Definition - High vs Standard & Nonstandard

[Cathy]

Hi Folks,

I've tried working with HD (1280x720) 16:9 aspect ratio but it drags my computer performance down and creates really big video files.
I've also worked with standard (720 x 480) but dislike the aspect ratio 4:3
Although 640 x 360 (50% of HD) is not listed as a typical size I like it because it's got the 16:9 aspect ratio of HD but is smaller and easier for my computer to handle. Today I also burned a test DVD with an avi file at 640 x 360 and it looks just like regular 16:9 letterbox on my TV (not HDTV).

Is there any reason why I should not use it?

Thanks,
Cathy

[slowtiger]

It only depends on where you want to show your films. If you want to sell them, to a TV station or a distributor, you're best off with sticking to standard formats. (I just learnt that HDTV 1920 x 1080 25p is the only accepted format for TV in Europe today. This means that I have to skip the more comfortable 1280 x 720 for production, although it's possible to do rough animation in the smaller format first, then modify it to the final size before clean-up and colouring.)

[Paul Fierlinger]

Anything less than 1080p looks undesirable when projected on a large screen such as a festival screening. 720p is acceptable but only when you are new to it. Once you start seeing other people's films done in 1080p you begin to regret the time you spent working in 720p. Home DVDs usually can't burn real HDTV (except for BlueRay now) and if you like what you see on your TV set, it must be a small set. All of TV broadcast in the U.S. is now digital and very soon everyone will have digital TV sets and anything less than HDTV will look pretty bad. I suggest you not get into a bad habit of going below standards if you are serious about your future as an animator. To just experiment and to test the waters it is fine to use the format you are using now as long as you understand that these animations are a temporary stepping stone to some possible serious work in the future or to later just drop animation and go on to another experimental venue such as illustrations for print.

[Cathy]

Thank you gentlemen for your knowledge and insight. From 720x480 to 1280x720 to 1920x1080. I wonder if next year it will be 4000 x 2000 and so on. This is the same issue I have with 3D. The constant escalation of medium requirements. Upgrade! Upgrade! Upgrade! Since I am a dabbling hobbyist and not a professional I think that fact also answers my question - as my work will probably never been seen anywhere beyond YouTube or a DVD shared among friends.

Pardon my personal musing here for a moment - Paul mentioned illustrations for print and it made me wonder... I must be a romantic traditionalist at heart. When I look at the tools I use for my pen and ink illustrations I feel comforted- they are the same tools I used 35 years ago, they are the same tools that others have used before me. There is a warmth and sweetness about that, a sense of familiarity. Perhaps these last few years of me flailing-about and going back and forth between computerized art-making programs has really, at it's crux, been about me choosing the wrong creative tool and then trying, unsuccessfully, to make it work. Don't get me wrong - I love the computer and it's power. But I am now questioning if it is the right choice for me as my main creative tool. I think the answer lies in how I feel when I am using it as opposed to other tools. Sorry for the rambling.

As artists - do you have certain feelings about your tools? Do you prefer one thing over another? I'm curious about this.

-Cathy

[Paul Fierlinger]

In my case it's always been the search for a process I could enjoy. I hated cels and cameras and harsh equipment that ripped and shredded film to ribbons. It was a constant battle to make things work properly. The screwdriver and pliers were what made me feel like you do about software and hardware. It was the drawing process I wanted -- without the machines.

Computers have brought me the closest I can get to Van Gogh's lust for life yet he himself would have hated them. He hated the onslaught of reproductions and the invention of printed pictures.

I never cared for your dippy pens and ink either because it took too long to dry and an animator needs to draw fast with little waste of time in between drawings; the software-generated work flow became an important expression in my new lexicon because with computers I could find ways to economize my time. So I love every new version and upgrade and hardware discovery and can't wait to see the next one as soon as the new one is in my arsenal.

I have always had the drive to produce as much work as my available tools would allow me to because it has been my only source of living for the past five decades. Your needs are different and you can't fit in to computers and you don't have the motivation to go with the flow of an always changing technology. You seem to be letting our world pass you by and you want out so you should follow your instincts. No one can say you didn't try.

[slowtiger]

I use whatever I feel like is appropriate to do the job. Nobody forces me to be a purist of any tool.

[meslin]

I love this discussion of SD / HD / Unlimited Def (real paper).
I animate with TVPaint on a tablet PC and a desktop with a huge Wacom and two monitors, and colerase and Ingram paper on a traditional animation disc.
In my experience, the creative sparks happen best in silence, with no computers on. It may be the bright light in the face, or the strange postures, or maybe the subconscious fear of breaking something expensive, but computers create constant physical tension for me. The tension seems to keep my imagination from unleashing any pleasing surprises. It's led me to repeatedly swear off computer art (but of course when the stress levels fall down again the tablet looks so tasty).

I came up with a decent compromise , where I do my key drawings by hand and scan 'em in.

That said, I think the repetitive nature of animation is undeniably ripe for machine aid, and for the rest of the process TVP is as great as creative software gets. The extreme customizeability of the UI and the Amiga-rooted refusal to be visually "cute" just screams "real tool." But it definitely helps me to have those scanned key drawings to remind me of the "reality" or the "essence" of the images, or whatever stupid romantic notion it is. Perhaps just to prove that it isn't an elf in the stylus doing all the work. I don't have the faintest idea how electromagnetic reflection works without a battery...

One thing I repeatedly wish for in TVP is a true full screen mode, with no edges of UI pixels on the screen whatsoever (but shortcut keys still functional). Maybe the shelves could still pop out at cursor contact with the edge of the screen, but I'd like them to recede to nothing--could the retracted size of the shelf be user-adjustable?

Thanks to Cathy for sparking an interesting discussion!

[Paul Fierlinger]

meslin,
Can you show us some of your animatiodone this way?

[slowtiger]

One thing I repeatedly wish for in TVP is a true full screen mode, with no edges of UI pixels on the screen whatsoever (but shortcut keys still functional). Maybe the shelves could still pop out at cursor contact with the edge of the screen, but I'd like them to recede to nothing--could the retracted size of the shelf be user-adjustable?

Great idea.

[Peter Wassink]

One thing I repeatedly wish for in TVP is a true full screen mode, with no edges of UI pixels on the screen whatsoever (but shortcut keys still functional). Maybe the shelves could still pop out at cursor contact with the edge of the screen, but I'd like them to recede to nothing--could the retracted size of the shelf be user-adjustable?

Great idea.

oh i'd love that too!
it must be very sexy to have the entire monitor surface as a canvas

[Sierra Rose]

I have pencils and paper all over the house and am constantly drawing when not at the computer.

But when I do sit at the computer with the stylus in hand, I feel most at home with the wonder of drawing.

It's not just that my hand disappears, it's also the feel of the tablet, the choice of tools, being able to pick up a section of the drawing, to undo (especially undo). And subconsciously for me probably is the fact that I'm not wasting paper or ink if I make a mistake....I feel free to experiment without limits. I'm not so concerned with time since I don't have a deadline, but the swiftness is delicious.

[sandriko]

ooh i see that here is pretty nice discussion..
i agree with you about fullscreen mode and not only

[artfx]

I say if 640x360 makes it possible for you to have fun and love what you do, by all means do that! I think all the quibbles over format are pretty much a moot point in the end. Unless that TV station or distributor came to you and ask you to make something for them, the chancing of you selling whatever you made are slim to none anyway. (note: They want to 100% own full rights to anything they show or sell)

I've worked in every resolution under the sun. 640x360 happens to be one of my favorites as well. The idea that you are somehow stuck with a non standard res in TVPaint is absurd. You can work at any resolution you want, and export at another.

When I worked in Hollywood, I did all my composites for feature films in TVPaint at 1280x720 and then exported the frames for output at 1920x1080. No one ever said anything about it. You can work at 640x360, because it is small, fast and easy, and then export at 720x480 or 853x480 or whatever your job requires.

[Fabrice]

Good to see you back in the forum Terrence !

LEARN HOW TO Create Your Own Animated Film!
You don't need millions of dollars or major studio backing!

Hmmm ... I like this !!

What will be your new project ? Tell us more

[Paul Fierlinger]

Hi Terrence
I think about you at least once a month or so, wondering when you will pop up again and here you are now. I have a suggestion for PART II to your "LEARN HOW TO Create Your Own Animated Film!" project. It's: Learn how to FINISH Your Own Animated Film! I'm serious; I see too many people with great determination rushing into making a movie "like no other movie" (or "just like other movies") but never thinking through the skills needed to actually complete the BIG ONE.

There are certain principles one must understand to be able to finish a film, starting with Understand Yourself First and ending with Understanding the Joys of Loneliness. Animation schools are notoriously unsuccessful at getting these principals across to their students. I, for one, never succeeded; all my students always took too big a bite to chew, in spite of all my repeated warnings.