Archive for the ‘Animation’ Category

Early animations

Students spent the first couple of weeks in February learning how to animate within Illustrator. They studied five of the animation principles: Squash/Stretch, Timing/Spacing, Slow-out/Slow-in, Follow Through/Overlapping Action, Anticipation.

Here are a few great examples from students, after just 3 days of animating in Illustrator.


Short People Will Rule the World

chibi After a kick in the pants from Graphic Content’s Graphic Comic Week I decided it was about time I learn how to draw manga. I’d been meaning to for weeks, inspired by the anime Miles and I watch (mostly by School Rumble) but just was downright lazy. So I checked out four books from the library to assist me in this endeavor and got started. I did a step-by-step of a chibi (cutesy short person!) to start off. She’s just so cuuuuuute! But, again, it was step-by-step so it’s hard to screw up. Though, I did use some artistic liberties in the fact that I gave her a headband. Go me!

I had supergrand ideas that I know many of you would have loved. I was going to create a scene from LOST using  season one characters in the chibi style. I quickly realized that it would not happen (over the weekend, at least.) Have you noticed…nothing really defines the characters in their wardrobe? There are a couple I could do things with, like Claire (pregnant) but she wasn’t in the scene I wanted to draw and Charlie (hoodie, guitar). Nothing really defines anyone else and so in my head, I figured it would just look like a bunch of short people standing around and one person has a guitar. Nothing too grand there. So for now, that’s on hold, but I might pick it up again in the future and give it a real go. Before I decided it was a flop, I drew two characters (actually three, but Hurley was a FAILure).

sawyer kate

Sawyer – angry, and in chibi style. And Kate, not angry, but in handcuffs and human person style. See what I mean? If I didn’t tell you who they were, or that they were from LOST, you wouldn’t have been able to guess it yourself.

I guess I’ve got my work cut out for me.

And hey! I see Graphic Content has posted my submission to them while I have been writing this post!

The Perpetual Vacationer

We’re watching Wall•E with commentary from Director Andrew Stanton and we’re loving it! (You may have seen me tweet about it yesterday, but we had to split it into a two-day viewing because we started it too late last night.) Not only do they show concept art, storyboard panels, and video footage, (all awesome) the director gives some great insight on the messages they were trying to convey through certain ideas.

One particular thought he had I found very interesting. He was explaining the humans in space and how they were portrayed in the movie 700 years in the future—as lazy vacationers who interact with their neighbor via video screens and golf via touch screen. They’re in a perpetual vacation and never get out of their lounge chair. Instant gratification, as they click what they want to buy and receive it immediately. He talked about people on a busy street walking by each other on their cell phones, or in the commuting lane in their cars and how close we are to each other, but still being so removed. He joked that with things like 1-Click shopping, we will evolve into being only a thumb (for clicking) and a mouth (for eating).

My one question for you is, do advances in technology make us more removed from each other or more connected? I, personally, am more connected to those around me because of advances in technology, and social media specifically. There are so many people I would have never heard of a year ago, but now I know their interests, their career, their humor, etc. though many of them I have not met. Is this connection false? Does this change the definition of “connected”?

But most importantly, will there really be robots who do style my hair in the future?!

The Iron Giant – Vantage Point – The Kingdom

With Sue as our guest this week, we each rented a movie to watch in the evenings. The Iron Giant was good in most aspects. Dialogue was funny and clever interaction between characters and even the story and series of events that occurred in the movie were interesting and kept me into the story – a lot like what Pixar does with their characters. The only criticism I have is on the animation. It could have been better. The movie was released in 1999. Toy Story 2 came out that same year. One year before that, was A Bug’s Life. Three years before *that* was Toy Story 1. So we know that 3D animation in a broad sense was already in the picture. Miles says the giant was in 3D, but I didn’t notice and I would have enjoyed The Iron Giant a lot more if Warner Bros. had been hip with the 3D scene for the whole movie. It would have been really good in 3D.

I give The Iron Giant a 3.5 out of 5 stars.

Vantage Point was a huge waste of time. Most of you know by now that the movie basically replays a short series of events several times from different character’s views and then one “this is how it happened” sequence. Even Matthew Fox wasn’t an enjoyment. The ‘rewind’ sequences were annoying and a waste of time. It’s like they just discovered their editing software had the option to fast-rewind and they thought seeing people move backwards was funny and wanted to show it off. The series of events that actually happened weren’t very believable. The 20 minute car chase will take you out of the movie, if you weren’t already. They didn’t spend enough time with each character for me to even care about them or get involved in their story. It was only 90 minutes but it was about 70 minutes too long. Other movies have done better jobs of weaving cross-over stories than this. It was a good concept, but it had already been done, much better.

I give Vantage Point a 2 out of 5 stars.

I had forgotten that we had seen the title sequence for The Kingdom on the internet a few months ago and how much I loved it.  One of the best, if not *the* best, I’ve seen. It gives you the history in just a few short minutes and if you already know the history, it’s design is interesting enough to keep you entertained.  I was concerned that the title sequence would overshadow the actual movie.  I didn’t want the movie to be a waste when the title sequence was so great.  But the movie wasn’t a waste.  It’s definitely worth seeing at least once.  While it *does* seem to take a while for any real action to take place (after the initial attack), the in-between time is entertaining and informative.  I didn’t think the time in between was dull, but I could see how someone might get ants in the pants and find the time spent on the situation in Saudi Arabia a little boring. But not me. And if you look past the believability of four FBI agents investigating this attack and achieving what they inevitably do in this foreign land, then you can appreciate this movie. It was a stellar cast – and you just can’t go wrong with Jason Bateman, am I right?

I give The Kingdom a 4 out of 5 stars.


Ticket stub for Hancock When we arrived at the Rausch Reunion on Thursday, about 18 cousins (and 2nd/3rd cousins) were set to go see Hancock, so we joined them. I enjoyed the first half of the movie. I hated the second half. And it seemed like pretty much all of the first half I’d already seen in previews. The second half had this odd twist that 1) I saw coming with the first very slight indication and 2) did not add depth to the movie, nor improved it.

I did enjoy the story and struggle of Hancock. I was also really pleased to find that Jason Bateman, playing Ray, has a much large role in this film than I thought. But of course, the story of Hancock and Ray trying to help his image, wasn’t the main plot in this movie and that left me highly disappointed.

The visual effects were less than satisfactory. The compositing of Hancock flying through a city was a wreck and the only way they could hide it was by shaking the camera and adding a motion blur to his image.

I’d like to get more in depth with this, but this is truly all I can say without spoiling it.

The first half of Hancock gets a 4 out of 5 stars. The second half gets a 2. So all together, Hancock gets a 3 out of 5 stars.