I didn't say I didn't get any useful feedback from ndchristie in relation to the artwork, I said I didn't learn anything from ndchristie about the process. That's why I put headlines on the different parts of the post to separate what I was talking about. The same thing goes for the valid discussion about weight. It's a talk about the animation right and not the method I use? See... you didn't learn anything from ndchristie either. All he did was say I'm doing it wrong but there was no lesson to be learned, no tips on how to think or anything that I myself haven't considered and processed myself.

If I was practical about animating I would draw ten times less frames than what I've got now. The number of frames needed for each character grows like crazy only because I want smooth animations. I'm not lazy when it comes to animating but with a lot of frames to be drawn I like a simple style. That's why I've got so little rendering and so on.

*facepalm* How can you say I'm trying to deflect the critique I'm getting on my results when that is what I'm fighting for at the moment. YOU deflect from the discussion on the results to a discussion about method. If we are going to talk method for gods sake post some examples or references or anything for me to bite into. Talk is cheap.

Using key frames is animation 101... Am I not using key frames? I've got two mirror key contact frames on frame 1 and two 7 with matching passing positions on frame 4 and 10 plus two extra key frames that double for jumping frames. That's an animation technique I haven't seen anyone use in gaming before. When jumping I keep running the cycle until I hit the jump-frame and then I freeze until I land when I continue the run cycle. That makes for really smooth jumping action. Also I'm currently working on easing in and out of running using different running speeds so I have a loop for 4 pixel running, 2 pixel jogging and 1 pixel walking that I can switch between seamlessly. All that would be impossible without using key frames. I also animate by doing the key frames first and then doing passing frames and adding the in-betweens after that.

Now TrevoriuS is telling me I should draw the hip first and work from there to the torso and onward which I think is terrible advice. He says you should finish your key frames entirely before working on and not animate limb by limb. I on the other hand think it's justified to animate limb by limb. You seem to think that I don't consider the animation as a whole but I do. I plan and project how things should move and then I do straight animations which might need some touch up at the end but that is not as big of an issue at the size I'm working at. It's not the same as some people do when they draw everything but the head and say they are going to add it later on which I think is really bad practice It's not the same as drawing everything but the arms and say that you want to finish the legs first. I iterate through the entire body but I don't work one frame at a time. I work similar to what Richard Williams suggests in the Animator's Survival Kit where he discusses Straight Ahead animation and Pose to Pose animation and how you easily can combine the two different techniques first getting the general movement and then do separate runs on different body parts.

You think you know how I work and then you tell me I have a bad method when in fact I just did a crappy animation because it's not easy to animate things moving slowly. Try for yourself, it's much harder doing a slow walk than doing a fast run.   If you point out errors I've made I will most likely change them because I listen to advice. If you tell me I should change my method then you have to showing me your way of working and then I might adapt some of that but without showing any examples it's all talk.

You say you don't know that much about animation but you defend ndchristie and TrevoriuS over me so you have confidence enough to trust that they know what they are talking about and that I don't.

I think my method rules! There's not a problem that I can't fix, because I do it in the mix!

Is this better?  =>

Here's an alternative run for the Rubin character with some added weight.

first, impressive work done on the previous guy.

My impression is that your professor is too rigid.
For an old guy like this, he stands too perfectly right, and moves too perfectly his feets. If i was in the school, i'm sure i'd be plotting to see whether he's hiding a robotic walking prothese ...

I suggest you work on giving him more character by bending him, make his walk irregular. When getting old, it's hard to stay on a single foot during the walk, so the "passing" phase of the walk tends to be faster, but at the same times, knees hurt and won't let you move your leg smoothly.

Yeah the professor is too rigid I can see that. The problem is that it's much harder to animated something moving slow than something at high speed at this size. He only picks his foot up one pixel over the ground but it still looks like he's standing too much on one foot. I'm going to try making it look like he's walking in slippers but I'm afraid it will look like he's skating but it might work. I'm going to drop the arms straight down too since it currently looks like he's dancing the twist.

I like you're idea of adding more character. Perhaps adding a cane might do the trick. Another might be to make him younger so the age fits the walk better.

I think the arm is coming way too far forward.  He'd throw off his aim as well as his balance.  Don't try things out on a treadmill, try them out on real ground.  You can't train for a boxing match just by hitting a bag all day, and if I can run around a bed-stuy block with one arm out without getting jumped, you can too .

If he is going to flail like a madman, he can't keep his aim up like that.  when one shoulder comes forward the other hangs back.  that's not just a fact - it's the whole point of moving your upper body while running.  It builds momentum and it keeps the body moving in a straighter line.

For the gliding issue, i see 2 things : there's no weight, and everything is completely even.  I agree that you can't change the placement of the foot on the ground during contact, but you haven't attempted to change the placement of the body over the foot.  Even Olympic sprinters who spend 99% of their time in the air still don't float.

The same goes for the doctor - he's a floating torso with the leg motion just for show.  I get the feeling that you're animating these all as separate pieces and then wondering why they don't work as a unit.  He's not only rigid, he's stunningly stable - more than is humanly possible.  what's worse is that when you start this way, now when you try to animate the body to compensate, it will only look bad, because the animation wasn't part of the action considered from the beginning.

It's all a matter of process.  Bad process leads to bad results no matter how much work is done and no matter how many problems are addressed.  Always start, work, and finish with the whole advancing in front of the parts.

No need to add insult to injury. Somehow you managed to review my methods instead of the "pixelart". The biggest flaw in my process is posting unfinished material here for people to review but to me that's a good way to get feed-back and it's usually fun both to post and review and make edits. When you say I'm not doing it right I take offense.

The one thing I felt I could take with me is the guy running and aiming at the same time. I might consider adding a pure running animation and only aim when shooting and drop the aim a couple of frames after each shot. I've tried that in the past and it looks good if you add a sufficient amount of time between the shot and the dropping of the aim so that the character don't wave their arm up and down like crazy during a fire fight.

I'll return when I've got edits.

I might be wrong but aren't vanishing points most effective when they are placed at eye level?
If you place the vanishing point for the doors in the center the guy will look like a giant.

This picture should have at least three vanishing points i think; one for the wall/door and two for the cart that is rotated in relation to the wall.