Annnnd here goes! After almost four weeks of research, I've finally found my proposal version 1.0!
All my examples and animations that I've researched (and want to make myself) were so-called intro or cutscenes. Games use a lot of animated (as well 2D as 3D) cutscenes, and I now start to wonder:
"What is the added value of animated (2D) cutscenes in games?"
Also, to expand the possibilities and difficulty of this task; I would love to investigate the following: games are leaning more and more towards realism.
"How can one make the 2D animation fit with the realism of the game without causing to break the style of the game?"
So there it is!
The only problem I'm currently facing, is the fact that I don't have a 'game' to make an intro for. I have been asking around for some projects, and there is some interesting stuff there - although I am not sure if students are able to create the high standard of realism that I've been aiming for in my research.
I'm not sure if it's okay if I create my own (fictional) game, but then there will always be an 'assumption' instead of proven fact that the style will fit according to my research.
February 26, 2010
February 22, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 16
Hyperreality will be my next big thing - surpassing reality in some ways. I am currently finding out its meaning.
http://brendonodwyer.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/research-essay%E2%80%94hyperreality/
Pretty awesome, while diving into the concept of Hyperreality, I come across the name of Umberto Eco, one of the most profound writers in essays about hyperrealism. I wonder if it's the same dude as the writer from 'The Name of the Rose' - but I guess it is.
Anyways, the concapt of Hyperrealism truly applies here; it means that parts of this 'reality' start to overtake 'our' reality. This means, that the perfect world that is created within that hyperreality (celebrities' lives, Las Vegas, games) even more 'real' feels to us than our 'normal real' lives. The world is more exciting, more beautiful, more succesful than our own. From the moment we decide to live in that hyperreality, we already forget to live from out of our own heart, and thus creating an hyperreal world for ourselves to live in.
The art I have been examining shows a hyperreal world without the imperfections (and often boring things) in our real life. People do not flee in this world, they start to see it as their own reality. (i.e. we would not hope to be living in a science-fiction world, but we do when we see the images of celebrities and models in the media).
http://brendonodwyer.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/research-essay%E2%80%94hyperreality/
Pretty awesome, while diving into the concept of Hyperreality, I come across the name of Umberto Eco, one of the most profound writers in essays about hyperrealism. I wonder if it's the same dude as the writer from 'The Name of the Rose' - but I guess it is.
Anyways, the concapt of Hyperrealism truly applies here; it means that parts of this 'reality' start to overtake 'our' reality. This means, that the perfect world that is created within that hyperreality (celebrities' lives, Las Vegas, games) even more 'real' feels to us than our 'normal real' lives. The world is more exciting, more beautiful, more succesful than our own. From the moment we decide to live in that hyperreality, we already forget to live from out of our own heart, and thus creating an hyperreal world for ourselves to live in.
The art I have been examining shows a hyperreal world without the imperfections (and often boring things) in our real life. People do not flee in this world, they start to see it as their own reality. (i.e. we would not hope to be living in a science-fiction world, but we do when we see the images of celebrities and models in the media).
February 21, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 15
Allright, seeing that I've come across the fact that I do not fully embrace realism as my favourite thing, as all my prima artist examples use a realism that is further away from realism than I expected: I'm going to dive into SUGGESTION.
So, here goes!
Where I had found an article about the realism in videogames, I found another one stating exactly the same thing. I guess more recent (3D!) videogames are unable to 'suggest' things, not sure how to explain this, but it's more like: all textures, area and surfaces are clearly defined to be rendered by the engine. This leaves more or less no room for any 'undefined' areas that can tickle the imagination.
This is why I love 2D and not 3D. A brushstroke in itself can suggest a lot of things. A plane in a 3D environment does not.
So, here goes!
Where I had found an article about the realism in videogames, I found another one stating exactly the same thing. I guess more recent (3D!) videogames are unable to 'suggest' things, not sure how to explain this, but it's more like: all textures, area and surfaces are clearly defined to be rendered by the engine. This leaves more or less no room for any 'undefined' areas that can tickle the imagination.
This is why I love 2D and not 3D. A brushstroke in itself can suggest a lot of things. A plane in a 3D environment does not.
February 18, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 14
As relative the term 'realism' might be, even the 'real-live-action' movies are not as real as they appear. Marlyn mentioned the assumption we viewers take on when seeing an actor. Knowing, that this man might be in his normal life a simple father who takes care of his wife and children, we still see the actor as the person he is playing.
With this in mind, I scrolled across an article which searches out the 'realism' in Science-Fiction. Even on a movieset, which is often no real-life location, we viewers are asked to place ourselves into that location for now. We are already requested to suspend disbelief.
The subject in the following is how we may identify and how we should weigh the criteria for what is implausible, improbable or impossible enough to impair our suspension of disbelief. Almost every fiction, as already mentioned, strives to overstate and to put emphasis on the extraordinary. There are also TV series of all genres, not only comedy, that are deliberately made without continuity and hence in a way not to be taken too seriously. An extreme example is "South Park" where Kenny, with exceptions in more recent episodes, is killed every time.
But what is the special quality a televised fiction must have in order to appear realistic? It seems as if a drama set in our present world and time has a clear advantage in that it apparently shows people, places, things and situations that we are familiar with from our every-day life. We should easily be able to unmask it if the depiction were flawed. In this sense some critics even go as far as rejecting any kind of science fiction because, in their opinion, it shows an utopian world and, in particular, science and technology that deviates from what they think is correct. Therefore, already the basic setting of science fiction as something that does not exist in our world or time should fall under the category "impossible". They don't manage to suspend disbelief (or don't even attempt to). Moreover, I am surprised that so many laymen out there seem to have the knowledge in physics and engineering that would allow them to recognize fictional technology as unattainable along the lines of "impossible speeds and starships defying gravity". Ironically, the share of science fiction fans among real-world scientists and engineers seems to be much higher than among the "ordinary" population.
With this in mind, I scrolled across an article which searches out the 'realism' in Science-Fiction. Even on a movieset, which is often no real-life location, we viewers are asked to place ourselves into that location for now. We are already requested to suspend disbelief.
The subject in the following is how we may identify and how we should weigh the criteria for what is implausible, improbable or impossible enough to impair our suspension of disbelief. Almost every fiction, as already mentioned, strives to overstate and to put emphasis on the extraordinary. There are also TV series of all genres, not only comedy, that are deliberately made without continuity and hence in a way not to be taken too seriously. An extreme example is "South Park" where Kenny, with exceptions in more recent episodes, is killed every time.
But what is the special quality a televised fiction must have in order to appear realistic? It seems as if a drama set in our present world and time has a clear advantage in that it apparently shows people, places, things and situations that we are familiar with from our every-day life. We should easily be able to unmask it if the depiction were flawed. In this sense some critics even go as far as rejecting any kind of science fiction because, in their opinion, it shows an utopian world and, in particular, science and technology that deviates from what they think is correct. Therefore, already the basic setting of science fiction as something that does not exist in our world or time should fall under the category "impossible". They don't manage to suspend disbelief (or don't even attempt to). Moreover, I am surprised that so many laymen out there seem to have the knowledge in physics and engineering that would allow them to recognize fictional technology as unattainable along the lines of "impossible speeds and starships defying gravity". Ironically, the share of science fiction fans among real-world scientists and engineers seems to be much higher than among the "ordinary" population.
February 17, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 13
Despite my horrible cold I'll try and evaluate some of the findings I've done today.
First, I came across an article from an University which had developed an automated method in which a 2D image could be transferred into a 3D environment.
This was a so-called Photo Pop-up. It had an annoying command-prompt program which I haven't been able to run 100%. Sigh. Ah well, I'll find that out later on.
Secondly, I found this video about transferring 3D motion information onto a 2D skeleton which used a more image-like approach.
I liked both of the subjects a lot, and hope I am able to dive into them a bit more to use them for my own project.
Thirdly, I wanted to adress some aspects of realism that I have been using very often in my work. The subject concerns Custom Brushes.
Many Photoshoppers use brushes with custom settings to apply in different situations. Often, you can use complete photographs to create textures, buildings or abstract works. I have done a seminar a while ago, about these custom brushes, and we went outside to take our own photographs and use them (instead of internet ones).
It is easy to use the photographed object 'as is'. For example, if you photographed rice and created a brush out of it, you would only use the brush when painting rice.
This was something I wanted to experiment with: often structure is the key to recognizing things, so I gave them a funny assignment.
They had to create a brush from photographed food, and then create a scene with that brush. I myself had done the assignment as well, and eventually created a deep-sea coral reef from a rice brush, flowing hills from wallnut-shells and a sea monster from a jar of beans.
The funny thing was, that the essence of 'realism' lay within the complex sructure of nature, and which you could adapt to your own advantage and purpose. Leaf-brushes are easily created and cost 1% of the time if you had to paint all the leaves by hand. And also, these images are often perceived as more real - the image complexity resembling a realism that 'hand painted' works do not quickly resemble.
I hope to be able to refine this area of 'abstract' designing with 'real-life' elements. I would love to be able to perfect the technique.
First, I came across an article from an University which had developed an automated method in which a 2D image could be transferred into a 3D environment.
This was a so-called Photo Pop-up. It had an annoying command-prompt program which I haven't been able to run 100%. Sigh. Ah well, I'll find that out later on.
Secondly, I found this video about transferring 3D motion information onto a 2D skeleton which used a more image-like approach.
I liked both of the subjects a lot, and hope I am able to dive into them a bit more to use them for my own project.
Thirdly, I wanted to adress some aspects of realism that I have been using very often in my work. The subject concerns Custom Brushes.
Many Photoshoppers use brushes with custom settings to apply in different situations. Often, you can use complete photographs to create textures, buildings or abstract works. I have done a seminar a while ago, about these custom brushes, and we went outside to take our own photographs and use them (instead of internet ones).
It is easy to use the photographed object 'as is'. For example, if you photographed rice and created a brush out of it, you would only use the brush when painting rice.
This was something I wanted to experiment with: often structure is the key to recognizing things, so I gave them a funny assignment.
They had to create a brush from photographed food, and then create a scene with that brush. I myself had done the assignment as well, and eventually created a deep-sea coral reef from a rice brush, flowing hills from wallnut-shells and a sea monster from a jar of beans.
The funny thing was, that the essence of 'realism' lay within the complex sructure of nature, and which you could adapt to your own advantage and purpose. Leaf-brushes are easily created and cost 1% of the time if you had to paint all the leaves by hand. And also, these images are often perceived as more real - the image complexity resembling a realism that 'hand painted' works do not quickly resemble.
I hope to be able to refine this area of 'abstract' designing with 'real-life' elements. I would love to be able to perfect the technique.
February 16, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 12
The original 'Realism' in painting has become famous because of a few schools that taught Realist methods.
The Realists (1800 - 1899)
This is a group of international artists in Paris which begin to devise new methods of pictorial representation. They are focused on scientific concepts of vision and the study of optical effects of light. The Realists express both a taste for democracy and rejection of the inherent old artistic tradition. The Realists felt that painters should work from the life round them. Indisputable honest, the Realists desecrated rules of artistic propriety with their new realistic portrayals of modern life. Artists: Marie Rosalie Bonheur, John Singleton Copley, Gustave Courbet, Honoré Daumier, Hilaire Germain Edgar Degas, Thomas Eakins, Ignace Henri Theodore Fantin-Latour, Wilhelm Leibl, Edouard Manet.
Barbizon School (1840s - 1850s)
Barbizon School was a group of French landscape artists one of first formed outside the Academy. They were named after the Forest of Fonteblau near the village of Barbizon where they got away from the revolutionary Paris to produce their art. They attempted to paint nature directly; Constable who pioneered in making landscape painting a faithful depiction of nature was their model.
The Barbizon painters helped establish landscape and motif of country life as vital subjects for French artists. They also cherished an interest in visible reality, which became increasingly important to the later artistic styles. Artists in the group: Camille Corot, Charles-François Daubigny, Jean-François Millet, Pierre-Etienne-Théodore Rousseau.
The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (1848 - late 19th Century)
In 1848 a group of English painters, poets and critics formed the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood to reform art by rejecting practices of contemporary academic British Art. They have been considered the first avant-garde movement in art. They accepted the doctrine of imitation of nature, as central purpose of art. Instead of the Raphaelesque conventions taught at the Royal Academy, their central doctrine was that artists should seek to represent the natural world. They believed that the only great art was before high renaissance, before Raphael. He was representative of the time when painters would scarify the reality of the subject to their own ideals of beauty and morality. The Pre-Raphaelite Brothers condemned this art of idealization, and promoted works based on real landscapes and models, and paid intense attention to accuracy of detail and color. They advocated as well a moral approach to art, in keeping with a long British tradition established by Hogarth. The combination of didacticism and realism characterized the first phase of the movement. The landscape compositions were painted outdoors, what was an innovative approach at the time.
The interest in the Middle Ages inaugurated the second, unofficial phase of Pre-Raphaelitism. Their subject matters were from medieval tales, bible stories, classical mythology, and nature. With technique of bright colors on a white background, they achieved great depth and brilliance. However, we can see now the curve from their immature rebelliousness, through the realistic painting of detail without idealization, to works of art that are finally more surreal than real. Their work cannot be realistic with the mythological matter and medieval tales that they chose - they can only be envisioned in the mind and do not exist outside of there. So they ended up closer to some other art rebellions - Symbolists.
French Realism:
Gustave Courbet
Honoré Daumier
Gustave Doré
Jean-François Millet
Rosa Bonheur
Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot
Charles-Francois Daubigny
Pierre-Etienne-Theodore Rousseau
Ignace Henri Theodore Fantin-Latour
Edouard Manet
Edgar Degas
J. Dalou
British - PRB:
Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema
Dante Gabriel Rossetti
John William Waterhouse
William Holman Hunt
Thomas Woolner
John Everett Millais
William Morris
Edward Burne-Jones
Ford Madox Brown
Arthur Hughes
Henry Wallis
Frank Cowper
Simeon Solomon
Evelyn de Morgan
German Realism:
Georg von Dillis
Wilhelm von Kobell
Friedrich Wasmann
Friedrich von Amerling
Ferdinand Georg Waldmuller
Franz Kruger
Carl Blechen
Adolf Menzel
American Realism:
Thomas Eakins
Winslow Homer
Francis Coates Jones
James Abbott McNeill Whistler
Thomas Pollock Anshutz
Augustus St. Gaudens - sculptor
The Realists (1800 - 1899)
This is a group of international artists in Paris which begin to devise new methods of pictorial representation. They are focused on scientific concepts of vision and the study of optical effects of light. The Realists express both a taste for democracy and rejection of the inherent old artistic tradition. The Realists felt that painters should work from the life round them. Indisputable honest, the Realists desecrated rules of artistic propriety with their new realistic portrayals of modern life. Artists: Marie Rosalie Bonheur, John Singleton Copley, Gustave Courbet, Honoré Daumier, Hilaire Germain Edgar Degas, Thomas Eakins, Ignace Henri Theodore Fantin-Latour, Wilhelm Leibl, Edouard Manet.
Barbizon School (1840s - 1850s)
Barbizon School was a group of French landscape artists one of first formed outside the Academy. They were named after the Forest of Fonteblau near the village of Barbizon where they got away from the revolutionary Paris to produce their art. They attempted to paint nature directly; Constable who pioneered in making landscape painting a faithful depiction of nature was their model.
The Barbizon painters helped establish landscape and motif of country life as vital subjects for French artists. They also cherished an interest in visible reality, which became increasingly important to the later artistic styles. Artists in the group: Camille Corot, Charles-François Daubigny, Jean-François Millet, Pierre-Etienne-Théodore Rousseau.
The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (1848 - late 19th Century)
In 1848 a group of English painters, poets and critics formed the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood to reform art by rejecting practices of contemporary academic British Art. They have been considered the first avant-garde movement in art. They accepted the doctrine of imitation of nature, as central purpose of art. Instead of the Raphaelesque conventions taught at the Royal Academy, their central doctrine was that artists should seek to represent the natural world. They believed that the only great art was before high renaissance, before Raphael. He was representative of the time when painters would scarify the reality of the subject to their own ideals of beauty and morality. The Pre-Raphaelite Brothers condemned this art of idealization, and promoted works based on real landscapes and models, and paid intense attention to accuracy of detail and color. They advocated as well a moral approach to art, in keeping with a long British tradition established by Hogarth. The combination of didacticism and realism characterized the first phase of the movement. The landscape compositions were painted outdoors, what was an innovative approach at the time.
The interest in the Middle Ages inaugurated the second, unofficial phase of Pre-Raphaelitism. Their subject matters were from medieval tales, bible stories, classical mythology, and nature. With technique of bright colors on a white background, they achieved great depth and brilliance. However, we can see now the curve from their immature rebelliousness, through the realistic painting of detail without idealization, to works of art that are finally more surreal than real. Their work cannot be realistic with the mythological matter and medieval tales that they chose - they can only be envisioned in the mind and do not exist outside of there. So they ended up closer to some other art rebellions - Symbolists.
French Realism:
Gustave Courbet
Honoré Daumier
Gustave Doré
Jean-François Millet
Rosa Bonheur
Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot
Charles-Francois Daubigny
Pierre-Etienne-Theodore Rousseau
Ignace Henri Theodore Fantin-Latour
Edouard Manet
Edgar Degas
J. Dalou
British - PRB:
Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema
Dante Gabriel Rossetti
John William Waterhouse
William Holman Hunt
Thomas Woolner
John Everett Millais
William Morris
Edward Burne-Jones
Ford Madox Brown
Arthur Hughes
Henry Wallis
Frank Cowper
Simeon Solomon
Evelyn de Morgan
German Realism:
Georg von Dillis
Wilhelm von Kobell
Friedrich Wasmann
Friedrich von Amerling
Ferdinand Georg Waldmuller
Franz Kruger
Carl Blechen
Adolf Menzel
American Realism:
Thomas Eakins
Winslow Homer
Francis Coates Jones
James Abbott McNeill Whistler
Thomas Pollock Anshutz
Augustus St. Gaudens - sculptor
February 15, 2010
EMMA - Field Research 11
Even though this might not be 100% appropriate, I found it quite convenient to place this article here. It is about visual perception.
I came across this article while reading the blog of James Gurney, creator of many creatures from Star Wars II and III, and author of the book 'Imaginative Realism - How to paint what doesn't exist?'
The article about visual perception stated an experiment in which visitors at a counter were first subjected to person A, and when this person had to bend down to get a paper, person B would emerge and take his place. None of the visitors ever noticed the change.
This reminded me vividly of the video we saw at the lecture: the 'Visual Awareness' video.
Did you notice them? I definately didn't.
Another post from Gurney Journey's blog: Face Detection.
http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/12/face-detection.html
In here, he uses a camera with automatic subject detection. So, when he focuses upon a face, the camera can recognize the face and switch to 'portrait' mode. However, the camera comes up with some interesting results, as the most icon face is seen as 'portrait' and a very detailed old man is not.
I came across this article while reading the blog of James Gurney, creator of many creatures from Star Wars II and III, and author of the book 'Imaginative Realism - How to paint what doesn't exist?'
The article about visual perception stated an experiment in which visitors at a counter were first subjected to person A, and when this person had to bend down to get a paper, person B would emerge and take his place. None of the visitors ever noticed the change.
This reminded me vividly of the video we saw at the lecture: the 'Visual Awareness' video.
Did you notice them? I definately didn't.
Another post from Gurney Journey's blog: Face Detection.
http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/12/face-detection.html
In here, he uses a camera with automatic subject detection. So, when he focuses upon a face, the camera can recognize the face and switch to 'portrait' mode. However, the camera comes up with some interesting results, as the most icon face is seen as 'portrait' and a very detailed old man is not.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)