(final animation)
The final animation. A little wonky, but still fairly accurate, and an interesting test nonetheless. Obviously, no one would ever animate a square like this in the real world. They would just set two keyframes and be done with it. But as I said in my previous post, this was just a simple attempt to maintain precision of an object by hand, since that's really what traditional animation is all about, working frame by frame.
My ultimate findings? Precision animation takes A LOT of laying things out in advance, and A LOT of practice.
(final animation w/ vertex points)
Here's an interesting alternate look at the animation. I've provided every final animation point, which I used to systematically plot out the lines of the square. This gives me a much easier glance at where I went wrong, since the dots clearly don't form a perfect circle. In hindsight, I really should have attempted to plot all of these on one frame in the beginning (each set of 4 were actually all on their own separate frame), so I could immediately gauge how accurate my rotation would be.
Looking at this second gif also gives me ideas of how various software/computers themselves might actually interpret keyframe commands. Obviously, it wouldn't just be hitting a set of dots on a grid as is the case with my animation, but something more like a spline curve, with various points dictated by how many frames it spreads over. I'm fascinated with that kind of stuff, so I could definitely see revisiting this with a set of "math animations". There's something very cool about translating numbers and coordinates into visual representations/animations. After all, that's the basis of all computer graphics, right?
Alright, I'm talking too much now, I gotta stop. haha But my final takeaways? 1. I need a lot of practice in laying out animations, and 2. I think I'm gonna do some math-based animations in the future. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment