Showing posts with label principles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label principles. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Some of my favorite Brianne drawings


Not only do Brianne's drawings have great style and flair, they also use classic principles-the same ones I always crab about.
Her stylistic influences are obviously a different assortment than mine (with some overlap) but they are held together by the same exact principles that my artists aspire too.




Her designs are real designs, not just collections of unrelated abstract flat shapes. They have hierarchy - an overall statement that is then broken down into levels of sub forms and details that obey the planes of the larger forms.
Her drawings have form; she can draw from difficult angles and in many styles.
She almost makes me like Anime!
Beautiful shapes, contrasts, large negative areas, clear silhouettes, line of action, construction....the whole shebang of good drawing skills, and to top it off, a lot of individuality and fun!

Saturday, April 12, 2008

Irv Spence - Perfect Cartoon-Animation Drawing Principles


Doing that Bickenbach post the other day got me to thinking about another classic animator who had all his principles down.

Irv Spence, more than any other 40s animator typified everything that represented the style. More than Scribner, Jones, McKimson, Kimball, Moore, anyone I can think of.

That's not to say he's better or more talented than those other giants. I'm saying that he puts all the 40s principles together in one package more completely and confidently than any other animator I can think of. He is great to study.

Irv has:

Solid Construction

Line Of Action

Clear Silhouettes and staging - easy to read the image
Flow All the details of his images flow along the line of action and construction of the larger forms.


Organic Shapes
Organic shapes means that the shapes are not perfect geometric shapes. Not circles, ovals, triangles etc. The curves do not bend exactly in the middle. S curves, asymmetry. Nothing looks mechanical.

No parallel lines. Even the hat and clothes are organic.


Design Balance-
Filled Spaces surrounded by empty Spaces -
to avoid cluttered design

This lion has much empty space in his design: his face around his eyes. The mane around his ears, the front of the muzzle versus the back. The jaw. Etc. This careful design makes the face very easy to read. If all the shapes were jammed close together you would get a jumble hard to read image.



Design contrasts
These characters from Tom and Jerry have many of the principles common to 40s cartoons, but they don't have any design. They are made of circles and ovals (somewhat organic) but without strong contrasts in the shapes and sizes. They are designed merely for the function of smooth animation, not for specificity.

Compare them to this more specific mouse. What makes it a specific rather than generic design? It's built up out of contrasting shapes. It's not just circles piled on top of each other.

Cartoony

Spence not only applies all the scholarly animation drawing principles, he applies them to a very cartoony look and feel. It's not merely "correct", it's fun.

The miracle: He makes them all work together
What's really amazing about Spence, is that he is able to balance so many principles and methods together and still make the result look effortless.

Many animators have some skills more developed than others. McKimson has perfect construction, clarity, dynamics but is not as flowing or cartoony as Scribner. Scribner is very cartoony, spontaneous, full of contrasts, but is less concerned with perfect construction and absolutely balanced poses. He understands them, but lets his spontaneity dominate his creative statements.

The top Disney animators have all the technical principles down, but lack spontaneity, design and specificity.

Spence manages to bring all this stuff together in perfect harmony.

------------------------------------
STUDENTS CAN LEARN FASTER WITH SPENCE

When you look at his drawings, you can clearly see each principle at work-which is why I recommend to cartoon students to use these model sheets to study, copy and learn your basics from. I will warn beginners to stay away from Scribner, because you get distracted by how wild his drawings are and will pick up the things he rushes through (like sometimes hasty construction or unbalanced awkward poses).



Does Irv ever Cheat? Sure...but when he does it's totally on purpose, in the clear and obvious. It's not an uneducated collection of mistakes that some people call "That's my style, man".
In this drawing, George's eyes do not follow the center line of his head. They are tilted to the left-however, they still flow; they don't look flat and don't exist on their own plane in front of the head.

The few cheats are on purpose, either to make a funny expression, or to make a cleaner design.

I always thought Spence was wasted animating for Tom and Jerry cartoons. The animators basically just had to move Joe's drawings from pose to pose using Bill's timing. Joe's poses are great, butdo limited and repetitive. There wasn't a lot of room to express any of your own acting, posing or cartoony ideas. It was a formula.

A good animator could just do what he was told, make it smooth and finish early to go play golf. Which apparently is what Irv did every week. I heard he would complete his quota by Thursday, then take Friday off to go shoot a few holes.

I also heard from other classic animators that he didn't think much about cartoons in his offtime. It was just a good job to him. He was so natural to it all, that I guess he didn't feel like there was anything to explore.

Whether that's true or not, he was a great animator and his stuff is really fun to watch.

Irv's animation for Iwerks is a lot more inventive, cartoony and looser than his Tom and Jerry work. It's much easier to spot his style. Same with his work for Avery. There is also a story that he didn't like working for Tex as much as Joe, because it was harder. Maybe someone knows more about this and can add some stories in the comments.

IS THIS IRV?

I always assumed this was Irv's animation but someone has said he thought it might be someone else.

It sure looks like his stuff. Irv always drew teeth with rounded blunt ends, very balloony but flowing bodies and a certain way of drawing toes.

There are a lot of scenes (like this below) in this cartoon that look nothing like the lion in the model sheet that Irv drew,

but these others look just like it and move like other scenes in other cartoons that I know for sure are him.

Either way, it's a brilliantly animated and hilarious scene!







Not Irv Spence
[Henpecked+<span class=



Here are some drawings from scenes not by Irv. By comparison with his models, these look very stiff and awkward and have no inherent sense of design. The contrasts have been really toned down from Irv's models.

Of course the animation and gags are still really funny.

Here's a model sheet done by Walter Clinton, a very funny animator.

See, I wouldn't recommend young cartoonists study this, because:
The principles are not as clear or well understood as they are in Irv's drawings.
The line of action is broken up, the silhouettes are not clean, the construction is uncertain.

Of course, they are still funny drawings and much better than anything being done today, but if you trying to learn how old cartoons work, this will confuse you, because so many of the rules are broken.

Irv's drawings are crystal clear, so take advantage of them.

I stole these images from Kevin Langley's great site, so I hope he doesn't mind. Go there and discover lots more great stuff!

http://klangley.blogspot.com/search?q=irv+spence

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Tom and Jerry Layouts - functional and elegant

I found these beautiful layouts from a Tom and Jerry cartoon. They are probably drawn by Dick Bickenbach. Dick was an animator before he became a layout artist so he knew how to make his poses functional for the animators.

These drawings have everything I always talk about in my lessons.

They not only have all the principles of good cartoon drawings, they do the job they are supposed to. They don't merely work as individual drawings. They work functionally as layouts.

The function of layouts is:

to tell the story in continuity
to show each important change in expression, pose, story, event

To be staged clearly, so that you can easily see what is happening
negative shapes, strong lines of action
with all the details of the characters flowing along the lines of action and construction

to leave enough room in the frame for the characters to move



Poses that compose well together



Now Tom and Jerry is a very conservative cartoon series compared to Clampett's, Avery's and even Jones' cartoons. Bickenbach was a very conservative cartoonist and animator working on very conservative cartoons.But, these drawings and cartoons use the exact same principles, tools and functionality that the more creative cartoons do.

On top of that they are very handsome, stylish in a manly conservative fashion and that is completely admirable and awe inspiring from a standpoint of skill and professionalism.


Ed Benedict made fun of Dick's work sometimes, just on the grounds that it wasn't very imaginative and that shocked me. To someone of my generation who worked in an environment where almost nobody had real drawing skill, or functionality, let alone style, Dick stood out as a giant cartoonist.
I would kill to have artists of this caliber work on my cartoons.

A talented animator that worked for me once has his own series now and he complained to me the other day about how the youngest artists on his team had no drawing chops whatsoever. To say nothing of functionality.

I assume that that is because people in their early 20s grew up accepting the primitive execution of South Park, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Dora and other TV cartoons that have no discernible artistic values or storytelling skills at all.

People of my generation also worked on crap and had no good training either, but we at least grew up watching the great cartoons, so the standards we aimed at were much higher.

Today we have no standards to shoot for. Complete amateurism is considered perfectly acceptable by studios, networks and worst of all, the audience.



Dick here worked in an age of supremely high standards, and among the great cartoonists of the day, he was in the upper echelon.

His drawings are not only functional and expert, he has a real charming and elegant subtle style.

You can buy these drawings by the way here:

http://www.animationartgallery.com/atomandjerryvintage.html


Here are some modern cartoon drawings to compare.Symmetrical cluttered frames, no composition, stiffness, no thought or planning involved.
I'm not picking on this particular show. It's no worse or better than a million other modern cartoons out there.

It's a good example of no skill whatsoever.

No principles
No Composition, no poses, let alone opposing poses
not functional

emotionless

soulless

Dead on every level

It's not the artists' fault that:

Networks don't run classic cartoons on TV anymore

The audience's senses have been dulled by uncreative sensory-absent entertainment

schools don't teach anything concrete

Executives don't know what they are looking at

Cartoonists have to follow bad scripts


No, it's not the artists' fault, but it sure is a damn shame to be entering a dark age so shortly after the brightest time in human history.

Friday, March 21, 2008

Rocky and Bullwinkle Step By Step

The difference between a thoughtful cartoonist and a random cartoonist is that the thoughtful one organizes all the elements that make up his drawings into a whole. He is thinking clarity of design, functionality and then an appealing arrangement of the shapes. Style happens only as an afterthought. After the important drawing and design principles have been covered.


An inexperienced and unskilled cartoonist thinks of the individual pieces and his personal style and ends up with a cluttered, disconnected uncontrolled random image.

The drawings from the first episode of Rocky and Bullwinkle are skilled organized images that display most of the classic cartoon principles. On the surface, you may look at them and think, "Oh! That's that 'UPA style' where everything is simple, designy and flat!"

Based upon that superficial observation you might then decide whether you like it or not. People who don't like things to look too simple will think "Oh that's easy to do. There are hardly any details."

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0785121013.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

this has a lot of details and some reasonable drawing skill, but no design or organization of the total image. Too many details can make an image hard to read and not have a point of view.

People who love UPA because it is superficially simple will think. "What genius! There are hardly any details!"


1) LINE OF ACTION
AND OPPOSING LINES OF ACTION.
Cartoonists use lines of action to express characters' attitude through the body. A line of action is even more primordial than a skeleton. Once you have decided on your line of action, then you form your character along that path.

When you have 2 characters together you need to balance each of their body attitudes together so that:

1) They read clearly
2) that we know the difference between them, either as characters in general or their individual attitudes at the moment
3) They create an appealing or aesthetic balance.

http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/11/composition-7-compose-your-poses.html


I picked this image because it has a very simple pair of lines of actions, just to make this point clear.

Here is an image with no thought to lines of action, let alone opposing ones.
Here is an image with a nonsensical attempt at line of action:

I see young artists do this all the time. They put a curve in the body, thinking they are drawing a line of action.
Line of action is a tool that points your character in a direction. It has to have balance and go somewhere-forward backward, etc.

This drawing has no direction or attitude. It is merely bent. Bullwinkle's huge head in this position would cause him to fall backwards. It's a very awkward uncontrolled drawing.
2 Proportions
Proportions do a lot to help or hurt your drawings. Even proportions tend to look generic and bland. Odd proportions are more interesting.

http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/06/animation-school-8-proportions-affect.html

Bullwinkle has very unique proportions. He has an extra long torso and tiny skinny legs.
His skull is much smaller than his muzzle.

Even the structure of his torso has uneven proportions. The chest area is shorter than his belly.

Bullwinkle's proportions contrast strongly against Rocky's more even "cute" proportions.

Here is a drawing that doesn't use Bullwinkle's contrasted uneven proportions:

Hi muzzle is more nearly the size of his skull. The body is the same size as his head. His body is not as skinny as the god drawing we are discussing. All contrasts have been dulled down.

3 Construction and Negative Shapes- Bullwinkle


I combined these 2 concepts because I couldn't figure out how to separate them.

Bullwinkle has sensible construction in the basic shapes that form him. As I was putting together these shapes, I had to look at the relationship between each shape and the next.

Negative shapes:
I do this by looking at the shapes of the spaces between them. These empty spaces are every bit as important as the filled spaces.

The empty spaces help us see the forms. Unskilled artists tend to have cluttered drawings. What makes them cluttered? There are no spaces- or no planned spaces.

The spaces should have appealing shapes too.

Note the thought in this drawing-not every part of the filled structures have the same amount odd spaces between them.

The arm on the left is close to Bullwinkle's side, while the arm on the right is much more in the clear where you can see it. The artist wants you to see that arm. It is waving. If the other arm also had the same amount of large space between it and the body, then it would compete for attention with the right arm.

Here is a picture made by someone not conscious of the usefulness and appeal of negative shapes:


Construction: Parts of Bullwinkle that in the finished drawing are made up of smaller parts are well organized. They fit within the larger forms.

His Antlers have a very definite overall shape. They aren't just wiggly lines. The negative shape in between them helps define their overall shape.


Unlike these:


Fingers are part of the hand shape. The hand flows out of the arm.
Rocky's proportions are more even than Bullwinkle's but not totally even. He is a bit more than 2 heads high. His design lies more in his details than in his form, but that's for the next post...


Note that Rocky's construction flows along his line of action. I have seen many artists start out with a line of action, but then lose it when they plop the construction on top of it. It happens all the time.

How did this artist avoid that problem? Compare the left side of Rocky's body to the right side. The right side puffs out more. It is a convex curve. The line on the other side is straighter. It doesn't puff out. This makes Rocky appear to have his chest coming towards us.

I am always harping on my artists not to add big lumpy details that break up the silhouettes and lines of action in their drawings. Your final drawings should have clarity of direction and attitude, and too many lumps and details that stick out of the silhouette eat those concepts up.



Raff here missed that subtlety - as many artists do. But now that I've explained it, I'm sure he will get it on his next try, and be a much richer man for it!




SO WHERE DOES STYLE COME IN?

I'll explain that in the next post. I'll also add the details of the characters and show how the they follow same principles that I discussed here.

Style is the last element of a good drawing. If your drawing doesn't have all these other principles in it, then it won't have style. It will just be a jumble of mistakes.

Monday, March 10, 2008

1st Season Rocky and Bullwinkle - Great Design and Style






They had some really good layout artists and designers on the first episodes of Rocky and Bullwinkle.


Here are some images from the first and 2nd episode. I don't who the designer/layout artist is, but he is topnotch.

His drawings have all the classic principles -

PRINCIPLES OF GOOD CARTOON DRAWING

PLUS

Style

Design

Every pose he does of Bullwinkle is different in the details. They all follow the general idea of Bullwinkle-the basic shapes, the basic proportions, yet the artist experiments with the specifics in every single pose.

You can describe Bullwinkle's designs in general terms-with adjectives.
He is tall and thin
He has a long neck
short skinny legs
knobby knees
A furry peanut shaped torso
His head is made of two shapes, a small rounded cranium and a larger droopy nose and muzzle.
Goofy eyes

The exact dimensions of all these adjectives is not set in stone. A great designer can play with the proportions, angles and specific details and still make the characters recognizable.

There is no tracing of model sheets.

The artist messes around with the specific details to keep everything organic, alive....and artistic.

FUNCTIONAL FIRST, STYLE AND DESIGN 2ND

The variations on the general theme of Bullwinkle are not totally arbitrary either. The artist makes sure his poses are functional first-they tell the story, they show us the emotion of the character, they act and they are perfectly staged so we can tell what's going on.

http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2007/01/functional-drawings1-draw-with-purpose.html

These variations from "model" are done with extreme control, guided by instinct and taste.
Today, this seeming freedom can be misinterpreted as having no rules. An amateur artist who considers himself a designer ends up drawing anarchic shapes that don't fit together, what we sometimes call "wonky". It's a misunderstanding of the 50s style of design.

EPISODE 1








Note that the characters evolve from the first episode to the second. The first episode drawings are fun and creative, but by the 2nd, the artist is comfortable with characters and is in "the zone" He now understands them intimately and is able to be a lot freer with the designs and poses.

EPISODE 2
Totally clear staging and silhouettes.



I love the way they drew Rocky back then too. He's so much more appealing and streamlined than the lumpy disjointed thing he became.The proportions of many famous cartoon characters tend to get evened out with time. They lose fun, spontaneity and life.Yikes!


The mouth animation is really creative and fun in this early stuff.

These 2 close ups of Bullwinkle have completely different proportions, but does the viewer notice?

His nose is turned down above, and up below. Why not?

I love the odd proportions-the tiny hands compared to the giant head. Great designers use strong contrasts in their shapes and sizes.
The shapes in this image are fantastic. So much thought! Look at the way Rocky's eyes are angled apart at the top.
His skull slopes back and the eyes follow that plane.
The interesting angles in his flying cap.
The organic cube.
The keys that splay outward at bottom.

This artist is very observant and creative at the same time.


How cool was Boris?
I also like the thick itchy lines. I wonder what they inked the cells with? It must have been done by an artist too, because it's done with such flair.


Genius!




I really like this UPA closed eye theory. It's abstract yet still drawn to wrap around the face.



Wow!

This stuff is pure cartoon candy.





You know who this artist reminds me of?

George Baker. It's a crunchy angular sort of style that still has underlying great drawing principles. I loved the covers of these comics when I was a kid. Still do!


Super crunchy!
Goddamn I like these drawings.

If you gotta do limited animation, use great drawings I always say. They don't cost that much. Just hire real designers and don't step on them.



I recommend this dvd with a big warning:

It has some great drawings here and there.
The Fractured Fairy Tales are generally good design and well animated.
Some of the bumpers are really clever and beautiful

BUT!

The people who put this out really did a number on the cartoons.

DVNR
Different voices! - In some cartoons the voices have been changed!
Rerecorded music
The wrong title sequence-it's not the first season title sequence which was really cool.

I can't understand the logic of messing with classic film and TV. Especially when they market it as "original" - "The complete First Season" which is a flat out lie.

If they know that collectors want the films untouched by executives, why do they waste the money changing everything?

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Goofy's Floppy Principles

Here's some animation from my favorite period of Disney. I love the character design and the way it moves.The late 30s is when they were discovering and polishing the basic animation principles that we still sort of base modern cartoons on only we don't remember exactly how they work or what to use them for.
The scene is interesting, because it has nothing to do with story or acting. It's just what they used to call "business". It exists purely to remind us about Goofy and to have some fun bouncy animation.

Warner Bros. cartoons used these same principles to tell more individual and original stories and to assert the artist's own world views, but it's interesting to see the principles here stripped of opinion and individuality- existing in wholesome purity.
Line of Action and Clear Silhouette


Overshoot past the keys for accents

Settle into the final pose after overshoot.

Everything is bouncy and timed to music.

Many of the actions move on arcs. One pose will squash down in the middle of the action to move into the next pose.
Always feature the ass.

And the groin is good too.


http://cartoonthrills.org/blog/Dis/magmick37/GOOFYPRINCIPLESPure.mov

Cartoons like this are all about the principles. They aren't very funny and nobody has specific personalities, especially not the director. These are strictly the basics drawn in a very appealing graphic style.

I kinda wish we could have a studio that would go back to these basics and from there move forward into individual styles and customization.

Today's full animation style is such a specific small collection of cliched actions that it is very hard to move forward from there.

I actually saw a movie the other day that didn't have all the stock acting and motions of most modern fully animated features.

It had a depressing drawing style to match the depressing subject matter and is not really my kind of thing but I was The image “http://parsonsillustration.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/persepolis432.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

impressed to see that the way it moved seemed more customized to what was happening in the story. It wasn't a collection of stock actions.

If only we could apply that kind of clear thinking to entertainment animation.

Sunday, January 27, 2008

First Steps For Ross - Basic Construction

This blog is getting so big now and so full of every level of cartooning concepts that it might be hard for students to find some of the basic lessons.

Here are what I think are the most important first tools of cartoon drawing. Constructing the body and the head. Without understanding these, almost every other artistic concept will be vague and mysterious. You can't really understand any of this stuff just by reading it. You have to actually do it, and do it a lot. Practice and self-criticism will help ram the understanding into your head for good.


Whether you want to do animation, inbetweening, story, storyboards, layout or almost any other aspect of cartooning for animation, the key to all those concepts starts right here:
http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/pbanimation02-745508.jpg

Monday, December 10, 2007

Cartoony + Principles - 1942 - Eatin' On The Cuff

Watch this pure cartoon fun:
http://www.cartoonthrills.org/blog/Clampett/Cuff/spiderlady01small.mov
Clampett combined Fleischer's cartooniness with Disney skills and added his own unique imagination and control to them.