Welcome to TVPaint Community forums !

Hi Everyone,

i'm totally new here. I was looking and exploring TVPaint a little and i think it was AWESOME!
I animate in a traditional way and in flash, but flash is a halfway tool for animate. I was searching for a good replacement and i find this kind off animated photoshop... So first of all cogratulations for all the TVPaint team.

Now i think that this suggestions could make the program better (sorry if this already exist but i don´t find them).

* First of all indexed colors like spot colors in illustator, or the colors in Toonz. Could change a color and automaticly update all the animation could be a huge time saver (same palette must be used in diferent proyects too). The adventage off spot colors instead of a color replacement is that you could have for example a character with a red hat and red shoes. The same red value. It there were two diferent spot colors (hat color and shoes color) you could update the shoes to brown without change the hat. With some kind of color replace or HSB correction you can´t do that, or need to make it frame by frame.

* The only thing that i miss from flash and other programs is the symbol stuff. I see about the animated brushes in the tutorial videos, its great but you need to render the animation to reuse it in the proyect. If you could have some way to use encapsulated animations could be a lot easier to make some stuff (like character walking) and also could work with the animated brush feature.

* The camera workflow is a little bit confusing for me. Something more like Toonz or After Effects is a lot more simple.

* The program workflow looks really good, even for me that are a Adobe user for about 8 years. But i think that the user interfase could be a little less messy. Too much options at the same time could by extreme confusing (look the diference between the ToonBoom -horrible- interface and something like Toonz or Retas and you gonna see what i mean). Maybe a simple set of defaut things and then customize them is better than have all options at one view.

* I don´t know if it has some way to work with vectors easy as Flash or Toonz, for web content most of all, but really i don´t gonna miss the feature.

that´s all,
thanks for reading.

martín.

mjloskin wrote:So first of all cogratulations for all the TVPaint team.

Hi Martin, welcome to the TVPaint community and thanks for your kind words.

mjloskin wrote: * First of all indexed colors like spot colors in illustator, or the colors in Toonz. Could change a color and automaticly update all the animation could be a huge time saver (same palette must be used in diferent proyects too). The adventage off spot colors instead of a color replacement is that you could have for example a character with a red hat and red shoes. The same red value. It there were two diferent spot colors (hat color and shoes color) you could update the shoes to brown without change the hat. With some kind of color replace or HSB correction you can´t do that, or need to make it frame by frame.

It's not possible with a bitmap software at the moment. Vectorial softwares don't understand what a color is, for them, it's just an element A, B etc... So if you change the element A from your library, the color will change on your animation.
With TVP Animation, it's not possible, because each color = N pixels and a 1 color nuance on millions possibilities. If that colors' change would be possible for a simple colored animation, what's about complex painted animations ?
So, if you want to change a color later, be prudent and put 1 color by layer.

mjloskin wrote:* The only thing that i miss from flash and other programs is the symbol stuff. I see about the animated brushes in the tutorial videos, its great but you need to render the animation to reuse it in the proyect. If you could have some way to use encapsulated animations could be a lot easier to make some stuff (like character walking) and also could work with the animated brush feature.

You can use the keyframer, the Xsheet, the multiplane camera etc... and define a source (a custom brush, a clip, a project...). It's a little like symbols.

mjloskin wrote:The camera workflow is a little bit confusing for me. Something more like Toonz or After Effects is a lot more simple.

As you said, it's a little confusing for you, because you're used to Toonz and After After Effects
Btw, which camera are you talking about (there a 2 different cameras : the camera tool, which is an animatic feature, and the multiplane camera).

mjloskin wrote:* The program workflow looks really good, even for me that are a Adobe user for about 8 years. But i think that the user interfase could be a little less messy. Too much options at the same time could by extreme confusing (look the diference between the ToonBoom -horrible- interface and something like Toonz or Retas and you gonna see what i mean). Maybe a simple set of defaut things and then customize them is better than have all options at one view.

Well, the UI's case is not the same for everybody. Some people are like you and are used to empty interfaces, with only 1 panel and a dozen of tools. Some people are pleased so see an interface with different tools, because they try to click everywhere and find what happens and so, they find the software more intuitive than the softwares you describe above (personally, I needed 3 years to understand I had to do ctrl + ALT + z to cancel several times with Photoshop. And don't mention Harmony : if I hadn't be trained on, I would never be able to understand how to open a project ).
Yes, TVP Animation's interface is a little complex, I must admit it, but there is no roses without a thorn : TVP Animation is a complete software, which allows you to draw, paint, animate, storyboard, create FXs, manage sound and notes (synchronized with the animation), use Xsheet, do stop-motion movie etc... And all that possibilities mean we cannot create a "pure" interface with few elements only. Because we don't know what the user wants to do ! Does (s)he want to draw ? paint ? animate ? storyboard ? create FXs ? manage sound and notes ? use Xsheet ? o stop-motion movies ?

Anyway, here is a little sum up of how the TVP Animation's interface works :

Click here

1) The main panel, where you can choose what your tool is : line, free hand, square, crop tool etc...

2) The colors you want for drawing tools (square, circle, free hand etc...)

3) The Tool panel : the options are different following the tool you choose. The crop tool doesn't have the same features than the line, polygon etc...
BTW, when you choose a drawing tool, you can here manage different parameters, such as how the color will appear (normal color, erase, behind, colorize etc...)

4) The drawing space (that you can rotate)

5) The hidden panel bin where you can see examples of custom panels (panels you can create yourself), like the Tool bin and the Animator panel

6) The remote to play your animations

7) The layer stack

The timeline, to create instances and exposures and so, animations

9) The sound space

10) The note space, for lip-synch and taking notes =)

11) The Storyboard tool

12) Your projects

mjloskin wrote:* I don´t know if it has some way to work with vectors easy as Flash or Toonz, for web content most of all, but really i don´t gonna miss the feature.

Well, TVP Animation is not a vectorial software.
But if you really like to draw and animate, you won't miss vectors anymore

I can but add my constant advice: if you need that many different functionalities, buy different softwares. You will be happier in the end than with a bloated software which tries to do everything (and brew coffee). (My personal setup includes TVPaint for bitmap, AnimeStudio for vector and cutout, and Flash for symbol-heavy and scripted stuff.)

slowtiger wrote:I can but add my constant advice: if you need that many different functionalities, buy different softwares. You will be happier in the end than with a bloated software which tries to do everything (and brew coffee). (My personal setup includes TVPaint for bitmap, AnimeStudio for vector and cutout, and Flash for symbol-heavy and scripted stuff.)

Thanks for the reply,
I tottaly agree with this sentence. I also use a different softwares for different stuff. Adobe most than all, because it was what i find in that moments and then i grow up with them.

My suggestions more than searching for a could-do-anything soft were more for my unexperience in TVPaint (asking i could do that and were) and some features than maybe are useful and i see in other products.

cheers,
martín

mjloskin wrote: My suggestions more than searching for a could-do-anything soft were more for my unexperience in TVPaint (asking i could do that and were) and some features than maybe are useful and i see in other products.

No problems Martin, feel free to request feature and critic our software. Questions need answers and I hope the ones I gave you sooner explained well why things are possible and why other things are not possible with TVP Animation.

Hi Elodie,
thanks for the reply.

Elodie wrote: It's not possible with a bitmap software at the moment. Vectorial softwares don't understand what a color is, for them, it's just an element A, B etc... So if you change the element A from your library, the color will change on your animation.
With TVP Animation, it's not possible, because each color = N pixels and a 1 color nuance on millions possibilities. If that colors' change would be possible for a simple colored animation, what's about complex painted animations ?
So, if you want to change a color later, be prudent and put 1 color by layer.

... ups. don't think about that.

Elodie wrote: You can use the keyframer, the Xsheet, the multiplane camera etc... and define a source (a custom brush, a clip, a project...). It's a little like symbols.

Ok, i gonna read the manual and try it. Thanks for the guide. More than the strict concept of symbol, my request was the reuse and simple modification of animation cycles.

Elodie wrote: As you said, it's a little confusing for you, because you're used to Toonz and After After Effects
Btw, which camera are you talking about (there a 2 different cameras : the camera tool, which is an animatic feature, and the multiplane camera).

I was talking about the one in the videotutorials the one in the animatic feature. Works exactly in animatics but a little confusing in other stuff. There is other camera? ok i gona search and try it. Maybe that was the problem - my ignorance in the software, again -.

Elodie wrote: Well, the UI's case is not the same for everybody. Some people are like you and are used to empty interfaces, with only 1 panel and a dozen of tools. Some people are pleased so see an interface with different tools, because they try to click everywhere and find what happens and so, they find the software more intuitive than the softwares you describe above (personally, I needed 3 years to understand I had to do ctrl + ALT + z to cancel several times with Photoshop. And don't mention Harmony : if I hadn't be trained on, I would never be able to understand how to open a project ).
Yes, TVP Animation's interface is a little complex, I must admit it, but there is no roses without a thorn : TVP Animation is a complete software, which allows you to draw, paint, animate, storyboard, create FXs, manage sound and notes (synchronized with the animation), use Xsheet, do stop-motion movie etc... And all that possibilities mean we cannot create a "pure" interface with few elements only. Because we don't know what the user wants to do ! Does (s)he want to draw ? paint ? animate ? storyboard ? create FXs ? manage sound and notes ? use Xsheet ? o stop-motion movies ?
....

Thanks for the explanation of the UI. Is exactly as you say, i was extremely familiar with other UI. This more than a suggestion was a simple comment, basic than maybe with some little improvements could atract some new potencial users. Things like a panel behavour similar to other softs. Some stuff could be more clear like the rooms: i need to guess what that buttons do. I was talking more about that kind of changes. If you want more feedback about that let my try the sofware a little more and then i could suggest something more specific.

Elodie wrote: Well, TVP Animation is not a vectorial software.
But if you really like to draw and animate, you won't miss vectors anymore

that's exactly why i told that if it don't work with vectors really i don't care.

cheers, martín.
---

mjloskin wrote: Ok, i gonna read the manual and try it. Thanks for the guide. More than the strict concept of symbol, my request was the reuse and simple modification of animation cycles.

To reuse an animation, as I said above, I advise you to use the Fxs Keyframer or Multiplane camera (or even the Xsheet, if you're brave...) and define a source (it can be the layer, the clip or event the project which contains your animation).
Read the user guide to know more about =)

mjloskin wrote: I was talking about the one in the videotutorials the one in the animatic feature. Works exactly in animatics but a little confusing in other stuff. There is other camera? ok i gona search and try it. Maybe that was the problem - my ignorance in the software, again -.

No problem =)
So yes, the camera tool is a particular camera, because it doesn't work with traditional keys, like in After effects. It's just a quick tool used to approximatively place a camera movement in your animatic.

mjloskin wrote: Thanks for the explanation of the UI. Is exactly as you say, i was extremely familiar with other UI. This more than a suggestion was a simple comment, basic than maybe with some little improvements could atract some new potencial users. Things like a panel behavour similar to other softs. Some stuff could be more clear like the rooms: i need to guess what that buttons do. I was talking more about that kind of changes. If you want more feedback about that let my try the sofware a little more and then i could suggest something more specific.

Don't worry, I understood your comments weren't "evil-minded" =)
It's a critic we frequently have (it's 50/50 with people who find the interface very intuitive), so we know the interface is still a little complex for newcomers, but well, it's hard to choose between "new customers" and "old users", who don't want to have an empty interface neither. I just wanted to share with you our point of view =)

Hi Everyone,

i'm totally new here.

You are welcome in the Bitmap animation world

I would like to take this moment to re-iterate my claim that true dynamic object based symbols would be the single largest boon to TVP technology.

The keyframer is a solution for re-using animation, but it doesn't come close to the power and ease of use of symbols!

It's the one weak point vs using flash for me in my workflow. I hope to see it some day. It would win animators over from the vector animation world in droves!
The keyframer by contrast seems cumbersome in comparison.

*beg beg plead plead!*

I would agree that the keyframer's interface is quite counter-intuitive. OTOH it gives much more control over every possible aspect than what's possible to do with a symbol in Flash.

And I think there's a flaw in your argumentation: the keyframer is not about symbols. The keyframer is about generating mechanical movements more easily.

Symbols are about saving file size and work with references instead of independently rendered images. The introduction of exposures and the X-sheet was the first step into this direction. The system is not perfect yet, it suffers from some redundance and inconsistancy, but I can work with it. Give me some better way of organising, grouping and hiding layers, and I'll be quite happy.

What for would I need extensive symbols anyway? There were some scenes in "The Secret Of Kells" which used Flash: all the tiny little workers in the background had been animated elsewhere, then put into Flash and made into symbols to be multiplied all over the screen. That's a good use of symbols.

I could think of several feature extensions to TVP which would enhance its capabilities and make it more attractive to producers, but all of them would step out of the established paradigm of the program, which means lots of coding (and testing) would be necessary.

Could someone point me to a famously well executed film made with symbols to convince me that I am missing out on some crucial aspect of animation techniques? We hear all this hype without examples to document this extraordinary technique which supposedly breaks all known conventions and is very undeservedly neglected by older generation animators who live in their brain attics junked up with the detritus of the last two centuries. Show me one film that will blow me away. I haven't the foggiest idea what you are raving about!

"Sita Sings The Blues". That's the only (good) film I can think of which makes good use of symbols, in the meaning of "animate something once, then place it multiple times in time and space".

The same approach is quite common in all those CGI-heavy films like "Scorpion King" or "Lord of the Rings": you animate only one warrior, then feed it into some particle system to create large armies. Kubrick in "Spartacus" still used real men, and his is the better film.

I suspect that all those who ask for "symbols" just have their terminology wrong. What they probably mean would be something between "re-use" and "limited animation", which is a certain workflow/production technique but says nothing about how to achieve it. This would include stuff like a library of facial expressions as well as mouth positions, created once, then used over and over. In order to allow this to be a time-saver, they must be easily accessible (Flash's symbols are quite close, AnimeStudio's switch layers are faster) and in some way position-linked automatically, like all mouths on the right spot of the face (something done with bones and layer linking in Anime Studio (done once, then truely automatic), or with swapping symbols in Flash (cumbersome)).

Fact is that several software solutions for this workflow problem already exist, the most common would be game engines. It's just a way of organising assets in a database, with lots of dependencies. This is totally separate from any style or animation technique: I could as well animate all the snippets in TVP, render them as QT loops, and import them into such a system. (In fact I'm already working like that, on a small scale.)

Thing is that all this makes sense only in the context of producing a series, or a longer film, and is only practicable if the assets (walks, faces, mouths, props) can be stored in a database/file system outside of individual scenes. This is the part for which larger production systems (Animo, Toons etc) demand their big money for. But TVP works on an entirely different level. Everything you want to see must be in the project file. There's no reference or linking to any stuff outside. If you want a re-use from scene to scene you have to export/import that part (or copy/paste frames if it's just one layer). And you have to do it yourself, there's no automatic process.

I could imagine the concept of a database holding TVP files, video files, images, which all could be linked into a TVP layer - like a linked video. But I suppose that TVPs whole internal architecture needs to be changed to allow for that. In any case, as long as such a production system is sold separately, and we happy independent animators can still work without that (and without paying for that), I'm OK with it.

I also could think of several methods which would make some parts of such a workflow possible or easier in TVP, but I'd need to sit down with the developers to seriously discuss that.

Cookie cutter films made with cookie cutter symbols by cookie cutter animators for cookie cutter audiences to be screened at cookie cutter film festivals. I understand the appeal now and I'll stay out of the way of the thundering herds as they pour into TVPaint, once symbols have been implemented.

Thanks for the as usual clear explanation, slowtiger.

Oh Paul, how did I know you couldn't resist a comment here. LOL

The suggestion that films made in flash using symbols are done with a cookie cutter, and the implication that they are without artistic merit because of it, is simply short sighted and ridiculous. Some of the greatest works of animated artwork today have been done with the technology. With all due respect, the technology is simply an enabler, the same way you're able to make a film without pencil, paper, paint, cels, or erasers. Which I'm sure is seen as one heck of a cheat by some of the animation old guard. That ol' Paul comes along with his computer, and there goes the neighborhood! It's laughable. Does it make the artwork any less valuable or interesting in the end? No. People are clearly asking for the feature, because it's useful, and one of the most innovative inventions that's happened in animation history as far as new tools go. If TVP doesn't do it, in a bitmap program someone else will at some point.

You can pound your fists about not liking Flash as much as you want, but I won't listen to your criticism of symbols or Flash, until I've seen you complete a film using it.

CartoonMonkey wrote:Oh Paul, how did I know you couldn't resist a comment here. LOL

I know, I know; it's just too easy. Puppets on strings with no expressions and dangling legs entertained children throughout the ages and the plastic muppets who followed and had no feet but could lip sync and looked like slippers incensed the woodcarvers. In the right hands even dog shit can survive on the screen for eighty minutes.