The pro of Adobe Animate is it's much easier to learn. Animate is Adobe Animate the program formerly known as Flash and we're comparing her with Toon Boon Harmony. I want you to bear in mind that Adobe Animate used to be known as Flash, and Toon Boon Harmony had a previous version called Animate. And for a lot of people the choice might be: Which of these two programs should I use? What's the best fit for me? I'm going to make a list of pros and cons of each. I've finally decided to ditch Flash/Animate for Toon Boom Harmony.- Before going much further, let's take a look at the big competitor for Toon Boon Harmony which is Adobe Animate. What are the reasons? You ask, the reason is that Toon Boom doesn't crash as much as Flash/Animate and it wouldn't keep not responding and there are loads more I can complain about. Adobe Flash/Animate isn't the industry standard sure big studios do use Flash/Animate but not as much as Toon Boom so Flash/Animate isn't worth learning if you want to work in a studio. While Flash/Animate is popular for internet animators, but my dream isn't trying to become an internet animator, my actual dream is to become an animator for Cartoon Network where Toon Boom is mandatory. A lot of professionals are telling young or new animators to stop using Flash/Animate which not many people are doing. While I will no longer be using Flash/Animate I will still be using the other Adobe products since there are no better competitors, unlike Flash/Animate. Even if you don't agree with my opinion you can share yours with me I'm not one of those people who force you to think the same way I do. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: software is irrelevant in becoming a good animator. If you want to work as a 2d animator in the industry, it is really quite simple:ġ) learn to draw. Learn to draw REALLY WELL.Ģ) learn to animate by drawing. As a 2d animator you will be asked to work in a certain style. I have seen hiring studios ask animators to adapt to a specific style within a week. 9 out of ten applicants were incapable of doing that, because their drawing skills were lacking.īluntly stated: if you can draw consistently well, and can animate your drawings well, then I will hire you, because learning to work in ToonBoom, Flash, CelAction, or whichever app is a matter of days or perhaps one or two weeks.īut I cannot teach you to draw and animate well in only a week. That takes years of practice.Īnyway, stop focusing so much on what software is industry standard, because by the time when you enter the industry, and depending on the studio/location, the industry standard may very well have changed and/or the studio is using different software.īut actual drawing and animation skills? Those remain valid no matter the software. Reminds me of how the original Pixar animators were hired based on their 2d animation skills. They figured out how to adapt to the new 3d workflow and churned out some good movies. Granted it was impossible to have 3d experience at the time because it was so new, but this story still definitely applies nowadays. Solid animation skills should always translate. That's not to say there aren't extremely good and professional 3d character animators that work at large studios who can't draw very well, of course. There are.īut if you're planning to get into professional 2d animation - well, you'd better draw like you breath: natural. Yes, studios will enforce their will in regards to software, but that is mainly to ensure a smooth pipeline and to adhere to solid standards. Not as if anyone became a better animator just because they were using the latest and greatest software - ever. But software didn't ever turn a bad animator or artist into a good one! :-) It can help, it can make the workflow proceed quicker, or even improve the final output quality. In fact, the over-use and reliance of badly animated rigged cut-out 2d characters in software has resulted in cookie-cutter animation more often than not. Yes, it is fast, and yes it looks and feels horrible and rushed. Which is understandable, because speed in production trumps quality. No-one has the time or money to produce full 24fps hand-drawn frame-by-frame animation anymore. The question is whether there are enough capable 2d animators left who could, really (which is another consequence of aforementioned production schedules). Which explains why most of the Cartoon Network stuff (not all of it!) is of such harrowing low quality. Can't even blame the artists or production houses. But it also means the audience gets accustomed to that super low quality generic 2d animation. Luckily, there are still exceptions, and it also seems to me that quality traditional 2d animation is getting back in fashion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |