Non vector Bug Art Animation Test

Toontoonz · Post by **Toontoonz** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:43 pm

Just a real rough test of non-vector art.
All art in the animation was originally painted with acrylic paints on canvas (not computer drawn); that is except for the brown tree branch which was drawn in Photoshop. The acrylic painted art was scanned into the computer.
All layers, parts, etc. were saved as .png image files and imported into Moho where they were given the bone and move them around a bit treatment.

What I was looking at in this test was what the art looked like when finally animated - was it sharp enough, look like the original, etc. Looks okay. Was not testing any animation elements. And testing to see if it slowed down the rendering much to use only .png files (answer - no, not really.)
Non-Vector Bug Art Test
1.9Mb. 320 x 240 pixels
Over 10 layers.
Blur added to background layer.
155 Frames/24 fps.
Time to render in Moho - about 2-3 minutes

bupaje · Post by **bupaje** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:49 pm

I like the style of the art. Really nice. For the record can you say what scanner and settings you scanned this in at? I have an aging one that is ok for lineart but eventually have to get something better.

jorgy · Post by **jorgy** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:03 pm

Very nice. I like the deep, rich look. This is the direction I'm thinking of going for my next animation.

Toontoonz · Post by **Toontoonz** » Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:46 pm

bupaje wrote:I like the style of the art. Really nice. For the record can you say what scanner and settings you scanned this in at? I have an aging one that is ok for lineart but eventually have to get something better.

The scanner is nothing special, actually a cheapo, low-budget one I got for the reason that it was slim and would fit in a suitcase when I travel (I scan in art I do while traveling)- Canon LiDE 50 - it´s about 3 years old. I don´t think they even make them any more. I think I paid around $50 for it.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=541966
When I scan I just scan at 200 or 300 dpi and save as a Photoshop file.
Nothing special was done to the scanned in image in Photoshop other than color correct it a bit and sharpen it - normal procedure.

For use in Moho I changed the dpi of each art file to 72 and the image was about 10 times bigger than what was used in the 320 x 240 pixel movie. (I reduced the images by about 90% in Moho.) Why that size? No particular reason - just always trying something new and different to see how Moho reacts.
However, this way I can zoom into the picture better if I want.

JCook · Post by **JCook** » Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:21 pm

Very nice job, toontoonz. I love the look. Before I viewed it I thought that you might have used photographs, but this is much better. It's very painterly, very rich-looking and lush. It reminds me of the paintings of Henri Rousseau, those lush, colorful, almost cartoon-like environments. Do you have a longer animation in mind, with a story, that you would do in this style? I'd love to see that.

Jack

Toontoonz · Post by **Toontoonz** » Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:50 pm

I mentioned in a previous post here that I brought the images into Moho at about 10 times the final size shown in the animation. I noted that this way I could zoom in for close-ups if I wanted to.

Below is an example of the same frame shown at the normal animation view (camera at 60 zoom) and then zoomed closer (camera at 20 zoom).

Note how one can now clearly the details of the art work in the closer view; one can even see the indivdual brush strokes when I painted the bug with acrylic paints. This detailed close up viewing was possible because I used a much larger image when I imported it and then reduced the size in Moho.

(Click for larger view.)

(Side note comment/question on the Moho camera zoom tool: Why is the zoom backwards in Moho to the way a camera works? When I use a 200 zoom lens on my camera everything is brought closer; zoomed in, when I use a 20 zoom lens everything is further away- a wide angle lens view. With Moho it is just the opposite- 20 is closer, 200 the object is further away. I guess there must be a logic or explanation I am missing.)

bupaje · Post by **bupaje** » Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:34 pm

Thanks for the info Toontoonz. I have a previous model of that scanner but my colored stuff comes in way too dark and something is always lost in trying to get it brighter. Guess I'll just use it for lineart until I can afford a new one though Kinkos does have a cheap digitizing service hmmm....

Toontoonz · Post by **Toontoonz** » Fri Jul 01, 2005 8:17 pm

JCook wrote:Very nice job, toontoonz. I love the look. Before I viewed it I thought that you might have used photographs, but this is much better. It's very painterly, very rich-looking and lush. It reminds me of the paintings of Henri Rousseau, those lush, colorful, almost cartoon-like environments. Do you have a longer animation in mind, with a story, that you would do in this style? I'd love to see that.

Jack

Thanks for the compliments.

This particular artwork is part of an illustration I did a couple years ago that was used as a limited-edtion 3-D construction print.

Regarding your question of do I have a longer animation in mind regarding these characters, the answer is no.
I have only been experimenting with Moho for a few months and am testing lots of things before committing myself to any commissioned work or longer animation projects that I have in mind.
I try different types of animating techniiques in Moho using different types of art to see what works and can I do it in a time efficient (read: profitable) manner. Looking for weaknesses (for example, the drawing tools of Moho), looking for answers on the Moho forum and seeing if there is an effective and efficient way around those weaknesses.
I am just about done with my experimenting in Moho.
Then I will disappear into the background as I move on to the next phase of my adventures in animation.

Post by **Lost Marble** » Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:50 pm

Toontoonz wrote:(Side note comment/question on the Moho camera zoom tool: Why is the zoom backwards in Moho to the way a camera works? When I use a 200 zoom lens on my camera everything is brought closer; zoomed in, when I use a 20 zoom lens everything is further away- a wide angle lens view. With Moho it is just the opposite- 20 is closer, 200 the object is further away. I guess there must be a logic or explanation I am missing.)

The number in Moho is the vertical field of view angle. The number on your camera is focal length. Field of view is an absolute angle, while the meaning of focal length depends on the size of your film or CCD. For example, a 200mm lens on a 35mm film camera is going to give a different amount of zoom (a different field of view) than a 200mm lens on a digital camera. Here's some more nitty-gritty information:

http://www.photo.net/learn/fov/

mr. blaaa · Post by **mr. blaaa** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 4:12 am

yes... the guys from lostmarble knew it all along

nice discussion