FA+
Shop
A quote from The Animator's Survival Kit
14 years ago
General
"So-called classical drawing seems to be coming back, but with a hyper-realized photographic approach because skilled artists are thin on the ground. Shading isn't drawing, and it isn't realism.
Good drawing is not copying the surface. It has to do with understanding and expression. We don't want to learn to draw just to end up being imprisoned in showing off our knowledge of joints and muscles. We want to get the kind of reality that a camera can't get. We want to accentuate and suppress aspects of the model's character to make it more vivid. And we want to develop the co-ordination to be able to get our brains down into the end of our pencil.
Many cartoonists and animators say that the very reason they do cartoons is to get away from realism and the realistic world into the free realms of the imagination. They'll correctly point out that most cartoon animals don't look like animals - they're designs, mental constructs. Micky ain't no mouse, Sylvester ain't no cat. They look more like circus clowns than animals. Frank Thomas always says: 'If you saw Lady and the Tramp walking down the road, there's no way that you are going to buy that they're real dogs.'
But to make these designs work, the movements have to be believable - which leads back to realism and real actions, which leads back to studying the human or animal figure to understand its structure and movement. What we want to achieve isn't realism, it's believability.
While Tex Avery released the animator from the more literal approach in order to do the impossible, he was only able to do it so successfully because his animation was mostly done by Disney drop-outs who already had 'the Disney knowledge' of articulation, weight, etc. So, ironically, his rebellion, his 'going the other route', had its basis in an underlying knowledge of realism.
But don't confuse a drawing with a map! We're animated masses, not lines. So we have to understand how the mass works in reality. In order to depart from reality, our work has to be based on reality."
- Richard Williams
(the guy who directed the animation of 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit')
I loved reading this today whilst in the crapper, it makes me feel better about how i love sketching bodies moving or posing, and constantly neglect backgrounds, shading, texture, etc.
sure shading and lighting a piece could make it pretty, but does it make it lifelike?
Good drawing is not copying the surface. It has to do with understanding and expression. We don't want to learn to draw just to end up being imprisoned in showing off our knowledge of joints and muscles. We want to get the kind of reality that a camera can't get. We want to accentuate and suppress aspects of the model's character to make it more vivid. And we want to develop the co-ordination to be able to get our brains down into the end of our pencil.
Many cartoonists and animators say that the very reason they do cartoons is to get away from realism and the realistic world into the free realms of the imagination. They'll correctly point out that most cartoon animals don't look like animals - they're designs, mental constructs. Micky ain't no mouse, Sylvester ain't no cat. They look more like circus clowns than animals. Frank Thomas always says: 'If you saw Lady and the Tramp walking down the road, there's no way that you are going to buy that they're real dogs.'
But to make these designs work, the movements have to be believable - which leads back to realism and real actions, which leads back to studying the human or animal figure to understand its structure and movement. What we want to achieve isn't realism, it's believability.
While Tex Avery released the animator from the more literal approach in order to do the impossible, he was only able to do it so successfully because his animation was mostly done by Disney drop-outs who already had 'the Disney knowledge' of articulation, weight, etc. So, ironically, his rebellion, his 'going the other route', had its basis in an underlying knowledge of realism.
But don't confuse a drawing with a map! We're animated masses, not lines. So we have to understand how the mass works in reality. In order to depart from reality, our work has to be based on reality."
- Richard Williams
(the guy who directed the animation of 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit')
I loved reading this today whilst in the crapper, it makes me feel better about how i love sketching bodies moving or posing, and constantly neglect backgrounds, shading, texture, etc.
sure shading and lighting a piece could make it pretty, but does it make it lifelike?
should go back and check them out again.
just for brushing up on the basics
Not just making it move. I totally agree with the whole "BELIEVABILITY" since you're trying to get across the point theses characters have flexible, organic bodies. They're bright and full of life.
Trying to head for Realism will require so much more factors to worry about, you'll have to rely on character personality for LIFE
While Animated cartoon characters can express emotions and their whole personality by their silouettes, poses, motion, bodyshape etc.
Like...... Characters like Mickey Mouse, When their body moves, it flexes, warps, bends, deforms and exaggerates it's proportions to give off the feel that this structure is oozing of character. If they moved like a robotic structure, they'd be horribly uncanny.
Honestly, Backgrounds and Lighting do add to a piece, doesn't GIVE it LIFE, but enhances it's brightness.
I have noticed my drawing have looked alot brighter to the tones and colour I give the characters' skin and the lighting of the scene, but like any artist could say, if the structure is horrible.... adding colour won't do anything in the long run.
I used to do heckloads of sketches before, but compared to my stuff now, they seemed awfully robotic and bland.
Right now I'm trying to focus more on curves and how the body flexes and bends. Mainly because my style is soft and elasticy than detailed/realistic.