it as an arm moving (which is animating forms) or does he conceive itas a FORCE? There is a world of difference in the mental approach -there is an entirely new philosophy of animation wrapped up in thisconcept of animating forces.
That leaves the responsibility of translating forceinto form up to the cleanup man which is quite a job.Yes, but that is where it should be. It is assuming that an animatorhas a cleanup man with whom he can work hand in hand. It is alsoassuming the cleanup man knows and understands these forces aswell as the animator does. The symbols must be understoodthoroughly by the two.
How can you move a form or mass form one positionto another without force?That of course is impossible.
Do you mean the animation we have had so far has noFORCE?Not at all - this is a matter of conception. If he moves the arm throughfast the animator knows that in doing it a certain way he will get areaction from the audience. He is dealing with forces all the time and itis with the expression of these FORCES that he gets reactions from theaudience. But in visualizing his animation, is he conceiving it as aFORCE or as a moving form?
This is a matter of terminology rather than adifference of approach.No- there is a philosophy here. In drawing the figure an artist can say:"I am going to draw that figure - those forms - and by drawing thoseactual forms I will get that figure. In order to draw these forms he willhave to understand balance and thrust to a certain extent to make thedrawing hold up. But that us a different approach than going into the
Don Graham Notes – “Action Analysis Class” 1937 3 of 13