The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
.
Kendeathwalker
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
.
Kendeathwalker on
0
Posts
I like the bears, I think you're having an easier time finding the curves. You might want to try some line gestures, doing the bubble thing is great for structure but not as informative for rhythm.
See here, for the guy in the middle I unified the spine line and the leg, and curved that arm down. Now you have a bit of motion (bending forward) instead seeming sort of locked up. The eye likes to move along those curves. With old people, you have the concept of gravity weighing down on them to aid you in choice making. If you wan them to look shaky and frail, you still have to think about how its flowing.
Look at how wonky and old bugs looks, but notice that hes still following some consistent, solid, curves. My teachers always stressed people who were used to drawing realistically to exaggerate/stretch as much as possible in that initial draw in, because they will naturally pull back as they refine. So you can always draw a streamlined curve and then break it into parts afterwards when adding details, but you want a flow thats unified. Thats why those bears are working so well, because you were mostly working with a nice, unified line for their spine and building from it.
With the guy at the bottom, no amount of cartooning changes the important of balance and weight, If you want to have a big upper body supported by tiny feet, you really need to think about where his weight is being supported and plant the feet accordingly. For him, spreading the legs gives both a logical stance and evens out the lumpy leg curves.
The biggest problem I'm seeing with these are the same problems that were evident in even your more realistic work, which is not looking at the drawings primarily as a series of design choices, rather than a series of bones and muscles.
(See previous: http://bacon.iseenothing.com/otherpeoplestuff/kdw_1.jpg
http://bacon.iseenothing.com/otherpeoplestuff/kdw_2.jpg)
That's visually vaguely annoying in a realistic style, but when it comes to cartoon design, where things need to be simple and abstract, it's a total deal breaker. Not just aesthetically, but in the practical sense that 'every new muscle we put in this design adds an hour (or whatever) of animator drawing time per second of screen footage".
The good news here is, when it comes to depicting the actions, you're actually pretty spot on- the actions are obvious, you can read the character's emotions. And some of your stuff in here leads me to believe you're trying to simplify, but are unwilling or unable because of force of habit, to push it far enough.
For example, take the top left ogre dude. You've got the start of a good simplified design there, pushing a curve from elbow to elbow. But you draw it slow, and unsteady- you indicate the notches of the elbows, the start of the traps- don't. Push one big confident sweep there, and it all of a sudden flows better, and has a more solid sense of design about it.
Now look at the picture next to it- you can tell what he's supposed to be doing, but it doesn't feel like he's really straining there. Part of that is because, again, you've tried to force in muscles simply for the sake of it; think of the situation more abstractly- the force of him trying to pull that rock up ends up straightening his arms out flat, stretching them like rubber bands. And that's all you need- to indicate that strain. Everything else you might add only serves to weaken that action, so don't add anything. Why would you? All it would do is make it harder to animate.
All I've done with these is take away all the shit that ends up just complicating the design.
What would be a good exercise is to take some tracing paper and draw over there, and see how few lines you actually need to depict the action. Not the anatomy, not the construction, just the action. When you've reduced it to the point where you can reduce it no further without impacting read of the action, you've probably reached a point where it's a solid design. Then, stop.
This is where, if you were animating, you'd move on to the next frame.
(Also here's where I usually pimp the book Force, because it applies really directly to this situation, and given how often I pimp Force I don't know why I still need to say this because every last one of you motherfuckers should have bought it already.)
Twitter
(great post :P)
Another book you might want to consider is the animation survival guide. Even if you never move to animating (should you ever, you need this book, though) It helps you see somethings that you might not notice in animation, like a tween that at any other time would look like a broken joint. It'll show a ton of ways to make something as simple as a walk.
If you are committed to cartooning, It cant hurt to actually sit down and try and draw from some cartoons. John K (pimp him all the time) is great if you need some guidance on how and what to study, classic animation wise.
Apart from the crits already posted (brilliant post by bacon), i'd just like to add that the style used in teh faces comes across as a bit symplistic. Are you going for an old-school animation vibe? some faces remind me a bit of old elmer fudd drawings. What help me when i'm stuck with this aspect is just trying to do some big sketches of faces, trying out some new stuff, borrowing from others and seeing what works for you.
Unless the facial style is totally intentional ofcourse. But i'm curious to see you experiment a bit with that.
I have to say, although maybe some of the designs are a little too complicated for animation, i do get a great sense of movement from looking at them. My mind kind of fills in the blanks and i can actually picture the character moving. So you hit the bulls eye on the rhythm and flow of the characters. So :^::^::^: for that!
my favorites are the polar bear, because its very different to yuor other work.
Steam Profile: miserium
Diablo 3 profile: miserium
PA Rocksmith League
I agree with the others that although its nice to see simple shapes employed I'd also like to see the line of motion within the character given a bit more of a priority.
Also on the animal sketches I would def consider trying to play up their hairiness a bit because the bears and dogs are coming across as fur-less. The one with the dog growling has some hair standing up, but besides that one there is no indication they are fuzzy.
INSTAGRAM
I forgot to mention that I think you should also try to differentiate the elements within the characters more. For example, lines that represent skin follow the exact same contour as the lines that are cloth. It seems like all the clothing is extremely form fitting and doesn't create the illusion of accessories/garment/jewelery being worn over skin.
It probably wasn't a big concern for these sketches as they are just quick studies of form, but something to think about anyways.
INSTAGRAM
The main one, that I really can't ever stress enough on the forums is silhouette.
Here are your silhouettes:
they just don't read well
you should be able to read not only what type of character it is from a silhouette, but also, hints about it's personality or what it's thinking. For example, the one with the mouse...push the emotion, exaggerate it, right now he's just standing straight up and down on one leg, he could be dancing with the mouse for all we know. a key element of animation design is understanding that you're designing actors. you need to make the characters act and come to life.
Shape dynamics are important, as are exaggeration, here are a breakdown of your shape dynamics:
everything's all pretty similarly sized, which tends to lead to boring, generic characters. push things around a bit, don't just go with the first design that looks half decent, make some that are more top heavy, some that are more bottom heavy, play with the dynamics between the rider and the goat thing because right now they're the same basic size and that leads to boring aesthetics.
i did a super rough redo of the guy on the goat, starting with silhouette first because that is honestly the best way i've found to get good dynamics:
you could even exaggerate this further, i played it pretty safe... but a great animator once said there's no such thing as too much exaggeration in character design.
if you push it too far, you can always reel it back in, but be confident and willing to experiment, that's how all of the best designs have happened, by people pushing things around and not just settling with the first design
INSTAGRAM