Random! Cartoons Logo

Very cool! In the video, the first piece comes down and then another piece comes down off of it. I think it would look better if the piece that comes off of it (it has the hand on it and then the ball tube thing comes down) well if the piece with the hand on it came down while the entire thing came down it would look much nicer… I dont know how to explain it that well lol

Somehow you are trying to pass off the animation and the contraption as being so mechanical and systematic, but as a engineering guru and a M.I.T. grad, (I do mostly mechanical 3D myself) it looks like its way off. I know its still in testing phase, but it doesn’t look convincing. I hope it gets better.
good luck

(it’s for kids cartoons buddy. it doesn’t need to be all that realistic. there is such a thing as suspension of disbelief.)
I think it looks cool. I only wished it looked more like a little kid genius slapped it together, like a 10 year old Macguyver or junior high version of the professor from gilligan’s island. only, don’t use coconuts.
not bad at all.
sincerely,
-JX

Looks great! Is this the beginning of the final animation, or is the motion just to test the rig?

This is a testing animation, not the final. Yes Stephen, if you animate one piece, they all move. This is from the rigging of Chris Boylan. He put controls on the machine so that as animators, we only adjust a few things and the entire machine will work properly. Bud, your post reminds me of a story that Frank Thomas told me one time. He said that while the animators were working on the clock sequence in “Pinocchio”, Wlat mentioned to them that although it worked for the film, one of their clocks (the one with the drunk guy popping out of a bar) would not work in the real world. The animators then went out and got a clock maker to create a real clock that functioned the same way. You can see that clock in the movie “The Reluctant Dragon”. When they showed the clock to Walt, he said that he knew they were clever, he just wanted to see how long it would take them.

You can read all about that, and see some photos of the clock here:

http://www.disneypov.com/issue05/ww5.html

when thingss are built in 3d like this, if you move that big gear, does the little one move as well? or do you have to mave the little guy manually to make it look like it work?

Well I like it. I don’t think that it NEEDS to work perfectly. Just the sense that it is working is fine. The only note I would give on it is it seems to need a bit more cartoony bounce to it. When the first piece comes down I think it should overshoot it’s position downward a bit more and then settle a bit more rubbery. Same for the hand being swung out and the ball shoot. I know they’re mechan ical but they should have a cartoony rubberiness to them to make the animation not so…well, robotic. Think about when a dancer does “The Robot”. They always go a little further than their final position and then shake to a stop to further make it seem like it is a heavy piece of machinery that has to stop it’s motion before it goes to the next move. I think that will add the final touch to your animation. Great job Chris and Floyd!

This is just a test animation to show the machine’s range of motion. It is not finished animation. There will be lots of overshoot and wobble in the action of the various parts… kind of like an old animatronic at Disneyland that has performed the same function day in and day out for decades. Keep watching this space.

I can agree with Jeaux about the way the thing should look more like how a junior Macguyver would put it together. Kind of like a wallace and gromit type mechanism. I also understand its for kid cartoon and the suspension of belief, but it should be made as if its for kids and not soo realistice like a clock mechanism.
I think the kids built machine theory would work much better. Just putting in my opinion, so if Jeaux or anyone else feels offended by my opinion, then don’t ask the public for their advice. This input was also backed up from my 8 year old.

No offense taken bud.
Thanks for concurring with me.
-jx