Archive for May, 2010
Q&A: Parenting
3
As previously mentioned in the Ted Ty Talk Back post, due to limited time we were unable to ask Ted all the listener questions. However, we will handle some of the extra questions in separate posts; here is the first.
Thanks again to everyone who sent in questions 
Q & A: Parenting
Olov asks:
I always get intimidated by scenes involving props so i though i could take this
opportunity to clear some things up. do I constrain hand to prop or the other way
around? how do I get nice arcs, should i think about the arc of the prop or on the
hand, or both? I am also having real problem posing the hand so that it looks good
on the prop.
Great question Olov. Props can be tough. When constraining props it always depend on what you are planning on doing with it, but there are some general guide lines that are a good place to start. For small, light props in most cases you will constrain to the hand. For long, or heavy props in most cases you would constrain to the prop. This all depends on how you will be animating the prop and what will be the lead and follow. If your hand is driving the action, constrain to the hand, if the prop is driving the action constrain to the prop.
If you are having trouble plotting arcs I’d recommend installing an arc tracking plug-in in your software. If you can’t find one, just get a dry erase marker and draw on the screen, but be careful, not all screens are good for dry erase(some lcd monitors). If you cant draw on your screen you can always get some clear acetate and tape that over your monitor.
Yes, you should think about the arc of the prop, especially if its a sword or something that will be traveling across the screen a lot.
For posing the hand, do your reference. The best is if you can hold the prop yourself, if not, find images on line and really study what the hand is doing. The hand shape always supports the prop.
-Steve
I agree with Steve in most respects. For light-weight small objects (cups, pens, toys) you should really always parent the prop to the hand, and for larger, heavier objects (boulder, refrigerator, car tire) I would parent the hands to the prop. I’m pretty sure this is the same idea Steve is suggesting, but my way of thinking about it is different:
Rather than what is driving what, I think about what weighs more.
If your character is picking up a really heavy object you want to make the object feel really heavy. In order to feel heavy the object needs to take a long time to start moving or change directions, which can be difficult to accomplish convincingly if it is parented to the hands. The slightest rotation on the wrist will send the other end of the object a good distance across the screen space.
So if the character is picking up a boulder, his arms and hands are physically ‘driving’ the action, yet I would do it the other way around to be able to have full control over the placement/rotation/timing/spacing of the boulder that I feel I cannot have as simply if it is the child of another object. Obviously, you run the risk of making it feel like the boulder is floating and the hands are just attached to it (well, they are…) so that’s where your understanding of weight and force will come into play by ‘faking it’ and making it look like the hands are picking up the boulder and not the other way around.
If you were animating traditionally then nothing would be parented to anything, you just have posing and timing and spacing at your disposal to make it feel convincing. When in the computer, do whatever is technically easiest to achieve that. The more time you spend fighting your setup, the less time you spend animating.
-Jacob
Body Language research
9
A while ago I got very interested in studying body language, believing it would drastically improve my animation skills. Knowing what visible signals the body is sending can be paramount in communicating with the audience (and with other characters). You’ve probably heard about Albert Mehrabrian’s study at UCLA which found that 55% of communication is through non-verbal cues*. So I thought the more I knew about non-verbal cues the better equipped I would be as an animator. I did some research on the subject.
As animators, I feel we tend to over-think every pose we use for our characters anyway. By studying acting we have a somewhat decent grasp on what pose a character should hold to communicate their feelings, and how to make a pose feel closed off or open. Therefore, studying body language did little to inform my animation choices but did aid me in social situations in my daily life. Basically, I find that social life is much more entertaining now.
Bonus: my animation improved “a little.”
That aside, for anyone else who might be interested in such an adventure I thought I might share some recommendations (and non-recommendations) so you get a more fulfilling experience and don’t waste your time in the wrong places.
What Every BODY is Saying
I really enjoyed this book and highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in learning more about body language! It is written quite well, the author doesn’t talk down to you, and it is full of great information. To top it all off, the author is an ex-FBI agent who shares his experiences in the field and explains how his observation of body language helped him solve cases! Real cases! How cool is that? Who doesn’t love FBI stories and solving crime?! He explains how he was never really trained for body language, he just started to notice things about how people behaved when they knew something they weren’t saying. These observational skills helped him figure out what people weren’t telling him! The body language information is presented in a memorable way coupled with real life stories, which served to make it both informative and entertaining. I definitely recommend this book.
The Definitive Book of Body Language
This book bothered me. Unfortunately I read it first, but if I read it after What Every BODY is Saying I would have have just given up on it after a chapter or two. For the most part it is written from a perspective of how to succeed as a business person, which made it difficult to hold my attention. The worst was that the authors often talk down to you. They over explain things as if you are ten years old, repeat lots of information without presenting it in newer ways, and don’t give you enough credit as a reader. Additionally, they quote findings of many studies that are either unannotated or sound bias in their testing methods. Lastly, they often use pictures of high-profile people as examples and tell you what they are thinking. Immediately this sounds suspect to me. When you show me a picture of Hillary Clinton and tell me exactly what she is thinking, you lose credibility in my opinion. Unless you went up to her after the photo was taken and asked what she was thinking (they didn’t) then you have no idea what was really going through her head. Now, what you CAN tell me is what her body language is suggesting to the people around her. What she is projecting rather than what she is literally thinking. It’s a slight difference, but it is a difference. When the distinction between the two isn’t made clear it can be misleading. The stuff that’s actually helpful is the same information you’ll find in any other book or video. Skip this one.
The Secrets of Body Language
This is a dvd from the History Channel. It was amusing, but not much more than that. After reading the books it was all basically the same information. They take the high-profile approach again trying to play at our interest in public figures like political leaders and celebrities. I’m pretty sure one of the consultants and interviewee’s on the show was one of the authors of the Definitive Book of Body Language, but I don’t remember exactly. They talk a bit about cultural differences (for example, the last person to enter the room is a big indicator of status in the middle east) which isn’t really so much about our instinctual or subconscious non-verbal communicators as much as it is a conscious effort to display status. They also talk about politicians taking pictures with each other, and how they jockey for who gets to have the ‘power position’ in the handshake (palm facing downward), because of the message that this sends to the public. In this instance, it is a conscious decision to have a subconscious impact on the audience. Interesting.
There were a couple of gems but overall it didn’t quite feel worth the money. If you happen to catch it on tv then go for it.
Lie to Me is (was?) a TV show on FOX. It is loosely based on Dr. Paul Eckman and his studies on the human face and what it reveals about emotions. In the beginning episodes it focuses much more on what you can learn from body language, but as the series goes on it becomes much more about the relationships between the recurring characters just like any TV drama does. Some shows excel at this. For example, I don’t watch House M.D. for what I can learn about practicing diagnostic medicine, I watch it for the relationships between the characters which are extremely well executed. However, in this case I want to know about body language. Sure it’s entertaining, and Tim Roth does a pretty great job with his character, but if you’re in it to learn about facial cues you are better off getting your information elsewhere. (For example, Eckman’s books – which I have not yet read but will). Also, the show inherently has a fatal flaw; it features actors. The script will tell them they must flash a ‘micro-expression’ of disgust; an uncontrollable impulse as an emotional response. The actors must TRY to make this emotional flash look instinctual and incredibly quick. Sometimes it works well, yet sometimes… you wouldn’t need an ‘expert’ to determine what’s on the characters mind (haha). A lot of the times it’s like they beat you over the head with their ‘micro-expression’ which defeats the purpose. Overall, the ratio of ‘time spent’ to ‘what you learn’ isn’t worth it. Read a book.
A very large majority of the information is the same across the board, the difference is how it’s presented. If anyone else has any other recommendations (or disagreements with mine) please contribute and post in the comments! If you’ve read Eckman’s books tell us what you thought and how they compare to these. Thanks, and enjoy.
-Jacob
*There is controversy surrounding these findings when applied to day-to-day interaction and not controlled experiments. Mehrabrian himself states “Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like–dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable.” You can find several sites that debunk these findings in greater depth. Here is one.
