After completing both animations with multiple tests being conducted after various talks and secondary research that informed the progression of the practical I can finally compare the both techniques in their completed versions:
As stated before the pre-production was exactly the same for both methods until it was time to start producing the sets for the animations. this was very different indeed which was the main fighting force for my dissertation as primary research, as there were many things I could reference in the secondary research such as all the 'art of' books I read but I needed to experience both methods first hand to counteract any bias that these other sources might have.
Chapter 1 of my dissertation was about the brief history of stop-motion and CGI, this was completed using books like the animation timeline and on-line sources with the same nature.
chapter 2 was discussing the hybridity of both mediums, the initial pacman tests and cave tests were present to assist me with that chapter as I could first hand experience some of the issues with hybridity such as camera angle accuracy to achieve the same angles in both stop-motion and CGI which was one of the problems I encountered with that experiment. also certain secondary sources such as when the wind blows helped me place in time some of the hybridity due to my topic not really being discussed in much detail.
Chapter 3, the uncanny, was assisted by the first test of the stop-motion sheep as it made me realise that if that was to be a complete animation then stop-motion would be the only medium to really incorporate legless sheep without looking tacky or whimsical. As well as my primary research there was also secondary research that helped more with understanding the uncanny valley in animation more which in turn allowed me to form my chapter in a more relevant and connecting way.
Chapter 4 was an in depth analysis of my practical work which fully included my practical into the theoretic work.
No comments:
Post a Comment