Saturday, August 11, 2007

Pedro Vargas - The Winner

I think it's great that so many cartoonists are taking the trouble to learn how the classic animators discovered animation's fundamental skills and properties.

Anyone who does this consistently will learn fast.

Here's one test that I thought was particularly good.

Not only did Pedro figure out the timing and the flow of the animation, he made sure Bosko looked like Bosko and that his proportions and volumes stayed consistent which is what a director would normally want.

Good drawing is every bit as important as smooth movement in animation.

Uploaded by PMVR

Go read how he approached the assignment logically:

Good job, Pedro! Now apply some of this to your own animation! Use the beats!


Pedro Vargas said...

Yay! Thanks John! I'll go start on those other cycles right now!

Bill Field said...

Beautiful job Pedro, I look forward to checking out your next cycles! John K. you retro-revoloutionary, you are a man on a mission-- glad we all get to tag along for the ride!

André Almeida said...

Yah! Man, I really liked your blog!
And I always loved your cartoons.
I´m a brazilian cartoonist, when you are surfing on the web go there:

see ya!

JohnK said...

Hi Pedro

I like how you logically figured out your steps.

Good thinking!

I look forward to your next cycles!

John said...

yea congradulations man!nice job!

oolong said...

hey John K,
I don't know if you appreciate comments that are unrelated to the post or not but i had a question, maybe something you could respond to or write a blog about if you're inspired. i was doing some research about a paper on different styles of cartoons in the 1960s and it got me thinking about Rocky and Bullwinkle. despite being notorious for having stiff and choppy animation, i never really noticed because the writing and funny character designs were good enough to compensate for it. which, in turn made me think about another 'low-budget' cartoon, disney's '101 dalmatians' which despite the studio cutting a lot of corners turned out in my opinion looking a heck of a lot better than the pillowy rotoscoped monstrosity that was 'sleeping beauty'. I guess in a roundabout way what I'm asking is - if you have a product where the characters and backgrounds and etc are all well drawn enough that you can take any individual keyframe and it stands alone as a funny, entertaining and attractive image, does the level of smooth tweening, gravity, bounciness and other aspects of 'good animation' still make or break it, or is it just icing on the cake? would the world of animation be better served if students at CalArts and other places spent more time learning to be 'good illustrators' at the expense of being 'good animators'?

Pedro Vargas said...

Thank you, John! This lesson is a life saver!

Brandon said...

Here's one I did today:

kate yarberry said...

great job Pedro! I am a bit math-lexic so when numbers get involved it becomes that much harder. How many tween's did you do between keyframes exactly? Any info would help me out loads! Thanks!

Pedro Vargas said...

Hi, Kate! I counted each of the frames that were between the keys from the Bosko clip to get the in-betweens. You just have to find the keys in the cycle and then count the frames that are in between those keys.

You might want to count all of the frames that are included in that cycle. That way you can make all the keys first then go step by step with the in-betweens to match the numbers you counted with the cycle. It's also best if you label each frame to not get too confused.

I left some examples in my blog
that illustrates how I did this process and read the comments section too for more info.

R2K said...

: )

bug said...

Yeah that one looks perfect.

I posted my first one here.