#Puppeteer anyone?
12 messages in this thread
Hi Martin,
<< There are ways of using MoCap with R4's IK and I actually mentioned a theory
a few months ago. >>
Yeah, I would think it would be pretty straightfoward, to someone that knew
what they were doing. I'm really surprised there hasn't been more s/w developed
for M/C, …the hardware's still pretty expensive I guess.
While utilizing M/C certainly makes sense to employ in many cases, if
available, …I have irrational thoughts about it. At some deep, inner
level….I kind of resent it <g>. I was wondering if you or anybody else has
ever had that kind of feeling about M/C, 3D Digitizers, etc.. I realize my
feelings on this are ridiculous <G>.
BILL
Bill,
I understand completely — kinda seems like cheating — an easy way of getting
something that takes you hours/days/weeks/months to produce the "right" way!
I used to feel this way about models too, but have managed to overcome this
self-imposed "rule" in one case — I'm using Humanoids in my current project.
I am adding/making clothes and various accoutrements myself, but I'm still a
bit uncomfortable doing this…maybe it's just my deep-seated fear of being (or
being thought of as being) lazy!:)
Regards, Connie
Bill,
>> Motion Capture …. I kind of resent it <g>. I was wondering if you or
anybody else has ever had that kind of feeling about M/C, 3D Digitizers <<
I strongly believe in creating my own custom meshes and texture maps – for me
there's more disappointing than seeing the same human mesh and/or texture maps
in some game or broadcast animation. However, I have no such reservations about
motion capture. I'm all for it as an efficient way to generate a large amount
of _custom_ character animation. It's just another tool and as along we don't
start seeing the same Viewpoint motion files being used over and over, then I'm
all for it.
Hi Martin,
RE: >> Motion Capture…I was commenting from a lighter perspective, and of
course if it made sense, I'd use digitizers, m/c, etc., if available. I was
just wondering if any other folks who've done this for a while had some sort of
negative/resentful feelings about all this semi-automated technology, deep down
inside. For instance, even though Disney Studios used live actor studies,
rotoscoping, etc., I wonder how Walt himself would have felt about M/C ? On one
hand, you could say he would accept & use it without reservation, as a means to
an end. On the other hand, with all the time & effort spent analyzing motion &
developing manual techniques for employing that knowledge…..would he resent
it *a little*, strictly from the standpoint of the ART FORM, as opposed to any
commercial/practical considerations ?
BILL
Bill,
>> I wonder how Walt himself would have felt about M/C ? <<
Good question. I don't feel qualified to second guess big Walt, but judging by
Disney's recent movies, they are doing very well without it. Also, some of
their animation is very stylized and doesn't really lend itself well to mocap
as well as regular human motion.
>> I wonder how Walt himself would have felt about M/C ? <<
Walt Disney did in fact make film of actors doing the movements of the final
animated characters. The animators would then use this film as a reference
point. They found that when they copied the movement of the human characters
directly that the final motion was jerky and linear. So instead they used the
motion as a reference and then exaggerated the motion to make it smoother.
Traditional animation stresses the importance of exaggerated motion to help
portray the motion to the viewer. This is something that can't be done as yet
with a computer. Only a skilled traditional/computer animator can give *life*
to the model.
David "Animer – to give life" Gould.
David,
>> Walt Disney did in fact make film of actors doing the movements of the final
animated characters. <<
good points. I'd guess that this is fairly well-known. I've seen plenty of
documentaries on Disney and "the making of …." programs. I think he would
have liked Motion Capture. Especially the knew "Monkey" device.
<<I think he would have liked Motion Capture. Especially the knew "Monkey"
device. >>
Sounds interesting could you tell me more?
David "Patented monkey device" Gould
David,
re: "monkey" device
if I'm getting my terminology correct the "monkey" is big mechanical thingy
with joints and lots of wires. You "pose" it in various ways and create
keyframes in that pose. Traditional puppeteers would really like it I think. It
allows you to work in real life in a more natural way.
<<if I'm getting my terminology correct the "monkey" is big mechanical thingy
with joints and lots of wires. You "pose" it in various ways and create
keyframes in that pose.>>
So it is like the "dinosaur input device" used in the Jurassic Park movie.
Having seen the film "Tim Burton's Christmas Nightmare" I was really impressed
what tradtional model animators can achieve. Combining their skills with the
power of computer graphics would produce some phenomenal results.
David "No monkey business" Gould
David,
>> So it is like the "dinosaur input device" used in the Jurassic Park movie.
<<
Probably. I believe it can be configured for different creatures.
M.G.,
Walt Disney is probably the first person who ever used Motion Control in a
computerized/mechanical means – not just in his animation but in his
animatronics.
I think he and his engineers probably deserve a lot of credit for developing
the technologies that are now in use in M/C.
Since we think of Mr. Disney as a figure of animation history, sometimes we
forget he was always ahead of state-of-the-art. A lot of times he created new
technologies. I feel very strongly that Walt would have used M/C himself and
would have developed it beyond where it is today had he lived in current times.
I am sure his angle would have been, "Let's make M/C an art form on it's
own."
Interesting Topic, Thanks,
Eddy