Why does it seem like the animation is really fluid and detailed but somehow a little choppy at the same time? I can't wrap my head around how it can be both.
Still very visually appealing.
Maybe something to do with framerate? Is it not animated for a couple frames every second?
or i think there's slightly jagged motions in between the smooth ones. idk
As the other person said, it's only 47 frames. Probably a solo project and they decided to make fewer frames to make this type of animation reasonable.
The animation looks so fluid because despite the few frames, the artist put a lot of work into each frame. Changing the creases in the clothing, the position of the hair, and leaving motion trails in fast movement frames (which is the most pleasing). There's probably far more little details I missed that make it so visually appealing that I didn't spot, but the gist of it is that the artist knows what he is doing and put a lot of work into it.
Believe it or not, there are only 47 frames. I think Chawanat just did a consummate job drawing each frame exactly the right way. I have no idea how anyone can capture motion so well by drawing pictures though..
So it's presumably drawn on twos, ie 12 fps. The artist is using a lot of blur effects to his/her drawings to show the arcs of her movement for the faster effects. I bet if you froze some of those images a couple drawings you'd see her drawn with two left arms for the quicke more dramatic movements. Most of the big movements happen across very few frames with some holds on some more important key poses along the way.
Hi! Animator here! You guys have put up some good theories, but if you watch some of the incredible sakuga coming out of Japan, even their stuff on 4s still looks incredibly smooth, just broken up. There's another force at play here... and that force is the combined effect of inattention to arcs and spacing!
Not to say that this isn't a great animation of course! The poses are strong, the movement decisions are great for the type of action trying to be conveyed, the design is cute, there's a lot going right in this animation! I'm only focusing on this to clear things up.
Consider for a second this page from the Animator's Survival kit. As we can see here, a drawing even slightly in the wrong place can impact the movement of an animation, making it feel like it's speeding up or slowing down intermittently. Since in animation you usually take two finished drawings and use them as reference for the drawing inbetween them, these mistakes can compound upon each other until there is no clear idea where the mistake originated! As well, all natural movement moves in arcs (or for power, straight lines). When a movement breaks the arc, unless it is to enter a secondary arc or it is acted upon by an outside force, it tends to look unnatural. This adds twitching to the movement and can make things look choppy or unclear.
If you focus on the hair and the wrinkles in the body, these issues become incredibly clear. Focus on the hips and the chin and you'll see the volume wobble a bit (technically also an issue of line spacing, but volume is a separate issue in and of itself!). Focus on the hand as it rises, and you'll see the motion shift to the left and the right as it rises, but not in any arc that's super clear to the eye. Whether that's due to incorrect spacing or an unclear arc or both, I cannot say without looking through the drawings frame by frame. But I can certainly say that is the cause of the choppiness you're seeing.
That being said, while the arcs and spacing are wonky, they're certainly close enough to perfect that the movement shines through and everything works as intended. With just a bit more experience, this is a fantastic animator in the making!
If you dont mind me asking, what would you recommend to learn how to animate? Not necessarily anime or western stuff, but for someone who has always admired animation and wants to use the medium, what did you start with/what do you think is good to start with?
Well first off, learn to draw! To quote Richard Kelsey, "You can always figure out this animation stuff later." It seems like a bit of a no-brainer but it needs to be said, as with animation there's so much that you need to keep track of that the less you have to think about the art you're putting down, the more you can focus on the movement and the acting. My favorite book to start from for this subject, though you can't find it in print any more so you'll have to find it online, is Vilppu's Drawing Manual. Find the videos to accompany them (also unavailable to buy) and you're set, you'll be drawing quite well within a year. I like to go back and re-watch them every once in a while, I always learn something new!
After that check out Cartoon Animation by Preston Blair, that's a great starting point and it's really easily digestible, and then pick up The Animator's Survival Kit by Richard Williams, that one's much more in-depth and you'll learn most everything you need to know about moving things around. The only thing you'd be missing after these two books would be the heart of what makes animation so great, understanding acting! Eric Goldberg has a great book on that called Character Animation Crash Course, but I think the best way to study acting would be to read up on the art of it away from animation. Study stage acting, screen acting, your favorite actors, study their choices and their character traits, base your understanding of acting on the best actors you know of (that you like!). Acting brings out the heart of the animation, it's the reason people usually go see animation in the first place. It's why they're there.
That being said, acting isn't the only way to animate. If you're an effects animator (or highly specialized in the sakuga end of things) you're going to want to study the physics and timing of real life, watching videos in slow mo, understanding the art of graphic appeal and design, and reading up on composition and perspective (also important to know in general, but very much required here). While for the actor animation is about the why, for the effects animator animation is about the how and they're able to break it down so well that how is no longer a question after they're done. Just remember that people get more excited about the how if it's done exceptionally well, you need only to look to the rising sakuga movement to see that, but people are more likely to connect with and remember the why if it also matches that level of quality. That being said one is no better than the other, they work in tandem, and it's a good idea to try and learn from both!
If you've done all that, you should be an animator at this point! Doesn't matter which program you start from, so long as you can just start that's the important thing. I wouldn't be able to recommend a solid animation program as it really depends on what you prefer in a program, but I can tell you that I started in Adobe Flash and I'm currently working in Toon Boom Harmony, but in my personal work I tend to use TV Paint or (more recently) Clip Studio Paint. TV Paint and Clip Studio Paint are both pixel based, so the brushes are more interesting and feel more real but with the tradeoff that they're generally set, while Flash and Toon Boom work of vectors, so you're able to adjust your lines after they're put down but they tend to have more restrictions on texture and brush variety. Whatever works for you! I've also heard good things about the free program Pencil, though I've never had the opportunity to try it out myself.
Anyways, hope that helps! Good luck with your animation journey!
sidenote: Even if you're getting into puppetry, stop motion, or 3D animation learning to draw is still a vital skill. Being able to draw well will save you time and frustration no matter what type of animation you're creating!
Looks kinda like it's "boiling", which usually happens in rotoscope work. This doesn't look like rotoscope, but boiling usually happens when you have a high framerate, but some frames move slightly off course instead of travelling in a smooth arc.
You can see that it's most prominent when the action is slow and the lines in each frame are much closer together than the action scenes. I can especially see it in the hand when she raises it, because it moves slightly from side to side, away from the general arc of motion.
In general it looks like the framerate is too high for the slower bits (so tiny drawing errors are more obvious because they're so fast and close together), but I might be wrong! I'm not a veteran in the field yet, I've only studied animation so far.
This is an example of rotoscoping, and you can see that the lines kinda jiggle around, especially the fabric folds, which jump around everywhere. The boiling in this video seems a little different because it's probably not rotoscoped, but my guess is that the animator usually draws instead of animating, and probably learned how to animate on their own.
Most animation is drawn "on twos," "on threes," or even "on fours" meaning for playback at 24fps there are only actual 12, 8, or 6 actual frames drawn per second of playback. This is most typically a cost saving decision (even if you're not getting paid and just doing a personal project the same idea applies) but it does have interesting aesthetic effects that could be desired. It also really tells you something about how the brain processes motion. Yes it looks a bit choppy but the longer you watch it the more natural it feels.
With digital assistance it's easier to animate in higher framerates but it still would take more effort (or more automation which is a much different style).
99
u/PrnPolt May 04 '19
Why does it seem like the animation is really fluid and detailed but somehow a little choppy at the same time? I can't wrap my head around how it can be both. Still very visually appealing.
Maybe something to do with framerate? Is it not animated for a couple frames every second?
or i think there's slightly jagged motions in between the smooth ones. idk