is that what we're debating? that's stupid. you could make a similar case for colors, if all you're saying is "a given animation is better at 20 fps than it is at 10 fps."
"if you took the mona lisa and removed 100 colors from it, it would not be as good as it currently is."
no shit, but that doesn't mean that painting with fewer colors is worse than painting with lots of colors, someone else could make a really beautiful painting out of 25 colors and someone else could make an equally beautiful painting out of 250 colors, do you disagree? the final product's quality is dependent on a lot of things, the varying colors isn't a factor at all.
if a person makes one animation at 10 fps, and someone else makes a totally different animation at 20 fps, there is nothing to automatically indicate which animation will be better. that's what i'm saying.
[SIZE="7"]your "example" isn't saying anything at all.[/SIZE]
Now you're just shitting out of your mouth! I was saying, as another example that two
identical animations, not totally different, one being 20 fps, one being 10 fps, made by the same person, the 20 fps will come out more fluent. I was saying this as a response to your ignorant statement that says there is no relation between fps and the quality of an animation. There is.
It's just like those colors you mentioned. Sure, you can make an equally well-made painting with 25 colors as one with 250 colors, but with 250 colors you have many more possibilities.
The thing is, you are connecting these two ideas and saying that I am replying to both of them in my previous post:
The first idea is the topic of this thread. Two totally different creations. My post was not replying to this, it was replying to the next idea:
Your post was the second topic. That's right, your post is a totally different topic on its own. You stated that FPS and the quality of an animation are both completely un-connecting Ideas and cannot possibly associate with each other. I was replying to that giving this example: Take one animation, take half the frames, and make it half the FPS and compare them. In this example, as well as Mona Lisa, the 20 fps and the 250 colors prevails in quality. I DID NOT in that post, say that higher FPS makes an animation better or that it makes a better animator, I simply stated that the ideas of Quality and Detail of motion through FPS can in fact be connected!
My example did in fact say something, but you were too lazy/ignorant/stupid/ungodly lethargic (which, I guess means lazy, but I have to repeat myself to get things through your thick skull.... oh and)/having a thick skull
to find the meaning of the example.
I haven't tried debating in a while. It's been fun so far. =/
