Using the Body - Stop Motion: Passion, Process and Performance - page 242

moment, but is part of a bigger sequence, and when animating that sequence can take all day
or longer it is hard to feel the structure of the movement. I am often nervous when producers
or clients watch me in action, as often a gesture or movement only works when you have gone
past it and put it into context.
More importantly, what is the motivation of the jump, and what story or emotion is the
character expressing? There has to be a reason for a jump, and this should be clear from the
head. The head can tell us whether we are running from something, or heading somewhere
with a purpose. No move starts with the whole body. A move has to begin somewhere and
then activate the rest of the body, or let the rest of the body catch up. The character needs to
show that it's thinking about doing something, and display some preparation. If a character
jumps with no preparation this will result in boring and lifeless animation. Preparation could be
a backward step or a crouch, or something smaller, but it needs some moment of preparation
and anticipation, and this should read with just enough frames to see the clean lines of the
limbs telling the story.
What is your actual animation process? Do you need a video assist or other
technical aids?
JD - I've never used video assist, except once when the moves were so small that I used a separate
telephoto lens, to see an enlarged image (I put markers to gauge the incremental moves at a larger-than-
life size). Due to video 'drift' this didn't work very well. I've never used frame grabbers, because the
technology didn't exist. I prefer to fi nish a shot in one 'sitting' rather than letting it go over several days.
TB - I read the script and, with the help of the director, fi nd the character. That's the most important
thing to me I use video assist for diffi cult movements such as walk or run cycles. For subtle performance
animation, I rarely use video assist, though that might freak the director out. I use surface gauges quite
a bit, but I'm from the old school. Some of my best animation was done intuitively, by just getting into
the rhythm of the shot and going with the fl ow. If I stop to check the video, then I tend to lose track of the
moment, of the performance, and then I'm in trouble.
RC - Many have animated perfectly fi ne without the technology we now have.
DC - I fi nd the monitor important for framing and camera angle, but the video quality isn't good so
you have to 'know' the shot. Shooting on digital makes it much easier to see what's going on and to fi x
mistakes. (Apparently, of course I wouldn't know!) I fl ick between the current and last frame but I try not
get too glued to the monitor. You lose your fl ow. It takes me a moment to get back into a scene after a
break. If I've just completed a long shot I can't immediately start talking to real humans!
AW - I look at and feel the puppet, not the monitor. All my life I've animated with just a camera. Peter and
the Wolf was the fi rst animation I've done with software. I can walk away from a shot for a long time and
then return, remembering every single frame.
SB - I'm a product of the digital era, I couldn't do without technology. I like to see each frame as part of a
sequence and how each shot fi ts into the scene.
RH - I look and feel the puppet, but I see the monitor as an essential tool - because I'm used to working in
this way. I always fl ick between the last and current frame. This just works because I know how far the