AuthorTopic: A (six) frame walkcycle.  (Read 4213 times)

Offline Zolthorg

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 474
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

A (six) frame walkcycle.

on: March 04, 2007, 04:18:34 pm


Here's how i started and the individual frames:


Don't have much time right now, so here are my notable errors i need opinions on:
- Frame speed seems a little off
- Leg movements seem too big, should i move up to 6 frames for tweens?
- The standing frame seems to be a pixel short.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2007, 08:33:40 pm by Zolthorg »

Offline eck

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 322
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • But why is RUM gone???
    • View Profile

Re: A 4 frame walkcycle.

Reply #1 on: March 04, 2007, 04:31:55 pm
i think 6 frames would be good.
untz untz untz?

Offline Zolthorg

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 474
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: A 4 frame walkcycle.

Reply #2 on: March 12, 2007, 08:33:24 pm

6 frames

side by side:


The palette isn't final, i just like greens
i need to work on the face, i may just sacrifice 90% of detail there since it doesn't communicate.
i haven't even looked at proportions for the figure, which would've been a good idea.

Offline alkaline

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 235
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • may be caustic
    • designflaw
    • awstenn
    • View Profile

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #3 on: March 12, 2007, 08:48:09 pm
maybe more frames would be good....it seems to me that there should be more tween when the front leg is moving forward

Offline rydath

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #4 on: March 12, 2007, 09:06:50 pm
For some reason the green makes it look much smoother than the grey. Maybe it's a timing thing different in the animations , maybe it's just the cleaned up frames*shrugs* (You know better than I, what am i ramlbing about?). I personally think these 6 frames should be fine, but I'm no expert in animation as of now. Proportions look fine, as well, though, you're right, that head didn't translate (I thought it was a weird neck and not a chin at first). Another thing is, though the angle makes it hard to tell for sure, his right arm seems not to move forward very much. It looks good, though, so don't sweat it if you think it's fine.

Offline Xion

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1551
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • FourbitFriday

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #5 on: March 12, 2007, 10:12:05 pm
I personally think these 6 frames should be fine
I tend to agree.

Offline alkaline

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 235
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • may be caustic
    • designflaw
    • awstenn
    • View Profile

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #6 on: March 12, 2007, 10:38:51 pm
really? i thought it looked a little choppy.

also on the back foot the foot should be planted at the bottom when it lands, right now it lands a pixel above and yet the tween frames show it one pixel below.

Offline RhysD

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • RhysD.com

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #7 on: March 12, 2007, 11:14:18 pm
For some reason the green makes it look much smoother than the grey. Maybe it's a timing thing different in the animations , maybe it's just the cleaned up frames*shrugs* (You know better than I, what am i ramlbing about?). I personally think these 6 frames should be fine, but I'm no expert in animation as of now. Proportions look fine, as well, though, you're right, that head didn't translate (I thought it was a weird neck and not a chin at first). Another thing is, though the angle makes it hard to tell for sure, his right arm seems not to move forward very much. It looks good, though, so don't sweat it if you think it's fine.

This is because the green one has 6 frames, the grey has 4..

Offline Fool

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 201
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
    • Fool's House

Re: A (six) frame walkcycle.

Reply #8 on: March 12, 2007, 11:15:21 pm
A few small thing i've noticed - his far leg goes too fast from one extreme to another, it looks a bit like he walks with his legs sreaded. Perhaps it's not that noticable in that size, but still...
Also It might look a bit better if body goes down on foot down.  And a middle position of front leg grows in length, which makes it feel boneless. A quick edit if you won't mind.

Again, its all not so critical in that size.=)
« Last Edit: March 12, 2007, 11:20:15 pm by Fool »