Quote from Jombo

That doesn't seem efficient though. Don't get me wrong tests do help you improve on whatever you're testing, but they're specific. Doing a full project is more of an all-around improvement. Think of it like leveling up in a RPG game. Tests will drastically raise your level for one specific thing (for example run loops), and full projects will raise your level a small amount over a wide range of things. While you're really good at run loops, you still have little experience with everything else. You're better off being good mediocre at everything than really good at one thing and eye-shatteringly bad at others. So you should start with full projects and see what your strengths and weaknesses are, and improve on your weaknesses and do better on the next one. Otherwise you're just blindly practicing. Who knows if that blood splatter will be put into effect in a full length? It's better to learn it when you get there. It's not like there's a list of criteria you have to meet before creating a full length, you have to discover them on your own.

And besides, there's more to a full length than what can be achieved through tests.

Quote from Jombo

One thing - I don't think I ever said that you said that full lengths don't help people improve. Or something.

Quote from Jombo

I can't agree that a short test can help you as much as a full length. Not to be harmful but what are your experiences in creating full lengths?

Quote from Jombo

There are aspects like pacing and keeping someone's interest that you can't really do in tests. They are also all separate, and in full lengths they're all mashed working together as the overall product. You're right that tests help people with some areas of animation, I just don't see how doing a test for one thing, then another thing, then another thing, then another thing, and STILL release a decent amount of good movies where they are all applied and work well together is at all efficient. At that point all those tests you did prior to your animation are useless and pretty insignificant.

Quote from Jeff

You are being close minded because you want to continue the self-aggrandizing practices we're talking about. I don't think there's any point in trying to convince you because you so firmly believe you will get somewhere that the only way for us to prove our point is to watch you fail at being an animator. I don't care if people think I'm being harsh, it's the truth. I'm not the only one who thinks what I'm saying, most of this information comes directly from the people you idolize. They've learned the hard way what the key to success is, and if you disagree then you're welcome to find out on your own that you're wrong.

Quote from xomegax

I dont think your being harsh your stating your opinion. I am not disagreeing that doing full lengths will help you improve and they should definetly be done but what you guys are saying is all those test wont help you at all that they will ruin you which I disagree because they can be helpful.

Quote from Jombo

The only time you should ever animate a 5 second tests is if it's specifically for a full project. By that I mean, you're planning or doing a full project and there's something you're unsure about so you test it and compare it with what you want out of your project. Independent punch tests or style tests are useless.

Quote from Chewy

I think you already mentioned this in the topic but people barely give criticism on those short animations or full lenghts. The only real good criticism I once got was from Arch-Angel, it was harsh criticism but it helped me alot. We need better criticism, especially in a stickfigure animating community. If some people here are actually thinking about an animating career they need good and straightforward criticism. Right now the flash animation section of this forum is mainly beginners that post their animations, and then other beginners comment on those animations with things like 'hey that was a nice animation' This way animators here improve very slowly or not at all.

Quote from xomegax

EDIT: Also Edyrem what your trying say is that you need artistic abilities to be considered a pro animator? I dont think that this is true the animators of poorly drawn shows such as South Park, where there is not much effort put into the actual art, would you consider those animators "pros" simply because what they are doing requires the teeniest amount of artistic talent to draw BG's and circular heads with bodys? Also there animation is not that high quality. Yet based on what you stated those animators would be considered pros?