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:

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.

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.

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.