|
|
What's your preference - traditional or mocap?
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
What's your preference - traditional or mocap? // Roundtable
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 2:38pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
Ok, as the title implies, this is with regards to the often-brought-up "traditional vs. mocap" debate. Of course this is akin to bringing up "PC vs Mac" or something like that but I'm prepared to wade through any harsh comments to see what the outcome is.
What sparked it is lately I'm getting the feeling that there are only a few of us trueSpace users that prefer traditional/hand-keyed character animation while the majority likes mocap. Is this so? I know what the consensus is in the industry, but what about within the trueSpace community at the hobbyist level?
This poll is specific to film/short film/video type animations and not games.
Also, I considered adding a third option for "BOTH traditional and mocap" but decided to leave it with only the two options. Just select whichever you use the most.
Thanks, guys! I'm interested in seeing the outcome. |
Post by Alien // Mar 8, 2006, 2:47pm
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
I haven't really done any animating yet. Not seriously, anyway. I've dabbled, & fiddled about with it on occasion, but I feel I should get my modelling skills closer to a level that I'm happy with before I start with animation. Having said that, to address your question, I'd have to say traditional. If you were trying to mix some animation with some pre-existing footage, then I could see the benefit of using mocap, but otherwise I agree with this quote from Chuck Jones, "Animation means to invoke life, not to imitate it". |
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 3:00pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
Alien: ... Chuck Jones, "Animation means to invoke life, not to imitate it".
Thanks, Alien! That's along the lines I think as well. ...and I believe that's why Final Fantasy wasn't liked very much - it seemed to be a showcase of new 3D technology, lacking good story, exaggerated movement (the mocap'd action was too rigid), and character emotion (they looked lifeless - same as with Polar Express). |
Post by davidjohnson // Mar 8, 2006, 3:04pm
|
davidjohnson
Total Posts: 169
|
I don't know Frank. I find that tradition works best with 2D animation. Nothing can top it, but as far as 3d animation - I have to go with Mo-cap. I look at movies like King Kong, LOTR - watch some of the characters that are not mo-cap, they don't have weight to them, then look at KK and Golem and see the difference. Anyways, that is just MHO.
DAvid |
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 3:10pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
davidjohnson: I don't know Frank. I find that tradition works best with 2D animation. Nothing can top it, but as far as 3d animation - I have to go with Mo-cap. I look at movies like King Kong, LOTR - watch some of the characters that are not mo-cap, they don't have weight to them, then look at KK and Golem and see the difference. Anyways, that is just MHO.
Excellent, David! This brings up something interesting. Although I haven't seen King Kong, I know Andy Serkis played the part, just as he did Gollum in LOTR. :)
So a good actor goes a long way with mocap. |
Post by noko // Mar 8, 2006, 3:19pm
|
noko
Total Posts: 684
|
Actually I think both are tools of the trade and if one is absent you have less of a package overall. Which is better is probably dependent more on what is needed and time lines to accomplish. I don't think this is a either or proposition, both are very useful. So I can't vote either way, I WANT BOTH :D. |
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 3:32pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
noko: So I can't vote either way, I WANT BOTH
:) Sorry, Noko! Well, you can vote on which you use/would use the most in your work. |
Post by Steinie // Mar 8, 2006, 3:39pm
|
Steinie
Total Posts: 3667
|
Alot of King Kong WAS Mocap. It's just a modern way to rotoscope (Snow White) using computers. Alot faster, cheaper and some say better. They had sensors all over Andy's body to capture movement and facial expressions. Sometimes it works like Kong but sometimes it looks fake (parts of LODR). I would hate to see the Road Runner using Mocap...wouldn't be the same. |
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 4:02pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
I believe for Gollum's facial expressions, keyframe animation was used. The result was very realistic.
steinie: I would hate to see the Road Runner using Mocap...wouldn't be the same.
That's for sure. I was thinking earlier about how some characters just can't be mocap animated. Another example is the comic-relief squirrel on Ice Age. His movements are so snappy and stylized, hand-keying is the only way to go in cases like that. |
Post by Délé // Mar 8, 2006, 4:16pm
|
Délé
Total Posts: 1374
|
I can't say that I've done a lot in the animation department either but I think most of the time I'd prefer traditional keframing as well. There's just something about having complete control over timing and movement that appeals to me. I'm sure there will be situations where I'll use Mocap too though. |
Post by frank // Mar 8, 2006, 4:30pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
Délé: There's just something about having complete control over timing and movement that appeals to me.
I have to agree! Not to mention the feeling of accomplishment you have after the character is animated. :) |
Post by TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb // Mar 8, 2006, 5:52pm
|
TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb
Total Posts: 858
|
I've only dabbled so far with animation in trueSpace to get to grips with it but I'd have to say that traditional is certainly my preference. As most of my characters/objects are figments of my imagination mocap doesn't exist for them anyway!
I'm slightly biased as I've been taught the basics of Motion Studio and animating in TS from Mr Frank (a real cool teacher! :) ) but I do think there's a greater sense of achievement from 'doing it yourself' as opposed to just plopping in somebody elses work. |
Post by frank // Mar 9, 2006, 3:31am
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb: I'm slightly biased as I've been taught the basics of Motion Studio and animating in TS from Mr Frank (a real cool teacher! ) but I do think there's a greater sense of achievement from 'doing it yourself' as opposed to just plopping in somebody elses work.
I wouldn't consider myself a real cool teacher, but I certainly appreciate you saying that! :) I'm happy to help folks if I can!
Totally agree about the sense of achievement from doing it yourself!
TheWickedWitchOfTheWeb: As most of my characters/objects are figments of my imagination mocap doesn't exist for them anyway!
This is true. You would be hard-pressed to find a mocap library for your bird characters, as an example. |
Post by mrbones // Mar 9, 2006, 5:30am
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
I voted for Mocap.
Cheers |
Post by frank // Mar 9, 2006, 5:43am
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
mrbones: I voted for Mocap.
I noticed. :)
Well, I have to say that I'm surprised by the results so far. I was thinking favor would be toward mocap but it looks like traditional keyframing may be the method of choice for the trueSpace community. Of course, voting's not over yet. |
Post by mrbones // Mar 9, 2006, 7:06am
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
Cmon Folks,
Vote one for the UnderDog!
Vote Motion Capture!
Cheers |
Post by GraySho // Mar 9, 2006, 8:31am
|
GraySho
Total Posts: 695
|
Preference: I would say keyframe animation, though I can't really say I'm anywhere near an animator.
What works better depends on the type of animation I guess. If you are doing caricature, then traditional keyframe animation is surley the way to go. Motion capture would look to flat and boring.
If cg-charakters are seen together with live actors, then motion capture is a big time saver for sure. Though I think every mocap needs a lot of adjustment and refining to look realistic. |
Post by Rhino169 // Mar 9, 2006, 9:33am
|
Rhino169
Total Posts: 14
|
MOOOCAP.....MOOOCAP......MOOOCAP!!!!:banana: |
Post by Alien // Mar 9, 2006, 10:31am
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
MOOOCAP.....MOOOCAP......MOOOCAP!!!!:banana:
Very useful for bovine animations. :) |
Post by frank // Mar 9, 2006, 10:50am
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhino169
MOOOCAP.....MOOOCAP......MOOOCAP!!!!
Alien: Very useful for bovine animations.
HA HA HAAAAA!
mrbones: Cmon Folks,
Vote one for the UnderDog!
Vote Motion Capture!
Cheers
Underdog? I thought you said mocap was the TOP-dawg, Mr. Bones! :) That's one reason I started this poll - curious to know.
:) |
Post by foleypro // Mar 9, 2006, 7:53pm
|
foleypro
Total Posts: 46
|
Mocap all the way baby.:p |
Post by rj0 // Mar 9, 2006, 8:11pm
|
rj0
Total Posts: 167
|
Due to my limited animating experience, I am going more on what I've read, so I voted for traditional. I really would like to hear about some recent experiences with MoCap, but my current understanding is that although industry went pretty crazy over MoCap when it first came out, that they found that noise cleaning and tweaking ate up much of its advantages over traditional, and when the boss came in and asked for animation changes, there wasn't much of a contest. So last I heard, industry was back to predominantly using traditional animation, with a more limited application of MoCap (but my info is a bit old, so maybe things have changed).
rj |
Post by Naes3d // Mar 9, 2006, 8:17pm
|
Naes3d
Total Posts: 0
|
One of the biggest problems I see in many industries is that the medium is under utilized. I like it when people create new realities.
I say traditional. At least tweak the mocaps. |
Post by rj0 // Mar 9, 2006, 8:49pm
|
rj0
Total Posts: 167
|
My (very limited, mind you) understanding is that MoCap is somewhat similar to having every frame be a keyframe. When it's exactly what you want (and it doesn't need too much noise cleaning), it is a thing of beauty, and you're set. When it's not quite what you want, I understand that it's a bit like having a polygon mesh with too much detail. It's sometimes easier to start over (which is OK if you catch it early, with the actors and equipment still available), than it is to try to ply it into what you (or the boss) want. But, then again, with new tools and updated techniques, ...
rj |
Post by jamesmc // Mar 9, 2006, 11:02pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
I'm sort of a lazy guy, but enjoyed keyframing 2D animation figures when I did it. With that said, it was a royal pain to do such in 2D because one has to change the configuration on each and every frame!
With 3D Models, there is no need to change the geometry, but there is still a need to change the way the model is depicted in each keyframe. This can be done by hand massaging each frame or using a library of motion. Don't think it makes to much difference what the source is, other than cost, time and whatever.
Now for the geeky talk.
http://amath.colorado.edu/outreach/demos/hshi/2005Sum/walk.pdf
A short interesting article on the mathematics of walking.
Not sure if anyone read my mysterious comment on GPS and that Caligari should investigate it. This is what I meant.
GPS uses a positioning system and with modern computers it is now available to have almost instant positioning in real time.
One has to have a known map and pre-mapped coordinates. This is done in the real world. It's why a bomb can fly unassisted once it is program to find a target. Pretty accurate as well.
With that said, the missle's method of movement is usually done in an arc and the propulsion is the ability to move in the air by thrusting.
What if...
-In a 3D world we can accurately map every coordinate... We can.
-In a 3D world we know the mechanism of motion. We know that, bones, friction elements, etc.
Now, let's tie in GPS. What if some clever fellow tied in GPS to a 3D world. Like calculating the factors of a human, dog, chicken, frog, bird and any other mammal, reptile, flyee thing to do this
Have GPS math elements in each appendage, feet, arms, legs, head, body, hips, your general joint connections.
Then by knowing the GPS math elements one could apply a path. I think 3D does that pretty well with paths.
So, the CPU calculates the type of model being used, let's say human, interprets the path, in a known world and then calcuates that this human model has all the appendages present and the ability to walk.
The range of motion of legs, arms, hips, etc. is already known, so this would be plugged in as part of the formula.
So, we have range of motion, path, appendages, position, GPS math element updaters and away we go!!!
Easy huh! :)
Not really, but it's my thought on how animation should be done.
I mean gosh we have computers, make them work for us! :):)
The Geeky part of coding I would have to leave to someone else as I break out in a cold sweat when I get too geeky. Sweating a little bit right now!!!
If someone does do all of this they can name it after my nick, Mac and use the acronym Motion Action Conversion (M.A.C.)
hahaha, like it would happen or would it. :) |
Post by mrbones // Mar 11, 2006, 9:39am
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
1 out of 4 thats 25% so far...
So, how many people out of the 75% that prefer traditional animation making have ever used or tried motion capture in TrueSpace?
(This poll is for just TrueSpace users right?)
And how many might change their mind once they try it and utilize it effectively?
Any guestimates?
Mocap seems to be the chosen alternative to handkeyed animation. |
Post by frank // Mar 11, 2006, 11:27am
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
mrbones: (This poll is for just TrueSpace users right?)
Correct. I wanted to get an idea of the animation method the trueSpace community preferred. As mentioned before, I thought mocap would win but I am pleasantly surprised.
I feel that if users of an industry-standard package like Maya were polled, traditional/hand-keyed character animation would win by a large percentage. Just my thought/opinion.
mrbones: Mocap seems to be the chosen alternative to handkeyed animation.
I think those are about the only two choices. Well, there's data-driven / procedural animation which uses physics algorithms and stuff, but I personally rank that in the "automated animation" category with mocap. |
Post by mrbones // Mar 11, 2006, 11:37am
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
Data Driven or Mocap is definatly not automated animation, and should not be defined or ranked as such.
If theres only 2 choices then Mocap ranks higher than you think, because once people try it they are more likely to adopt it. I dont think many TrueSpace users have tryed Mocap. So how can they make a fair or unbiased descision to vote, without some tactile reference to the experience.? Thats why I dont give much creedence to such polls. Thanks for running it though, It has caused much interest in my website lately.
In addition the line between traditional and mocap animation is becoming blurred quite quickly. I would expect to see hybrid animation solutions appearing soon.
Cheers
I think those are about the only two choices. Well, there's data-driven / procedural animation which uses physics algorithms and stuff, but I personally rank that in the "automated animation" category with mocap. |
Post by frank // Mar 11, 2006, 12:27pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
mrbones: I dont think many TrueSpace users have tryed Mocap. So how can they make a fair or unbiased descision to vote, without some tactile reference to the experience.?
As you may have read, some users haven't tried a lot of hand-keyed animation either, BUT they are familiar with how mocap is often regarded when it comes to character animation.
MoCap PROS:
Looks like real-life motion (may be good for games but not so good for character animation)
Gets the job done quicker (usually)
MoCap CONS:
Looks like real-life motion (if you're going for EXPRESSIVE / EXAGGERATED animation then that's a drawback in this case)
Mocap animation is only as good as the actor (not everybody has Andy Serkis at their disposal)
May require adjusting several keyframes to get it right
Limited by what's available in your library (ie. If your character is a standard biped, you can have him dance, do karate kicks, the whole nine yards.....but forget animating a dancing spider with mocap)
Limited by the mocap'd movement itself (ie. Want your character to run 15 yards, leap a few feet, and land at a specific point? Better hope you have it in your library - otherwise you'll have to change your props and environment to work around the recorded motion.)
"Foot-slide" - Sometimes looks like the character's feet are skating around
Potential jitter
Many of the top character animators didn't regard rotoscoping very highly, and this is basically the same as mocap (actually, it takes more work to rotoscope, but it's still the same - limiting your character to the moves of an actor) |
Post by frank // Mar 11, 2006, 12:42pm
|
frank
Total Posts: 709
|
Here's a neat documentary about a mocap artist:
http://www.ryantown.com/manbehindthemotion/ |
|
