The severed limbs could actually be cool for cinematography stuff. Like having another person hold extend their arms towards the camera but it's not the actor's hands to get the composition you want
This "landmarks" technique is very interesting, I've been doing something similar on instinct. The cylinders and coiling still come in handy when I'm struggling with definition of the shape, though.
🐚 The 3d forshorting trick is genius,never new they had to Actually stretch the models,but honesly that makes it good because your able to stylize the perpective,and make it easier.🐠
it is the least tricky part, trust me. if you are a digital illustrator, a lot of apps like Adobe fresco and Clip studio have perspective tools that draw the lines for you. If not, there's always Lazy Nezumi which is a plug in for photoshop. If you are a traditional ilustrator, get a ruler, draw lines towards the points. IT can get more complicated than that but not by much.
Great approach. Especially with no more than two landmarks, you can do whatever you want size-wise and still make it work by connecting the dots correctly. As always, the hard part is consistency, as soon as several different subjects are prone to the same foreshortening. Also, one should not understand this as a "get out of jail free" card to not complete the sketch of the body, lest one might end up with a Fight Club movie poster style abomination.
Exactly! It's not really a cheat, but with the landmarks in place you have a good idea of how the rest of the body should appear proportionally compared to the landmarks.
@Javicandraw seriously, it's easy to forget when practising art that the point of it at the end is to have a cool result and get bogged down trying to have everything accurate. This makes me want to go and do really dynamic angles that I was always intimidated by. ☆O☆
@@Howdyasdo that’s the thing isn’t it? We get overwhelmed with academic and mathematical accuracy that it is easy to forget that we as artists are trying to comunícate something. And if that mathematical accuracy gets in the way of what we want to say we should throw it out of the way!
There's a really nasty habit of trying to turn art (and music, so media) into an exact science- and of course when we do that, we get caught up in a metaphorical machine. Art always has been, and always will be, based on FEEL over all.
I agree... I had made a video on foreshortening 8 years ago and at some point my recommendation was to "wing it" or to feel things out. While I still believe this, I also like to find small tricks that might let me keep my confidence on the process a bit high during the "feeling" part
"stop thinking like photographers" perhaps some of the foreshortening can be solved in 3d if they understood camera, actually. The extreme foreshortening stems from wide angle lens.... that 3d can simulate. Exaggeration is great. But varying lens is too. It's kind of embarrassing that they break mold rather than stage things.
That is not what is going on though. Animators do understand how camera lenses work. But readability and composition are more important than accuracy. And while your argument can seem logical for animators, how do you explain that shot from Hellboy 2? the logic is the same: no lens width or angle matched the composition desired, so they "cheated" to get the results they wanted.
because sometimes distorting the perspective still doesn't give you the results you want. Camera angles and accurate perspective doesn't account for readable action or flow. You have to do what's best for what you are trying to communicate, even if it's not accurate.
Well, it's only half the explanation unless you show us what happens if the 3D artists do NOT use distortion. Why can't they use fish-eye lens? Why can't they... just do it without distortion? Isn't the whole point of foreshortening to convey reality that works like this? I thought our brain only likes what makes sense physics-wise.
Fish-eye lenses would distort the background and other elements too which isn't what they want 90% of the time. It's also, a very specific kind of distortion that they might not like. Why can't they do it without distortion? Because they don't get the shot they want in that case. Remember that these are STYLIZED models and aren't proportionally true to... most things we know in real life. For example, the sonic image they were compositing bear almost no resemblance to human proportions, and seen from an angle that effect might be exaggerated. Also a lot of other examples were exaggerated for a cartoony effect (TF2 ones for example) and once again, bear no relation to real life.
I imagine it's because changing the camera and optics will affect everything in the scene from composition to perspective and proportions. Breaking the rig allows you to do dramatic scenes more easily.
@@milesyalzin2018 Still would love to see comparison to non-exaggerated version. Would it be that bad? I don't mean giving up on exaggeration in animation, just no breaking the model. Can't fish-eye lens be only applied to the model? It's a program after all, not RL. Seen those videos of n-dimensions? You can pretty much have ALL of possible geometries in one frame. 3D world next to 4D world next to 5D, spherical and triangular...
@@RedGallardo The easiest way to think about an example is if you want a character to have extreme foreshortening on their hands, but also keep their face in focus. With a fish-eye lens, there would be too much perspective and probably barrel distortion on the face it becomes really ugly if you want a good composition between the hand and the face. By breaking the rig, you can keep a good focal length while still achieving the composition you are looking for without much distortion.
@@RusticKey But they manage in theaters and films, mimes and magicians don't need it to look good... Photography also only uses reality as a base. So I wonder why only 1 area needs this.
0:00 But wait, based on the thumbnail, wouldn't this almost mostly apply to 3D animation/rigging at best? I guess if a separate opinion could elaborate while I'm asking.
In stylised art, drawing what _looks right_ is always more important than drawing what is true! That is the main advantage of stylisation, too, imo.
WORD 🥂my dude, can tell people what you just said?? I'm gonna use that 🔥🔥
Agreed, also in 2d art, foreshortening is exaggerated, especially in action shots
heck even in graphics design and lettering that's true , always do what looks correct rather than what's accurate
Exactly! I've found myself thinking about how to draw something "right" when I should have been asking myself how to make it look good.
The severed limbs could actually be cool for cinematography stuff. Like having another person hold extend their arms towards the camera but it's not the actor's hands to get the composition you want
I imagine that, just like in the hellboy example I showed, this technique has been used a lot of times!
Splatoon 3 also does this! The more exaggerated the style is, the best it works
I agree!!!
This "landmarks" technique is very interesting, I've been doing something similar on instinct. The cylinders and coiling still come in handy when I'm struggling with definition of the shape, though.
I agree, I'm not against coiling just not as an first step but rather as a way to connect the landmarks
This goes on the list of “advantage of 2d”
hahahaa I agree!
From my little 3D experience, fussing with camera settings, focus points,wide angles etc can be frustrating..so good hack to know..
I imagine that if even disney artists skip all that messing with settings it must be for a reason!
🐚 The 3d forshorting trick is genius,never new they had to Actually stretch the models,but honesly that makes it good because your able to stylize the perpective,and make it easier.🐠
exactly! us 2d artists need to keep this in mind when physical accuracy gets in the way.
Sweet 💖👌 Now I just gotta figure out perspective 💀
it is the least tricky part, trust me. if you are a digital illustrator, a lot of apps like Adobe fresco and Clip studio have perspective tools that draw the lines for you. If not, there's always Lazy Nezumi which is a plug in for photoshop.
If you are a traditional ilustrator, get a ruler, draw lines towards the points. IT can get more complicated than that but not by much.
This is so helpful! Thank you!
You are welcome! glad to help!
Great approach. Especially with no more than two landmarks, you can do whatever you want size-wise and still make it work by connecting the dots correctly. As always, the hard part is consistency, as soon as several different subjects are prone to the same foreshortening.
Also, one should not understand this as a "get out of jail free" card to not complete the sketch of the body, lest one might end up with a Fight Club movie poster style abomination.
Exactly! It's not really a cheat, but with the landmarks in place you have a good idea of how the rest of the body should appear proportionally compared to the landmarks.
Holy shit this is a game changer
Thanks!!! it's a bit of a mindset change but it has helped me a lot.
@Javicandraw seriously, it's easy to forget when practising art that the point of it at the end is to have a cool result and get bogged down trying to have everything accurate.
This makes me want to go and do really dynamic angles that I was always intimidated by.
☆O☆
@@Howdyasdo that’s the thing isn’t it? We get overwhelmed with academic and mathematical accuracy that it is easy to forget that we as artists are trying to comunícate something. And if that mathematical accuracy gets in the way of what we want to say we should throw it out of the way!
oh my god that's me! 0:05 i was Not expecting this on election night 😂
Hehehe I owe you my thanks, your "tricks" unlocked something in my brain
@ happy to help XD
hilarious thumbnail, perfect!
good stuff!
Thank you! I'm glad you liked it!
Woah, it def opened my eye about foreshortening 🙏🏻✨
Thanks, It did the same for me!
Love this! Thank you so much!
You are welcome!
You are so great to listen to, love your videos
Thanks so much! I'm a bit conscious of my accent so I try very hard to be clear and entertaining.
There's a really nasty habit of trying to turn art (and music, so media) into an exact science- and of course when we do that, we get caught up in a metaphorical machine. Art always has been, and always will be, based on FEEL over all.
I agree... I had made a video on foreshortening 8 years ago and at some point my recommendation was to "wing it" or to feel things out. While I still believe this, I also like to find small tricks that might let me keep my confidence on the process a bit high during the "feeling" part
the way you pronounced guillermo del toro was a dead giveaway from where you are from
@@felicitaspng guissssssshhhhhherrrrrrrrmooo 🤣
Thanks!
You're welcome!
"stop thinking like photographers"
perhaps some of the foreshortening can be solved in 3d if they understood camera, actually. The extreme foreshortening stems from wide angle lens.... that 3d can simulate. Exaggeration is great. But varying lens is too. It's kind of embarrassing that they break mold rather than stage things.
That is not what is going on though. Animators do understand how camera lenses work. But readability and composition are more important than accuracy. And while your argument can seem logical for animators, how do you explain that shot from Hellboy 2? the logic is the same: no lens width or angle matched the composition desired, so they "cheated" to get the results they wanted.
Thanks
you are welcome!
I'm so happy you're getting some attention :D !
Thank you! I'm also happy to get it :P
Street fighter 4 designs come to mind
fighting games use this a lot. If you search for "dragon ball fighterZ free camera" you'll find a lot of examples.
i need the link to the twitter thread, please!
x.com/Tonymation/status/1633239873992953856
So instead of distorting the perspective they do things the hard way and distort the characters instead? WHY?!?!
because sometimes distorting the perspective still doesn't give you the results you want. Camera angles and accurate perspective doesn't account for readable action or flow. You have to do what's best for what you are trying to communicate, even if it's not accurate.
oh hey thas me
@@TubeBOI15 it was about time someone exposed you… CHEATER!!! 🤣
Well, it's only half the explanation unless you show us what happens if the 3D artists do NOT use distortion. Why can't they use fish-eye lens? Why can't they... just do it without distortion? Isn't the whole point of foreshortening to convey reality that works like this? I thought our brain only likes what makes sense physics-wise.
Fish-eye lenses would distort the background and other elements too which isn't what they want 90% of the time. It's also, a very specific kind of distortion that they might not like.
Why can't they do it without distortion? Because they don't get the shot they want in that case. Remember that these are STYLIZED models and aren't proportionally true to... most things we know in real life. For example, the sonic image they were compositing bear almost no resemblance to human proportions, and seen from an angle that effect might be exaggerated.
Also a lot of other examples were exaggerated for a cartoony effect (TF2 ones for example) and once again, bear no relation to real life.
I imagine it's because changing the camera and optics will affect everything in the scene from composition to perspective and proportions. Breaking the rig allows you to do dramatic scenes more easily.
@@milesyalzin2018 Still would love to see comparison to non-exaggerated version. Would it be that bad? I don't mean giving up on exaggeration in animation, just no breaking the model. Can't fish-eye lens be only applied to the model? It's a program after all, not RL. Seen those videos of n-dimensions? You can pretty much have ALL of possible geometries in one frame. 3D world next to 4D world next to 5D, spherical and triangular...
@@RedGallardo The easiest way to think about an example is if you want a character to have extreme foreshortening on their hands, but also keep their face in focus. With a fish-eye lens, there would be too much perspective and probably barrel distortion on the face it becomes really ugly if you want a good composition between the hand and the face. By breaking the rig, you can keep a good focal length while still achieving the composition you are looking for without much distortion.
@@RusticKey But they manage in theaters and films, mimes and magicians don't need it to look good... Photography also only uses reality as a base. So I wonder why only 1 area needs this.
Learn the rules, then break them
Exactly
First?
🎉
🤡
☕🔥 Congratulations o(*￣▽￣*)ブ
👏👏🎉
Congratulations!
0:00 But wait, based on the thumbnail, wouldn't this almost mostly apply to 3D animation/rigging at best? I guess if a separate opinion could elaborate while I'm asking.
Watch the video before commenting
I think the video was pretty self explainatory, what did you have questions about?