Don using the word 'Key' in the same sense as many most of us would tend to use it (we tend to extend it a bit too freely). In the video and elsewhere he is known to refer to 'keyframes' as a word borne from computer terminology. This is an important distinction as Keys and Keyframes are certainly not the same thing.

As seen in Don's older Academy site (http://donbluthanimation.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=22323), the term 'Keys' are treated much the same as Richard Williams and other animators would use the term. The Keys may be your Extremes but then again... they may not be. Every drawing will not be a key drawing or an extreme. Some will be Breakdowns and some will be Inbetweens.

In the case of that video tip, Don is just emphasizing the importance of establishing two keys/extremes before moving on to inbetweening.

[aidanani09]

My extremes might not be up for a while due to new year and I need a new scanner :( so it might be a while

o and happy new year :D

[Rodney]

My extremes might not be up for a while due to new year and I need a new scanner so it might be a while

Ah, the joys of sharing hand drawn animation online. :)

Don't let a lack of technology hold you back.
Sketch in your Operating System's basic paint program if necessary.
Download a drawing program and ruff things out.
Draw with words if you've nothing else to illustrate with.
Animate.

As they say here in Japan, 'Akemashita Omedeto Gozaimasu' (Happy New Year!)

------------------------------------------------------------------
Macprofilms,
If you have some other way to post your images I'd love to see them.
The forum doesn't display unapproved attachments.

[macprofilms]

Hey there.
I did not realize they would not be visible. I moved them to my photo file. They are just ruff drawings, I am trying to get the feel for the movementl, then I am going to clean them up. Then finish the inbetweens. Take a look, and give me your opinion. Happy New Year.
Mike

[aidanani09]

Hi guys just found my reference that I analyzed for my shot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMLRp6JCdOM

hope you like it :)

[Rodney]

MacProfilms said:
Take a look, and give me your opinion.

Found them: http://donbluthanimation.com/forum/album.php?albumid=317

Looking good!

As far as opinion's go I can clearly see changes in shape, the play of lines and curves, the facial expressions, the body turning... and my eye seems to be directed toward her face.

It's hard to tell without flipping the drawings but it seems to me that the anticipation of the turn is missing in the sequence. It seems to me that drawings 2 and 3 chould be exchanged with each other... but perhaps we are just missing drawing/key#1? Perhaps it's not included? My thought is that it should be in order get they eye ready to fully read her turn. I expect I'm seeing this out of context so I'll leave off with that.

There is no mistaking who she is and what she's doing.
Nicely done.


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

aidanani09,
You are animating a character doing parkour? (or am I reading that wrong?)

Hehe! You've got me intrigued with the parkour video reference.
I've had the beginnings of a parkour sequence waiting in the wings... mostly the character design. I've been hoping to refine the basic story idea as I find the time but for now it's gathering dust. Your video reference makes me want to dust it off and give it another try.

I look forward to seeing more!

[aidanani09]

Hi no I've animated something different that was just something that I found that I did some time ago. at the moment though I'm having well animators block :( I HAVE NO IDEA what to animate so could some on give me some exercises and what would be best if they where done in a straight ahead manner or a pose to pose manner ?

thanks for the help :)

[Rodney]

I HAVE NO IDEA what to animate so could some on give me some exercises and what would be best if they where done in a straight ahead manner or a pose to pose manner ?

I'll hit on yet another principle of animation in my suggestion to you regarding what you could animate... exaggeration.

I suggest you look around you and observe every day life. Find something of interest to you but stop and then consider how you could exaggerate that action or activity via animation.

Let's say you see a kid kicking a ball.
Perhaps there is an interesting way he approached it.
Perhaps the ball didn't go where he expected it to after the kick.
Perhaps he missed the ball entirely and it's still just sitting there while he's just laying there on the ground.
Perhaps the ball was kicked and it bounced right back at him.
Perhaps he ducked and it missed him on the rebound.
Perhaps his friend was standing right behind him.
...

Now in the drawing of the animation the layout of the extremes should be pretty straightforward; a kid, a ball, the ground.

The setup might consist of:
- An Anticipation
- An Action
- A Reaction

(Three drawings at a minimum)

If the three drawings are enough to tell the story you've already established your extreme drawings. Inbetween drawings can then be added to progress the action/activity.

So...
Pose to Pose (to place the extremes)
and...
Straight Ahead (to connect the drawings and tell the story in an interesting (and an exaggerated!) way.

There's my initial thoughts on the matter but when you look out at life you may not see a ball... or a kid.

Animation is caricaturing (exaggerating!) how otherwise ordinary things move and change.

When all else fails you could also ask yourself questions: be curious about everything.
Pick something and try to stick with it until you've satisfied your curiosity.
Use what you discover to formulate and refine more questions.

[aidanani09]

Thanks Rodney you've given me a lot to think about. I see what you mean by taking things and exaggerating them.

thanks for the help