Hi I?m new + a little question on animation

beenieman · Post by **beenieman** » Wed Jan 23, 2002 5:11 pm

Hello people!
I recently discovered this Reinventing Comic Message Board and I think it?s very interesting, though I?m still quite new to this stuff. I hope you will welcome me and be patient with a not that up-to-date comicfan from Germany (hey, "Reinventing Comics"was released here in November last year ! Translating in Germany always takes a lot of time, sniff). I believe that I can make many new and fascinating comic-experiences through you and this board, and perhaps even strengthen my English

So my first question may seem to you like a very old topic, but I would like to know what kind of theoretical approach to animation in digital comics there are, this means any kind of article, analysis or comic. If someone could post any links in this direction (or any comments, groundbreaking ideas, world domination plans etc..) I?d be very grateful.
Thank you and sorry for bothering
beenieman

ScottE · Post by **ScottE** » Fri Jan 25, 2002 7:05 pm

I don't really know much about animation in comics myself. Even though I have a background in animation (traditional and CG), I don't see animation as being an integral part of a comic.

Most fo the examples I've seen tend to be redundant/annoying, without contributing much more than any static image.

The only exception to this might be in the case of interactive buttons, which "do" something when clicked, like advance the story.

Post by **Greg Stephens** » Fri Jan 25, 2002 7:09 pm

Generally it seems that animation and comics seem to be at cross-purposes, but to see an example of how it might be done right, check out Demian 5's When I Am King.

ScottE · Post by **ScottE** » Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:35 pm

Ah. Very interesting. I hereby revise my opinion.

catgarza · Post by **catgarza** » Wed Jan 30, 2002 11:46 pm

i've used a little animation on my website as well. check out the archives, particularly strips 51, 73, 85, 114, 124, 126, 127 (and scott mccloud seems to be partial to 36, although it's a bit archaic for me...)

cat
magicinkwell.com

beenieman · Post by **beenieman** » Tue Feb 05, 2002 10:45 am

Hello,
thank you for your response. hey catgarza I?ve seen some of your animated ones and especially the one with the cat pulling the panel is very cool! Here the comic itself really benefits from animation and wouldn?t be possible without animation. I?ve also seen Demian5 (though already some time ago) and the use of repetitive animation is quite well done. But unfortunately I found no theoretical things about this topic when I tried to research a little bit in the internet. I?ve thought quite a lot about it and also read quite interesting ideas here in this forum. But I think for the time being I will have to keep on seeking.
Thanks
beenieman

catgarza · Post by **catgarza** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 9:32 pm

you know, it may be that no one's really written anything on this subject yet. the theory is that comics are sequential moments in time and/or space juxtaposed spatially on a page/screen. animation is the representation of "real time" with the use of repeated static images, like a comic going really really fast... so... to use a panel that has a looped or fixed/timed animation would be like a series of x number panels all stacked on top of each other and flipped through really fast... encapsulating a moment or to emphasize an emotional conotation.. i think that would be the most effective use of animation without killing the integrity of a "comic" or sequential story where it's strength and underlying premise is static images in sequence.

blah. hope that wasn't too boring/rambling...

catgarza · Post by **catgarza** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 9:33 pm

oh, wait, i think scott may have in REINVENTING COMICS come to think of it....

catgarza · Post by **catgarza** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 9:34 pm

um, but you KNEW that already....

Jack Masters · Post by **Jack Masters** » Wed Feb 06, 2002 11:28 pm

He also said some usefull things in <a href="http://www.zwol.org/forum/viewtopic.php ... um=2">This thread</a>. I myself will be using animation in the next House of Stairs comic, but I have a fever so it'll be a while...I can't tell what's really surreal and what just seems surreal because of my warped state of mind.

d.5 · Post by **d.5** » Thu Feb 07, 2002 7:25 am

i think animation works well in comics as long as you don't use it too much, and as long as you don't make your story dependent of the animated parts.

In comics, every picture has a message, every picture is a symbol for a tiny bit of information. the reader collects this information by reading the comic, from picture to picture.
the flow of reading doesn't get interrupted by something moving around, it gets interrupted if a picture includes too much information. It gets interrupted if the information isn't easy "collectable" anymore.
The animated pictures in WIAK never included more information than a single 'not-moving' picture. and the information they represent is very easy "collectable".
They worked because i never thought of them as movies, i thought of them as images, magically enhanced images, where things were moving around, but the moving was just an effect, it didn't add anything to the storyline, there was no message in it.

Too much effects may disturb the flow of reading as well, because effects aim at our senses, and our senses sometimes confuse our minds.
but thats another big theme and i stop now before i get confused myself.

I wish you guys a nice time at APE, if you go..

_demian

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Thu Feb 07, 2002 12:53 pm

On 2002-02-07 06:25, d.5 wrote:
It gets interrupted if the information isn't easy "collectable" anymore.

...in my opinion, this can also go for static images as well. Of course the whole thing is a matter of personal taste, but I see some comics that go overboard trying to imitate the world of painting & fine art. I feel that some of that stuff isn't "collectable" as comics, though of course no one would argue that they are not comics (...at least, I think no one would argue that...)

Somehow artists like Moebius can pull off the fine art style without loosing that comic book feeling, though...

So, I guess what I am trying to say is that the boundries of taste for animation also seem to apply to static images as well (at least for me). Thus, it isn't such a big issue whether a comic incorperates animation or not, but the basic spirit behind that animation, and the static images as well.

Looking at it from this point of view, there is a sort of "comic book spirit" that prevails over issues of using animation and what not. That term is way too vague, though... I'm sure someone could break it down a little bit better than this...

vince

beenieman · Post by **beenieman** » Sat Feb 09, 2002 6:18 pm

hello

encapsulating a moment or to emphasize an emotional conotation

I agree especially with this. perhaps not(only) emotional, but expressionistic effects like these little waves above a hill of garbage that show how its stinking etc. Imagine a cup of coffee with a cute little moving sine floating above; this is how I think that repetitive animation could be used best (perhaps not the best, but you understand what I mean..)
@d.5
basically I also think that one shouldn?t overdo it with animation, (particularly the mere amount of it)but why shouldn?t it be a crucial part to the comic? For example look at catgarza?s strip no.51 (the already mentioned panel-pushing cat):this comic strip wouldn?t be possible without animation, the "story" IS dependant on it. But I believe that this case will rather be seldom, the most frequent use of repetitive animation will imo be one that "only" emphasizes the content and none that makes moving/changing pictures the content itself.
Very interesting, this whole thing.
Thanks
beenieman

d.5 · Post by **d.5** » Sun Feb 10, 2002 8:00 am

The point about cayetano's Strip 51 is that every picture just delivers one message. If it's moving or not.
And this is what i mean. The story may be dependant of the animations in some way. but the animated pictures themselves don't tell long storys they just deliver one main message like: the cat is pushing the frame with his hands, the cat is pushing the frame with his back, the cat is turning around with the frame.

Of course there are also some sub-messages included in the pictures, like, perhaps, the cat is sweating while it's pushing, or, the cat owns a nice red tie with yellow spots. But these sub-messages don't tell the story, they 'decorate' it. (which is very important as well)

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Sun Feb 10, 2002 6:22 pm

that's an interesting point. So, would you say that one way to look at using animation in comics is decoration vs. story-telling? If the animation is restricted to decorational purposes, then it does not detract from the "comic-ness" of the comic, but if it overflows into the area of story-telling, then it takes some of the "comic-ness" away?

I don't know if that is what you wanted to say, but that is how I understood your point...

vince

d.5 · Post by **d.5** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 4:50 am

Well, more or less...
i've never talked about 'comic-ness'.
I've just been talking about the flow of reading in online comics and printed comics.
If a comic is a bit more complicated to read because there is much information to 'collect', it is still a comic, isn't it?

i think the main difference/borderline between comics and animated movies lies in the fact if the storyline moves in space or in time.

but who cares about borderlines?

catgarza · Post by **catgarza** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 12:38 pm

well, and that's just it, isn't it? the web blurs those lines and we have to be the ones to define those lines. what makes it a comic? what makes it just full on animation?

demian's done some marvelous things with animation that i'd like to incorporate in some stories. strip #51 was definitely more of a formal experiment with the use of animation in the service of comics. it relies on the visual gag of each panel being a moment in time and space till both are joined in the last panel, making the panel more "real" in the sense that it now has movement. this will definitely not work all the time, but at the time little had yet been done with animation with comics.