Agreed, but I never said I had a problem with funny storylines. I just said I hate it when people write storylines that take themselves too seriously. By all means have a loose humourous storyline, have a stickman who must save the princess from a castle by battling sentient mushrooms with a garden rake, have a stickman who infiltrates an underwater death fortress to obtain cookies. I don't have a problem with it, because dumb storylines like that will actually add to a movie.

The storylines that piss me off are The stickman awoke to find he had no memory... he was on the floor of a strange room with blood and spent bullet shells all around him and his face was covered in scars... the only key to his identity was a series of numbers tattooed to his forearm... now to fulfill his destiny he must kill... and discover who he really is... *Battle scene begins* *Before I Forget by Slipknot plays* (because if it was in guitar hero it must be hardcore)

Combine the above storyline with sub-par animating skills, cheesy cinematic effects, and closeups of the stickmans face with angry/serious anime style eyes and you'll see why flashes like that just make me laugh.

On Topic!!!!11!

This is about the framerate people!!!
I have seen loads of awesome animations with low framerate. But having a low framerate will limit what you can do in terms of effects and speed.

If you have someone shoot a beam, and you want to make the beam dissipate, the framerate has to be high to make it dissipate smoothly.

In short, the FPS determines how good the animation is, not the animator.

Quote from adrenalineflash

However, animations with funny storylines, or playful ones like Counter-Stick or Stix, actually turn out decent because they feel playful and fun. Even I have considered making a stick video with a playful storyline, but all I have is ideas, and no skill. If anyone wants to collab with me on this (I give story and ideas, and they animate and whatnot.) they can PM me..

PMing...

It's pretty much up to who you are. If you the kind who likes the choppy style, you'll enjoy the lower fps, and think that the lower fps animators are better than the higher fps people. However, if you like smooth animations, you'll prefer the higher fps animations, and think that the higher fps people are better than the lower fps people, which starts some seriously retarded flame wars and gets a lot of people banned.

Also, following on from what Pirate said about creativity:
Is it me or am I the only one who DOESN'T enjoy making stickfights on Flash?

Quote from FizzlemanJ

On Topic!!!!11!

This is about the framerate people!!!
I have seen loads of awesome animations with low framerate. But having a low framerate will limit what you can do in terms of effects and speed.

If you have someone shoot a beam, and you want to make the beam dissipate, the framerate has to be high to make it dissipate smoothly.

In short, the FPS determines how good the animation is, not the animator.

I like how this is by far, THE most ignorant post to date on this thread because of that one statement.

Just get out.

There was this awesome Flasher who worked at 30-40 FPS and made some outstanding stuff, easily better than JC imho.

Ghost-something-or-other..

He has like 50 posts?

Quote from Chimaera

There was this awesome Flasher who worked at 30-40 FPS and made some outstanding stuff, easily better than JC imho.

Ghost-something-or-other..

He has like 50 posts?

Krinkels~30 fps

I know sly was beyond good while using only easytoon. Did he change his name to sly elf or is that someone else?

Either way, I wonder what sly used as a framerate.

http://www.imo8.cn/gf2008.swf
JustSolo-40fps.

Quote from Chimaera

http://www.imo8.cn/gf2008.swf
JustSolo-40fps.

I seriously have to get back into learning chinese. That just reminded me.

But nice!

Didn't Daneximuz animate at 30 fps once?

Quote from Spazz

You're obviously not seeing the connectiong in what I'm saying. And if you're not going to see it, then you might as well not post a rebuttal. The point is, many of the people who are in the mindstate that "the smoother the animation, the better" are the same people who are popping out cliched stick animations left and right. That's all fine and dandy if you're a beginning animator trying to learn the ropes, but if you've been at it for quite a while and you're still under that mentality, then that's not good. Creativity is the main part of animation, even if you're not the one behind the story itself. And in that second sentence, you pretty much just contradicted yourself.

"this thread isn't about the creativity portion of animating..."

"This thread is about how able the animators are a conveying the creativity in a skillful and fluid way."



Please tell me the difference between those two thoughts.

Conveying an animation isn't being creative, it's actually animating it. you can't animate soley with creativity, you have to actually draw it, and with higher frame rate, you can show people what you want them to see more than having their eyes fill it in.

And exactly how many posts of mine have you read for you to say that I'm always cutting down on Jcamelo? Yes I know that JC isn't the only uninspired animator who uses a higher frame rate, but that who most people on this site are familiar with, so I used him as an example. Don't try to be a smartass. And what does his absense have to do with anything? Honestly...

Alright, once again, JCamelo isn't a good example of a high fps animator. This thread is about how high fps or low fps animation effects the skill level of an animator, and just putting him at the end of your post to say how he spams the blurr filter isn't at all relevant to the thread. you went completely off topic to talk about JCamelo's style

And a smoother animation doesn't necessarily mean it's better. It depends on the style of the animation. A more sketchy looking style of animation wouldn't look best with smoother movements while a more solid style probably wouldn't look best at a higher frame rate. Adding in-between frames doesn't take that much skill, just a lot of patience. You can simply add in as many frames as possible to get the movements down and when you're finished, delete the necessary frames. With a lower frame rate, you need to know which frames to ommit to make it look good.

Smooth animations are a milestone people should get to before they move on to their own style of animating, because without being able to be smooth, then the animation would wobble, be choppy, and lack the ability to convey force. i never said that smooth animations are the pinnacle of greatness that all animators should aspire to do, but being smooth is the goal for most people at SPP because achieving a smooth style means that you have to be at an intermediate level of animating. while low fps is harder because you need to know where to place actions in the frames because you have less, you can just switch to a high frame rate, and, if you have a smooth animating style that allows you to ease and delete and make physics, than that problem is completely eliminated. the trouble is getting to be smooth. if somebody was an amazing animator but didn't have a smooth animating style, the animations would have choppy, wobbly, and ugly, which, proving my point, would mean that they weren't a good animator. without smoothness, you can't branch out to have a GOOD style. A lot of great animators use sketchy or uneven animation styles, but i'll bet you that they know how to draw smoothly or else it would just look like crap

Quote from drocksta

Smooth animations are a milestone people should get to before they move on to their own style of animating, because without being able to be smooth, then the animation would wobble, be choppy, and lack the ability to convey force. i never said that smooth animations are the pinnacle of greatness that all animators should aspire to do, but being smooth is the goal for most people at SPP because achieving a smooth style means that you have to be at an intermediate level of animating. while low fps is harder because you need to know where to place actions in the frames because you have less, you can just switch to a high frame rate, and, if you have a smooth animating style that allows you to ease and delete and make physics, than that problem is completely eliminated. the trouble is getting to be smooth. if somebody was an amazing animator [SIZE="4"]but didn't have a smooth animating style[/SIZE], the animations would have choppy, wobbly, and ugly, which, proving my point, would mean that they weren't a good animator. without smoothness, you can't branch out to have a GOOD style. A lot of great animators use sketchy or uneven animation styles, but i'll bet you that they know how to draw smoothly or else it would just look like crap

Bold:
How do two contradicting things prove your point? He isn't good if he isn't good. He's not amazing if he isn't good which is what you basically said.

Underlined:
Depends upon the animation he's/she's doing, and if other factors make the animation good or bad. LF2 foes really well in his sketchy animation in the Come Back Collab, whereas we've seen plenty of sketchy animations here that lack many qualities that make a film well-made.

Quote from Chimaera

There was this awesome Flasher who worked at 30-40 FPS and made some outstanding stuff, easily better than JC imho.

Ghost-something-or-other..

He has like 50 posts?

Ghostface?

Anyways. I don't think fps has anything to do with how good an animator is.

Like NTG's, his animations are usually at like 16 fps but his animations are always enjoyable. That's usually because they're pretty hilarious and original, and they actually are pretty technically good.

Then this one guy made a 12 fps animation and I couldn't have told the defference between that and a 20 fps animation.

FPS affect style, quite obviously. Lower fps will obviously have a different style than a higher fps. But a higher fps almost always has to be smooth otherwise it won't work.

Lower fps allow you to experiment with different looking styles.

If that makes sense.

How good an animation is depends soley on how enjoyable it is. Like others have said an animation could be the most technically orgasmic animation, but if its just a guy walking it's obviously not enjoyable.

On the flip side if an animation is epically creative but it looks like absolute shit it's not going to be enjoyable, especially if you can't tell what's going on.

To make an animation enjoyable you need a balance of technique and creativity.

Umm....

Yeah.

Yay for disjointed thoughts?

yeah, that was my point, that somebody can't be an amazing high fps animator without being able to draw smoothly, whether or not they do so. that phrase was kind of confusing.
edit: directed at kitsune, not shwa

"yeah, that was my point, that somebody can't be an amazing high fps animator without being able to draw smoothly"

You basically just said, someone can't be an amazing animator if they don't animate well.

Quote from drocksta

Smooth animations are a milestone people should get to before they move on to their own style of animating, because without being able to be smooth, then the animation would wobble, be choppy, and lack the ability to convey force. i never said that smooth animations are the pinnacle of greatness that all animators should aspire to do, but being smooth is the goal for most people at SPP because achieving a smooth style means that you have to be at an intermediate level of animating. while low fps is harder because you need to know where to place actions in the frames because you have less, you can just switch to a high frame rate, and, if you have a smooth animating style that allows you to ease and delete and make physics, than that problem is completely eliminated. the trouble is getting to be smooth. if somebody was an amazing animator but didn't have a smooth animating style, the animations would have choppy, wobbly, and ugly, which, proving my point, would mean that they weren't a good animator. without smoothness, you can't branch out to have a GOOD style. A lot of great animators use sketchy or uneven animation styles, but i'll bet you that they know how to draw smoothly or else it would just look like crap

1. "Smooth animations are a milestone people should get to before they move on to their own style of animating, because without being able to be smooth, then the animation would wobble, be choppy, and lack the ability to convey force."

I never said anything about beginning animators nor supposed to animate smoothly. If you had read my post (which you obviously haden't if you're saying that), I had said that beginning animators should try to work at different frame rates to expand their skill until they get to the point where they can take on more professional work. But this thread isn't addressing beginning animators. The question is asking if you're a good animator for animating at a high fps for your animations. If you've been animating for years and you're under the mindstate that "smoother = better", then you're obviously one of those people who makes the same mediocre crap that everyone's seen already and will eventually get bored and quit animating altogether.

2. "if somebody was an amazing animator but didn't have a smooth animating style, the animations would have choppy, wobbly, and ugly, which, proving my point, would mean that they weren't a good animator."

"yeah, that was my point, that somebody can't be an amazing high fps animator without being able to draw smoothly, whether or not they do so."

So what you're basically saying is is that someons who has a style of animation that doesn't look best in a higher frame rate with smoother movements is automatically a crap animation? So which point are you proving exactly? That animations are only good if their movements are smooth? And whose standards are you basing that off of? You? Unless everyone else in the world uses the exact same standards as you do. And wouldn't that mean you just contradicted yourself? Because earlier in your post, you claimed that smooth animations aren't the pinnacle of greatness, but now they're the only animations that are good. Do you know why certain animators call for certain voice actors (don't go and say any crap about how that sentence is of topic, read on and you'll see why it's related)? It's because of their style, their voice. You wouldn't put a geeky, prepubescent adolescent to voice the role as a hulking, ruggid Rambo-type because it wouldn't fit the character and would turn the audience off. The same applies to animation. You wouldn't animate a more skethcy style of animation at a higher frame rate with more smoothness added. Why? Because it doesn't fit. Certain rates of smoothness don't fit certain styles. Just because something is scary smooth that doesn't right it off as an expert animation, as you seem to think but constantly deny that you think as such.

3. "Conveying an animation isn't being creative, it's actually animating it. you can't animate soley with creativity, you have to actually draw it, and with higher frame rate, you can show people what you want them to see more than having their eyes fill it in."

Do you even know what the word "convey" means? I means to carry something out, to transport it, or to express something. I suppose you'd be leaning toward the third option, but in doing so you would then void your entire argument because in order to "express" an animation, creativity is involved. Don't use a word in your argument if you don't know what it means. Just because it sounds right it doesn't mean it will make your argument look any more sound..

And you have it all wrong. Making an animation is supposed to be creative. That's how it is in entertainment animation. The best animators are the ones with their own style of animation, just like how the best painters in history are the ones who've found their own style. You're supposed to animate with creativity. Basically, you're telling animators to be uninspired and to not use any creativity at all when animating. Do you even know where the word "Creative" comes from? Create. When you're making an animation, are you not creating something? And in order to create something, should there not be some level of creativity?

4. "Alright, once again, JCamelo isn't a good example of a high fps animator. This thread is about how high fps or low fps animation effects the skill level of an animator, and just putting him at the end of your post to say how he spams the blurr filter isn't at all relevant to the thread. you went completely off topic to talk about JCamelo's style"

You are a collosal idiot. Just shut up. If you're not going to read past the word "Jcamelo" then don't reply to the post. Or if you're just going to reply for the sake of defending him, don't reply either. Once again--maybe I should make the words bigger for you so that you understand:

[SIZE="5"]I KNOW THAT JCAMELO IS NOT THE ONLY ANIMATOR WHO USES A HIGH FRAME RATE. I USED HIM AS AN EXAMPLE TO REPRESENT ANIMATORS WHO MAY HAVE SOME SKILL BUT USE A HIGH FRAME RATE AS AN EXCUSE TO SHOW OFF THEIR SKILL. I USED JCAMELO AS AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH HIM AND WILL KNOW THE REFERENCE.[/SIZE]

If you need me to use smaller words for you so that you understand, then I will. If you haven't gotten it already, I'm referencing at the part where animators who think that people who use a higher frame rate for their animations are more skilled, thus being related to this thread. I see not how that is going off topic, let alone completely off topic especially since it's discussing the thread's topic, you braindead monkey. In fact, by your standards, you were going off topic too. By discussing to me how Jcamelo isn't a proper reference to this thread and telling me how off topic I am by doing so, you went off topic by not sticking with every literal phrase this thread has set up.

If you're next post is just going to include an attack at me for using Jcamelo as a reference because you still misinterpret the meaning of even the simplest of words, do us all a favor and don't even respond to that part of the post. Because obviously you aren't ready to see the word "Jcamelo" in someone's post with out assuming it's some sort of attack towards him since you're so attached to him.

Quote from FizzlemanJ

On Topic!!!!11!

This is about the framerate people!!!

Just from that bit I have to assume you're retarded.

Quote from FizzlemanJ

I have seen loads of awesome animations with low framerate. But having a low framerate will limit what you can do in terms of effects and speed.

This further confirms my suspicions.

Quote from FizzlemanJ

If you have someone shoot a beam, and you want to make the beam dissipate, the framerate has to be high to make it dissipate smoothly.

Yeah, because the only animations one can make are animation involving stick figures shooting lazer beams out of their hands like some sort of Dragonball Z clone. And animators who use a low frame rate for one animation must use the same frame rate for every single animation they produce. Brilliant deduction, Watson.

Quote from FizzlemanJ

In short, the FPS determines how good the animation is, not the animator.

And that just right there writes you off to sign up for an special education class. So what you're saying is if I were to make an animation where a ball tweens across the screen, then I would be an expert animator? Or better yet, if I were to take THIS ANIMATION and animate it at a higher frame rate, that would make it expert material, huh? I really hope you're being sarcastic with that statement, Fizzle.

Yeah I know guys, going after Fizzle was way to easy of a target, but I was surprised no one but Kitsune took care of him. So, yeah.