>animation discourse is dominated by people who know jack shit about animationThis is genuinely sadThe whole medium in the west is at the risk of dying off, not because knowledge isn't being preserved, but because of active disinformation being spread
did you watch the video
>>150368851Post your stuff then.
>>150368851>it's better>aka we're coping about the absolute state of western animation
>nobody wants to watch a Tartakovsky movie about dog sex>But if it's 3fps and the dogs are gay...
>>150368891Yes, he keeps talking about holds and timing/spacing (things you can do regardless of framerate), and then somehow attributing those animation principles to arbitrarily lower framerates, he doesn't understand the absolute basicsHe also presents the argument as a false dichotomy of interpolation vs 8FPS, when you can manually animate digitally in 2D or 3D at any framerate for the same effect without the choppinessHe also didn't bring up Peanuts as the progenitor of the look in western theatrical animation, or Guilty Gear Xrd as the thing that popularized the effect in modern 3D animation
I escaped anime to get away from this shit, take your low fps and shove them up your ass.
>>150369323anime is better animated than this
>>150369323Lol, looks like you will have to become a gamer if you want those sexy high FPS.
>>150368851I guess now’s as good of a time as any to ask this, but for any frame rate I’ve got some questions about FPS, e.g. how did they land on the idea of 24fps (animated on 1’s) as being the basis of “realistic” movement when stuff animated on 2’s (like those Disney paper keyframe tests) still look incredibly smooth too? At what point does something look “choppy” or like a slideshow? Animated on 3’s? Animated on 4’s?
>>150368851It made stylistic sense in The Lego Movie but I haven't heard a convincing argument for why it's a good choice for the Spider-Verse movies
>>150368851What? How does slop ruin animation 4ever? Are animators watching these?
>>150369854It hides all the minor animation errors that would otherwise take years to comb out
>>150369818>how did they land on the idea of 24fps (animated on 1’s) as being the basis of “realistic” movement Because that's the live action movie standard i.e. the lowest they could go to cut corners and keep film cost down without looking choppy>when stuff animated on 2’s (like those Disney paper keyframe tests) still look incredibly smooth too? Twos looks okay for animation for the same reason 24fps looks okay for movies, we all got used to it, and now 60fps live action or smooth interpolated animation looks fake and wrong even though they would've been the standard if not for the associated costs and time requirements >At what point does something look “choppy” or like a slideshow? Animated on 3’s? Animated on 4’s?3s is usually when it starts looking really choppy but it varies, you can have something animated on ones and still look choppy if you design the motion wrong
>>150369922>Twos looks okay for animation for the same reason 24fps looks okay for movies, we all got used to it, and now 60fps live action or smooth interpolated animation looks fake and wrong even though they would've been the standard if not for the associated costs and time requirementssometimes I like to do interpolation tests on this like Disney clips just for fun (always 2x) but I keep coming to the conclusion that there’s just some kind of diminishing returns past 24 frames per second for some reasonif I went from 12 frames per second to 24 frames then I can clearly feel the difference, but 24 to 48 just feels very marginal, like I have to consciously notice
>>150370042Interpolating already finalized animation doesn't produce a faithful recreation of what the animation would look like with that higher framerate if it was designed with it in mind When you interpolate finished footage you're inserting a frame between every existing frame, which messes with the intended timing and spacing and makes the animation feel like sludge, but yeah going higher than 30FPS mostly does not matter for non-interactive media, it's important for games because they need to be responsive but when it comes to passive media we've all just become too used to ~24FPS
>>150369818if we finally get to have an actual thread about animation as a goddamn medium for a change then I wanna ask a question too - how do people actually narrow down frame timings for actions? the industry standard playback of 24 FPS makes things really easy for editing and total frame count, but how do people figure out>yeah I want this action here to have a frame timing of 3 frames, not 2 frames
>>150370315Trial and error, and later experience You do it one way, if it feels wrong you change it until it's right, then you develop an intuiting but still adjust as necessary
>>150370315>hmm... lets see how 19 frames per second works>now lets try 20...>21...>22...>24... that looks nice>25...>yeah, i think 24 will do.
>>150368851>animation discourse is dominated by people who know jack shit about animationHow does someone get more knowledge about animation other than from videos?No really ever talks about books on it
Finally a good thread.>>150369898I'm not familar with how 3D animation works, can you explain why choppy animation instead of smooth animation would hide errors?>>15036981824 drawings is more resonable to draw than 30 or 60 drawings to make up a second of footage. And at 30 or 60 frames there is almost no difference in smoothness drawing wise at least.2s can look choppy if the poses are too far away from each other but usually 2s still look smooth. 3s almost always look choppy unless the poses are very close and its a small action like a subtle slow movement.>>150370315In the beginning I played back the animation to see how it felt and added and removed frames as needed but once I got enough experience I can usually tell based off of writing a timing chart or imagining it in my head how many frames I need. Basically you go off of if it feels right.
