I’m going to be looking at hand drawn 2D fx animation, investigating what makes it appealing. There is a wealth of information and debate about general 2D animation, however 2D fx remains more in the shadows hidden behind the spotlight of character animation, Tina O’Hailey (2010, p.119) saying “It is a worthy topic that is more than often left out of animation discussions”. The bulk of fx information for animation relates to the 3D world, talking about the mathematical physics and particle generation rather than the actual art of the medium. Personally, what drew me to 2D fx animation and what makes it shine is the energy behind it, the exaggeration you so often see in character animation and the way it expands upon reality rather than merely copying it.
This project will delve into the world of 2D fx animation, looking at the fundamentals of it and really searching for what makes good fx standout. To do this, I will research the work of professional 2D fx animators, studying their own animations as well as learning from and applying their advice and tutorials to my own practice as a beginner. A huge resource for me will be Joseph Gilland’s Elemental Magic book, however there are many other artists out there I will study from. In addition to these, I will be looking at references to observe from the real world, and understand the theory behind the advice.
This investigation will be split into several sections, covering: general fundamentals of fx animation, Smoke, Water, Lightning and Style. I hope the outcome of this investigation will be an increase in both my understanding of, and skill with, animating fx elements.
Wednesday, 9 December 2020
FX Blog - My Own Practice
In order to demonstrate the usefulness of the theory and to provide a source to compare to, I decided to animate the three chosen elements with my current knowledge on effects animation. Bar my initial research and intake of animated content, I have no experience with it and I ended up finding these very challenging. The focus of these were the actual animation rather than the quality of line or colour, thus treat them as roughs.
Smoke:
The main struggle with this element I had was conveying the floaty quality of smoke whilst keeping track of each individual form. I found I had so much trouble just creating the effect of the smoke moving upwards that I lost a sense of the three dimensional, and it became flat and almost lazy looking.
Moreover, in an effort to create a looping cycle I found I was trying to inbetween frames that shouldn’t have been in-betweened, thus resulting in a jumpy animation.
The beginning also proved to be a large problem as I didn’t know how to start and plan the effect. I ended up going for a straight ahead approach due to a lack of any better options, with not enough thought on how to end it.
Despite this, I learnt a lot about getting the right timing and spacing for this compared to less natural elements. Before starting it, I had no idea what the end result would look like/how to make it look good, so trial and error helped me out a lot here.
Water:
This one was probably my favourite to animate, as it felt more like a scene with a purpose rather than a general loop, as well as the fact that the secondary movements were very fun to do.
I started this one with more of a plan of what would be happening, and I did a preliminary sketch to use as a base/reference. From there, I just animated straight ahead, thinking about the form and perspective. Once I finished, I realised the timing was really off and had to add more frames to the initial peak of the splash, as well as take a couple away from the start. Looking back at it, I think I should have taken more out as it looks too slow and mechanical at the start, rather than like it is reacting to something.
My favourite part was that smaller after-splash, as both the secondary particle animation and the main water ripple/splash were easy to do yet looked convincing and full of life.
Despite being very enjoyable to do, I still recognise the weaknesses of this animation, the main one being the timing and the stiffer drawings of the initial splash. I think adding energy lines would have made the initial part more interesting, and I need to study photo references of water as currently it looks a bit too much like a pie.
Lightning:
This was also a very enjoyable element due to how quick and forgiving the element is. I had no idea how to animate lightning at all, so for this one I used a couple of references. The first one was this actual footage of lightning:
Robert Patterson (2010)
The problem with this, is that even going frame by frame the lightning is too quick, and the camera can’t pick up the initial strike due to how bright it is, therefore it wasn’t useful as reference for animation, though studying the shape was helpful.
Next, I decided to look at an example of an artist’s lightning animation by Andrew Crotty (2014):
Andrew Crotty (2014)
Going through the first strike frame by frame, I observed how the lighting hesitates slightly before striking down, as well as how doing several drawings for the actual full strike gives it the impression of dynamic movement.
I think this animation is the most successful out of the four, however this one is the most like a study rather than my own experimentation.
I definitely learnt a lot however, especially with designing the bolts and getting that variation to avoid it looking too stiff.
Animating these was really beneficial to me, as I’ve learnt a lot about the struggles of effects animation as well as what is really important to make it look convincing. I found that whilst adding particle animation adds variation and interest and increases the appeal of the effect, a solid base animation is still the most important element, much more so than details (as shown by my smoke cycle).
To improve on my skill at animating that base movement, I need to study the physics behind each element so that I can understand why the effect will move like the way it does.
I’ve also found that I need to study a lot of real life reference of elements, as my drawings and shapes were all very unconvincing and stiff.
FX Blog - How To Study Reference
Joseph Gilland claims that observation and observational drawing is vital for effective 2D effects animation, saying that “attention and observation is key” Gilland (2009, p. 18). After trying to animate my own elements without any studying, I agree - drawing natural shapes was very challenging for me, and I found I was focusing a lot on that which detracted from my ability to then focus on the actual animation.
The purpose of observation is to improve your drawing skills of the subject you are studying, but of equal importance it is to gain a stronger understanding of that subject, so that you can “imbue your art with soul and integrity” Gilland (2009, p. 24). Observation is such a vital part of an artist’s study, proven by the fact that the big studios like Walt Disney Animation actually funded a trip for their animators to go to the location of the film they’re shooting. Gilland (2009, p.24) talks about his trip to Hawaii to research for Lilo and Stitch (2002), saying how the effects animators not only drew from observation, but also recorded reference and simply observed the elements without active participation. This allowed them to be more authentic and animate with the feel of the location in their memories.
This feel of an effect drawing is just as important if not more so than the draftsmanship of it, which Gilland explains through his explanation of energy and capturing it in your drawings. Energy as explained by Gilland (2009, p. 27) is the “underlying substance of every effect”, it is the flow of the element, and successful effects drawings “must be informed with natural patterns of pure energy” Gilland (2009, p. 27).
To help capture this energy, Gilland (2009, p. 25) advises the artist to “loosen up, and let your drawing hand flow”. This can be done by drawing from the shoulder, as well as holding the pencil from above to allow a greater range of motion, Gilland (2009, p. 41).
The main difficulty I had with drawing smoke was trying to avoid noodling. There are a lot of details in a smoke cloud - and a lot of them were similar looking - so I had to consciously correct any unappealing shapes. In addition to this, I found I kept getting lost in the details and I often lost the structure. This is most prevalent in the first drawing, as it is a bit too chaotic.
My favourite drawing was the second one, as it captured the energy of the smoke very well whilst still demonstrating a clear form. I ended up taking quite a while on that drawing however, so for the last two I decided to be quicker and more expressive. I think they weren’t as successful visually but helped me in cementing the right kind of shapes to use with a smoke drawing.
I found these water drawings incredibly challenging for three reasons. Firstly, I had a lot of trouble drawing the ripples in the right perspective. Generally I have trouble with symmetry, and if the ripples aren’t very accurate it is obvious to the viewer. Secondly, there were so many details within the water photos that I had trouble selecting the right amount of information to show. It also made it harder to capture the energy as I was getting lost in the reflections. Finally, due to how many small details and shapes there were, I found it very difficult to draw looser. The marks I made with my shoulder were more appealing, and I ended up using that as much as possible, however I wasn’t very accurate that way. This juxtaposition caused me a lot of frustration, and I feel my drawings both lack enough energy and accuracy. I think it would have been better to go for a layered approach, firstly just using my shoulder to capture that energy, and then going over it with a darker pencil to capture the details.
Despite this, I learnt a lot, specifically about what shapes to use to close off the drawing at the peak of the splash. This was something I had trouble with in my animation, so I was paying particular attention to it here.
In addition to this, having thinner, secondary strikes come off the main beam gave it a more realistic look. I think the part of the strike that looks the best is when the shape of it veers outwards significantly. I think exaggerating these in an animation would give it a lot of appeal.
Observing actual reference of these elements significantly improved my understanding of their form and shapes. If you compare these drawings to my initial animations, you can see how much more appealing and believable they are, and how their sense of design, form and energy are more evident.
Later on in this project, I will also need to study video reference for animation and live action in order to both observe the movement and timing of effects, but to see the shapes and energy learnt from observational drawing in practice. Naoki Arazia (no date) says “the only thing that separates you from the professional animators is that precious knowledge hidden in the inbetweens, so what them carefully”.
I found a helpful video by Jason Keyser (2016) that gave a few tips on reference finding and studying. He provided a large library of fx animation references on his pinterest boards that will be useful to use, as well as a website to go through youtube videos frame by frame. The importance of this was stressed as Keyser talked about how something he’s noticed from 2D effects animation portfolio reviews is that often people lack really strong, punchy and dynamic timing. Studying references frame by frame is what he recommended to improve on this.
Another method of studying is to actually download the GIFs and videos and put them into an animation program. This would then allow you to actually draw over the reference frame by frame so that you can study the shapes and spacing.
The purpose of observation is to improve your drawing skills of the subject you are studying, but of equal importance it is to gain a stronger understanding of that subject, so that you can “imbue your art with soul and integrity” Gilland (2009, p. 24). Observation is such a vital part of an artist’s study, proven by the fact that the big studios like Walt Disney Animation actually funded a trip for their animators to go to the location of the film they’re shooting. Gilland (2009, p.24) talks about his trip to Hawaii to research for Lilo and Stitch (2002), saying how the effects animators not only drew from observation, but also recorded reference and simply observed the elements without active participation. This allowed them to be more authentic and animate with the feel of the location in their memories.
This feel of an effect drawing is just as important if not more so than the draftsmanship of it, which Gilland explains through his explanation of energy and capturing it in your drawings. Energy as explained by Gilland (2009, p. 27) is the “underlying substance of every effect”, it is the flow of the element, and successful effects drawings “must be informed with natural patterns of pure energy” Gilland (2009, p. 27).
To help capture this energy, Gilland (2009, p. 25) advises the artist to “loosen up, and let your drawing hand flow”. This can be done by drawing from the shoulder, as well as holding the pencil from above to allow a greater range of motion, Gilland (2009, p. 41).
I started by drawing smoke, as I felt it’s natural flowiness lends itself well for capturing energy, and is a good starting point for me to get used to drawing with my shoulder. I found that my mark making with this new pencil grip was a lot more appealing to look at, the curves being smoother and more energetic. I did find myself slipping back into using my wrist when I needed to be very accurate however, but with practice I think I can fully use my shoulder.
The main difficulty I had with drawing smoke was trying to avoid noodling. There are a lot of details in a smoke cloud - and a lot of them were similar looking - so I had to consciously correct any unappealing shapes. In addition to this, I found I kept getting lost in the details and I often lost the structure. This is most prevalent in the first drawing, as it is a bit too chaotic.
My favourite drawing was the second one, as it captured the energy of the smoke very well whilst still demonstrating a clear form. I ended up taking quite a while on that drawing however, so for the last two I decided to be quicker and more expressive. I think they weren’t as successful visually but helped me in cementing the right kind of shapes to use with a smoke drawing.
I found these water drawings incredibly challenging for three reasons. Firstly, I had a lot of trouble drawing the ripples in the right perspective. Generally I have trouble with symmetry, and if the ripples aren’t very accurate it is obvious to the viewer. Secondly, there were so many details within the water photos that I had trouble selecting the right amount of information to show. It also made it harder to capture the energy as I was getting lost in the reflections. Finally, due to how many small details and shapes there were, I found it very difficult to draw looser. The marks I made with my shoulder were more appealing, and I ended up using that as much as possible, however I wasn’t very accurate that way. This juxtaposition caused me a lot of frustration, and I feel my drawings both lack enough energy and accuracy. I think it would have been better to go for a layered approach, firstly just using my shoulder to capture that energy, and then going over it with a darker pencil to capture the details.
Despite this, I learnt a lot, specifically about what shapes to use to close off the drawing at the peak of the splash. This was something I had trouble with in my animation, so I was paying particular attention to it here.
Finally, I found these lightning drawings the least useful study, as due to lightning’s nature the only aspect I could observe properly was the shapes. I noticed that to give it more appeal, varying the line width of the main strike was important.
In addition to this, having thinner, secondary strikes come off the main beam gave it a more realistic look. I think the part of the strike that looks the best is when the shape of it veers outwards significantly. I think exaggerating these in an animation would give it a lot of appeal.
Observing actual reference of these elements significantly improved my understanding of their form and shapes. If you compare these drawings to my initial animations, you can see how much more appealing and believable they are, and how their sense of design, form and energy are more evident.
Later on in this project, I will also need to study video reference for animation and live action in order to both observe the movement and timing of effects, but to see the shapes and energy learnt from observational drawing in practice. Naoki Arazia (no date) says “the only thing that separates you from the professional animators is that precious knowledge hidden in the inbetweens, so what them carefully”.
I found a helpful video by Jason Keyser (2016) that gave a few tips on reference finding and studying. He provided a large library of fx animation references on his pinterest boards that will be useful to use, as well as a website to go through youtube videos frame by frame. The importance of this was stressed as Keyser talked about how something he’s noticed from 2D effects animation portfolio reviews is that often people lack really strong, punchy and dynamic timing. Studying references frame by frame is what he recommended to improve on this.
Another method of studying is to actually download the GIFs and videos and put them into an animation program. This would then allow you to actually draw over the reference frame by frame so that you can study the shapes and spacing.
FX Blog - General Fundamentals - Part 1
I have previously talked about the importance of energy within 2D effects animations, however in addition to this there are other fundamentals that should be thought about no matter which element you’re focusing on. Each of these basic principles use the idea of creating contrast in your animation to increase its appeal, Jason Keyser (2015).
Shape:
As effects animation is visual, shape is a huge factor in the general appeal of it. There are several subsections of shape that should be paid attention to, one of them being the shape language. Depending on what you want to convey with your effect, the shape design could be sharper and more angular, or it could be softer and rounder. This falls more under the style category, which I will be talking about towards the end of this project, however another thing to note is that the shape design is linked to the concept of energy. Gilland (2009, p. 62) explains how sharper shapes tend to be more dynamic and energetic, and thus convey speed, whilst “soft, flowing, languid designs” express a slower approach. This means that the shape design could change between the two as the energy behind the element fizzles out.
In terms of what makes good shape design, there are four main sections:
Repetition of shapes should generally be avoided when drawing natural elements, as this will end up looking very stiff and inorganic. Within an effect drawing, there are two main aspects - the overall shape/silhouette and the details within that. When drawing both these aspects, repetition should be avoided. Gilland (2009, p. 32 to 34) talks about how it is common to find repeated marks within the more detailed section, as there is a tendency to just noodle. This was something I found myself doing within my own animations and observational drawings.
To overcome this pitfall of shape design, each mark should be made with a purpose, and you should try and vary both the spacing between the shapes as well as include a combination of big, medium and small shapes, Gilland (2009, p.34).
The importance of avoiding repetition can be shown by comparing these drawings:
Gilland (2009, p. 52) says “it is important to avoid symmetry when designing or animating special effects”. This differs slightly from the previous two concepts, as often natural effects are symmetrical. Gilland (2009, p. 52) uses an example of an explosion to demonstrate how this is different to how it works in real life. An explosion would radiate outwards with the same force, but as artists we have the liberty to build upon reality. In this situation, making it asymmetrical will increase its appeal and sense of dynamism. Here are a few examples to demonstrate how much more appealing asymmetry is:
Shape:
As effects animation is visual, shape is a huge factor in the general appeal of it. There are several subsections of shape that should be paid attention to, one of them being the shape language. Depending on what you want to convey with your effect, the shape design could be sharper and more angular, or it could be softer and rounder. This falls more under the style category, which I will be talking about towards the end of this project, however another thing to note is that the shape design is linked to the concept of energy. Gilland (2009, p. 62) explains how sharper shapes tend to be more dynamic and energetic, and thus convey speed, whilst “soft, flowing, languid designs” express a slower approach. This means that the shape design could change between the two as the energy behind the element fizzles out.
In terms of what makes good shape design, there are four main sections:
Repetition:
Repetition of shapes should generally be avoided when drawing natural elements, as this will end up looking very stiff and inorganic. Within an effect drawing, there are two main aspects - the overall shape/silhouette and the details within that. When drawing both these aspects, repetition should be avoided. Gilland (2009, p. 32 to 34) talks about how it is common to find repeated marks within the more detailed section, as there is a tendency to just noodle. This was something I found myself doing within my own animations and observational drawings.
To overcome this pitfall of shape design, each mark should be made with a purpose, and you should try and vary both the spacing between the shapes as well as include a combination of big, medium and small shapes, Gilland (2009, p.34).
The importance of avoiding repetition can be shown by comparing these drawings:
As you can see, the drawings on the right are much more appealing to look at, as well as being more organic looking. This is because of the larger variety and thus the greater contrast.
Gilland (2009, p. 54) also says to “avoid parallel lines as much as possible”. This should be done for much the same reason as repetition - it creates inorganic looking drawings. Here is a comparison to demonstrate this in effect, with the non parallel line version looking much more appealing:
Parallel lines:
Gilland (2009, p. 54) also says to “avoid parallel lines as much as possible”. This should be done for much the same reason as repetition - it creates inorganic looking drawings. Here is a comparison to demonstrate this in effect, with the non parallel line version looking much more appealing:
Joseph Gilland (2009, p. 54)
Rarely in nature would you see parallel lines, but even if a reference almost has them, exaggerating their angle would add drama as well as create more of a sense of weight.
This concept should be applied to the shadows of an effects animation as well, explains Gilland (2009, p.54). As you can see by the below images, parallel shadow lines do a much worse job at describing the form of the smoke cloud. It also creates a less appealing image due to that lack of 3D and perspective.
This concept should be applied to the shadows of an effects animation as well, explains Gilland (2009, p.54). As you can see by the below images, parallel shadow lines do a much worse job at describing the form of the smoke cloud. It also creates a less appealing image due to that lack of 3D and perspective.
Joseph Gilland (2009, p.54)
Symmetry:
Gilland (2009, p. 52) says “it is important to avoid symmetry when designing or animating special effects”. This differs slightly from the previous two concepts, as often natural effects are symmetrical. Gilland (2009, p. 52) uses an example of an explosion to demonstrate how this is different to how it works in real life. An explosion would radiate outwards with the same force, but as artists we have the liberty to build upon reality. In this situation, making it asymmetrical will increase its appeal and sense of dynamism. Here are a few examples to demonstrate how much more appealing asymmetry is:
Joseph Gilland (2009, p. 52)
Joseph Gilland (2009, p. 53)
The fact that this fundamental doesn’t correlate 100% with reality results in an advantage for 2D animation and the finer control it offers. Gilland (2009, p. 55) talks about how digitally created particle effects of smoke often suffer from too symmetrical and too parallel shapes. This can be seen by this after effects rendering I created:
I added wiggle expressions to try and increase contrast in both symmetry and parallel shapes - and you can see how it has some variation- however it isn’t the same as 2D effects where you can really push the asymmetry and make the shapes much more dynamic. The general movement is good, and you can tell it’s smoke, however it loses so much appeal and overall, it’s a bit lifeless. It has no sense of energy.
FX Blog - General Fundamentals - Part 2
Exaggeration:
Building upon symmetry is the idea of exaggerating your effects drawings to increase their appeal. In addition to this, exaggerating helps to capture the energy of the effect more effectively. Gilland (2009, p. 50) says how not exaggerating enough is a common beginner mistake. There is also safety in exaggeration, as Gilland (2009, p. 49) claims that “you can always scale back an overly exaggerated drawing, but it’s far more difficult to breathe life into a stifled one”.
All of these principles can be seen in action within professional 2D effects animation work:
Quentin Cordonnier (2019)
This still from Quentin Cordonnier (2019) shows that even among different styles and types of smoke animation, the shape design can be consistent whilst following the design principles. In all of these he uses rounded shapes yet he still varies them to avoid repetition, parallel lines and symmetry. The leftmost smoke cloud on the middle row shows an example that is quite symmetrical by nature, yet Cordonnier uses the forms inside the silhouette to create contrast and weight on one side.
Chris Graf (2010)
This is a great example from Chris Graf (2010) of avoiding symmetry and using different actions to give the smoke more appeal. There are a variety of shape sizes as well that give the smoke a good sense of scale.
Chris Graf (2009)
This cigarette smoke by Graf (2009) shows how using non-parallel lines can significantly increase the appeal of a drawing.
Nikolaos Finizio (2017)
Finally, Nikolaos Finizio’s (2017) still of an explosion shows a great example of how to make a naturally symmetrical (in this case completely spherical) effect look appealing, through the use of varied line width to avoid parallel lines as well as asymmetrical negative space (in the center of the explosion).
Timing and spacing:
Contrast is vital for not just the aesthetics of the effect, but also within the timing and spacing. Without it, the animation “appears stiff and mannered” Gilland (2009, p. 39). Repetition is what causes this lack of contrast, so to overcome this and make the animation more dynamic, you should “overlap the timing of our elements and the directions of overall movement as well” Gilland (2009, p. 38). Gilland (2009, p. 39) uses an example of a bottle smashing against the floor to explain this concept. If the bottle smashes on the floor with all the pieces moving with the same speed and in their same respective directions, then the animation will look quite boring. Simply by having different pieces do different things with different timings will fix this and make it a much more appealing scene. For example several pieces could explode outwards as normal but in different trajectories, but some could slide along the floor or bounce away.
The same principle should be applied to the spacing, but here focusing on creating enough of a contrast to give the illusion of different pieces having different speeds.
Form:
The final general fundamental links to the importance of observation, in the sense that it is about the understanding of the element. Knowing the form of the effect you are trying to animate is vital, Tracy Strong (2017) says how “if you wanna know the basics, [...] learn to understand the form, learn to understand the perspective”. Knowing the form of what you're drawing is essential to understand how it’s moving in 3D space, how to avoid flat looking animations and it also helps massively with keeping track of all the lines in an animation.
To practice this, Tracy Strong (2017) recommends drawing a wireframe over your drawings to help visualise their form, therefore I did this for one of my previous smoke sketches:
FX Blog - Smoke Plume
Smoke is quite a general element that can be classed under different categories. For example there are: dust clouds, which look like smoke but are affected by gravity; linear smoke - things like cigarette trails; steam, where the water vapour heating results in smoke-like properties; explosion smoke; and finally billowing smoke, something you’d see as a result of heat on a medium to large scale. To simplify things, I will be focusing just on that last one for this section of my project.
Gilland (2009, p. 161) says that for smoke, animating it is “far more about understanding the energy that is in play than moving pretty shapes around in random ways”. That second part is pretty much what I ended up doing for my first attempt, and as the experiment showed it was unsuccessful, therefore to animate smoke properly I must know how it works first.
Smoke essentially is just “the waste by-product of a material reaching its combustion point” Gilland (2009, p. 196), that reacts to air currents such as wind, movement of the object the smoke is coming from and the intensity of the energy source - how hot the fire is. So for a billowing smoke caused by a large fire, the hot air pushes the smoke upwards quickly and the cool air above it slows it down, acting like a barrier due to the friction. This causes the smoke to billow outwards and forces it to roll over itself. The continuous rolling effect you see in large smoke clouds is caused by the hot air sucking the rolled smoke back into itself, David Tidgwell (no date) and Gilland (2009).
Upon dissipation, smoke breaks down into smaller shapes rather than fades out with opacity, Gilland (2009, p. 201). A common problem when animating the dissipation is making the particles too similar in shape, size and spacing, which makes it look unnatural. Gilland suggests changing the path of action - which way the general movement is. David Tidgwell recommends dissipating the particles by having “one area ‘bite’ into the shape faster than the rest of the reduction”. This gives the smoke quite a dynamic look. For bigger plumes, adding more holes is needed to properly suggest its size.
Both Tidgwell (no date) and Gilland (2009) suggest that you start off the animation very rough, using spheres to describe the form and concentrating on the animation before going into the details. When cleaning up the animation it is important to add a degree of shakiness to the circles as smoke particles are affected by external forces, they’re not just rising spheres.
David Tidgwell (no date) says the “best way to start an effect you have never animated before is to first study any live action reference you can get a hold of”, then to look at animation to “see how others have interpreted reality”. This is exactly what I’m going to do next:
Gilland (2009, p. 161) says that for smoke, animating it is “far more about understanding the energy that is in play than moving pretty shapes around in random ways”. That second part is pretty much what I ended up doing for my first attempt, and as the experiment showed it was unsuccessful, therefore to animate smoke properly I must know how it works first.
Smoke essentially is just “the waste by-product of a material reaching its combustion point” Gilland (2009, p. 196), that reacts to air currents such as wind, movement of the object the smoke is coming from and the intensity of the energy source - how hot the fire is. So for a billowing smoke caused by a large fire, the hot air pushes the smoke upwards quickly and the cool air above it slows it down, acting like a barrier due to the friction. This causes the smoke to billow outwards and forces it to roll over itself. The continuous rolling effect you see in large smoke clouds is caused by the hot air sucking the rolled smoke back into itself, David Tidgwell (no date) and Gilland (2009).
Upon dissipation, smoke breaks down into smaller shapes rather than fades out with opacity, Gilland (2009, p. 201). A common problem when animating the dissipation is making the particles too similar in shape, size and spacing, which makes it look unnatural. Gilland suggests changing the path of action - which way the general movement is. David Tidgwell recommends dissipating the particles by having “one area ‘bite’ into the shape faster than the rest of the reduction”. This gives the smoke quite a dynamic look. For bigger plumes, adding more holes is needed to properly suggest its size.
Both Tidgwell (no date) and Gilland (2009) suggest that you start off the animation very rough, using spheres to describe the form and concentrating on the animation before going into the details. When cleaning up the animation it is important to add a degree of shakiness to the circles as smoke particles are affected by external forces, they’re not just rising spheres.
David Tidgwell (no date) says the “best way to start an effect you have never animated before is to first study any live action reference you can get a hold of”, then to look at animation to “see how others have interpreted reality”. This is exactly what I’m going to do next:
Reference video by ActionVFX
I first studied this reference of a smoke plume from ActionVFX. You can really see how energy affects the movement of the smoke with the varying speeds at which the smoke rises (very quickly at the start, and then much slower as it gets higher) as well as the rotational movement as the colder air forces the smoke outwards. I think convincingly animating this rotational movement will provide a challenge, as well as how to merge the faster, lower smoke with the slower, higher section.
Before animating the final version of smoke, I warmed up by tracing Gilland’s (2009) smoke formula in his book, whilst also adding inbetweens. I did this to get a feel for animating that floaty quality of smoke and to help wrap my head around it.
The main problem I encountered was how exactly to do the rotational movement of the higher section. Initially I had the lines move downwards, however that didn’t look right and I wouldn’t know how to end that. So instead I just focused on conveying different speeds, and had the spacing for the higher section be very close together throughout. This worked a lot better but I don't think it effectively shows the rotation talked about in the theory of billowing smoke. I also started to show how a lower section would merge into the larger section and overcome that, however due to time I didn’t get to properly show that.
Another problem I had was the further I went from the starting drawing, the less appealing the forms were getting. I think this was as I was so focused on what moves exactly where that I focused less on the design principles talked about earlier in this project.
I think to make this effect more appealing - in addition to focusing more on the later shape designs - I could add more in betweens so it’s animated on 1’s. Smoke naturally has a very flowy quality, and a smoother animation would help sell this.
Comparing this animation to my original smoke animation you can clearly see how much the theory and studying benefitted me in creating a more appealing and convincing smoke animation. This animation has a much better sense of form, which describes it in 3D space more effectively and also renders it much easier to look at, as there are no randomly disappearing shapes. In addition to that the overall silhouette of the smoke is considerably more interesting than the almost parallel line of my original. Finally, the original had no varying velocities like this animation has, thus it had no overlap and no contrast - it was too linear.
Matt Luck (no date)
RT-FX (2017)
Finding the right type of smoke (billowing smoke plume) was surprisingly difficult, with most examples being from dust clouds or explosions. This was disappointing as I wanted to really study the way the smoke merges and rotates, however I found these two examples that show this together. Matt Luck’s (no date) animation is a great example of billowing smoke on a slightly smaller scale than what I intend, however it really demonstrates the different speeds of the different sections of smoke. I think because it is a rough animation, the forms get quite confusing when they merge, and there is no clear rotation seen. RT-FX’s (2017) animation fills this gap by very effectively animating that rotational movement. This is done by having the outer edge of the smoke rise quickly while having the shadow line remain at roughly the same place/slightly downwards. I also really like the style of cleanup done, with two-tone lineless rendering.
Before animating the final version of smoke, I warmed up by tracing Gilland’s (2009) smoke formula in his book, whilst also adding inbetweens. I did this to get a feel for animating that floaty quality of smoke and to help wrap my head around it.
I’m not sure how convincing this is, but it did help me with the use of spheres to represent floating forms. For my actual animation, I think I will have less of a side to side movement.
The structure I took with this animation was to draw the first frame as the starting point, and then animate straight ahead from this. This meant I spent a lot of time on that first drawing making sure there were clear forms, and that it was an appealing drawing. I also wanted to clearly separate the slower, meandering section from the faster one, therefore I drew the former with larger spheres. This also gave the smoke a good sense of scale. From there, I started animating the different forms rising, making sure to have the spacing much farther apart for the lower ones, and the higher ones would barely move.
The main problem I encountered was how exactly to do the rotational movement of the higher section. Initially I had the lines move downwards, however that didn’t look right and I wouldn’t know how to end that. So instead I just focused on conveying different speeds, and had the spacing for the higher section be very close together throughout. This worked a lot better but I don't think it effectively shows the rotation talked about in the theory of billowing smoke. I also started to show how a lower section would merge into the larger section and overcome that, however due to time I didn’t get to properly show that.
Another problem I had was the further I went from the starting drawing, the less appealing the forms were getting. I think this was as I was so focused on what moves exactly where that I focused less on the design principles talked about earlier in this project.
I think to make this effect more appealing - in addition to focusing more on the later shape designs - I could add more in betweens so it’s animated on 1’s. Smoke naturally has a very flowy quality, and a smoother animation would help sell this.
Comparing this animation to my original smoke animation you can clearly see how much the theory and studying benefitted me in creating a more appealing and convincing smoke animation. This animation has a much better sense of form, which describes it in 3D space more effectively and also renders it much easier to look at, as there are no randomly disappearing shapes. In addition to that the overall silhouette of the smoke is considerably more interesting than the almost parallel line of my original. Finally, the original had no varying velocities like this animation has, thus it had no overlap and no contrast - it was too linear.
FX Blog - Water Splash
As with smoke, there are many different categories of water effects: waves, rain, running water, waterfalls, water fountains, splashes, geysers, ripples, water drops and more. For this section, I will be focusing on water splashes - and consequently ripples. I will primarily be looking at medium and smaller splashes as larger splashes both take a lot more time to animate due to the detail needed, but also behave slightly differently.
With drawing and animating water, simplicity is paramount - much more so than other elements due to the sheer amount of detail involved in even the smallest action. Gilland (2009, p.95) recommends learning to identify the main formations seen in water references, and then break those down into simpler, graphical shapes. He says “if we attempt to draw all of it, we will quickly be overwhelmed by the details”, and in addition to this, if after struggling through the details we do complete the animation, it could become too visually messy for the audience and thus lose its appeal. Simplification and stylisation are therefore incredibly important for this element.
Before getting onto the theory of a water splash, both Gilland (2009) and Kathleen Quaife (2013) talk about the importance of good perspective with a water splash effects animation. It is common to think that perspective isn’t that important due to the abstract nature of water, however if the perspective is wrong, the “viewer will feel that something is amiss, and their attention will be drawn away from the story” Gilland (2009, p. 96). Where this is prevalent is within the water ripples. Often times, the ripples are animated outwards from the base ellipse with even spacing (which is fairly intuitive as they will in fact be moving at roughly the same speed), however as the water splash is three dimensional, the ripples furthest from the viewer should be closer together than the ones nearest to the camera. Drawing a ground plane and a base ellipse over that grid to represent the water splash will help with the animation’s perspective.
To help understand the theory behind a water splash, I used information from Gilland (2009), Garrett Wren (no date), Kathleen Quaife (2013) and Howard Wimshurst (2018):
The primary force in a water splash is caused by an object entering the water. The size, speed and shape of the object will affect the type of splash generated. When the object enters the water, it will displace the water and cause it to explode outwards from the impact in a sheet. This sheet will be carried on a trajectory dependent on its initial velocity outwards, slowing down as it is affected by gravity. As the sheet gets higher, it also thins, and the surface tension causes holes to break the surface. The holes expand, eventually causing the sheet to break into droplets of water. The period where the sheet reaches its apex is called the hang time. This is when gravity has overcome the upwards velocity, causing the droplets to start arcing downwards. Whilst this initial splash is happening, the impact caused by the object also causes ripples along the water’s surface. When the droplets crash down from the primary splash, they create their own ripples that expand outwards. They may also create their own little splashes as well depending on their size.
Once the object enters the water, an air pocket is formed due to the displacement. After a fraction of a second, the water then rushes into this air pocket and gets launched upwards creating a secondary splash, again creating more ripples along the water’s surface upon landing.
As you can see by the theory, there will be a lot of overlapping elements within a water splash, which is what makes it so dynamic and appealing to look at. Playing around with each part’s timing, as well as the length of the hang time will give different results and effects. Another point to be wary of is that the primary splash creates a lot of droplets, however when animating them hitting the water’s surface it is important to not add too many secondary splashes and ripples to avoid “making your animation overly busy”, Gilland (2009, p. 121).
The size of the object entering the water affects the size of the water splash, however different sized water splashes will have different timings. Gilland (2009, p. 102) says “the key to the size and duration of a splash, is how much water is being displaced”. A raindrop splash is the simplest water splash to animate due to its small size and thus length. They can last as short as 2 to 5 frames and don’t have a secondary splash (especially if the rain falls on a solid surface). For a slightly larger object - such as a pebble - it can last about a half second, with the ripples being very short and the secondary splash being either non-existent or a small, 4 to 6 framed droplet splash. A medium sized splash usually lasts a second to a second and a half, and a larger (big rock) one would last about 2 to 3 seconds, with the secondary splash being almost as big as the primary. These are all timings to play around with, but generally the larger the object is the more water it will displace, and thus the slower, higher and more detailed the animation will need to be.
You can see this theory in effect in the following video:
I used these animations as reference for timing, style and general movement. Each of these are slightly different types of water splash animations. MaginPanic’s (2017) is a small-medium sized splash, with the edges folding over outwards and being the first to crash against the water, whilst the one at 00:09 seconds by Matt Timms (2011) is the same sized splash but has the edges folding inwards, and then coming crashing down with the very tips being the last to hit the water. They provide different effects with both being appealing. I also noticed that extending the hang time for slightly longer than reality gives the water a very dynamic and punchy feel.
Chris Graf’s (2020) water splash was in the same style as MaginPanic’s, however on a larger scale. This meant that the hang time was even longer and the animation was a bit more detailed overall, as well as having more evident ripples from the crashing down of the primary splash’s edges. The secondary splash of this animation was also much larger.
Studying all of these I noticed that deciding when to show the secondary splash is important, as it gives a lot of information about the size of the splash. Generally, the longer time between primary and secondary splashes, the larger the splash. I quite liked the longer durations as it also made the animation more punchy.
Before animating a proper water splash, I decided to warm up by animating a raindrop, as it’s much shorter duration would give me a feel for animating water:
Now for the actual water splash:
With drawing and animating water, simplicity is paramount - much more so than other elements due to the sheer amount of detail involved in even the smallest action. Gilland (2009, p.95) recommends learning to identify the main formations seen in water references, and then break those down into simpler, graphical shapes. He says “if we attempt to draw all of it, we will quickly be overwhelmed by the details”, and in addition to this, if after struggling through the details we do complete the animation, it could become too visually messy for the audience and thus lose its appeal. Simplification and stylisation are therefore incredibly important for this element.
Before getting onto the theory of a water splash, both Gilland (2009) and Kathleen Quaife (2013) talk about the importance of good perspective with a water splash effects animation. It is common to think that perspective isn’t that important due to the abstract nature of water, however if the perspective is wrong, the “viewer will feel that something is amiss, and their attention will be drawn away from the story” Gilland (2009, p. 96). Where this is prevalent is within the water ripples. Often times, the ripples are animated outwards from the base ellipse with even spacing (which is fairly intuitive as they will in fact be moving at roughly the same speed), however as the water splash is three dimensional, the ripples furthest from the viewer should be closer together than the ones nearest to the camera. Drawing a ground plane and a base ellipse over that grid to represent the water splash will help with the animation’s perspective.
Theory:
To help understand the theory behind a water splash, I used information from Gilland (2009), Garrett Wren (no date), Kathleen Quaife (2013) and Howard Wimshurst (2018):
The primary force in a water splash is caused by an object entering the water. The size, speed and shape of the object will affect the type of splash generated. When the object enters the water, it will displace the water and cause it to explode outwards from the impact in a sheet. This sheet will be carried on a trajectory dependent on its initial velocity outwards, slowing down as it is affected by gravity. As the sheet gets higher, it also thins, and the surface tension causes holes to break the surface. The holes expand, eventually causing the sheet to break into droplets of water. The period where the sheet reaches its apex is called the hang time. This is when gravity has overcome the upwards velocity, causing the droplets to start arcing downwards. Whilst this initial splash is happening, the impact caused by the object also causes ripples along the water’s surface. When the droplets crash down from the primary splash, they create their own ripples that expand outwards. They may also create their own little splashes as well depending on their size.
Once the object enters the water, an air pocket is formed due to the displacement. After a fraction of a second, the water then rushes into this air pocket and gets launched upwards creating a secondary splash, again creating more ripples along the water’s surface upon landing.
As you can see by the theory, there will be a lot of overlapping elements within a water splash, which is what makes it so dynamic and appealing to look at. Playing around with each part’s timing, as well as the length of the hang time will give different results and effects. Another point to be wary of is that the primary splash creates a lot of droplets, however when animating them hitting the water’s surface it is important to not add too many secondary splashes and ripples to avoid “making your animation overly busy”, Gilland (2009, p. 121).
The size of the object entering the water affects the size of the water splash, however different sized water splashes will have different timings. Gilland (2009, p. 102) says “the key to the size and duration of a splash, is how much water is being displaced”. A raindrop splash is the simplest water splash to animate due to its small size and thus length. They can last as short as 2 to 5 frames and don’t have a secondary splash (especially if the rain falls on a solid surface). For a slightly larger object - such as a pebble - it can last about a half second, with the ripples being very short and the secondary splash being either non-existent or a small, 4 to 6 framed droplet splash. A medium sized splash usually lasts a second to a second and a half, and a larger (big rock) one would last about 2 to 3 seconds, with the secondary splash being almost as big as the primary. These are all timings to play around with, but generally the larger the object is the more water it will displace, and thus the slower, higher and more detailed the animation will need to be.
You can see this theory in effect in the following video:
Reference Video by Videezy
This reference doesn’t have the holes forming in the primary splash, and after studying other references I believe this is due to the smaller size of the splash - as the primary splash doesn’t go up that high the water is not stretched enough to break the surface tension. I also noted with these studies that the overlapping timing of the secondary splash provides a lot of the appeal.
MaginPanic (2017)
Matt Timms (2011)
Chris Graf (2020)
Chris Graf’s (2020) water splash was in the same style as MaginPanic’s, however on a larger scale. This meant that the hang time was even longer and the animation was a bit more detailed overall, as well as having more evident ripples from the crashing down of the primary splash’s edges. The secondary splash of this animation was also much larger.
Studying all of these I noticed that deciding when to show the secondary splash is important, as it gives a lot of information about the size of the splash. Generally, the longer time between primary and secondary splashes, the larger the splash. I quite liked the longer durations as it also made the animation more punchy.
Before animating a proper water splash, I decided to warm up by animating a raindrop, as it’s much shorter duration would give me a feel for animating water:
Now for the actual water splash:
I found this very challenging, mainly due to all the elements I had to keep track of as well as because it’s animated straight ahead, which was necessary to avoid it looking too mechanical. I studied the animated references for the right timings to use and then just started, focusing on creating interesting shapes and following the perspective grid I had set up.
I animated up to the peak of the primary splash, where I then went back and started adding the holes in as I wanted my splash to break apart and come crashing down in two sections - the bigger drops and the main body. From there, I animated the holes and the main body, before going back to animate the bigger drops. I really wanted to focus on getting strong, punchy timing, therefore I decided to have the hang time be quite long and the crash be quite short, which I think I overdid slightly. I feel I could have increased the duration of the primary splash’s crash.
The drops were probably the most challenging part as following the arcs and having overlapping timing was quite difficult, and I feel like they are the weakest part of the animation. I should have spent more time studying how other animator’s approached them.
For the secondary splash, I wanted to have quite a big duration between it and the primary one to create a swing-like timing, which I think worked pretty well.
To add polish and to make the animation more believable, I added smaller splashes for the drops and for the secondary splash, as well as adding the ripples. I found the main splash’s ripple challenging due to the same problem as with my observational drawing - circles in perspective.
Overall, I was really paying attention to the theory learnt from my research to make this animation as appealing as possible (namely the punchy timing, overlapping actions and strong shape design) and I think despite it not being professional quality, it is significantly more appealing and believable than my initial water splash animation. The timing is much stronger, and the animation has much more energy and character to it. The shapes are also much more realistic and appealing to look at due to my observational drawing practice. Finally, one of the biggest issues with my initial animation was the start of the splash, as it moved too slow and uniformly, resulting in a pie-like effect. This animation definitely fixed that issue, with the splash feeling like it’s truly reacting to something rather than moving of its own accord.
I animated up to the peak of the primary splash, where I then went back and started adding the holes in as I wanted my splash to break apart and come crashing down in two sections - the bigger drops and the main body. From there, I animated the holes and the main body, before going back to animate the bigger drops. I really wanted to focus on getting strong, punchy timing, therefore I decided to have the hang time be quite long and the crash be quite short, which I think I overdid slightly. I feel I could have increased the duration of the primary splash’s crash.
The drops were probably the most challenging part as following the arcs and having overlapping timing was quite difficult, and I feel like they are the weakest part of the animation. I should have spent more time studying how other animator’s approached them.
For the secondary splash, I wanted to have quite a big duration between it and the primary one to create a swing-like timing, which I think worked pretty well.
To add polish and to make the animation more believable, I added smaller splashes for the drops and for the secondary splash, as well as adding the ripples. I found the main splash’s ripple challenging due to the same problem as with my observational drawing - circles in perspective.
Overall, I was really paying attention to the theory learnt from my research to make this animation as appealing as possible (namely the punchy timing, overlapping actions and strong shape design) and I think despite it not being professional quality, it is significantly more appealing and believable than my initial water splash animation. The timing is much stronger, and the animation has much more energy and character to it. The shapes are also much more realistic and appealing to look at due to my observational drawing practice. Finally, one of the biggest issues with my initial animation was the start of the splash, as it moved too slow and uniformly, resulting in a pie-like effect. This animation definitely fixed that issue, with the splash feeling like it’s truly reacting to something rather than moving of its own accord.
FX Blog - Lightning Strike
There is a lot less information about lightning fx than other elements, however due to how fast it is, animating lightning is all about good shape design and timing, Tracy Strong (2017). For the very few frames that lightning shows, it should read very well with very bright light and angular shapes. Strong (2017) also suggests not being tight with your successive drawings, as the natural wonkiness helps give the bolts an electric feel. This allows you to be very loose and go a bit wild with your designs, depending on style.
Ron Doucet (2014) talks about the anatomy of a well designed lightning bolt. Generally there should be a combination of these to give it the right feel, but the actual design can be exaggerated or simplified. In essence, it is a “shaky line that goes from thick to thin to thick and thin again.” Doucet (2014).
With my own animation, I want to combine features from these three artists. I’ll have an initial strike for anticipation, and use the blank frames technique to give the lightning a flashing quality. I’ll also use a combination of fully white frames and glow to give the strike more impact. For the dissipation of it, I think I will combine Redfish’s and Kevin’s styles - some strands dissipate on the spot while others continue their movement outwards.
Here is the animation:
The most trouble I had with this was creating interesting shapes for the lightning. I used the principles from Doucet’s lightning anatomy guide, whilst also focusing on avoiding parallel lines. Despite this, I think I still should have exaggerated the angles further to give it more appeal.
A mistake I made with my initial lightning animation was making some of the drawings overly complicated which resulted in it looking cluttered, so for this one I focused on rendering the main strike as interesting as possible and reducing the number of branches coming off of it.
Again, I think this animation is significantly better than my original lightning animation, mainly due to the addition of the white frame, blank frames and glow effects. In addition to this, the shape design is much stronger, and the timing is more believable. Looking back at the original, I think the timing is too slow, making it look less like a strike and more like a character that’s moving forward.
Ron Doucet (2014) talks about the anatomy of a well designed lightning bolt. Generally there should be a combination of these to give it the right feel, but the actual design can be exaggerated or simplified. In essence, it is a “shaky line that goes from thick to thin to thick and thin again.” Doucet (2014).
Ron Doucet (2014)
For the actual animation of lightning you have a lot of leeway. Doucet (2014) says that generally it’s good to have; a few frames of it striking, having the same start and end points but changing up the angles in the bolt; a flash of white before a thicker, larger strike; a blank frame every 2-4 frames to give the lightning a flicker effect; and finally a couple of frames of dissipation, just so that it doesn’t suddenly disappear.
Leeroy Kevin (2016)
Alex Redfish (2014)
Matt Timms (2013)
I used these three animations as references to inform my own lightning animation for different reasons. With Leroy Kevin’s (2016) animation I liked that initial ball of energy before the lightning strike followed, it created good anticipation as well as suggested the potential energy of the effect.. The way it dissipated - simply getting thinner and thinner - was also very effective and gave it an appealing quality, much more than if it just disappeared or faded out. Alex Redfish’s (2014) animation took a multiple lightning strike approach, however he also incorporated that initial short strike. I really liked the way he tackled the dissipation, making the strikes fizzle out whilst moving away. This made it seem like the lightning had motion and the energy was propelled by the force of the strike. Finally, Matt Timm’s (2013) animation had really strong timing, and good use of glow effects. Instead of having that initial smaller strike, Timms just made the base of the strike very bright. He also used blank frames to give the strike a flashing quality that was very effective.
With my own animation, I want to combine features from these three artists. I’ll have an initial strike for anticipation, and use the blank frames technique to give the lightning a flashing quality. I’ll also use a combination of fully white frames and glow to give the strike more impact. For the dissipation of it, I think I will combine Redfish’s and Kevin’s styles - some strands dissipate on the spot while others continue their movement outwards.
Here is the animation:
As with my initial animations, this was definitely my favourite. I had a lot more freedom with the shape design, and playing around with the timing was quick and fun. I used the approach of my plan, and I included a secondary strike.
The most trouble I had with this was creating interesting shapes for the lightning. I used the principles from Doucet’s lightning anatomy guide, whilst also focusing on avoiding parallel lines. Despite this, I think I still should have exaggerated the angles further to give it more appeal.
A mistake I made with my initial lightning animation was making some of the drawings overly complicated which resulted in it looking cluttered, so for this one I focused on rendering the main strike as interesting as possible and reducing the number of branches coming off of it.
Again, I think this animation is significantly better than my original lightning animation, mainly due to the addition of the white frame, blank frames and glow effects. In addition to this, the shape design is much stronger, and the timing is more believable. Looking back at the original, I think the timing is too slow, making it look less like a strike and more like a character that’s moving forward.
FX Blog - Style
Style is a huge factor in appeal, as it determines the visual outcome of the animation. Moreover, it can help tremendously with the actual animation, as stylisation is necessary “to bring our drawing to a level of detail which is possible to draw” Gilland (2009, p. 47). Nature is simply too detailed to be able to capture everything in an animation, thus simplifying and stylising can bring it down to a level that is both easier for the animator to animate, and the viewer to view.
There are many different styles out there - your imagination is the only real limiting factor - so what is vital is that “every special effect drawing must embody the art direction of the film” Gilland (2009, p.44). If it does not then there is a disconnect between the character animation and the effects emanating from them. In addition to this, knowing the purpose of the effects is extremely important too. Are the fx meant to help with a scene’s realism? If so, you have to be careful not to overdo it or draw too much attention away from the main action. If the fx are meant to be the primary action in a scene, such as a huge crashing wave, then you can go more in depth and pull out all the stops.
Furthermore, the emotional response should always be the focus of your animation. Genevieve Koski (2014) says that with Pinocchio's (1940) water animation, despite its realism the focus was on “how the water should function within the story and the emotional response it should provoke, not replicating the real world exactly”.
The final reason why style is important is budget - the more detailed the style, the harder it is to animate, thus the longer it will take and the more expensive it will be, Gilland (2009, p. 104). In Pinocchio’s (1940) water scenes, the animators were going for a detailed look however did not have enough time, therefore details further in the back were made more impressionistic, Koski (2014). This allowed the focus to go on the front whilst still giving the illusion of realism throughout.
There are many different styles out there - your imagination is the only real limiting factor - so what is vital is that “every special effect drawing must embody the art direction of the film” Gilland (2009, p.44). If it does not then there is a disconnect between the character animation and the effects emanating from them. In addition to this, knowing the purpose of the effects is extremely important too. Are the fx meant to help with a scene’s realism? If so, you have to be careful not to overdo it or draw too much attention away from the main action. If the fx are meant to be the primary action in a scene, such as a huge crashing wave, then you can go more in depth and pull out all the stops.
Furthermore, the emotional response should always be the focus of your animation. Genevieve Koski (2014) says that with Pinocchio's (1940) water animation, despite its realism the focus was on “how the water should function within the story and the emotional response it should provoke, not replicating the real world exactly”.
The final reason why style is important is budget - the more detailed the style, the harder it is to animate, thus the longer it will take and the more expensive it will be, Gilland (2009, p. 104). In Pinocchio’s (1940) water scenes, the animators were going for a detailed look however did not have enough time, therefore details further in the back were made more impressionistic, Koski (2014). This allowed the focus to go on the front whilst still giving the illusion of realism throughout.
Lilo and Stitch (2002)
Mulan (1998)
Hercules (1997)
Pinocchio (1940)
Here are a few different stills of water fx animation from just Disney films. As you can see the styles vary considerably, despite them being from all the same studio. Lilo and Stitch’s (2002) water splash is the simplest of the four, using curvy rounded shapes. This isn’t to say it’s worse than the others as it is just a different style, however the important thing to note is that it fits with the style of the film. The characters are designed to focus on conveying weight, using varied curves to do this, which reflects perfectly in the water animation.
Mulan (1998) has a slightly more realistic style, thus the water fx reflects this by using sharper shape language and introducing smaller details. Hercules’s (1997) water fx reflects the very stylised nature of the film by subtly incorporating the infamous spirals into the peak of the splash, as shown by the above still. Finally, Pinocchio’s (1940) water animation takes a much more detailed approach, as instead of following the style of character animation it mimics the realism of the backgrounds.
As you can see, you can achieve different styles by changing either the rendering style of the fx, or the shape design. I want to try this out for myself, so here are a few different styles - using my smoke animation as the base to cleanup:
Mulan (1998) has a slightly more realistic style, thus the water fx reflects this by using sharper shape language and introducing smaller details. Hercules’s (1997) water fx reflects the very stylised nature of the film by subtly incorporating the infamous spirals into the peak of the splash, as shown by the above still. Finally, Pinocchio’s (1940) water animation takes a much more detailed approach, as instead of following the style of character animation it mimics the realism of the backgrounds.
As you can see, you can achieve different styles by changing either the rendering style of the fx, or the shape design. I want to try this out for myself, so here are a few different styles - using my smoke animation as the base to cleanup:
With these I tried to create as many different styles without changing too much of the original animation to see some of the possibilities. I think all these animations would be suited to different films despite how little some of them differ from each other. The lined animations tend to look more cartoony, and the angular ones look more gritty or more for an older audience. I also think adding the shadows improves the animation considerably, as not only does it have that contrasting, graphical element but it also describes the form much better than just lines.
FX Blog - Conclusion
Effects animation is a medium younger than character animation, yet with the rise in technology the process behind creating incredible and dramatic elemental magic has spread out. Despite this, “the background knowledge of how to bring our artwork to life has not changed. Only our paintbrush has changed”, Gilland (2009, p. 12). Without the knowledge gained from studying life and learning the theory behind effects animation and the specific elements I covered, my animations may be visually pretty but would lack that true appeal, shown when you compare my original animations to my new ones. The foundations are so important because knowing how something moves allows you to then build on that, therefore most importantly, understanding of the theory and fundamentals is what makes effects animation appealing.
I knew that by the end of this project my animations would not be professional quality, but I didn’t expect how much I would actually learn, and how useful that information was. Animating the effects at the beginning of this project was frustrating - I knew roughly how things were meant to move but I didn’t fully comprehend it, nor did I understand the forms of the elements. My drawings were awkward and the movement was clunky. The animations at the end fixed all this, with the drawings being more believable and the animation having more energy to them, therefore I definitely can say I improved.
Whilst theory and fundamentals are the most important, the visual style of the animation has a lot of power too. Not only is it necessary to stylise in order to actually animate the elements, but with few changes the effect of an animation on the audience can be significantly altered. As I was focusing on just the elements on their own it is harder to see how important this would be, however where this really becomes vital is when the fx is part of a scene. There, proper attention should be paid to the shape language and cleanup style so that it creates the right emotional response that both fits with the story as well as the animation’s overall style.
With any form of frame by frame 2D animation, you have to create everything from scratch. This means that knowing your theory is vital as you have no computer to generate it for you, but it also means that you have much more control over your animation. I found that I could really easily tweak timings, scale, anticipation and exaggeration to suit how exactly I wanted the effect to work.
After doing this project, I believe that whilst the skill floor for animating appealing 2D fx is higher than other mediums, the skill ceiling is exponentially so, as there is no limit but time and your imagination.
I knew that by the end of this project my animations would not be professional quality, but I didn’t expect how much I would actually learn, and how useful that information was. Animating the effects at the beginning of this project was frustrating - I knew roughly how things were meant to move but I didn’t fully comprehend it, nor did I understand the forms of the elements. My drawings were awkward and the movement was clunky. The animations at the end fixed all this, with the drawings being more believable and the animation having more energy to them, therefore I definitely can say I improved.
Whilst theory and fundamentals are the most important, the visual style of the animation has a lot of power too. Not only is it necessary to stylise in order to actually animate the elements, but with few changes the effect of an animation on the audience can be significantly altered. As I was focusing on just the elements on their own it is harder to see how important this would be, however where this really becomes vital is when the fx is part of a scene. There, proper attention should be paid to the shape language and cleanup style so that it creates the right emotional response that both fits with the story as well as the animation’s overall style.
With any form of frame by frame 2D animation, you have to create everything from scratch. This means that knowing your theory is vital as you have no computer to generate it for you, but it also means that you have much more control over your animation. I found that I could really easily tweak timings, scale, anticipation and exaggeration to suit how exactly I wanted the effect to work.
After doing this project, I believe that whilst the skill floor for animating appealing 2D fx is higher than other mediums, the skill ceiling is exponentially so, as there is no limit but time and your imagination.
FX Blog - Bibliography
ActionVFX. (no date) Free - Smoke Plumes. Available at: https://www.actionvfx.com/collections/free-smoke-plumes-stock-footage# (Accessed 4 December 2020).
Araiza, N. (no date) ‘Naoki Araiza’ Tumblr. Available at: https://naokiaraiza.tumblr.com/ (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Bunting, D. (no date) David Bunting Animation. Available at: http://www.buntinganimation.com/drawn-sfx-reel (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Cordonnier, Q. (no date) ‘Quentin Cordonnier’ Tumblr. Available at: https://quentincordonnier.tumblr.com/ (Accessed 5 December 2020).
Crotty, A. (2014) ‘Lightning 2D FX Animation’ Youtube, 10 June. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhD8uijbtKw&ab_channel=AndrewCrotty (Accessed 21 November 2020).
Doucet, R. (2014) ‘FX Notes and Designs from Various Artists - Part 1’ Blogspot, 7 September. Available at: http://flashfx.blogspot.com/2014/09/fx-notes-and-designs-from-various_7.html (Accessed 2 December 2020).
Doucet, R. (2014) ‘FX Notes and Designs from Various Artists - Part 3’ Blogspot, 11 September. Available at: http://flashfx.blogspot.com/2014/09/fx-notes-and-designs-from-various_11.html?m=1 (Accessed 2 December 2020).
Doucet, R. (2014) ‘FX Notes and Designs from Various Artists - Part 6’ Blogspot, 16 September. Available at: http://flashfx.blogspot.com/2014/09/fx-notes-and-designs-from-various_16.html (Accessed 2 December 2020).
Doucet, R. (2014) ‘#11 Lightning - Part 1’ Blogspot, 24 January. Available at: http://flashfx.blogspot.com/2014/01/11-lightning-part-1.html (Accessed 3 December 2020).
Doucet, R. (2019) ‘Flash FX Animation’ Blogspot, 20 August. Available at: http://flashfx.blogspot.com/ (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Dunaway, B. (2018) ‘CCC 325 - The Alex Redfish Interview’ Youtube, 5 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02b2JFjMltc&feature=emb_title&ab_channel=BrianDunaway (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Edgar, L. (2020) ‘FX References’ Pinterest. Available at: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/eaglefour444/fx-references/ (Accessed 7 December 2020).
Finizio, N. (2017) ‘2D vfx reel’ Artstation. Available at: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/Qq1kB (Accessed 5 December 2020).
Gallardo, J. (2014) ‘2014 - 2D FX Animation Demo Reel’ Vimeo, 2 June. Available at: https://vimeo.com/97177013 (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Gilland, J. (2017) ‘Elemental Magic’ Blogspot. Available at: http://elementalmagic.blogspot.com/ (Accessed 10 October 2020).
Gilland, J. (2009) Elemental Magic: The Art of Special Effects Animation. Burlington, MA and Jordan Hill, Oxford: Focal Press.
Gilland, J. (2006) The Animated Scene: Classical Hand-drawn Special Effects Animation - Facing Extinction?. Available at: https://www.awn.com/animationworld/animated-scene-classical-hand-drawn-special-effects-animation-facing-extinction (Accessed 10 October 2020).
Gilland, J. (2006) The Animated Scene: “Elemental Magic”: The Classical Art of Hand-drawn Effects Animation. Available at: https://www.awn.com/animationworld/animated-scene-elemental-magic-classical-art-hand-drawn-effects-animation (Accessed 10 October 2020).
Graf, C. (2017) ‘Chris Graf’ Blogspot, 13 March. Available at: http://chrisgraf.blogspot.com/ (Accessed 5 December 2020).
Graf, C. (2020) [Instagram] 22 September. Available at: https://www.instagram.com/p/CFcTDJ0Da-s/ (Accessed 6 December 2020).
Hercules (1997) Directed by R. Clements and J. Musker [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Animation Studios.
Kevin, L. (2016) ‘2D FX Training - Lightning Strike’ Imgur, 22 April. Available at: https://imgur.com/gallery/KbDxbrW (Accessed 3 December 2020).
Keyser, J. (2015) ‘2D Design Tutorial - Shape Style Guide’ Youtube, 5 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQDQLS_gNXM&list=PLQD_sA-R5qVK3YW6UHKFp-L9jjKul7z-5&ab_channel=JasonKeyser (Accessed 1 December 2020).
Keyser, J. (2016) ‘Reference Gathering Tutorial - Frame-by-Frame Pinterest Videos!’ Youtube, 22 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLQD_sA-R5qVLOZ2EIi4zqsD3WSnF4QwIy&v=ajOS_8hJnpU&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=JasonKeyser (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Koski, G. (2014) How Pinocchio set the standard for feature animation. Available at: https://thedissolve.com/features/movie-of-the-week/815-how-pinocchio-set-the-standard-for-feature-animati/ (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Lilo and Stitch (2002) Directed by D. DeBlois and C. Sanders [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Animation Studios.
Living Lines Library. (2011) ‘Fantasia 2000 (1999), The Firebird Suite Effect Pencil Tests’ Vimeo, 25 April. Available at: https://vimeo.com/22856764 (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Luck, M. (no date) ‘Matt Luck’s Animation’ Tumblr. Available at: https://maluck1557.tumblr.com/ (Accessed 4 December 2020).
Maginpanic. (2015) ‘2D FX LIGHTNING EFFECT’ Youtube, 6 November. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO_zWf3T9xE&list=PLbrsZLZTQ3JHHF6DfRGTTB1E4ZhjhsnpC&index=40&ab_channel=Maginpanic (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Maginpanic. (2018) ‘2D FX FIRE EFFECT’ Youtube, 16 November. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR46vWsc18s&list=PLbrsZLZTQ3JHHF6DfRGTTB1E4ZhjhsnpC&index=52&ab_channel=Maginpanic (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Maginpanic. (2017) ‘2D FX SPLASH’ Youtube, 13 January. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U_5t7NNJAc&ab_channel=Maginpanic (Accessed 6 December 2020).
McCallum, T. (2020) ‘2D Effects with Alex Redfish’ Podcast, 3 May. Available at: https://www.buzzsprout.com/931801/3599878-2d-effects-with-alex-redfish (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Mulan (1998) Directed by T. Bancroft and B. Cook [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Animation Studios.
O’Hailey, T. (2015) Hybrid Animation - Integrating 2D and 3D Assets. Second Edition. Burlington, MA and Abingdon, Oxon: Focal Press.
Patterson, R. (2010) ‘Lightning in Super Slow Motion’ Youtube, 26 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLWIBrweSU8&t=51s&ab_channel=RobertPatterson (Accessed 21 November 2020).
Pinocchio (1940) Directed by N. Ferguson and T. Hee [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Animation Studios.
Quaife, K. (2013) ‘ANM261_Animating_A_Splash.mov’ Youtube, 13 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3TNsYGsJLk&ab_channel=quaife (Accessed 3 December 2020).
Quaife, K. (2020) ‘Kathleen Quaife Effects Animation’ Blogspot, 4 September. Available at: http://kathleenquaife.blogspot.com/ (Accessed 5 December 2020).
Redfish, A. (2014) ‘Behind the back - Fire Cycle’ Youtube, 4 July. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wvVQ25dIrU&ab_channel=AlexRedfish (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Redfish, A. (2014) ‘Behind the Back - Lightning Strike’ Youtube, 14 May. Available at: https://vimeo.com/95304705 (Accessed 3 December 2020).
RTFX animation. (2020) ‘Smoke animation review [“Basics of 2D FX” course]’ Youtube, 29 July. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqV8CiKAEUg&t=80s&ab_channel=RTFXanimation (Accessed 7 November 2020).
RT-FX. (2017) ‘Smoke 041 Explosion Up MIX’ DeviantArt, 27 April. Available at: https://www.deviantart.com/rt-fx/art/Smoke-041-Explosion-Up-MIX-668568800 (Accessed 4 December 2020).
Salla, O. (2017) Mastering the Elements - Basics of 2D Effect Animation. Undergraduate. Kajaani University of Applied Sciences. (Accessed 15 October 2020).
Schnier, M. (2020) Marty Broski and Aidan Neeson Discuss 2D FX and Character Animation. Available at: https://blog.toonboom.com/marty-broski-aidan-neeson (Accessed 7 November 2020).
ShutterStock. (no date) Water surface wave and glass falling shooting with high speed camera, phantom flex. Available at: https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-3166525-water-surface-wave-glass-falling-shooting-high (Accessed 6 November 2020)
Storm, O. (2020) ‘2D Animated Explosion - Frame by Frame’ Youtube, 15 September. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxpPLp6h06A&ab_channel=OlofStorm (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Strong, T. (2017) ‘Animating Traditional Smoke and dust fx’ Youtube, 13 September. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EQIlwxcBco&ab_channel=StylusRumble (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Strong, T. (2017) ‘How to Animate Lightning’ Youtube, 16 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHyBmN0aD4Y&ab_channel=StylusRumble (Accessed 3 December 2020).
Strong, T. (2017) ‘Intro to hand-drawn fx animating.’ Youtube, 26 July. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT1LHvz0MvA&ab_channel=StylusRumble (Accessed 7 November 2020).
TheSketchist. (2015) ‘Sketchist Speed Animation - Explosion 2’ Youtube, 22 April. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOgx_06ZCgc&list=PLfuKxRfLeoUNpuQViO4uRbP3JElQMkV7d&index=34&ab_channel=TheSketchist (Accessed 7 November 2020).
TheSketchist. (2015) ‘Sketchist Speed Animation - Explosion 3’ Youtube, 25 October. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIpQ4sv9JDc&list=PLfuKxRfLeoUNpuQViO4uRbP3JElQMkV7d&index=7&ab_channel=TheSketchist (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Timms, M. (2013) ‘Bitey 2D FX tests 1-6’ Vimeo, 22 March. Available at: https://vimeo.com/62449708 (Accessed 3 December 2020).
Timms, M. (2011) ‘Water FX Compilation’ Vimeo, 11 April. Available at: https://vimeo.com/22257775 (Accessed 6 December 2020).
Toon Boom Animation. (2020) ‘Marty Broski and Aidan Neeson on Adding Effects to 2D Animation’ Youtube, 20 October. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBjiS5LQMZw&ab_channel=ToonBoomAnimation (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Tokumasu, N. (2015) ‘2D FX DEMO 2014 NAOKI ARAIZA’ Vimeo, 21 May. Available at: https://vimeo.com/128530741 (Accessed 7 November 2020).
Tubee55. (2017) ‘Slow motion water drop splash’ Youtube, 4 April. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O50o1aWbDZk&ab_channel=tubee55 (Accessed 6 December 2020).
Vanity Fair. (2019) ‘Disney Animation Designer Breaks Down Cinderella's Dress Transformation | Vanity Fair’ Youtube, 9 August. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP7lop_zBaQ&ab_channel=VanityFair (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Videezy. (no date) A Drop of Green Liquid. Available at: https://www.videezy.com/water/48717-a-drop-of-green-liquid (Accessed 6 December 2020).
Wimshurst, H. (2018) ‘Learn This Trick Before You Animate Water’ Youtube, 3 March. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeQLbPW1S2Q&ab_channel=HowardWimshurst (Accessed 8 November 2020).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)