View Full Version : hall

03 March 2008, 12:29 PM

you will need adobe shockwave, should auto install

03 March 2008, 11:01 PM

03 March 2008, 02:42 PM

03 March 2008, 09:04 PM
ground motion

03 March 2008, 04:33 AM
dress plodding along

03 March 2008, 04:57 AM
arch hall

04 April 2008, 05:01 AM
get behind

04 April 2008, 06:35 AM
set 6

04 April 2008, 11:58 PM
a little motion

04 April 2008, 08:02 AM
cloak, its rough (

a little fun with the cloak

04 April 2008, 09:41 AM

04 April 2008, 10:49 AM

04 April 2008, 12:48 PM
woa that hurts my eyes, I think you need to get yourself a much less complicated character and focus on the principles of animation more. You're getting too distracted with the hair and camera and strange environments... sure the hair flops down in secondary motion but the rest of the body moves so unnaturally that it takes away from it completely.

I would recomend posting just one animation and focusing on that.

04 April 2008, 10:43 AM
a little post

04 April 2008, 04:27 PM
I have to agree with Phredrek where I'm not sure what you are try to do. Maybe you should tell everyone what you are trying to accomplish. I also think you might want to start with something alittle easier because it looks like you bit off more then you can chew. Start with the basics then move on to charater stuff. Mostly I just don't know what you are trying to do? Do you have a story? If you do let everyone know so they can comment on it.

04 April 2008, 03:16 AM
your looking for all natural movement but the post are not attempting to be all natural. with where we are with software depending on the animation system your using. that can be achieved by doing pose to pose and letting the animation do the in betweens and just dealing with timing. the majority of my post are not using pose to pose, there meant to be a little odd and there also meant to be quick Im spending 30 minutes to an hour on them

as far story goes dark in nature

04 April 2008, 03:39 AM
Hmmm, tyree I'm not sure you get what the guys are trying to say.
It doesn't matter if your trying to create a natural or fanciful character
animation, what matters is believability.

Your characters look like they are composed of no bone or muscle what
so ever, also no spirit or character.

If your trying to bang out little animations in under an hour, what are you
trying to achieve? Animation cannot be treated like speed chess, there is
little to no point throwing work out that quick.

04 April 2008, 08:59 PM
I disagree speed in regard to doing anything artistic has a value. it may start off rough but it does get better

float 2

float 3

float 4

04 April 2008, 01:03 AM
Yes it is true what you are saying that doing anything artistic has value, it's just that your art ironically looks just like early student demo reels which is why we were trying to give some tips that might help. And if you are going to try to eventually try to find work in the animation industry, this sort of style won't make it possible to find employment.

Well if you are doing something purely artistic and has nothing to do with human movement, then perhaps this forum isn't for you because that is what we are used to comment on.

If you want to learn animation then we can help you.

04 April 2008, 01:31 AM
by all means give your critique, about what you think is flawed I take it all under consideration and what Im doing is simply a process and I sayed speed in relation to whatever your doing artistic has value

04 April 2008, 02:36 AM
Mate, I'm not going to get into a debate over subjective/objective.
I will say this though. If I create a bad painting or sculpture, it is not
art simply because it is artistic, to me true art is something that not
everyone can create with little to no effort. This is true for painting,
sculpture, music, CGI, cooking, you get the picture.

To quote Richard Williams, animation differs from most forms of art because
it is not subjective, if an animation looks wrong it's wrong. That's not to say
different styles of animation are either right or wrong, rather to say that the
foundations of animation are the same.

The process of creating animation was nailed down in the 1940's and remains the
same today, so don't waste your time trying to re-invent the wheel. Use the proven
methods to realize your vision.

Please, please, please, do yourself a favour and buy "The Animators Survival Kit" by
Richard Williams, the best book to learn from.

04 April 2008, 01:23 PM
I fully agree with Lewis.

instead of trying to do something quick in an hour, spend some time on 1 bit, doesn't have to be longer than a couple seconds, but something where the character is actually doing something and not convulsing in some abstract manner. Pick one thing and we'll help you.

whatever you decide to do, you NEED reference. every animator does.

04 April 2008, 11:04 PM
I have that book I have had it for years, I know it up and down. Im fully aware that even though its being done a computer were still flipping pages and the rules of 2d drawings apply. like I said this is a process it may look crude and ugly but it serves a purpose. I hear you phredrek on reference material

04 April 2008, 12:57 AM
It's not that "were still flipping pages and the rules of 2d drawings apply", it's
that the principles of 2D animation apply to 3D.

Squash & Stretch, Timing & Motion, Anticipation, Staging, Follow Through & Overlap,
Ease in Ease out, Exaggeration, Secondary Action, etc. These are the foundations
that good animation are built on. None of the work you have shown displays any of
these principles, so if you know the book inside out it's hard to see that in the examples
you have shown us.

Were all here to help and learn as Phredrek said, just maybe explain what it is your trying
to achieve and we can all figure it out together :)

05 May 2008, 12:00 PM
dive back

why is it necessay for me to show it, is it not a choice of whether or not I want to show something. I went to an animation school that was supposed to teaching computer animation but it had been a traditional media type of school. so when it started teaching computer animation it was done from the point of view of traditional media, meaning they taught fondation and fundamentals it was up to you to use it as it relates to the computer. figure drawing, painting by hand, animating was done on paper, page flipping, art history, design, perspective, color theory, it goes on and on. but you wont see any of those in my post either unless I feel some need to do it.

but I do appreciate the offer for help and Im sure Ill be taking you up on it

05 May 2008, 02:52 PM
I still don't really understand why you are posting here if you feel that strongly about doint your own artistic thing and you say " why is it necessay for me to show it, is it not a choice of whether or not I want to show something." Are you refering to animation principles?

I dunno, it seems like you don't want our help but heres a couple tips on your "dive back":

-needs more secondary when she's bending forward at the beginning, hip then spine then head. Then again when she bends backwards so that her head is the last thing that rotates back to get some nice overlapping.
- Hands pop and don't seem to have any real direction, like they're just keyed without real thought about how they should be placed for balance.
- Last part when she bends back down, I don't know why she does this, but if she's going to do that, you'll have to unfreeze the rest of her body, especially her hips, have them rotate in the opposite way to show balance.

Get some reference of someone doing a dive or something. check out the bbc motion gallery, they might have some good stuff up there.

but you're doing this specific art thing so I dunno if any of those comments help or whatever you are looking for.

05 May 2008, 12:23 PM

05 May 2008, 04:43 AM
look up

hit wall

05 May 2008, 07:12 PM
get up

up 2

05 May 2008, 05:19 AM

05 May 2008, 08:15 AM
dust test

05 May 2008, 05:27 PM
Hi, tyree!!

I saw that you was have a lot of work here!!
Can you post some stills showing the bone extructure!!
I guess it important to do some help for you!!
Keep it up!!


05 May 2008, 07:50 AM
I tend to not look at it as a lot, I build em pretty quickly, I really do believe you should be able to think it and do it. as easily as you would if you were just drawing it. I spend my time working on the fastest technique so I dont have to spend a lot of time doing whatever it is

Im already on that kerry character she looks good

Ill post something showing the skeleton

snake like

06 June 2008, 04:52 PM
for fun

looks like a typical polygon build but her body was built from a patch. if you look at the lines on the mesh a lot of them have curves in them. thats a benifit of using a patch

06 June 2008, 05:57 AM
test that will use more rope

06 June 2008, 05:24 AM
a little fun with a signature

06 June 2008, 04:14 PM
I tend to not look at it as a lot, I build em pretty quickly, I really do believe you should be able to think it and do it. as easily as you would if you were just drawing it. I spend my time working on the fastest technique so I dont have to spend a lot of time doing whatever it is
doing things quickly is fine, but you generally want them to look good, not only in your eyes, but to other people.

anyways, with that out of the way, I have a basic character model that i use to practice animations, and with each animation i make, i do editions to the model to fix skinning and stuff. looks like you just do different animations w/o actually changing stuff (with the exception of the hair).

with this animation, she pauses a bit, it's not very fluid

this animation is jerky towards the end, you can space out the frames to make it so it's a bit less jerky

with this one her lower legs clip into the thighs, and her knees and kneepits look like they're part of a ragdoll with those part of her stitched together, they pinch immensely and you need to work on the skinning of that part.

if you were doing any tests with the longer front hair, it looks like as she's getting up it has some hardcore gel in it then towards the end they loosen up. consistency ftw so try to either keep them stiff or make it look natural and make it more hairlike through the entire animation

06 June 2008, 05:11 AM
with get up I wanted the legs to look like a ragdoll from the waist down

I'll go back and look at the skinning

the jerk in diveback comes from the export to shockwave. its not in the actual animation I noticed it but I didnt go back and make a correction to remove it

with the long hair I noticed that the hair should be falling in front of her face but I didnt want to spend anymore time on it. I was working under my get it done in an hour routine. I may go back and change it to see how much of a difference it makes

I have other characters and models in general So I dont really change her but I will throw various clothing on her and animate that

06 June 2008, 08:24 PM
swim like

06 June 2008, 12:14 AM
swim like
looks more like she's flying more than swimming, there's hardly any swimming motion in her legs try making her kick more often, and there needs to be more spine and neck movement

06 June 2008, 09:45 AM
I was going for less swim and more glide but I get what your saying

cloth attempt

06 June 2008, 12:52 AM
Cloth has interpenetration issues all over the place.
It also does not appear to be moving like any type
of cloth, increase segments and subframe timestep.
Also play around with properties.

Which 3D app are your using?

07 July 2008, 08:42 PM
that was bones not actual cloth which is why I called it an attempt I can get much better version of it though

typical motion

07 July 2008, 01:56 AM
Cool mate. Though bones would be better used on say the coat tails
of a long jacket, where you might want it to behave a little like cloth
without the setup and simulation time.

The one in your animation is pretty basic so using a cloth simulation
would end up being pretty quick, as opposed to using bones to get
a half decent result.


07 July 2008, 07:55 AM
with statue

I already know I can get a better result because of how often I use that approach that was like one attempt and Ill come back to it later. actually doesnt take long to set up which why go with it. if you havent tried it, try using skin wrap on bones that are being deformed by actual cloth

07 July 2008, 10:17 AM
I've looked at some of these, and there is little change from the first to the last, animations

Iím going to second an earlier suggestion. Pick a situation and play with it for a bit longer than an hour.

Sometimes I suggest that people start bad results over to get more experience with a particular technique. Thatís how I learned most of my techniques, and itís a quick way to get much need experience. Plus some problems are harder to fix after they appear then they are to avoid. So instead of continually adding new scenes and content to your gallery. consider playing with one scene and remaking it several times. This way you can get down several core techniques to push your animation to a higher level. The goal doesn't have to be realism but if you are going to stylize things it needs to be in a consistent manner. Where you appear to own every aspect of the image. The current work is really hard to approach as its too choppy and un-finished. If this is some sort of a compression error. considers providing downloadable movies instead of using shockwave, so we can at least suggest how to improve your animations. If youíre looking for some direction to start you off I notice considerable skinning errors in all of the animations, and you should spend some time thinking about what the stuff which isnít in primary action( Like fingers) is doing. Also the lighting conditions could use a lot of tweaking. And I would suggest you stop using dynamics right now. It would be better to spend the time keying secondary motions then it would be setting up simulations, and with some time you would most likely get better results.

07 July 2008, 10:55 AM
Don, as you can see from my previous posts in this thread, I have
all but given up trying to talk to him about this. So have a couple
other people. I'm not sure how old tyree is, but all we wanted to do
was help him improve his work.

The character model needs a fair amount of work, edgeflow and
proportions are in need of work, and as said before, the skinning
needs to be fixed as well. If the environment was better lit it would
make checking out the animations much easier.

If you don't want C & C on your work, why are you posting in the
WIP section. WIP means just that. That you show us a piece and
we all give our two cents as to how it's going, then you go back
over it, and so do we until it's sorted. You don't go back over any
of your work, so I'm still at a loss as to what you are doing posting
in this section.

Sorry to seem harsh it's just confusing trying to help you.


07 July 2008, 04:36 AM
they pretty much are all over thats true without following any one style I didnt bother animating the hands thats also true. shockwave doesnt usually give errors in the animation playback. thats a one time thing. Im not attempting to get complete realism but I will add realistic aspects to the animation. Im also aware that I should be posting longer animations

lewis your also right I havent made changes to the previous animations as for as corrections go

07 July 2008, 05:08 PM
ok, I just watched dusk again for this for the sake of time.
Nearly every joint is folding wrong, you need to go back to the rig, and test extremes while adjusting envelopes. have one key frame on 1 which is the rig pose, and then go to the next frame and put the body into extremes(using animation keys). you can have several extreme poses if you want so you can see how different motions effect the skin. if you need an example of how they should move just use yourself. if adjusting the envelopes and painting weights isn't working consider adding geometry to areas to get the creases right, but I don't think you should have to-do that.
When in regards to the motion only pieces of here are animating. For instance in dusk you have the hands moving but not the elbows (are you using IK?). The feet and legs aren't too bad but the hip and the chest have none or to little rotational movements. And then the hair is moving a ton which is acting like a highlighter to how stiff she is. I was just suggestion you go back into the setup for these scenes spend some time working on the skin. Then go through a scene and spend maybe a week getting that action down. You don't like to go back and change things, thatís great. Start the scene over every day until you understand the exact motion you need to achieve, look at video of people doing similar things.

ok here is a good rigging guide that has a pretty detailed explanation of skinning and also check out the general techniques animation section it has a lot information floating around. And some usefull stickys

good luck.

07 July 2008, 09:54 PM
I think this has already been said, but animation is not about realism, it's about believability.

There's a kind of spectrum in animation where realism is at one end and stylized (for want of a better word) is at the other. Regardless of where you want your work to be on this spectrum, animation is an art where THE UNIVERSE needs it to be believable for it to work.

I think you have been offered a lot of great advice on improving your animation in this way, but you seem reluctant to listen. And I think the "but it's art" defense here is a mistake.

I think you have an interesting project (and process) but you may be posting in the wrong place...

07 July 2008, 02:04 AM
devi did you mean dust. here is an Idea for both of you devi and lewis if your up to it. how about I email the both of of you the character and you can make whatever adjustments to her that you like and make her how you believe she should be. and we can put all three versions of the characte in the same scene and look at the differences between them

devi in dust I stopped nearly all the motion of the pelvis and the chest. that was intentional
there is no Ik on the arms there free moving. but I can also control the different parts of the arm with a slider. and come up with some odd movements. thats one where I animated the hands as you stated. and I belleve there is some bend in the arm during the swing just not a lot

its not really reluctance Im hearing what they are saying I just have yet to go back and make changes

tree with leaves

07 July 2008, 04:23 AM
Hey Tyree,

As far as adjustments go, are you talking about the
character model? Or the rigging and skinning?

Rigging is either working or not working, so I don't
think it would benefit you for me or Don to re-rig her.
The model is in need of adjustment, but also the style
and proportions are up for debate. I would be happy
to have a look at the model and tweak some of the
more obvious areas for you.

I mostly work in 3ds Max, so if you can export from your
app to a format I can use that does not corrupt the model
that would be cool. Also using Maya and Houdini.

What 3D app are you using?


07 July 2008, 09:20 AM
wow Lewis thatís very kind of you.

I think you will really benefit from that tutorial I recommended, and there are allot of other helpful tutorials which can be found in the animation section. if youíre so attached to this character perhaps you should try to do things properly on a different character so you can return to this work more informed.
I will certainly be willing to critique any of your future work. I know Iíve always benefited from a second set of eyes. Of course I will always be willing to offer you advice on the technical use of 3d studio max, or general animation techniques. And youíre welcome to pm me any specific question you have in regards to those topics. Unfortunately with sig graph around the corner I do not have time to work on anything by my own demo reel. Thereís allot of good animators out there to compete with and my own work still has along ways to go. Best of luck.

07 July 2008, 08:16 PM
There is something I don't really understand.
Why do you post in a WIP forum and ask for comments, when you totally refuse to listen?
Everytime people makes a comment on something they think need more work or doesn't really work, you reply with: "Yeah, that's intentional"

You don't seem to take critism very well, and sadly the result is, that you don't progress very much. And because you only work on them for an hour or so, and regardless of comments think they work well, you don't really improve on the next shot you make (which I suppose is the meaning with all this).

Don't get me wrong. I think it's great you animate as much as you do. If you don't spend a lot of time animating, you'll never learn it, so that's cool, but I would really recommend that you try and work on one shot till it works well, try look a little bit beyond the "art excuse", and try make it realistic and believable.

It's the same thing we see all the time with people learn how to model faces. You undoubtly fail the first 10/15 times you try to create a realistic human head, but it's the best way of learning it. If you can create a realistic human head, you will have no trouble creating an orc, a tooney character or whatever you wan't.
The same goes for this. If you learn how to animate a character with a certain amount of realism and believability, you can easyly apply any type of "stylization" you wan't.

Cheers :)

07 July 2008, 12:25 AM

lewis Im a max user myself I'll try and get that to you. doffer I hear you. get one looking as good as possible before moving on to the next which is also what devi said

07 July 2008, 10:36 AM
Cool Tyree.

My e is ((( tinyhawkus at hotmail dot com ))).
Make sure you choose to archive your scene for me. Don't
email me a .max file, archive is the best way to keep it intact
and not corrupt :)


07 July 2008, 06:12 AM
hit the ground

Its been emailed

08 August 2008, 05:54 AM
Hey Tyree,

I've looked at the model, and mate it's too much work.
I wouldn't use an editable patch to model a character,
it's very hard to sculpt out and rigging/skinning would
be a nightmare.

You have the symmetry modifier on, but it's gizmo isn't
adjusted for the fact that your characters torso center line
isn't at the origin. This is producing a mirrored model that is
not correct.

I would model using editable poly and use a turbosmooth modifier
for your sub-d side of things. Place your skin modifier above editable
poly, but below turbosmooth and skin away :)


08 August 2008, 04:58 AM
since I kept hearing change the model I added some small changes gave her some little breast and rounded the shoulder

this isnt a scene just looking at the changes

her upper body wasnt defined because she meant to be template for easily making changes

its easy to model with a patch, the controls are a little different but not much I find it easier to add detail with a patch. if dealing with a patch doesnt interest you. it would be difficult to edit her. the center line is right its just that the patches that make up the center line are curved

08 August 2008, 07:12 AM
Hey Tyree,

It's not that modeling with editable patch doesn't interest me,
it's that I prefer to model characters using the sub-d approach.
You wont find too many people modeling characters with editable
patch or nurbs in Max, that's just a fact. I really think you should
consider modeling using the method I mentioned above. There are
plenty of tutorials covering it, so have a look.

Your model is not on the centerline, check the image below. Your are
not getting a true mirror, and that's why the middle of the models
chest is all messed up.

The following image shows how your edgeflow is messed up, thus
causing those terrible creases in the model.

Here is a female model I did this morning, just rough in a couple
of hours. I'm using the editable poly with a turbosmooth method
as mentioned above. See how in just a short time, you can get
something looking okay, with good edgeflow and no creases.


08 August 2008, 10:30 PM
thats not an accident I wanted it to look like that, I already know how to model with polygons. Ive been using max for a long time. I prefer both patches and nurbs, suits me better. Im fully aware of the preferance among max users. you can box model or edge model a body out of patch just as fast.

2d or 3d, you tell me

08 August 2008, 11:05 PM
Poor topology is intentional?

Now I'm really confused...

2D or 3D? Strictly speaking everything you've posted is "2D", but that's a different story. The image on the right looks like your character lit with a single bright light, or it's using some kind of cell shader. It's not a very strong silhouette and isn't easy to read or appealing, but I'm going to assume that's intentional. Whether it's real-time 3D or a rendered image doesn't seem relevant.

Are you asking what we prefer? Or are you trying to trick us into thinking it's one or the other?

Can you explain what your project IS? What's your brief? What are you trying to achieve?

08 August 2008, 06:16 AM

You do realize that you can have a highly stylized
character, and still have good topology don't you?

It's your messy topology that makes rigging and skinning
very difficult. Your characters deformations are also being
messed up by the bad topology.

If you know how to model with nurbs, patches, polys, then
you would know how important topology is.

I wasn't being Max specific about poly/sub-d compared to
patch and nurbs. You will find most people model using sub-d
because it simply works!

If you want your character to look like that, that's cool. But as
I said above, you can still achieve this with good edgeflow/topology.
The added benefit of maintaining good flow is that deformation of
the skin will be more predictable during animation.


08 August 2008, 12:42 AM
martin I wanted to know what it looked like it from someone elses view. your damn near on the money its a paint map. its taking its color from the background color how it looks depends partially on the background behind it. its another take on getting a 2d look for a 3d character. if I put a sketch or painting behind it. it could blend in perfectly

lewis its been pretty obvious for years that polygon modeling is the most used regardless of the program. that was never in question. thats true about edge flow but Im at the point where experimentation is more important than edgeflow. Im not saying I completely disregard edge flow I dont and having a edge with a curve in it doesnt automatically make it problematic.

take the image you posted with the curve at the soulder. that wasnt causing a problem during animation. but I did take the collarbone and stretched it out to the shoulder in the skin modlfier. why, just wanted to see what it would look like to have the collarbone driving the shoulder animation. the topology really isnt messy your thinking about it like its a polygon it starts out as a patch and gets converted to poly and the polygons are evenly distributed

08 August 2008, 01:55 AM

Topology is messy! That's obvious from the clearly visable
shadows/creases in the rendered image. It looks like
the character is made out of cardboard, and as the arms,
legs, etc bend, the body creases, thus making it look like
a woman made of cardboard.

This is the point I'm trying to make, your characters skin does
not behave in a believable way. Note, I said "believeable", not
realistic, not trying to argue mate :)

It's just really hard to get a feel for where your coming from.
At the moment your model looks like the work of a beginer/intermediate
artist, and as people progress, their topology and edgeflow gets better.
We haven't seen any models of your's that have good flow, so it's very
hard to see that if you have reached a decent level of modeling, why you
would want to regress.



08 August 2008, 05:19 AM
cardboard female thats an interesting take Ive never seen a model and thought that looked like cardboard. I'll have to do something about that

2d 3d side

08 August 2008, 06:16 AM
Tyree, you're confusing me with this thread.

In order for you to get feedback (if that's indeed what you want) you need to explain to me what it is you are doing. So far all you've showed me are a series of poorly animated scenes with a less than impressive character rig.

I don't get it.

08 August 2008, 06:18 AM
Ha ha,

Yeah cardboard would be interesting :)
I was just using it to roughly describe the creases, oh well.

There is an advert in Australia for a photo copy paper company,
and the ad features a city made out of rough paper. People, cars,
etc, and the hero is all smooth paper dude. Really well done CG ad,
I will have a look on youtube for it.


08 August 2008, 05:33 PM
line work

I know one of them doesnt look like cardboard

08 August 2008, 10:01 PM
Are these all for some big project your working on? Im not quite sure I follow what your trying to achieve. Are these tests for some sort of web based 3d game? It would be nice to get some backstory on what your working on and what your trying to achieve. It would make giving feedback much easier

08 August 2008, 08:53 AM
thats the direction Im going in something interactive. but also something that you just look at. shockwave isnt the only format but its so easy to throw something in this format and test it out.

just checking to to see how the character and environment blend

tree line

08 August 2008, 09:41 AM
I really shouldnt write this but cant help myself, this thread is like talking to a wall. nothing you guys say will make it better, there are so much people here on cgtalk that actually hears you crtis and try to make things better when getting feedback so this thread is almost an insult to them.

Stop wasting time on this thread and just help other people instead, who actually listen...

08 August 2008, 10:59 AM


CGTalk Moderation
08 August 2008, 10:59 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.