Hello James, Thank you for the course! I found it very useful and I always come back to it whenever I’m practicing walk cycles. In another animation basics course I’m working through, I had to do a simple side view of a walk cycle. The point of the exercise was to familiarize myself with the structure and main poses of a walk cycle (not make anything polished). I ended up making three versions – arms bent, arms loose, and carrying a box (there are no inbetweens and the animation is on 4s). At the end of the exercise, I did some self-analysis (the best I could) and came up with some notes for myself. Since I value your expertise on this subject, I was hoping you could offer some additional guidance: 1. At first, I was confused by the extreme height difference between the “Down” and “Up” pose (I measured everything a bunch of times to make sure that it wasn’t me not keeping things consistent). Later I realized that the wide stride is in fact really exaggerated compared to a normal walk (I tried to walk this way around the house and it was pretty difficult :D). In any case, the extremely wide stride seems to be the cause for the height difference between the poses (please let me know if I missed something). 2. Out of the three variations for the arms, I think the first one with the bent arms fits best. I don’t really like how the second one turned out. I was going for a more relaxed feel but to me it just looks completely off. If I were to try this version again I would probably have the tilt of the body be in the other directions, so that he’s leaning backwards a bit, and work from there (and of course have the steps be narrower). 3. The third version also seems a bit off. The way I made the box move up and down seems to imply that it has a bit of weight to it. However, if that were the case, holding it with the palms from the side doesn’t really make sense. If the box were to be empty, so that the way the character is holding it would make more sense, then I think the animation of the arms would have to be adjusted (I would really like to know your thoughts on this). Any additional feedback is highly appreciated. Thank you!
I had to take a break from the course for about 2 months. Now that I’m back at it, I decided to do a refresher and go over every project once again. Here’s another attempt at the first project we had. It's far from perfect, but it was nice and encouraging to see that, after many failures along the way, I made some progress.
Joe Shuster -Superman This was my first drawing where I predominately used the overhand grip. I really like the lines that you can draw but I struggled with control. Has anyone got any warmup exercises that they do to make this grip more familiar?
Hey, I don't really have a photo to upload, because I honestly don't understand how to do this one. The concept of figuring out how to study from a master is very difficult for me, it feels like I'm trying to look at car and then disassemble it and then reassemble it all with my mind. I looked at the comments and everyone seems to already understand how to deconstruct the proverbial car in this situation. Is there something I just can't see? Any help would be much appreciated on how to approach this assignment, thanks.
Hello everyone! This one ended up being really challenging. I spent about 2 hours on this attempt. And when I noticed that I couldn’t focus properly I decided to call it. I knew it still wasn’t completely accurate but I had no idea I was off by this much :D The self-critique method is really useful. To me, it seems that my biggest mistake was not getting the width of the head right. And from that, a lot of other mistakes ensued. There’s also the length of the nose and the angle of the left shoulder (among many smaller ones). I wasn't able to draw on something as large as Stan recommended, but even on the A4 size of my sketchbook, I still didn’t utilize the entire page. Overall, there are a lot of points for me to keep in mind for my next attempt. Any additional feedback is highly appreciated. Thank you!
Perhaps not a popular opinion, but here goes: Having struggled with how to approach this assignment at the start, does anyone else find it super frustrating that Stan gets wrapped in analyzing submissions from folks who are way, way beyond the beginner level? This isn't the first time, but it feels like he's getting distracted by "ooh this is nice" and not focusing on the actual lesson at hand. This was billed as a basic fundamentals course for beginners, but there are obviously a lot of samples here that are from artists that are very experienced, if not already professional. Maybe they're just showing off or maybe they're chasing Likes, but it makes what was supposed to feel like an entry level course - and the community attached to it - much more advanced and really exclusive than it arguably should. I could care less if my own submissions are critiqued, but it leaves at least me with a "Why Bother" feeling when we're examining stuff from concept artists and other obviously experienced artists in what's supposed to be fundamentals class. For me, a relative absolute beginner, it would be much more helpful to learn things from people making the same mistakes common at my level. Perhaps I misunderstood the course intent or maybe I'm not the intended audience. If I could offer a critique, it would be more productive to dedicate more time at the start of each project assignment for a clearer statement of what the assignment is - or more importantly *isn't* - and perhaps some more examples, and then to more selectively chose examples that highlight those specific goals. Just my two cents; thanks.
This is a tricky subject. But here are my two cents. I have not used generative AI and I have no intention of using it. But I've seen what it can do. I think that using AI to get over those “sticking points” (whether it’s text or imagery) can be a slippery slope. Sure, it’s small things at first - writing an E-Mail, writing video descriptions, or generating some ideas for artistic projects. However, after a while, it might become increasingly tempting to integrate AI more and more. And before you know it, you'll end up becoming dependent on it. I think the struggle and the “getting stuck” part is essential for someone's growth. The act of learning has value (even when it comes to smaller stuff). It’s not always easy, it’s not always pleasant, but it doesn't always have to be.
Hello everyone! I just wanted to share a quick thought I had on finding new shapes. This worked especially well whenever I felt stuck or uninspired. All I did was find small nooks in my sketchbook (spaces that resulted between drawings) and I tried to fill those with a design. Most of the time, these empty nooks had such a random shape that the results ended up being quite interesting (like in the example below with a horizontally stretched triangle for a monkey head). I know this idea is nothing revolutionary, but for me, it’s a good one to keep in the back of the mind when doing these exercises. Also, thanks for the demos! These really help a lot!
Here’s a page of circle warm-ups. The first pass was with a pencil. The second one was with a fine liner. The second pass was really difficult. Having a specific circle you need to draw as accurately as possible was way more challenging than just drawing random circles. This is definitely a good exercise for the warm-up routine. Thanks!
Hi man, Really nice work. It feels nice, clean, consistent. I would guess that this is a ball filled with rice affected by a weaker gravity. Maybe the solution is that the ball suffers less deformation or bounces less times. The tail of the ball is on point. Nice work again
Hello! This post might be geared more toward hand-drawn animation enthusiasts, but anyone is welcome to chime in. As many of you might know, the bouncing ball is a great exercise for beginners to dip their toes into the animation world and familiarize themselves with concepts like timing, spacing, squash & stretch, etc. Attach a tail to it and you can easily introduce some follow-through and overlapping action into the mix. On the surface, the exercise seems quite simple. And you don’t have to achieve the most realistic result in order to fulfill the purpose of the exercise – practice the aforementioned concepts. However, I always found it difficult to achieve a bouncing ball that is also believable. More often than not the ball would be squashing and stretching and bouncing but... in an odd way. Some of the main problems I would identify would be: - the forces of gravity would seem inconsistent with each bounce; - the energy loss after each bounce would be off; - the reduction in squash in stretch would not match the energy loss the ball would experience; The way we apply squash and stretch to an object can give us information about its mass, the material it’s made of, and so on. But if the way the object behaves during the animation is inconsistent with its pre-determined properties, then the animation starts losing believability. This is my latest attempt at some bouncing balls (with a tail) that are a bit cartoony but also believable throughout the animation. I’m still not 100% happy with the result, but I also can’t really figure out what the problems are. Is this just a case of fine-tuning? Or is there more going on? So, based on what I described previously, if anyone would like to take a look at these 3 bouncing ball variations and offer some feedback I would highly appreciate it. Thank you!
A couple square versions of shape animals. I had a tiger too, but had way to many shapes...those stripes! I like the owl more than my alien version of a cow. I need to tweek the owl to give the quisitive look at has in the photo.