The time limit and deadline for this rotation being just 2 weeks meant my animation became quite rushed. This is very noticeable when you compare the first half of my animation to the second half which has less frames and seems more disjointed. The easing is also less considered, and the pacing seems off.
I struggled to make things look consistent throughout the animation – e.g. the size of the feet, the spikes of my characters legs, the size and the weight of the character’s head and how this varied pose to pose, the width of the legs and the length of the arms.
I would have liked to develop the sound more, so it looks like my character responds to the sound
I would have liked to work om the backgrounds more – so to make the setting and atmosphere clearer (I intended to depict the woodland as a scary one).
I initially planned to make my character squash down into their compressed form, so I wanted to create a climax to this movement (the character hears a scary sound which creates a need for them to hide in their smaller camouflaged form). Unfortunately, the character turning took too much time and I was unable to make my character do what I had intended in my motion plan.
Another thing I would have liked to do if I had more time is colour in the hair and body of my character in black. Unfortunately I didn’t end up having time for this.
What I have taken away from this project:
In my next animation project, I think the character design really needs to be manageable in terms of animation. I also need to consider some of the following:
Does it need to have clear outlines?
Could it be more abstract and simpler in style?
How could I make the movement more fluid – I could use squash and stretch next time?
The importance of frames – try not to cut them out to save time as this can make an animation choppy in places
Pauses – where can these be placed to be effective to the story/message being communicated?
Animation is framed differently – next time how can I consider how different scenes are framed – how does this work to keep my viewers interested?
Consider the time limit for a project – what is manageable? What ideas are too ambitious?
How can I be more expressive with my character?
Feedback:
There could have been arcs for things like the antenna of my character to make my imbetweens smoother
The weight of my character’s feet seemed to slip in places when they turned
The first half of the animation is smoother than the second – this could have been improved with more time and the use of more arcs
The background and style of the character works well together
The scene looks like it could have been a part of a bigger project.
Our first task of this rotation involved cutting up paper into a variety of shapes and using the app ‘Stop Motion Studio’ to make a short movie (exploring how shapes could turn into different ones). I feel I could have made my outcome more complex by cutting out more organic shapes rather than just geometric ones. When watching my peers’ outcomes, one I particularly liked utilised the principle of squash and stretch. If I were to redo this task, I think I would try to do something similar.
The second task we completed in this session was to create different faces using cardboard. I found this enjoyable as we had to be quite experimental ( we couldn’t sketch out any facial features beforehand). The image to the right shows my three outcomes, I explored ripping the cardboard to reveal its inner texture, adding sections of cardboard and cutting holes/shapes through the cardboard. I would have liked to try crafting an entirely 3D face from cardboard if I had more time.
After the second task I tried transitioning one of my cardboard face outcomes into one of my peer’s outcomes. I found this reasonably challenging as due to the different nature of crafting it was difficult to make the transition look smooth. For example, in my cardboard face I had applied my eyebrows (added more cardboard), whereas my peer had cut out their eyebrows.
The final ‘Cardboard faces transformation’ is a stop motion movie where I created frames using different cardboard faces made within my group. I felt this looked quite choppy due to the different shapes, sizes and styles of the faces.
In the second lesson of my rotation, we did puppet making in small groups of four. We were tasked with making a puppet between 30cm-50cm out of the materials available, this included cardboard, string, tape and wire.
Initially as a group we struggled to produce concept ideas for the puppet. This led to us all working separately on different parts of the puppet and then combining them together. I think the final outcome could have been more creative if we were given more materials to use and if we had properly planned out the puppet.
I think it also turned out quite humanoid (except the face) which was less interesting than some of the other groups who challenged the idea of what the body of their character could appear as; one group had a fish tail for their character that was cut into segments and tied together with string. Another thing we struggled with was the size of our puppet; since we were all working on separate parts of the character it ended up being quite large (which later required more people to manoeuvre).
Although we tried to make our puppet look more interesting by collaging over its chest in the third session, I still think there was room for improvement if we were to redo the project. For example, some things I would consider:
The overall shape of the puppet – how could it look – more geometric/more organic?
Movement – how does its design compliment the way it intends to move?
Different materials – how does different textures/colours shapes add to the character of the puppet?
Joints of the character – to portray movement and life of an inanimate character – how could the joints of the puppet be constructed – e.g. maybe we could have used wire armature?
Our Puppet:
Making a Short Movie:
In this session we worked in the same groups to make a short stop motion film. We used our puppet from the previous session to film a fight scene (between the puppet and one of our group members) using the app Stop Motion Studio.
Our experience of filming: (can be found on the padlet link titled: ‘initial group work’)
We found it very challenging trying to manoeuvre our puppet especially the arms as though we did add strings to the cardboard arms they were quite stiff already due to the nature of the material, so the string didn’t make them any more flexible.
Due to our puppet being inflexible we had to be more involved in the puppeteering – this meant we were noticeable in the camera shots – which was distracting for the viewer to look at when watching the film.
Feedback/Improvements:
We didn’t take enough frames which meant our video looked quite choppy – at a frame rate of 12fps the film was too fast to understand (the video took only 4 seconds at 12fps). So maybe next time we should have taken more to make the film look smoother.
The movement of the puppet wasn’t very fluid
The audience did find our film entertaining and clear to understand when at a slower frame rate (4fps)
The audience also liked our use of tissue paper which we had used to portray blood (when our side character died).
Other group work: (can be found on the padlet link titled: ‘additional group work’)
Since we finished filming our movie, we ended up helping another group manoeuvre their puppets. I noticed the way they had crafted their puppets was much more intuitive; one of their puppets was a fox and had ears which could move with the placement of the puppeteer’s hand. When watching back the film outcome I did however notice some aspects that could have been improved. For example, the distance of the camera and puppets meant that the detail of how they were crafted was lost slightly. It was still comical to the viewer but also could have been even clearer had their film been shot at 12fps and had a longer duration.
Dragonframe – short stop motion film:
At the start of the second week of this rotation we were tasked with creating a short stop motion film. We had to reuse our puppet from the previous week and create a 30 second piece using the stop motion rooms (using the cameras + bays with the software Dragonframe).
Some of our initial story ideas based on the prompt of ‘transformation’:
Our puppet drinks from a can of coke and starts being ripped apart + then evolves into a new character based on the object of a paper cone (a random spare object we had to try to incorporate)
Our puppet could get tangled in string and then becomes so wrapped up that they seem to transform into a new character – which is almost mummy like
Our puppet interacts with a separate cone character – there is a chase scene, where the puppet tries to catch the cone character. It struggles and ends up tearing apart its arms/body to throw at the cone character (in the hopes to stop the character from escaping).
Our puppet drinks from a can of coke which kickstarts a problem – our character passes out and gets mistaken for trash due to its materiality – people pass and drop litter onto the pile. This then is later used /recycled to make a new character based on the cone object.
Since the project task required a ‘major transformation of our puppet’ our group ended up choosing the last idea – we decided to deconstruct our puppet and reuse its materials to create a new character. The idea seemed the most practical considering the space of the stop motion bay we were using (a chase scene would have been impossible). It also seemed the most manageable given the limited time we had to complete the film. One issue we had which affected our project was that myself and one of my group members was ill, this made it difficult to contribute as much as I would have liked to.
Some issues we faced when shooting our film:
Our character was quite large for the given space and therefore we found it challenging getting our character to sit upright without it falling over.
Our character was quite inflexible due to its design meaning it was difficult to maneuver.
Our film can be found on the Padlet link titled ‘Final outcome’.
Feedback session:
Our tutor liked our concept of deconstructing our character and reusing materials
Our peers thought our stop motion animation was clear to understand visually and engaging.
Our peers also appreciated our use of sound to complement our story; we used 3 sounds from the given sound library that included music, background chattering and a squeaking noise (we used for the new cone character)
Ideas for improvement:
When observing other group outcomes, I really liked their creativity, for example some mixed regular film and stop motion, others used a variety of interesting materials like felt to help set their scenes, and others explored interesting angles (like top down). If I were to redo this project I would have liked to apply some of these ideas.
I believe that our stop motion could have been more interesting had we explored background design + considered colour palettes and aesthetics.
Our film was 10 seconds shorter than the requirement so perhaps we could have done more frames or added to our storyline.
Below is my first 25 panel post-it note storyboard based on the prompt ‘A flight is delayed and a couple gets into a heated argument with the airline’s customer service’:
I found this task fun but challenging as it required me to dip into storytelling and narrative, which is something I don’t have too much experience and practice doing. The use of the prompt given, I did however find useful in kickstarting my ideas.
After receiving feedback from two tutors, I realised that a lot of my panels were unnecessary and didn’t get straight to the point of what I intended to convey. For this reason, I decided to cut some of them out and replace them with clearer shots. My tutors also helped me to think more creatively in how my shots appeared visually; I tried to incorporate some over the shoulder shots, wide shots and close ups. I also tried to make sure to consider the 180-degree rule, so my panels looked less choppy and flowed together nicely. This version ended up being only 15 panels.
Reworked Storyboard:
Below is my reworked initial storyboard. I think it is more concise and clearer for a reader to interpret.
Although I was somewhat happy with this version. I wanted to make my drawings even clearer so I could differentiate my characters and their features but also make the setting of the airport more obvious. For this reason, I decided to digitally draw the panels on procreate.
Digital Storyboard:
Digital storyboard made on Procreate:
I spent a day making my panels on procreate so I could make them neater and more cohesive with one another. I do think this has elevated my narrative as it has allowed to set the scene better and show more of my characters and their expressions. I would have liked to polish them a bit more had I had more time; however, I still am somewhat satisfied with what I was able to create.
On Friday of the first week of this rotation we had the opportunity to use Premier Pro. This was my first time using the software and I was very eager to learn how I could develop my storyboard into an animatic by editing and applying sound. I at first found navigating the interface challenging, however by week 2 felt more confident using it.
Feedback session:
On Monday of the second week for this rotation, we received feedback on our draft animatics. Suggestions I noted down (from my peers and tutor) for further improvement included:
make the progression of time clearer in my story by editing
portray the progression of time clearer by changing some of my panels (adding a clock, adding a panel to show the exterior of the airport and showing that it was nighttime, editing in lighting etc.)
implement sound effects to compliment my panels
Re drawing – some of my scenes and exaggerating the anger and frustration of my character – if I wanted to go for a more comical effect
Wednesday: I spent the session editing my animatic and adding sounds to make my narrative more engaging for the audience. Overall, I am quite happy with it, although I notice some things I could have improved if I had worked on it for longer; I would have liked to have shown the progression of time in a clearer way. For example, by altering my panels as suggested above, however with the limited time I had, I compromised by using a phasing out editing inbetween feauture between my panels. I think this was somewhat successful as it does demonstrate the changing of the surroundings which does imply the passing of time.
Some feedback I received in the group crit included:
Improvement in the composition of some of my panels – one example given by one of my peers was that my last panel looked unrealistic – they suggested the plane should have been further from the window of the airport.
More careful consideration of sound effects – even though I attempted to make the sound slightly quieter when I panned out to wider shots within my scene, I don’t think it was a clear enough distinction.
Making the passage of time clearer – I could have used a clock to show the progression of time or shown the exterior of the airport (at nighttime).
Positive Feedback:
My peers found my animatic had a clear storyline, they liked the establishing shot of the first scene (with the airport background), and they found that my sound effects elevated my storyline (it became more comical which then made it more engaging for the viewer).
Self-Reflection:
If I were to redo this rotation, I think I would try simplifying the style I drew in to make my process more manageable – As shown in the first panel I tried to add more detail and make clean lineart, however with the limited time I had, the style became more inconsistent and sketchier by the end.
Next time I would also make sure to make my canvas size correct for film (1920 x 1080)
The thing I struggled the most with (during the process of making the animatic) was in fact coming up with the initial storyboard on post it notes – specifically thinking concisely in how I could compose each panel, so it was meaningful and so that the story flowed nicely while also trying to expeirment with different types of shots.
