Showing posts with label thinking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thinking. Show all posts

Thursday, 6 December 2012

MA Artefact 01



So here is the second pass at the scene i have been working from. As an artefact, this has been built up using the pipeline that is taught at animation mentor. The idea of this first artefact was use reference footage to improve timing and spacing of my animation. The feedback was that the resulting action spaced out effectively but was very pantomime in the gestures. There is quite a bit of over-action and not enough refinement or internal monologue coming from the character. Looking back over the other elements of the artefact highlighted issues with the character design and the reference material. The design of the character did not take into consideration both the aesthetic and movement required. This will no doubt be a result of the character being designed without a specific goal and prior to the narrative I had conceived. There were several issues i had during the generation of the two passes, mainly caused by the size of the hands. The pointing finger dominated much of the scene, which I think is why there is such feeling of over action, which isn't aided by the slight walks in each direction; the latter is a result of the reference footage shot. The footsteps timing was used as the foundation for the performances pacing. A positive offset of this was that the weighting felt much stronger than i have previously done. What was interesting was driving all of this was my own internal monologue; from character design and reference footage of myself.

The other issue i came across was the characters break for the thought process. I noticed while animating that it was far too quick but thought I’d run with it as it kept with the rhythm of the piece. This was noticed by my supervisors, which prompted a discussion regarding my interests. In truth i was waiting for the issue (of the thinking time) to be raised. At the time i knew it was wrong, but my own stimulation from watching it flow overrode (and it represents a good limitation of live-action reference). However, as discussed at the very start of the project that sounds influence on timing and spacing was my primary interest, and after revising it towards my longer-term aspirations, that of character performance, we established that it could actually could be the primary focus of the research, and the others - performance, timing and confusion as secondary purposes that ultimately feed the project. I feel it is good to have made this distinction because it helps build the context and direction towards what I am trying to achieve.

The narrative of the piece was a play on the virtual puppet being given constant (Rhythmic) instructions. Upon meeting the crossroads (A Glitch in the system) he suddenly has to think for himself, which creates the confusion. One question asked was, is the performance right for the story? By this, was the consistent rhythm right? To pull this back to the internal monologue, surely the reaction would be more reserved and frozen up upon reaching the glitch, which is true, I feel it would have been better in that regard also. To conclude, this artefact shows why reference material should be suitable for the narrative. It also signifies the importance of designing and producing a character fit for purpose. It has also highlighted that on some subconscious level I am stimulated and engaged through rhythm through other purposes than just storytelling in a large studio process.

Next step: I am going to produce some really short pieces of a character showing confusion. To increase productivity and to start thinking about how rhythm can be expressed with narrative.

7 Acting Principle - Ed Hooks


Ed Hooks lists seven acting principles in Acting for Animators, which he describes as essential. They are:
1) Thinking tends to lead to conclusions, and emotion tends to lead to action.
2) We humans empathize only with emotion
3) Theatrical reality is not the same as regular reality
4) Acting is doing; acting is also reacting
5) Your character should play an action until something happens to make him play a different action
6) Scenes begin in the middle not the beginning
7) A scene is negotiation

In order to break down their context and relationship to the animator i am going to list where i feel they sit in the storytelling process of studio animation, and where they fit into that process.
1 & 2 are essential to performance and are subservient to the action of the narrative.
3 i feel is significant to the writing stage (but is still vital for the animator to understand)
4 i feel sits between 3 and 1 & 2 and is important for negotiating the action.
5 again sits just after the writing stage but also important to the establishing the chronology of the action
6 Scenes begin in the middle not the beginning. This is certainly true for live action. (In pantomime we always see the decision to leave home but never the actual leaving, we then join them mid journey for example). However, for animation we can extend this into performance.
7 this, as stated by Hooks, is suited to the scriptwriting stage.
Relationship Graph

This graph is my interpretation and breakdown of Hooks first principle. Thinking is thoughts and decisions that lead to conclusions ('I am going to do this'). Emotion (Automatic value response) is feeling and leads to action ('How i am going to do this'). It is a combination of the two that generates performance.

Sunday, 2 December 2012

Wall-E and Emotion

Wall-e and Eves love story has quite the emotional arc we are so accustomed to from Pixar films. What i am going to talk about is the scene at the end, where Wall-e has been damaged and is removed from emotive performance and becomes his physiology - a robot. 

Eve starts as the robot looking for life forms to bring humans back to earth. Wall-e falls in love with her and cares for her during an unfortunate event (I am cutting a huge chunk of the story out here, because if your reading this, or this blog and you have not seen it yet, im very concerned!) anyway, eve realises that wall-e cared for her and falls for him. While back in space, Wall-e gets damaged and eve returns them both to earth to repair him. Once back at Wall-e's storage unit Eve applies a new circuit board etc. The result is that Wall-e goes into what i describe as auto-pilot mode. He is un-aware of who eve is, what they've been through and their connection. They are eventually re-united and there love resolved in quite a charming way. 

So, how does this work? Wall-e's gesture and movement throughout the film is like that of a nervous turtle, constantly moving his arms and legs back in constantly. However he is a curious guy, and always move to things that attract his interest. (also note the character design - Wall-e is squared off at every opportunity to show brawn and eve is curved like that of a ladies hips). With this consistency in movement and action it allows a juxtaposition to be formed when his memory is removed. Once repaired, his eyes are static, his body movement rigid, his gestures are not cautious; they are systematic. His eyes do not subdue at their far sides and peer in - which he does a lot to eve throughout the film. Basically, he loses his emotion, we lose his empathy and in doing so we gain eves. This transition in very important. Eve trys on last time 'to bring him back' but giving up, she leans in, a spark transfers between them (it happened earlier in the film the first time they both 'connected') and she turns away softly, head down, as if she has lost all hope. As her hand drifts from his, his tense stopping her - his gestures are again un-rigid, it really is a nice storytelling moment.

The change in the gestures movement is what carries the narrative. By becoming completely rigid the audience physically see the change in him. His body language is no longer responsive to his relationships; he is cold and systematic. His eyes do not acknowledge Eve, there is no increased tension, this removes any communication of thought and emotion. However, we still accept he is real. At no point do the audience believe he isn't. This also allows us to empathize with eve. We feel her experience loss, the lower of the head, the shape of her eyes cutting in from the top corners. At that peak moment when she leans in, just before she turns away, her head almost touches his and the electricity transfers through and the result is that her love brings him out of his coma. 

After reading more of Ed Hooks he lists 7 acting principles (which im going to talk more about in a separate post) but this moment covers the first two he lists - 

1) Thinking tends to lead to conclusion and emotion tends to lead to action. 

2) We humans empathize only with emotion.

I've struggled to find a source online with the clip in. I have found that there are many 'FanVidz' online and are just awful. Please watch this video from 3.18 whilst on mute. You've been warned: your ears will suffer. 



Below is one example of a fan vid that has been animated externally as an afterthought. I'm posting the link as it has the same two characters break the two principles listed above and shows the difference between a skilled animator and a not so skilled one...

http://youtu.be/k1BJxKd7NUo

Sunday, 18 November 2012

Starting to define 'confusion'


Confusion.

Confusion n. The act or result of confusing; a confused state.

Confuse 1. To bring into disorder, to mix up. 2. To throw mind or feelings of (a person) into disorder; to destroy the composure of. 3. To mix up in the mind, to fail to distinguish between. 4. To make unclear.

(Dictionary 2001)

Confused adj. 1 Puzzled, perplexed, baffled, mystified, bewildered. Opposite: Enlightened. 2 disordered, disorderly, muddled, mixed up, in disarray. Opposite: orderly.

Confusion n. 1 bewilderment, perplexity, puzzlement, mystification, uncertainty, opposite: understanding. 2 misperception, misunderstanding, mix up, muddle, mistake, opposite: clarity. 3 disorder, chaos, rumoil, upheaval, commotion, opposite: order. 4 embarrassment, awkwardness, disorientation, uncertainty, self-consciousness, opposite: confidence.

(Thesaurus 2002)

Lazarus labelled both confusion and bewilderment as functional mental confusion. He says ‘…they are bound to have emotional correlates and consequences without being emotions [themselves].’ (Lazarus 1991 Pg.83) This corresponds with the dictionary definition that the state of confusion is a result of cognitive processes, and suggests confusions relationship with emotion is that of a catalyst. Function mental confusion must derive from thinking. This is an important element of creating a convincing character performance.

There are other neurological conditions that recognise confusion as a symptom. Senility, dementia and delirium are such examples. Zarit & Zarit citing Lipowski (2011 Pg.72) lists other meanings, at least medically, to the word confusion:

·      -Disorientation
·      -Inability to think clearly or coherently
·      -Poor contact with reality
·     - Reduced awareness of environment

Regarding delirium, Zarit & Zarit (2011 Pg.71) describes its onset as ‘… [A] person who has been functioning adequately suddenly develops global impairment in intellectual functioning.’ They goes onto say (2011 Pg.73) ‘Thinking is often characterised by a dreamlike quality with some merging of dream content with reality.’ It’s important to remember that confusion is a symptom of delirium and not the cause. There are other symptoms that could be the driving force or instigator of confusion. Other symptoms include delusions, hallucinations and illusions. As delirium is a driving force for confusion, and confusion being a state rather than an emotion, an animator might be inclined to borrow actions from other symptoms of delirium to portray confusion, such as a series of gestures that make no readable, literal or chronological sense (dream content with reality for instance). I would suggest there is a risk of miss-communicating the action (thus narrative) to the audience. Particularly when the other meanings listed above would appear to have more substance. If we look at the types of delirium it is possible to start to build possible characteristics to apply to performance.

‘The types of performance have long been recognised (Lipowski, 1990; Ross, Peyser, Shapio, & Folstien, 1991). The first type is characterised by hyperalertness and hyperactivity; patients are restless, agitated and vigilant. In contrast, the second involves hypoalertness and hypoactivity. Patients are quiet and subdued and maybe drowsy. The third pattern involves the fluctuations between the other two types … Patients have difficulty focusing and sustaining or shifting attention.’ (Zarit & Zarit, 2011 Pg.73)

The issues for character performance arise when applying these characteristics to characters that are naturally defined by them (hyperactivity for example). However, with the symptoms physiological reactions being at opposite extremes of considered normal reactionary behaviour speeds, there appears to be an option to suit different character beats.

In science we can see examples of what drives confusion, such as neurological conditions, but in storytelling terms, it is the narrative itself that will drive the confusion. If we look into cognitive behaviours rather than neurosis, such as irrationality in practical cognition, we can see an example of what confusion drives, and gain a deeper understanding of where it is situated in narrative character performance.

Irrationality

‘One way people can behave irrationally is by being broken. If a person suffers a stroke, he may behave irrationally. But this is not the kind of irrationality I am talking about … So when I speak of irrationality in this paper, I am only concerned with those varieties of irrationality that arise in intact cognizers.’ (Pollock 2006 Pg 4)

So confusion can drive irrationality, but irrationality is not confined to confusion. The above quote is important because it suggests that the initial driving force does not have to have a middleman. This exposes a problem in storytelling; if irrational choices in performance arrive from an un-established source we could potentially arrive at the same issue as mentioned above, of miscommunication to the audience. We do not want to risk the loss of believability.

To understand confusion in performance, we have to understand the relationships of conditions and states as actions and reactions to narrative objectives. By touching the surface of relationships in and around confusion we can see an action and reactionary sequence. Delirium (action) can cause (the reaction) confusion and confusion (itself an action) can drive irrationality (also a reaction). If we replace delirium, with say a choice to either go left or right as a road splits (action), and irrationality with a decisive choice (reaction), confusion then, still the central component (action and reaction – the act or result) is thinking. So if a character does not think he cannot be confused. 

Definition (So Far):

Confusion is the process of thinking. Other aspects such as how and why are reliant on the narrative. Exploring whether real-life physiological reactions or narrative subtext will be more efficient in conveying narrative will be fertile ground.

I will be exploring the non-verbal non-expression performance first. 

References

DICTIONARY, 2001. The Oxford Popular English Dictionary. Bath: Parragon.

LAZARUS, R., 1991. Emotion & Adaption. New York: Oxford University.

POLLOCK, J., 2006. Irrationality and Cognition. University of Arizona.

THEASAURUS, 2002. Encarta Essential Thesaurus. London: Bloomsbury.

ZARIT, J. & ZARIT, S., 1991. Mental Disorders in Older Adults: Fundamentals of Assessment and Treatment. 2nd ed. New York: Gilford Press.

Sunday, 28 October 2012

Group Tutorial: Things I don't like

On Thursday we had to present things we either liked or disliked. I came prepared with two things i didn't like, they were quite specific compared to others, so here they are with a rationale...


In the Corpse Bride intro, as the hand writes there is absolutely no weight or pressure being applied to any of the movements. No pressure or muscle movement from within the hand itself makes it look dead, and causes one to question what is the driving force? The elbow appears to be the top of the chain. The wrist only articulates any movement when easing in and out to the page. On has to assume that as a stop motion that they did not 'animate' the whole of the physiology. 

Animating the whole physiology, even when not in shot, is important. All movements force is driven primarily from the trunk and without consideration can cause performances to look off. This can be seen below in my Viva Voca posted below, and was also established in a workshop i attended last year about Laban movement theory held by Elisza Ribeiro.
However, having never worked with stop-motion i'm not fully aware of the technical capabilities. Although, i am aware to produce a model with such flexible hand movement could have adverse affects regarding control. This would surely make it far-less cost effective, and is the most probable cause. This brings me to the aesthetic of the work. Compare it to Nightmare Before Christmas, it appears CG, whereas NBC is clearly stop-motion. However innovative NBC was, we can feel the textures, this sets context. The Corpse Bride however, at the benefit of technological capability, has an ambiguous context. This ambiguousness causes the conflict in shots such as the writing hand in my opinion (because in CG it is entirely possible to general such movement). 

Further on in the scene, the towns folk all follow the beat of the music, which is accompanied by a tick. This breaks the rules for creating performance but is acceptable as its function is to set the context - a boring, monotonous and repetitive life that the protagonist (not bound by such conditions) needs to escape. We did highlight however the larger characters lacked weight in their walks. 

This was not however the worst example i could find. Roll on DFS, and their Arthur Christmas endorsed ad.


There are many fundamentals wrong with this characters performance it's difficult to decide where to start. Firstly, in gestural terms, his trunk and legs are not synchronised with the hands and head. In animated performance, it is never advisable to separate a bodies movement into two actions that do not influence each other. A coherent performance will be difficult to produce for 8 seconds of animation, due to lack of thinking time, but it clearly does not work having both separate parts running constantly, with no structural narrative purpose. The second aspect that doesn't work is the expressions. They neither have storytelling purpose nor any emotional value. The character is dead behind the eyes. A reason for this might be a poor designed character that was suitable for the limited emotional value they provided for the original feature film. (One thinks to Studio AKAs lead in Lost and Found, but they had more time for better timing and spacing, and relied on gesture over expression, and aided by an narrater. Remember the design principle, Form follows Function?)

I can hear you say well the dialogue doesn't offer much so how do we convey an engaging performance with a limited character?

This can be difficult, but the answer is simple: planning.

They had not established 2 things: Storytelling poses and the major/minor emphasis points. What it appears they did do was produce a walk cycle that would composite with the length of the distance to the door in 8 seconds and bake gestures on top. I have no conclusive evidence of this, but based on experience this is my prediction. [I am in the process of finding out who produced the ad to find this information out, i have contacted VTR North and Ink Films who worked together to produce the 2011 ads]

This draws me back to my comments regarding Corspe Bride above. All movement starts from the trunk. We have two performances in the DFS advert between the physiology causing a conflict. The problem essentially starts where they have used the walk cycle as the storytelling pose - this is okay - but it doesn't deviate. It's mechanical. The upper body doesn't move on the major emphasis points. This is a must to work with the excited tone in the voice, and ad purpose to the dialogue.

Major emphasis points = whole body
Minor emphasis points = arms + head

The storytelling poses tend to be most appropriate for Major emphasis points - a significant moment. The minor emphasis points are ideal for the transitional period.

This brings us back to the face. It makes it difficult to comment again because i have not seen the rig set up. In the discussion we agreed that the poor emotional expressions could be down to a poor rig. To really find out the answer we would need to find out if they used a character that was produced for the film. In the clip below, watch from about 1.15 in, the performance provided here shows what can be achieved if a rig from the film was used. This also raises the question of if it is from the film, what was its role in the film? was it a primary/secondary or background character? 


Once i have a response from my initial enquiry i shall be asking these questions (if applicable). The above clip is important because it expresses storytelling significance, and uses major and minor emphasis points as well as using expression. The character appears to be thinking, something that is clearly missing from the DFS advertisement. 

Check out the link below for more examples of how the character (if from the film and fully rigged) can move in terms of physiology. This is surely evidence enough to place blame at a poorly planned scene. 



When i have a response i shall update on another post.