ipisoft.com
http://forum.ipisoft.com/

Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio
http://forum.ipisoft.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5339
Page 1 of 1

Author:  saberfiend [ Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

Hey there guys.. for my university disseratation i looked at using an affordable means of mocap to get better results than keyframe animation. Here are the results. http://www.undisputedvisualeffects.com/show-reel.html

Any Feed back would be brilliant thank you... !
Chris

Author:  mrbones [ Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

Yep Great,

Now try to convince Disney and Pixar this same thing.

Maybee Dreamworks will listen.

Great job pal.

Cheers

Author:  Pat [ Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

Pixar was said that they would not use mocap because traditional keyframe animation gave them a "certain look", compared to mocap. I dunno - maybe I'm just lazy, but I like being able to get the a full length feature made in a weekend.

Author:  mrbones [ Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

I really wonder about them, They would have to know about this technology.

A certain look? cmon..

We have an inate ability to dicern differences in the way we move.

In the end they are trying to create the illusion of power,

I wonder also if they know things about the smoothing process.

I would venture to say that maybee Lucas Arts does....

As CLONE WARS looks like iPiSoft animation if you look closely.

What animation needs is that quiet calm, so it looks like a reserve kind of power in motion.

Not to still and not to wild either.

And animation is all about accuracy of timing, timing is everything.

iPiSoft/Kinect is great for my needs.


Pat wrote:
Pixar was said that they would not use mocap because traditional keyframe animation gave them a "certain look", compared to mocap. I dunno - maybe I'm just lazy, but I like being able to get the a full length feature made in a weekend.

Author:  Pat [ Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

Give me mocap any day. I think it's crazy to ask someone to only produce 35 seconds of animation per day, like Pixar and the other houses do. Frankly, if anyone has seen How to Train Your Dragon, they did a damn good job with traditional key framed animation - but it took forever. I like what Robert Zemeckis did with Beowulf - that was perfect.

Pat

Author:  mrbones [ Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

WHoever said 35 seconds a day?

One second per day for claymation and maybee 4- 5 seconds per day for CG.

but 35 Seconds per day,? Where can I verify that?

Author:  nikfaulkner [ Thu Sep 22, 2011 2:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Motion Capture Results against traditional keyframe animatio

saberfiend - i'm not sure you get the point of your post. are you trying to point out how much better mocap is? or how much better mocap is in a given amount of time?
without wanting to offend, obviously the mocap is going to be better than sub-par animation. i think a better comparison would be to compare mocap to the output of a pro animator.

35 SECONDS A DAY!!!!!!??????? you got a source for that number? be interested to see it. the game studio i worked at they aimed for between 8\10 a day for ingame stuff and about 5 for cutscene level of detail. i remember reading somewhere that rango they aimed for between 15\20 seconds a week (maybe in 3dworld or even the directors commentary)

this is also and interesting watch

http://vimeo.com/7002457

- Jeff Gabor on Ice Age 3 showing the evolution of his shot from layout to finished stage.

i'm using mocap as the foundation for my animation, i then work into it with traditional animation techniques. some shots could be 90% mocap 10% hand whilst others could be 100% hand animated. i tend to use the best tool(for me) to do any given job rather than put all my eggs in one basket and evangelise some new tech\software. i currently make use of ipisoft, motion builder, animeeple, lightwave, bvhacker, blender, sculptris, photoshop and after effects to "get the shot done" in many different combinations.

avatar made a big publicity hooha about how great their tech was and how it was revolutionising the industry. they didn't shout that loudly about the 100's of animators employed to fix their mocap and make it usable and make the shots work :/

at the end of the day the audience doesn't care how something was created as long as it looks good.


....end of rant :)

Author:  saberfiend [ Tue Oct 04, 2011 2:27 am ]
Post subject: 

nikfaulkner wrote:
saberfiend - i'm not sure you get the point of your post. are you trying to point out how much better mocap is? or how much better mocap is in a given amount of time?
without wanting to offend, obviously the mocap is going to be better than sub-par animation. i think a better comparison would be to compare mocap to the output of a pro animator.



Hi nikfaulkner the idea of the investigation was to see whether motion capture could be used as an alternative at a university level where i had only 2 university years studying animation. I am aware that the animation was poor however it was more to prove that in the same amount of time it took to create 3 solid mocaps i was only able to produce sub par animation. That is always going to be the case however it was to see if it was possible on a budget. :D

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/