Animation, part 2 · 6:40am Sep 15th, 2016
I've linked this Youtube channel, Every Frame A Painting, two or three times in the past. Imma do it again. This is another good one. It's not even about movies or film editing this time, just Looney Tunes. Specifically, the director.
So much of this rings true to me. I liked the part about discipline, though I'll save that for another topic.
Jones believed it wasn't enough to just watch movies. You had to have interests outside of film. You had to study real life. Most of all, he encouraged this... reading.
Is it backwards if I take stuff from animation back to books?
This is why I keep linking this channel's videos, despite my low interest in filmmaking and editing. They're not really about technical stuff, but about effective communication. Techniques that don't directly translate to other art mediums, but could inspire new ideas with a little experimenting.
This is a flaw I see in a lot of MLP "analyze" videos, that they're actually unable to analyze episodes other than as a MLP fan, within the MLP setting. At that point it's nothing more than a review, and reviews are a dime a dozen on the internet. The show's not THAT deep on its own, so you'd need to bring something from an outside interest. The more successful analysts have done this with storytelling/writing, or psychology. I think there's plenty more possibilities.
This rule is what I've noticed in a lot of the best influential artists. You can easily tell they had outside interests and could combine them into their work. After them come a lot of copycats, still very talented, but only recycling what came before, better and flashier on the surface, but without fresh new ideas. The art gets incestuous, like breeding tiny dogs. Musicians who only cared about one genre of music. Writers who know nothing outside of their chosen genre. Videogame creators who only played retro videogames. Without new ideas, all one can hope for is to find a gimmicky twist 
, which probably won't last long.
Every action is dictated by what goes on inside of you. You have to be able to think the way the character thinks. If you can't tell what's happening by the way the character moves, you're not animating.
It helps to have the dialogue, but the dialogue is not the only thing that makes it work. The story should tell itself by the way it moves.
I love that this part is right when Pepe le Pew is shown hopping instead of walking or running, which was the direct inspiration for Pinkie Pie.
Maybe this point is rather specific to animation, but hold on to this thought. Let me connect it to something else I found......
Watching this music video is completely optional, it has nothing to do with my point, but it's fun.
That's right, abstract art can be fun too! 
Anyway, the reason for that is I saw the creator was inspired by an article someone had written....
The Very Models of Modern Cartoon Individuals
This is a great, interesting perspective that I don't see a lot in the fandom. A lot of animation details that you probably didn't understand, but maybe subconsciously noticed. and it's still amazing that Jayson Thiesson was so confident he could pull this off. the show didn't HAVE to go that extra mile, but it did.
Fan-artists teaching themselves to draw ponies like in the show have discovered that in defiance of the ponies’ basic physical similarity, an excellent exercise is to draw one of them without her mane or tail or unique eye shape, and try to make her recognizable as a specific pony purely through the facial expression and body language.
The viewer can instantly tell what kind of character each of them is just by glancing at the silhouettes of these two figures. ... The two of them don’t have to say a word or even make a face to let us know who they are. That’s specific acting right there, the kind even John K might appreciate.
Very similar to what Chuck Jones said above!
I'll have to try that drawing exercise sometime. But here's what I'm wondering.... can you do this specific acting in writing? 
This is the kind of discipline that could go a long way. You need a bit of restraint, otherwise you get into purple prose, describing every mundane little thing. But it's a good starting point for weeding out what we DON'T need. I already know what Fluttershy's colors are, and it tells me nothing about her personality, no more than "Jedi with the beard."
Let's take it a step further, and also remove dialogue from this hypothetical practice. Character voice is an important thing that a lot of writers are advised to practice and study, and it really helps to bring forth the different personalities in a conversation scene. You don't need annoying said-isms if the dialogue itself gives you everything you need to know. If done well, you don't even need the characters' names! However, the most common self-praise I see among skilled writers is that they pride themselves on good dialogue scenes, and..... hrmm, what if they couldn't rely on dialogue? Let the characters shut up for a little while. 
(this exercise is mostly meant for myself, not as a criticism of dialogue authors. you don't have to do it yourself, just me trying to figure out how I approach writing. but if it does inspire you to try something new, go right ahead! 
)
Body language, something you don't see often in writing, because it's so subtle and visual-based. There's an easy way out.... I smiled elegantly. She smiled back shyly. Gee, I bet you can guess who these characters are. BUT THAT'S CHEATING. 
It's using vague abstract concepts, instead of tactile sensations for immersion. Fluttershy doesn't consciously think she's shy while acting, she just is. Get me into her perspective, trick me into thinking the way she might think.
To be honest, this is something a lot of visual artists have trouble with as well. They learn anatomy from careful study, but not necessarily how body language works. They'll copy the same cliched expressions and poses they've seen before by other artists. The good ones learn how to break out of this rut, and become able to communicate freely.
One thing to watch out for is getting waaaay too subtle. Ear twitches, tail twitches. How am I supposed to know what a twitch signifies without context? Unless it's Pinkie-Sense 
Obviously it means something crucial to the scene, or it wouldn't be inserted in there, but it comes across as some repetitive winking signal. I'm not so much getting into the character's personality, but more like trying to translate the hidden code. 
Oh yeah, there's another thing, that's just a minor pet peeve for me. Using the exact same human body language, only replacing "hands" or whatever. It's lazy, ignoring that they're ponies with their own body parts and posture. It's not required really, but you can really spice it up by trying to think how ponies would develop their own unique signals. Hey, I told you, quit with the ear/tail twitches! Okay, okay, use them sparingly, but don't let that be your first and only solution.
I'm not sure how much of an improvement this exercise would be, it could just turn into more kinds of purple prose. In writing, you can condense just about anything into a few simple words, and that often turns out best anyway. Dialogue usually works out better then actions in prose, but I wonder if that's just because most writers graudally learn how to write good dialogue, but are never taught how to improve actions? It's a possibility.
Take out the actions and body language, and it might as well just be a script. I don't want to read scripts. 
Yes, this is very true.
You know, I think I may try that!
It's funny, because I feel like all the blind indoctrination of Show Don't Tell has actually overemphasized the use of body language as the primary method of communicating emotions ("Rarity ground her teeth," instead of "Rarity felt angry"--though that is hardly the only way to express that, but Show vs Tell enthusiast like to simplify the opposition to make readers side with them).
Maybe our ideas of body language are just different. Either way, I totally agree that it is a) usually modeled after human body language, and b) not always clear, meaning it is best suited to a particularly prose style and intent (when used as the sole means of communicating emotion, not when mixed with other methods).
Ha, you got me. I do sometimes resort to ear twitches. I agree, it can come across as meaningless, because it could mean anything. Is she flicking her ears out of annoyance or excess joy? I suppose context would help with that. I just use it to indicate there's more emotional meaning behind a piece of dialogue than what might otherwise seem. Like this:
Is the implication there clear at all? I did cheat a bit.
4221034
you have a point. that kind of body language is used a lot, yet it's different from the type I think I'm looking for. I need to narrow this down a little more, though it's difficult.
that's a good example to start with. "Rarity ground her teeth" to tell us that she's angry, just hidden behind one thin layer of description. to me it feels like a lot of writers favor the dialogue and conversation, characters exchange spoken words with each other, and there's some actions in between. but the latter usually comes across as obligatory and telegraphed, like they're putting up those greek masks of HAPPY/SAD. they're just talking heads, because all the important information the writer cares about is in the dialogue, and everything else is there to embellish it.
I suppose what I'm looking for is more like the Rarity & Fluttershy spa example in that essay. they're just moving naturally, not reacting to anything, but the way they're moving communicates so much about each character. I can see any of the mane 6 grinding her teeth when angry, but what's something only Rarity would do? (can't think of anything at the moment). I guess what I'm warning against is using the same cookie-cutter body language for all characters, though that can be very subjective.
I'm approaching this from comics, where pictures and words are seperate yet can affect each other in unique ways. nonverbal body language becomes pretty important, but there's a lot more going on than {feel this emotion} -> {do this thing} ... that just leads to boring talking heads with SLIGHTLY more expression but not yet feeling alive. I feel like there's something similar in acting, where great actors add themselves into the character, and that's exactly what Chuck Jones was trying to capture in animation.....
blah, this is too abstract for me to figure out.
I'll have to put it into practice and hope it's noticable (and doesn't become distracting purple prose)
that does work a little better, making it more than just a tic.
4221154
Nah you're fine! I think I get exactly what you mean.
You're talking about body language that expresses personality, as opposed to mental or emotional states. So, like, Rarity flips her mane with a hoof, or Rainbow Dash strikes a bit of a pose, or Fluttershy tries to draw her head into her neck like a turtle.
I agree, most body language writers use the kind that could apply to anypony. I don't think many use personality body language. That's why your writing experiment idea struck me so, because I hadn't really thought about it myself. How does Rarity move, or Celestia? How can I capture that and express it, in a clear direct way? I really wanna be able to do that now.
I think this is one place where metaphor can really come in handy and cut some shorter routes. Or you could just simply employ telling. Trying to mechanically describe a movement like you're a verbal camera lens doesn't really work. Describing Rarity's graceful trot across the room like that won't make it seem graceful at all. Far more effective to just say "Rarity trotted gracefully across the room" or "Rarity always moved like she was in a dance, an eternal waltz with life. Every pair of eyes that watched her was her prince." Or maybe even "Rarity was often more feline than pony. When she moved, grace purred like a cat drunk on cream."
What do you mean by purple prose, Haze? We must have different ideas of it, because purple prose is the last thing I would have thought about reading your blogs here and talking with you.
4221588
the metaphors are a good idea, especially for keeping them concise.
I tend to write a lot of physical details, then go back reading over it and see multiple paragraphs bogging down the story because nothing is happening. I have to trim those down as much as possible.
4222659
Maybe. There are readers (like me!) who like a lot of detail when it's interesting. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.
Could I see some examples of yours where you think you've used too much detail? :)
Personally, I'm not sure "too much detail" constitutes as purple prose. I think of it as prose that tries too hard to be "pretty" (a very vague word) and comes across as overwrought (all very subjective). But honestly, I hate the phrase and think it's kinda stupid, and almost entirely based on taste. It's an easy, go-to phrase people love to use because it makes them look and feel like a critical reader who knows their stuff. It leads writers and readers into limited, dogmatic views of prose, turning them against a legitimate style which can be done as well and effectively as any other, and like all styles, can be done poorly too.
I've seen an """editor""" label the color of a pony's magic as purple prose before. So there ya go. Also, saying it to an author doesn't actually DO anything to solve the "issue". It doesn't get at the cause of it, and that's way more important (and actually helpful).
I could go on (believe me) but I'll stop ^.^
4221588
i just remembered THIS VIDEO as an excellent addition to all that body language stuff I was saying. I can't believe I forgot to add it to the blog post.
it's fascinating how subtle this was, yet seems so obvious in hindsight when this guy points it out.
even though this technique is primarily visual, i'm now convinced more than ever that it also applies to writing. readers notice when they can visualize things in their head! and I'm not sure about others, but I do notice when I'm not visualizing anything at all. I don't like stories where characters stand still and exchange paragraphs of dialogue at each other. they just become voices in my head, and I start to suspect that's how the author is treating them as well. authors talking to themselves.
just like Robin Williams could use dynamic motion to make the difference between a mediocre scene and a great performance, a writer can do the same to create immersion. I think the secret I'm looking for here is.... not using body language to replace unspoken dialogue, but to support dialogue with added context, the kind that dialogue can't express by itself. tl;dr = visuals and dialogue adding up to more than the sum of their parts.
4230657
Sorry for the delay!
I had forgotten about that one! It's a great video.
This can bother me too, and when I write dialogue I try to infuse it with as much non-dialogue as possible without ruining the flow. To me, dialogue is like a dance. There's so much more going on than just the words.
You know what's interesting? I don't think talking heads bothers me as much in regular fiction. It's often very prevalent there too, from the books I've read. And I wonder if it bothers me less due to the fact mlp fanfiction is based on the cartoon, which is a visual medium, where I'm used to seeing ponies move and act as they speak. So that, when I read fanfiction lacking that, I notice it more?
I've think you've got something here :D
I mean, I know dialogue-centric, or even all dialogue stories can be done successfully, and those are cool, but personally, I prefer dialogue to reflect the depth and nuance of communication that occurs in real life.
Terry Pratchett is a master at adding in details besides the dialogue: body language, details about the character, what they think and are thinking, anecdotes about them, metaphor and imagery, and author commentary. It all adds up to give you a fleshed out experience. Really, as a writer I think there's so much more information available for you to mine and express.