Squash and stretch thread.

File: tumblr_m4bf4offcc1qbbgmdo1_250.gif (444KB, 245x138px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 245x138px

I got your stretch right here

>>85773448
hehehehehehe

>>85773555
nice trips boba

>>85773272
Im not an animator so im curious why it would strech going down the way? Is this some rule???

File: principles-of-animation1.jpg (311KB, 1457x1600px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1457x1600px

>>85774352
Yes. Yes it is.

>>85774352
Its like, one of the 8 main ones actually.

OP your pic is wrong. The ball DOESN'T STRETCH ON THE WAY IN. It only squashes when it touches down, and then stretches when it bounces up.

So many people don't understand this.

It's like movies where people fall down before they even get punched. It doesn't work that way and it looks like shit.

Think of a parachute. When you pull it up from the top, it gets thin. When you pull it down from the bottom, it opens up. Objects don't react the same way in reverse motion as they do in forward motion, with few exceptions.

File: flour_sack_02.jpg (34KB, 500x266px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x266px

>>85774352
There's a rule called "anticipation" but this is a misuse of that rule.

A person (or a living flour sack) can anticipate landing and reach out to the ground with their feet. That's anticipation and it's good.

An inanimate ball cannot anticipate its landing.

>>85777168
This is squash and stretch not antipaction you pretentious dripping of assfroth.

>>85777152
>>85777168

But in this case, it's has nothing to do with anticipation; it's physics meets the limitations of photography.
At the velocity the ball is travelling combined with an average camera, the result is what's basically a smear in the simplest form.

>>85777260
yo momma

>>85777304
No. No matter what camera you use, the ball will not deform before touching the surface.

You might be thinking of motion blur where a ball appears to be elongated; that's a different effect.

>>85777260
Read a little about anticipation and squash-and-stretch. When you're done, you can continue calling people pretentious drippings of assfroth.

Or you might learn something.

>>85773448
>people didn't like BatB

>>85777324
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Stop insisting that the ball is actually deforming. It's a smear, a camera trick translated into animation principles.

>>85777260
Why would the ball stretch on it way down though? There's not reason for it except at high velocity.
Aftrer the bounce sure, it's a natural reaction to the squash.

File: Crazy_Punching_Bags_11.jpg (55KB, 500x548px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x548px

>>85777379
This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're confusing a smear and squash-and-stretch. If it were a smear, the ball wouldn't get thinner. You can actually see properly-executed smears of tennis balls in a few Looney Tunes cartoons. What OP's picture does is mix up smears and squash-and-stretch and anticipation with very bad results. When you see the animation in OP's picture in action, it looks bad, like a guy falling down before getting punched.

Think how weird it'll look if this clown started to lean back BEFORE getting punched.

File: 1d6.jpg (138KB, 929x1280px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 929x1280px

Only the best.

File: ^12EDDAA3064BC526E742CA7829A7D2A2A5B015809597D0AA78^pimgpsh_fullsize_distr.png (337KB, 333x750px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 333x750px

We're stretching it a bit at this point

>>85777464
>>85777482
These are smears, not squash-and-stretch.

>>85777494
>>85777482
>>85777464

they look stretchy to me

>>85777333
I don't really give a shit enough to right now. Doesn't change the fact that he was a pretentious asshat and my insult was gold.
>>85777405
It just looks wrong in practice. You ever see smears? Of course shit IRL doesn't do that but on paper at 24 FPS it looks wrong without some bending.

It looks fine. It doesn't come off as anticipation, it comes off as falling at high velocity.

>all of these faggots who don't understand toons

File: tumblr_o6vgdb7jzw1t1ig6no1_400.gif (77KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 320x240px

>>85778565

File: tumblr_o9c63d3cYq1t1ig6no8_400.gif (155KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 320x240px

>>85778648

wander over yonder is the only recent cartoon i can think of that used it to significant extent

File: Cartoon Classics title animation.gif (195KB, 546x408px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 546x408px

Here's a study I did on squash and stretch

>>85777709
>24 fps
When will this end? Especially in the film industry where I can't imagine it saves them any money

>>85781512
>When will this end?

Never. 48 has soap opera effect, and 60 is for video games.

Theatrical films are going to be shot at 24fps for the foreseeable future.

File: 1469357964263.jpg (118KB, 627x477px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 627x477px

>squash and stretch pleb
>not superior joint breaking technique

>>85781611
>soap opera affect
What is that?

>>85781677

When you cry in Spanish.

We're used to seeing movies at 24fps, so when people see them with anything more, they associate it with television. Which if you're in an NTSC country, is 30fps.

>>85781611
Why do they film the soap operas that way It just feels wrong?

>>85779431
This is surprisingly good.

I think you're a professional animator pretending to be a beginner.

>>85781822
It's because you're accustomed to 24fps.

If you watch 48fps or 60fps for a few hours, suddenly 24fps looks jerky.

Try it.

>>85781897
Why 48 and not 60 or some other framerate? Seems odd to double it rather than the highest framerate the camera has.

>>85777168
maybe the ball isn't inanimate???