this waiting shits killing me weres the movie dammit

At 2/23/09 06:26 PM, El-Cid wrote:

At 2/22/09 12:31 PM, Osuka wrote:

At 2/22/09 09:59 AM, Chakra-X wrote: Was there ever an actionscript version specification? And out of curiosity, why do the collabs use 30 fps instead of 24?

30 is more fluid than 24 fps, gives more quality to the animation tweening and stuff

False. Traditionally, animation has been done at 24 frames per second. For what ever reason, there's a visual cadence that we psychologically respond better to than say standard video (29.97). It may be also a matter of conditioning, since all movies we've watched from an early age have been at 24 fps.

30 fps is very TV looking. Like watching "Days of Our Lives". As backasswards at it seems, the more removed from reality the rate is, the more we accept it as real.

So yeah, it's more fluid, but the quality is not necessarily better and stuff.

Yes and no, 24fps it more than enought to trick the eye, 12fps is the bare min to be able to produce movment without becoming jerkie but isn't enough to do alot more complex things. i believe this colab was made on 30s cause its easier to count 30s than 24s, i often work on 25s instead just cause every 50 frames is 2 secs of animation, just makes it easier.
and no the reason older animators used 24fps was cause they worked with film, and it was a easier ration back then, not to mention drawing an average of 12 pictures for 1 sec of animation is enough to do the job, why would they try to animate at 30 or 29.whatever fps, its stupidity, be a waiste of money and time. And then there is also rythum that comes into the equasion, 6 steps for a half an average walk cycle, animated on 2's would give you half a step in half a second so a whole step would be 1 sec, 12 drawing animated on 2's... the standard was set by disney so that they would have more control over the way their creations moved, and to save money and time, and the ratio to film aswell.
Today you can animate at whatever you want, but 24 is stil the standard, cause most animation is animated on 2's and if your an animator you'd like get the timing right, so that it makes it more pleasing to the eye, as you said

dude stop it that is really fucking annoying nobody here likes naruto go fuck yourself with a stove you bitch

all of you naruto fans get out of here you fags

False. Traditionally, animation has been done at 24 frames per second. For what ever reason, there's a visual cadence that we psychologically respond better to than say standard video (29.97). It may be also a matter of conditioning, since all movies we've watched from an early age have been at 24 fps.

30 fps is very TV looking. Like watching "Days of Our Lives". As backasswards at it seems, the more removed from reality the rate is, the more we accept it as real.

So yeah, it's more fluid, but the quality is not necessarily better and stuff.

Yes and no, 24fps it more than enought to trick the eye, 12fps is the bare min to be able to produce movment without becoming jerkie but isn't enough to do alot more complex things. i believe this colab was made on 30s cause its easier to count 30s than 24s, i often work on 25s instead just cause every 50 frames is 2 secs of animation, just makes it easier.
and no the reason older animators used 24fps was cause they worked with film, and it was a easier ration back then, not to mention drawing an average of 12 pictures for 1 sec of animation is enough to do the job, why would they try to animate at 30 or 29.whatever fps, its stupidity, be a waiste of money and time. And then there is also rythum that comes into the equasion, 6 steps for a half an average walk cycle, animated on 2's would give you half a step in half a second so a whole step would be 1 sec, 12 drawing animated on 2's... the standard was set by disney so that they would have more control over the way their creations moved, and to save money and time, and the ratio to film aswell.
Today you can animate at whatever you want, but 24 is stil the standard, cause most animation is animated on 2's and if your an animator you'd like get the timing right, so that it makes it more pleasing to the eye, as you said

So, you actually meant, "yes and yes" because at no point did I give misinformation. No shit, animation was 24 fps because of the film rate, I was addressing someone's comment about the aesthetic impact.

Which leads me to wonder if your statement about Disney setting the standard holds any water, considering it seems like the decision was out of the animator's hands anyway.

At 2/23/09 07:52 PM, wynand wrote:

At 2/23/09 06:26 PM, El-Cid wrote:

At 2/22/09 12:31 PM, Osuka wrote:

At 2/22/09 09:59 AM, Chakra-X wrote: Was there ever an actionscript version specification? And out of curiosity, why do the collabs use 30 fps instead of 24?

30 is more fluid than 24 fps, gives more quality to the animation tweening and stuff

False. Traditionally, animation has been done at 24 frames per second. For what ever reason, there's a visual cadence that we psychologically respond better to than say standard video (29.97). It may be also a matter of conditioning, since all movies we've watched from an early age have been at 24 fps.

30 fps is very TV looking. Like watching "Days of Our Lives". As backasswards at it seems, the more removed from reality the rate is, the more we accept it as real.

So yeah, it's more fluid, but the quality is not necessarily better and stuff.

Yes and no, 24fps it more than enought to trick the eye, 12fps is the bare min to be able to produce movment without becoming jerkie but isn't enough to do alot more complex things. i believe this colab was made on 30s cause its easier to count 30s than 24s, i often work on 25s instead just cause every 50 frames is 2 secs of animation, just makes it easier.
and no the reason older animators used 24fps was cause they worked with film, and it was a easier ration back then, not to mention drawing an average of 12 pictures for 1 sec of animation is enough to do the job, why would they try to animate at 30 or 29.whatever fps, its stupidity, be a waiste of money and time. And then there is also rythum that comes into the equasion, 6 steps for a half an average walk cycle, animated on 2's would give you half a step in half a second so a whole step would be 1 sec, 12 drawing animated on 2's... the standard was set by disney so that they would have more control over the way their creations moved, and to save money and time, and the ratio to film aswell.
Today you can animate at whatever you want, but 24 is stil the standard, cause most animation is animated on 2's and if your an animator you'd like get the timing right, so that it makes it more pleasing to the eye, as you said

Let's just put this frame rate thing to bed. I used to work in a video lab. PAL standard, for our friends across the pond, is 24 fps. NTSC standard is 29.98. There is also creepy old SECAM. Within these standards, there exists the potential for drop-frame, non-drop frame, etc. This is the video equivalent of a leap year. Discernible to the human eye? Rarely. Important in this discussion? Hardly (since flash does not deal with dropframes). As far as Flash animation is concerned, anything above 24 fps, is gonna yield smooth, video-like movement. I usually animate at 45 - 60 fps for webdesign flash though. Depends on the project.

At 2/23/09 07:18 PM, dantec666 wrote: this waiting shits killing me weres the movie dammit

theyre building anticipation~

Let's just put this frame rate thing to bed. I used to work in a video lab. PAL standard, for our friends across the pond, is 24 fps. NTSC standard is 29.98. There is also creepy old SECAM. Within these standards, there exists the potential for drop-frame, non-drop frame, etc. This is the video equivalent of a leap year. Discernible to the human eye? Rarely. Important in this discussion? Hardly (since flash does not deal with dropframes). As far as Flash animation is concerned, anything above 24 fps, is gonna yield smooth, video-like movement. I usually animate at 45 - 60 fps for webdesign flash though. Depends on the project.

Dammit, man. I also want to put this thing to an end, but you just made it worst. PAL is not 24 fps, it's 25. NTSC is not 29.98, it's 29.97.

And yes, the whole drop frame stuff is irrelevant here, so thanks for catching yourself there. But the whole point of this discussion, was what worked better visually for story-telling animation, not website design. *sigh*

At 2/20/09 09:42 PM, Catoblepas wrote: ireallycantthinkanthingworsethanSFporn

yo u gay. sf porn owns.

God... i could of made a new street fighter entry in the time i've been waiting for this collab to come together... LOL

Got a much finnier concept too now i've played number 4. :(

Fucking Zangrief's grab spam attack is BS...

At 2/24/09 07:17 AM, Master-Samus wrote: God... i could of made a new street fighter entry in the time i've been waiting for this collab to come together... LOL

Got a much finnier concept too now i've played number 4. :(

Fucking Zangrief's grab spam attack is BS...

Aw, don't tell me that. I haven't played it yet and I'd hate to hear the game is already broken.

People who cant animate arguing about framerates...
:D
I like working at 15fps typically so i mainly just drew 2s for the collab.

....i think i'll make something at 7.5fps
HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL!?

i heard that is going to be a PC version for SF4, i cant wait to play it, i dont have a 360 or PS3 :(

At 2/24/09 09:25 AM, Osuka wrote: i heard that is going to be a PC version for SF4

I found it, the release date is June 2009 T.T crap...

At 2/24/09 09:17 AM, PiGPEN wrote: People who cant animate arguing about framerates...

D

I like working at 15fps typically so i mainly just drew 2s for the collab.

....i think i'll make something at 7.5fps
HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL!?

it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, knowing you're such a talented animator.

Can somebody send me a link to this collab i can't find it!!!

At 2/24/09 10:01 AM, RIGO1 wrote: Can somebody send me a link to this collab i can't find it!!!

It's not out yet. Simple as that.

And what is up with that image that has completely nothing to do with Street Fighter?

At 2/24/09 09:17 AM, PiGPEN wrote: People who cant animate arguing about framerates...

D

I like working at 15fps typically so i mainly just drew 2s for the collab.

....i think i'll make something at 7.5fps
HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL!?

Teehee! You're sooo willy-silly with your ironic statements!!! :3

About time. Hit the front page people.

At 2/24/09 09:17 AM, PiGPEN wrote: People who cant animate arguing about framerates...

D

I like working at 15fps typically so i mainly just drew 2s for the collab.

....i think i'll make something at 7.5fps
HOW DOES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL!?

pigpen you get the award for first submission we received we actually liked.

can it be the x men collab next time?

If anyone needs a voice actor for thier part just drop me a line :)

At 2/24/09 04:31 PM, TomatoMan7 wrote: If anyone needs a voice actor for thier part just drop me a line :)

Not the best place to advertise.

At 2/24/09 12:05 PM, JohnnyUtah wrote:

At 2/24/09 09:17 AM, PiGPEN wrote: People who cant animate arguing about framerates...

D

I like working at 15fps typically so i mainly just drew 2s for the collab.

pigpen you get the award for first submission we received we actually liked.

Congrats pigpen. can't wait to see it.

NG= full of liars who dont want to tell you the release date of the SF collab. >:(

i'm not in. in this flash...lol

its gonna be worth the wait~

I kind of have feeling that Zangief is a very popular character in this collab.

At 2/24/09 09:39 PM, speedsk8r wrote: NG= full of liars who dont want to tell you the release date of the SF collab. >:(

will be released when they finish the final .fla
when you work with a heavy flash file the computer gets real slow and errors can appear anytime in the .swf

so be patient

At 2/24/09 10:21 PM, thecultguy wrote: its gonna be worth the wait~

Hells yeah it is.