i thought joe johnson only made the animatic to this. i remember raeding a post saying that an animation team in korea animated the scene.

kintuin said:
i thought joe johnson only made the animatic to this. i remember raeding a post saying that an animation team in korea animated the scene.

If that's the case, then which one was it, Rough Draft or SIMP?

Anihunter said:
If that's the case, then which one was it, Rough Draft or SIMP?

wym

kintuin said:
wym

Animation studio for episode. I can't keep them straight.

The storyboarding and art direction are great, but the animation is mediocre, lacking any extremes or breakdowns and having evenly spaced in-betweens.

ihhh said:
The storyboarding and art direction are great, but the animation is mediocre, lacking any extremes or breakdowns and having evenly spaced in-betweens.

I'm very new to animation, as in I have almost no knowledge, so correct me if I'm wrong. Are you saying the animation is bad for not having a specific beginning or ending point, as in, extremes? And that there's no breakdowns because there's no actions between keys? How exactly does this animation not have any of these things? And does it really make the animation bad? It looks so dynamic to me.

neptune432 said:
I'm very new to animation, as in I have almost no knowledge, so correct me if I'm wrong. Are you saying the animation is bad for not having a specific beginning or ending point, as in, extremes? And that there's no breakdowns because there's no actions between keys? How exactly does this animation not have any of these things? And does it really make the animation bad? It looks so dynamic to me.

I assume he means it's very one tone and expressionless. It's not using the full potential of the medium. Animation brings a performance to life, but there's nothing here that's really doing that. She's just going from pose to pose with little in the way of actual expression. I have no idea what the scene is trying to convey because there's just nothing there. It's obviously not badly animated, but it's not very interesting.

Ajay said:
I assume he means it's very one tone and expressionless. It's not using the full potential of the medium. Animation brings a performance to life, but there's nothing here that's really doing that. She's just going from pose to pose with little in the way of actual expression. I have no idea what the scene is trying to convey because there's just nothing there. It's obviously not badly animated, but it's not very interesting.

Yeah, Steven Universe (and quite a few other shows) mostly just go from pose to pose, but I didn't think that there was no expression to this scene. I loved the subtlety in the expressions, personally. That's one of the things I like about this show. Also, it doesn't seem that hard to tell what this scene is conveying. The character is feeling sad, remorseful, and is reminiscing about something. That's what I thought of *before* I saw the episode, and I was right. Even if you ignore the melancholy, wistful feeling from the city lights, you can tell all of this just from the character's face.

Maybe it would have been more interesting if they weren't just going from pose to pose, but I was under the impression it was hard to do that with only a TV budget, unless you're really skilled, like the animators for Superjail. Besides that problem, I don't see the issue with this scene.

neptune432 said:
Yeah, Steven Universe (and quite a few other shows) mostly just go from pose to pose, but I didn't think that there was no expression to this scene. I loved the subtlety in the expressions, personally. That's one of the things I like about this show. Also, it doesn't seem that hard to tell what this scene is conveying. The character is feeling sad, remorseful, and is reminiscing about something. That's what I thought of *before* I saw the episode, and I was right. Even if you ignore the melancholy, wistful feeling from the city lights, you can tell all of this just from the character's face.

Maybe it would have been more interesting if they weren't just going from pose to pose, but I was under the impression it was hard to do that with only a TV budget, unless you're really skilled, like the animators for Superjail. Besides that problem, I don't see the issue with this scene.

Isn't pose to pose animation a common method regardless of country or format?

neptune432 said:
I'm very new to animation, as in I have almost no knowledge, so correct me if I'm wrong. Are you saying the animation is bad for not having a specific beginning or ending point, as in, extremes? And that there's no breakdowns because there's no actions between keys? How exactly does this animation not have any of these things? And does it really make the animation bad? It looks so dynamic to me.

I never said it was bad, I specifically used the word "mediocre", which I specifically use to refer only to the animation, by which I mean the way the characters move, and not anything else. I can partially understand the confusion as a lot of people use the term "animation" to refer to the visuals as a whole, although I did specifically distinguish them in my comment.

Keys, Extremes, and Breakdowns are different types of poses, each of which play a different role in defining the movement. This video, made by the son of Richard williams, a well known american animator, does a much better job of explaining them then I could. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d418iMMxfl8

Ajay, None of that is correct. My criticisms are strictly technical, and strictly refer to the movement between the key poses, though now that I look at it, the key poses, while expressing emotion, lack any line of action.

neptune432, you seem to be confusing poses in general with key poses

There is a lot wrong with your comments which I don't feel like rebutting, but it might help you to research the principles of animation.

ihhh said:
I never said it was bad, I specifically used the word "mediocre", which I specifically use to refer only to the animation, by which I mean the way the characters move, and not anything else. I can partially understand the confusion as a lot of people use the term "animation" to refer to the visuals as a whole, although I did specifically distinguish them in my comment.

Keys, Extremes, and Breakdowns are different types of poses, each of which play a different role in defining the movement. This video, made by the son of Richard williams, a well known american animator, does a much better job of explaining them then I could. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d418iMMxfl8

Ajay, None of that is correct. My criticisms are strictly technical, and strictly refer to the movement between the key poses, though now that I look at it, the key poses, while expressing emotion, lack any line of action.

neptune432, you seem to be confusing poses in general with key poses

There is a lot wrong with your comments which I don't feel like rebutting, but it might help you to research the principles of animation.

I did say I know almost nothing about animation. That's why I asked.

Anihunter said:
Isn't pose to pose animation a common method regardless of country or format?

Yeah, why?

neptune432 said:
Yeah, why?

it's easier to do than straight-ahead animation, plus you can plan out timing much better.

Anihunter said:
it's easier to do than straight-ahead animation, plus you can plan out timing much better.

Yeah, that's fine. I think maybe I came off as not liking pose to pose animation, but to clarify, I'm OK with it.

ihhh said:
There is a lot wrong with your comments which I don't feel like rebutting, but it might help you to research the principles of animation.

You made some great points. That said, while the principles of animation are an absolutely essential resource, I think referring to them as the holy bible of animation is a bit of a heavy handed approach. There isn't only one way to make "good" animation, and implying that animation can only be good if it checks all the boxes on the master list (i.e. uses the medium to its fullest potential, as you said) is kind of restrictive. But maybe I extrapolated too much and you didn't really mean it like that.

bioid said:
You made some great points. That said, while the principles of animation are an absolutely essential resource, I think referring to them as the holy bible of animation is a bit of a heavy handed approach. There isn't only one way to make "good" animation, and implying that animation can only be good if it checks all the boxes on the master list (i.e. uses the medium to its fullest potential, as you said) is kind of restrictive. But maybe I extrapolated too much and you didn't really mean it like that.

If a story told through in medium X doesn't use benefits (potential) of it's media to tell said story, then why tell a story through it and not other media?
These principles are principles for a reason. Animation which is just motion from X to Y with even in-betweems and without anticipation and stuff is boring and lacks any impact on the viewer.
It's very sad for me how a lot people could care less about these things.

bioid said:
You made some great points. That said, while the principles of animation are an absolutely essential resource, I think referring to them as the holy bible of animation is a bit of a heavy handed approach. There isn't only one way to make "good" animation, and implying that animation can only be good if it checks all the boxes on the master list (i.e. uses the medium to its fullest potential, as you said) is kind of restrictive. But maybe I extrapolated too much and you didn't really mean it like that.

You need to understand the rules in order to break them. You cannot break them arbitrarily, accidentally, or through lack of knowledge, you need to have a good reason to break them.

Ajay said:
I assume he means it's very one tone and expressionless. It's not using the full potential of the medium. Animation brings a performance to life, but there's nothing here that's really doing that. She's just going from pose to pose with little in the way of actual expression. I have no idea what the scene is trying to convey because there's just nothing there. It's obviously not badly animated, but it's not very interesting.

I think what your saying is its not smooth. It does feel a little stiff. There's no easing into the poses.