Thursday, December 24, 2009

Heartaches Pilot 2

As Mom and Dad leave, we hear Mom still ranting...

Mom: "You know, it's not that that toy is just old, dirty and disgusting!...
...It's probably covered in germs! It'll give her scabies or something! Probably kill her! Then what will you say??!"

The Curly Fuzz Poodle sits up! Why, he's alive! Alive I tell you! He heard the whole wretched thing!
And he's got something to say about it!
He pulls his string (God it feels good) and a garbled voice box says very slowly: "I........L o v e .................Y o u...."Whoops! That's not it!
He tries again

Fuzz Poodle: "Y'know she's right! I AM old and disgusting! I'm nothing but a worthless...
(repeat) piece of..."
SHTUNK! The pull cord reels back in before he can finish his sentence. He sputters, trying to get the rest out. "PPP...PP...PPP..." (This is a constant frustration for him)
He yanks the string again and finishes the sentence really fast before the cord can retreat back into its rusty hole.

His lips flap frenziedly to get the notion out.
"piece of crap that will probably give Roxy a disease and kill her and it'll be all my fault for being a selfish old filthy bag of moldy stuffing!"
"Whew!" That was a toughy.

to be continued...

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

L.O. 8: Plan for multiple poses: Scene Planning For TV - Setups for storyboard and layout 5a - setups Rough Blocking

when you read through a storyboard, you look for scenes that use the same angle and same camera distance

http://jkcartoonstories.blogspot.com/2009/12/slabs-first-fist.html

when you find them, you try to design a layout that can use the same "setup" for all the scenes



In other words, one master Background that all the action can take place in

That means you have to plan how much space you need around the characters in order to be able to draw all the most extreme poses

Like all these images can use 1 setup:

This is a "long shot" That means the camera is far away enough to show the whole bodies of the characters.


so you have to plan all the drawings to work on the same background, and the sixes of the characters have to make sense from pose to pose

if they are on the bed they are smaller

if they are on the floor in the foreground they are bigger

if there are consecutive poses within a scene, the poses have to "flip" between each other

This lesson is to draw all these poses, so they use the same background, and that the consecutive poses flip.

You also of course have to remember everything from previous lessons - like negative space, style, not toning down the poses etc.

Questions?I went through all the scenes in the last setup and blocked out the spacing for all the poses and the background.

I haven't commited to any finished detailed drawings yet, because I wanted to make sure all the actions would fit into the scenes.
I had to push and pull shapes around to get the best possible positions.
all these poses have to register to the same BG as in the first pose.

The next step would be to start tightening up the drawings to make them look good.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Character Design 3: Layout Artist With Versatility, Conservatism, Style and Control


This drawing was not done by the designer, but it took design ability and drawing skill to do it. A lot!

All Ed gave the artists was this:
2 poses!The model sheet pack for Yogi Bear in 1958 was 2 pages high. As opposed to our 6 foot stacks of paper that we call models today and force hundreds of artists to strictly adhere to, no matter how stiff and ignorant the drawings are.
Even in 1965 there were still cartoonists who could really draw, that weren't abstracted specialists on an a broken assembly line. The last gasp before the hippies came.

Gene Hazelton (and the others who did these comics) were less specifically "character designers" than they were great draftsmen with style. They could draw just about anything - and from any angle. They didn't need all the poses and angles of the characters spelled out to them in model sheet packs.This is drawing functionally-drawing scenes on command. It requires more than raw talent or design sense. Yeah, these are very stylish and that's great - as a final topping to the strong compositions and solid drawing.I used to be impressed by fancy sketchbooks that young cartoonists showed me and have hired many cartoonists on that basis alone. I am more wary now. Even if you have raw talent, drawing one-eyed monsters and half naked girls floating in space is a far cry from being able to sit down and draw a careful scene of some event on purpose. ...That has very specific needs of staging, storytelling, continuity and a hundred other skills.
These panels are stylish yet very conservative at the same time. Conservative in the use of extreme self-control - in making the picture say what it's supposed to say and say it clearly and with finesse.
Granted, the stories aren't very funny or interesting, but then most comics and cartoons aren't. But if it was a funny story, artists like these would only make the story more powerful.

I could have the most talented sketchbook or Deviant Artist in the world working for me (and there are lots of them), but if he couldn't draw a folding chair in perspective on a beach he wouldn't be able to do this scene. He would sit and stare at the paper for days, or scribble madly hoping by some stroke of luck that a good looking picture might appear. I've seen it happen many times. Forcing some artists to be functional is just too much for them. They have been praised so long for their abstract sketchbook drawings, that controlling their pencils and forcing them to do something on purpose and on command is just too stressful and depressing.
Studios used to have a solution for this. They started beginners artists as assistants to already functional artists and they learned from the ground floor up. Now you gotta learn everything on your own and that's hard to do.

This above panel looks more like Iwao or Jerry Eisenberg than Hazelton, but who knows? All those guys could really draw.
Whether you like Hanna Barbera characters and their cartoons or not is besides the point. I am sure these artists could do anything I (or any other director) asked of them, and I could push them to be more exaggerated. Tex sure did.
These boxes are very slightly off-kilter, but only enough to make them cartoony and stylish, not enough to make them wonky or to confuse the viewer as to what positions they are inhabiting in space.
These layouts use all the principles and techniques I talk about. All the positive areas-the trees, the leaves, the characters are full of variety and interest-but they are all separated by spaces that are just as interestingly designed.
The poses are varied. They have lines of action and opposition to each other. They are asymmetrical, yet controlled and solid. This is an exercise of extreme balance. It takes an artist who is also a complex thinker to pull off layouts like this.

That's a nice down shot of the kid's head. It's not cheated like in modern cartoons where you just take a 3/4 head pose and tilt it down, making the character look like his neck is broken.
The spaces and the trees accentuate the exaggerated perspective of the ladder. The whole picture is designed, not just the character.
I love the shape of that mountain in the background. Its very subtle curves really make it seem huge and far away. The whole scene would be very difficult to draw, but Hazelton's flair makes it all look simple carefree and easy, like swimming with brand-name protection.
How many character designers can draw a solid simplified motorcycle?
Let alone in perspective.
Ranger Smith is sporting some fine bitch tits in this careful composition. This is surely Hazelton. You can tell by the cuteness of the mom and the kid. (How did Smith get such a hot wife?)
These trees and the composition really look like Eisenberg, but the characters don't. I'm confused about how they made these comics!
I always loved the title lettering in the HB comics. It was different and stylish every week. Nowadays, the marketing department demands that each show and character have an official trademarked title logo. Someone explain this oddity to me. Isn't variety more fun than stale sameness? Smells like lawyers ruining all the fun again.
These are definitely Hazelton kids. Drawing a running crowd and making everyone read clearly is not a simple task.
How many artists today would crap if the director came in and said "Draw a train in perspective screeching to a stop and partly coming off the rails."? I know I would! I'd make Vincent do it.
Anyway, I would trade a thousand "character designers" for 2 great layout artists with style. Hopefully someone out there can see why.

Thanks to Chris Lopez for digging up more great and rare treasures of cartoon art.
http://comicrazys.com/2009/12/18/yogi-bear-sundays-1965-1967-gene-hazelton/