Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Efficient 2D Animation Software?

Cliff posted more than 8 years ago | from the anything-but-flash dept.

64

jack hunter asks: "I just found out about MOHO, a software that minimizes frame-by-frame tweening in 2D animation via the usage of a 3D concept --- bones (among other things). Believe it or not, prior to this, I thought Macradobe Flash was the only affordable animation software, and I was prepared to do frame-by-frame grit-work for my budget-wise animations. Anyway, I've learned my lesson: there are more powerful pieces software out there, and there are those who know of them. What do you use to animate? If you use Flash, do you use any add-ons/components or special techniques to make things more efficient?"

cancel ×

64 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

We don't care for pirates here (0, Troll)

linvir (970218) | more than 8 years ago | (#15432956)

Macradobe Flash was the only affordable animation software
I think we all know what that means [linuxvirus.net] . Here on Slashdot we don't take too kindly to illegal copying.

Server downtime! (2, Funny)

linvir (970218) | more than 8 years ago | (#15432978)

My server has gone down! Bastards! They must be rebooting it or something, because I can take a Slashdot comment PNG link like it was nothing.

Re:Server downtime! (1)

linvir (970218) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433003)

In case it is down, and I haven't been temporarily banned from my own frickin' server for some bandwidth crap, the image is also now on my Google page [googlepages.com] .

Re:We don't care for pirates here (0, Offtopic)

JayTech (935793) | more than 8 years ago | (#15432984)

We don't know what he did
But we're down with Captain kidd
We don't wake up before lunch
But we all eat Captain Crunch
We don't smoke, we don't chew
We watch Captain Kangaroo

Re:We don't care for pirates here (2, Funny)

ProfM (91314) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433265)

We prefer to be called "Buccaneer-Americans".

Thank you

What are you talking about? (1)

ludomancer (921940) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433444)

Piracy is a great way to try multiple applications before purchasing. It also helps expand the marketshare of companies who might otherwise be too expensive for some individuals to purchase. It also helps those who want to learn the software, and be familiar with it before entering the workforce (where their studio or employer will be responsible for purchasing the legitimate license).

So don't poop on piracy man. You're just being a tool of blind-faith for corporate greed.

Re:What are you talking about? (1)

linvir (970218) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433456)

Actually I was making a joke about Slashdot being pro piracy, but whatever.

Re:What are you talking about? (1)

Jaruzel (804522) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433476)

Dude, it was too subtle. We didn't get it ;)

-Jar.

TweenMaker is where it's at (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15439906)

You have to try it out to believe it.

http://www.tweenmaker.com/ [tweenmaker.com]

Automatic inbetweening. Computer assisted animation the way it should be. None of the "moving 2D puppets around" like Moho or ToonBoom. In TweenMaker, you draw each key frame and TweenMaker creates the inbetweens for you!

Free student version.

Professional version is only $55!

Toon Boom (3, Informative)

sakusha (441986) | more than 8 years ago | (#15432983)

Try Toon Boom Studio. Cheap, free trial available.

Re:Toon Boom (1)

rishistar (662278) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433950)

I did use ToonBoom. It has a lot of nice features for animation workflow, but there were a couple of flaws which meant I gave up using it.

Although it allows multiple camera usage in scene planning, when it comes to rendering the video you are only allowed one camera for the whole video, which made switching between cameras to do something like get a close-up of someones face and back to the whole scene a pain to implement and was a really stupid limitation. It was deeply annoying because the multiple camera thing is something they really tout on the publicity, but in effect, unless your going to do post processing work, its useless.

It may not be a killer for others as it was for me but, as the forums showed, its a limitation that frequently catches new users out.

Synfig (5, Informative)

sir99 (517110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15432988)

I haven't used it, but Synfig [synfig.com] 's capabilities look similar to Moho. Synfig is Free software.

Re:Synfig (1)

bunbuntheminilop (935594) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433089)

Nice one! That looks great!

Re: Synfig NOT as good as Moho yet (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15433272)

"Moho is a more well-rounded and complete package than Synfig is at this point. While Synfig has been used in production, the animators using it had the benefit of having the primary developer sitting behind them. That counts for a lot. In other words, Synfig still has a long way to go before v1.0."

The author of Synfig said the above: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=13241 [osnews.com]

Inverse Kinematics? Re:Synfig (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15433384)

But does it support inverse kinematics?

Synfig needs developers... (1)

pabs3 (259410) | more than 8 years ago | (#15443838)

Synfig needs more people working on the code. The original developer doesn't have time for it, and I have commit access, but not time or knowledge of the code to reduce memory usage, fix crashers and so on.

http://www.synfig.com/2006/01/26/new-developer/ [synfig.com]
http://wiki.synfig.com/Roadmap [synfig.com] (not decided on or posted yet)

Re:Synfig (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 8 years ago | (#15444802)

Ironic statement from the Synfig site: ...we are currently unaware of any other software that can do what our software can.
I guess that has changed.

LiveMotion (3, Interesting)

stubear (130454) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433066)

It's difficult to get a copy these days but if you can you won't be disappointed. Adobe buying Macromedia is, IMHO, one of the best things that could have happened to Macromedia and their software. Flash will improve by the merging of LiveMotion. LM is like AfterEffects for .swf files and is a much better tool for animators because it animates property attributes seperate from one another where as Flash animates object properties all at once when you set a keyframe.

Re:LiveMotion (1)

sexyrexy (793497) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433242)

it is quite possible to animate different properties on different timelines by nesting movie clips. That is how many sophisticated Flash sites and animations are developed.

Re:LiveMotion (1)

bensch128 (563853) | more than 8 years ago | (#15434907)

Or the merging of the two companies will destroy the innovative Flash interface and be replaced by an unusable one just so Adobe doesn't have to maintain two seperate product lines.

There's very good reasons for Flash not to go down the "seperate animation curve/property" approach that all other animation packages seem to use.

Ben

Disclaimer: I've never worked with LiveMotion before though. I just find the idea that Adobe can improve flash editor just because they're adobe to be offenive. I think its more likely they'll kill it one way or another.

Re:LiveMotion (1)

stubear (130454) | more than 8 years ago | (#15436073)

Innovative? Macromedia has barely changed the interface from its days as FutureSplash Animator. If I want to animate transparency and position, LiveMotion kicks Flash all over the place and then some. If you've ever used AfterEffects or damn near any other any other animation program such as Combustion you'll notice that you can keyframe each property seperately. In Flash once you set the keyframe it sets all property values at their current levels. The work arounds in Flash, such as nesed movie clips, get very cumbersome and tedious. Care to enlighten me to the "very good reasons for Flash not going down the seperate animation curve/property approach"? LiveMotion can and will improve Flash, mark my words.

Re:LiveMotion (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452581)

I've used LiveMotion back when it first came out. I wasn't very impressed by it, but perhaps I'm biased by how Flash was my first "animation" software. Then again, I cannot say I am a professional animator. For me, it's just a fun pasttime/hobby. Still... I'd have to agree with that other guy's negative view of LiveMotion's effects on Flash.

Would you care to explain what you mean by animate transparency and position? I don't see why it's more difficult to do that on Flash than LiveMotion... I mean, if you're talking about alpha level/opacity fadings, it's a simple 2-step process, as well as motion tweens. Also, what do you mean keyframe each property seperately -- can you give an example?

The other thing about LiveMotion... I believe its sales ranking is way down, when compared to Flash. Flash is just, in general, more easy to use. I'm not sure how LiveMotion can make Flash easier to use, so please elaborate on that, too. (Moreover, does LiveMotion even support Actionscript? There are some complicated animations that can be made trivial by about three lines of Actionscripting...)

Re:LiveMotion (1)

macadamia_harold (947445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15460565)

Disclaimer: I've never worked with LiveMotion before though. I just find the idea that Adobe can improve flash editor just because they're adobe to be offenive. I think its more likely they'll kill it one way or another.

WTF are you talking about? The incorporation of Illustrator-style vector drawing tools in the next version of flash is light-speed ahead of what Macromedia was able to cobble together in their many years of trying create a workable art space. Honestly, the Adobe buyout of Macromedia is nothing but a good thing(tm) for content creators.

2D animation software (5, Insightful)

iamelgringo000 (928665) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433090)

Most of my 2D animation has been done either with Flash or Adobe After Effects [adobe.com] .

After Effects is an industry standard package, and it costs about the same as Flash, last I checked. One of it's most powerful features is the scripting language. It helps to create procedural animations which can be difficult to do by hand.

You also might want to consider doing 2D animation with a 3D package. Most of my time 3D time was spent learning Maya [autodesk.com] . The strength that 3D animation packages have, is that they get used more often for character animation than the 2D packages, therefore they have a lot more tools forcharacter animators such as bone structures and deformations. A lot of them have physics packages that can help automate certain types of animation. Most 3D packages also come with built in scripting languages for procedural animation.

The down side to 3D packages is the intense learning curve. At last count, I heard that Maya had over 80,000 commands. These are huge and complex software packages. The proprietary ones also tend to cost quite a bit, although Blender [blender.org] is free as well as open source.

A lot of what software to use depends on what kind of animation you want to do. Are you doing short character animations? Are you doing experimental stuff? Are you Rotoscoping? If you tell us a bit more about the type of animation you want to do, we could be a bit more specific in recommending specific packages.

Other thoughts:
--I know that Photoshop and ImageReady can be used to animate between layers ( but involves a bit of hackery to get it to work well).
--The integration between Photoshop and After Effects is really nice. It's one of the reasons AFX is used so much in television.
--FilmGimp/Cinepaint [cinepaint.org] has been used for wire removal and image clean up for a while in the FX industry, I have no experience with it.
--I know that there are also some animation plugins [google.com] for the Gimp [gimp.org] that have been written. Again, I have no experience with these.

Regardless of the tools, there is always a steep learning curve, and there's always seems to be a lot of work coaxing the software program to do what you want it to do. If it's not coming easily, it's because we still have a lot of work to do in developing great animation software.

Good luck, and have fun.

Re:2D animation software (2, Interesting)

axolotl_farmer (465996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433588)

South Park [southparkstudios.com] is done completely in Maya. According to the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] , it was likened to building a sandcastle with a bulldozer.

Re:2D animation software (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15434239)

My understanding is that they went with Maya because it was a better work flow solution for their needs.

Re:2D animation software (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452593)

I'd tend to agree with the analogy... considering that Southpark consists of 2-dimensional characters with circular faces and blobular-bodies; seems like setting up all the stuff in Maya wouldn't beat the time to simply sketch and make movie clip instances of reusable heads and blob-bodies in Flash. o_O

Re:2D animation software (1)

wanerious (712877) | more than 8 years ago | (#15435534)

You also might want to consider doing 2D animation with a 3D package.

I'll put in a plug for Animation Master [hash.com] . I use it for 3D animation, but I've seen some good examples of 2D animation and "cut out" paper-doll type stuff done with it, too. It's a really good package for $299 ($199 educational).

What to use? Use moho! (5, Interesting)

UNIX_Meister (461634) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433091)

I've been using moho for a couple of years now. The features can't be beat:


- runs on linux
- scriptable with lua
- great forum
- particles
- bones (inverse kinematics) as you noticed
- batch rendering
- 2.5d (move camera and 2d objects around in 3d space)
- import 3d objects

It's a great program, I use it every day for animation, for creating DVD menus, for creating swf files, just about everything.

Re:What to use? Use moho! (2, Informative)

beef3k (551086) | more than 8 years ago | (#15434126)

I'll second that! Quick link for the lazy [lostmarble.com]

Re:What to use? Use moho! (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452606)

anyone use use mojo? personally, i believe it's the best software proposed thus far for animation (bones!). but, if it's so fluid and easy to use (and efficient!), why isn't it well-known?

After Effects (2, Informative)

thesimplicity (973644) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433105)

After Effects, hands down. It's worth every penny.
I could ramble on about how I've been an professional animator for years and how AE has ever feature an animator could ask for, but the bottom line is this: if you're outputting to video, read up on After Effects.

Toon Boom / Opus (1)

grendel_x86 (659437) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433133)

Toon Boom [toonboom.com] / Opus [toonboom.com] (for groups) costs a little bit, but its the 'standard' for a reason (from what ive heard). We use Opus at work, seems to do everything well, and runs on just about everything.

Tweenmaker (2, Informative)

tfinniga (555989) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433239)

I know a guy who made similar software. Not sure how it stacks up to some of the other products mentioned in the thread, although it does have some fairly sophisticated shape blending which minimizes bending energy to produce the morphs. Has bones, cross-platform, etc. It's called TweenMaker [elecorn.com] .

MotionArtist is good for quick simple stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15433417)

Synfig is better (2, Insightful)

slashdotnickname (882178) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433440)

Not only do Synfig [synfig.com]'s capabilities match Moho's, but in some areas I actually prefer it over the latter. Plus, Synfig is absolutely free.

Synfig is buggy and needs developers... (1)

pabs3 (259410) | more than 8 years ago | (#15443885)

Speaking as one of the people who packaged it for Debian, and now has upstream commit access, synfig has lots of crash bugs and other bugs. Synfig needs more people working on the code. The original developer doesn't have time for it, and I have commit access, but not time or knowledge of the code to reduce memory usage, fix crashers and so on.

http://www.synfig.com/2006/01/26/new-developer/ [synfig.com] [synfig.com]
http://wiki.synfig.com/Roadmap [synfig.com] [synfig.com] (not decided on or posted yet)

Re:Synfig is better -- bones? (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452617)

does synfig have bones (which mojo has)?

PlasticAnimationPaper (2, Insightful)

UglyMike (639031) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433521)

Time to pimp MY favorite 2D package..... Being interested in traditionl animation, I found PlasticAnimationPaper http://www.plasticanimationpaper.dk/ [plasticanimationpaper.dk] to be very good. Their product(an advanced virtual lighttable) is available on Linux and they recently reviewed their pricing policy making the entry package very affordable. Of course, you don't get Moho's tweening, but then again, it is a traditional 2D cel animation package... Worth having a look if you are into traditional animation

Re:PlasticAnimationPaper (1)

klack (823307) | more than 8 years ago | (#15435396)

I also tried PlasticAnimationPaper wanting to create traditional 2D cel animation, but the problem with it is that it costs the same as ToonBoom studio while being a lot less powerful. The free and home edition are so stripped down (no layer for instance) that nothing complex can be done without relying on other tools. I finally settled for ToonBoom Studio. After a couple of weeks of use, I can understand why Disney, Warner Bros and a huge number of other animation studios uses their product (Studio, Harmony, Opus).

South Park (2, Funny)

aarku (151823) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433523)

South Park uses Maya [wikipedia.org] , described as "building a sandcastle with a bulldozer." Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Ktoon (3, Interesting)

CandyMan (15493) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433528)

Re:Ktoon (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452640)

is it better than Flash in anyway? I looked through the v 0.7 features list in the doc's (they seem to only have a features list for 0.7), and it seems that Flash can do all Ktoon can do... does Ktoon support "bones" (in the mojo sense) mentioned above, by any chance?

Animo (1)

Judge_Fire (411911) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433558)

This is second hand information, but Animo is liked by some animators I know:

http://www.cambridgeanimation.com/products/default .htm [cambridgeanimation.com]

J

Re:Animo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15456121)

Animo was used by DreamWorks for most of their 2D films.

What I want to know is when (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | more than 8 years ago | (#15433650)

Is Rotoshop ever going to come out? It was hinted at a future release, but now they seem to have it locked down.

God do I want that one.

Re:What I want to know is when (1)

dasdrewid (653176) | more than 8 years ago | (#15442580)

Check out Studio Artist [synthetik.com] . It works very well for rotoscoping and is pretty automatable and works with wacom pens and tablets and such quite well.

Re:What I want to know is when (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | more than 8 years ago | (#15443129)

HEY! - That's GREAT! Thanks for the heads-up!

PD Pro (project dogwaffle) (1)

rubberbando (784342) | more than 8 years ago | (#15434152)

It all depends on what featurs you are looking for but PD Pro [squirreldome.com] is dirt cheap and not only does animation very well, it has "Painter" like abilities. I would sayt that this software is the closest I have found to the old Deluxe Paint from the Amiga days.

Re:PD Pro (project dogwaffle) (1)

NickFusion (456530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15435233)

Dogwaffle is awesome. If DPaint-like abilities is what you crave, oh you of pixel-animation ambitions, then also check out ProMotion [cosmigo.com] , which is, well, pretty much exactly D-Paint.

We use it extensively for GBA development.

Re:PD Pro (project dogwaffle) (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452677)

From the Features list, PDPro looks like it's mediocre on animation abilities, but extreme on "painter" abilities. Do you know if it has the equivalent of bones?

Also, CreaToon and The Tab (1)

CarlJagt (877688) | more than 8 years ago | (#15434176)

While I've jumped into 2D animating by purchasing an older version of Flash (4) and a graphics tablet, I did come across other software solutions in the course of my investigations:

CreaToon - a "cut out" approach to animation. I enjoyed the demo, but not the price tag. There is a free (Windows) trial at www.creatoon.com/ [creatoon.com]

The Tab - vector with very interesting drawing tools, but an odd timeline manager (and a one year license bothers me). There is a free (Windows/Mac) trial at www.the-tab.com/ [the-tab.com]

3D Packages (2, Informative)

SpaceToast (974230) | more than 8 years ago | (#15435184)

I have a friend who swears by ToonBoom, but I haven't done much with it myself.

I'm just finishing up some cutout animation (Monty Python-style) for a science museum. I considered Flash, but ultimately went with Animation:Master [hash.com] . A:M is actually a full-featured 3D character animation package, with a price closer to Flash. The advantages on this project were an excellent animation interface, forward and inverse kinematics with bones, rigging, smooth interpolation with many options, motion blur, and glow effects. On the flip side, building a character by applying texture maps to a bunch of parallel planes tends to take a while (about an hour per character, plus the time to cut them into pieces with Photoshop), A:M can be unstable, and animating with line art would be a whole different process -- although I'd be curious to see what someone could do using the .ai importer. Since I'm basically rendering a bunch of planes, with no lights or shadows, the final render took only a few second per frame.

If you're comfortable with a 3D package that's geared toward character animation, there are advantages to using it for 2D animation. If not, the learning curve is probably not worth climbing unless you're looking to branch out into 3D.

Longing for Fantavision (1)

ghostlibrary (450718) | more than 8 years ago | (#15435562)

I'm still looking for an equivalent to the old Amiga "Fantavision" program. Drop dead simple, basically a 'paint' program with built-in tweening. While its selection of drawing primatives was limited to 'polygon', its user interface was great and it was fun for doing abstract stuff.

Is there anything out there for purely amateur purposes?

postscript and perl (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15437338)

I played around with using perl to generate postscript program output then rendering the pages and outputting them to tiffs and sewing those together to produce a movie.

This was ten years ago or so-- I might have used tcl instead of perl, but it did work.

I'm not a professional artist, so my results were rudimentary (a skeleton of a lizard walking), but aesthetically, I find the fancy shading that people try to do via flash just acentuates how crappy the format is for art-- so I think simpler is better in flash, concentrate on conveying the idea, don't get to ambitious with trying to make it look great.

Hello again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15437794)

Wow, my NG forum questions have spread! To those who like Synfig, I added the repositories for Ubuntu Dapper and installed it, but I can't actually get it to do anything :(
I would be happy to support Synfig and give up on Moho (even though I just payed £65 for it [with tax]) but it seems a little complicated and I need to try it out some more and maybe find some tutorials. I do like Moho though, as it's bones come in handy for all sorts of things (my personal favourite is using the bone dynamics system for flowing fabric)

Flash and After Effects (1)

Stinky Fartface (852045) | more than 8 years ago | (#15438048)

I use a combination of Flash and After Effects the most frequently. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. Flash is fast and easy, but not aprticularly full featured. But it's hard to underestimate how helpful it can be to just hit 'play' and see an immediate playback without any rendering times. After Effects is way more powerful. It makes hard things easy, but it also makes easy things hard. It offers a lot of control over so many differnt aspects, which you need to do complex things, but can be a hindrance if you just need to knock out some shit real fast. Flash has basic drawing tools, which are mediocre but functional. After Effects offers klunky painting tools. Flash is great with vector based artwork but quickly bogs down and gets buggy with raster graphics. AE loves raster graphics and allows you to layer up lots of cool (suprise) effects and such. Flash isn't very precise when it comes to synching audio. Animations slowly fall out of synch becuse Flash screws up the audio. At 24 FPS, synch will slip about 1 second for every three minutes. So if I don't have to deliver a SWF, I will work in Flash on a scene by scene basis and then import those scenes into AE to make my final composite. It's also nice to be able to change frame rates in AE, which you can't easily do in Flash mid-project. In my projects, I usually start in Flash, setting up the layouts and doing the character animation. Then I'll bring it into AE to composite the shots, handle camera moves and effects. I love the 2.5-D camera. I don't generally handle much audio so I'll bring in an already mixed down track. Final output is handle by AE. Of course, this technique is particular to my style of animaiton, and may not work for you. I wouldn't recommend Flash for anything close to feature film quality animation. There have been some very good TV shows done using Flash (Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, the Venture Bros.) but honestly, it's not a professional quality animation program on it's own. It still even in version 8, has too many quirky bugs and limitations. It's very difficult to do resource management. There is no way to make global changes (like changing a character's skin tone)- it doesn't even have a way to select all of a particular color on a frame. You have to manually go through and select every area.. these are basic tools that have exsisted for decades in Adobe's products. I am extremely excited that Adobe bough Macromedia because I have felt that, as far as design and animation goes, the program has offered no substantial new features since it was called Futuresplash. Anyway, I am ranting.. I still use Flash every day and deal with it. At it's core its a great program. AE too.

Re:Flash and After Effects (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452712)

Actually, if you make your character into a movieclip or an object, you can definitely make "global changes," like changing the skin tone (in Flash). Also, I believe there's an extension for selecting all colors on a frame.

TweenMaker is where it's at (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15440511)

You have to try it out to believe it.

http://www.tweenmaker.com/ [tweenmaker.com] [tweenmaker.com]

Automatic inbetweening. Computer assisted animation the way it should be. None of the "moving 2D puppets around" like Moho or ToonBoom. In TweenMaker, you draw each key frame and TweenMaker creates the inbetweens for you!

Free student version.

Professional version is only $55!

Re:TweenMaker is where it's at (1)

yosofun (933530) | more than 8 years ago | (#15452766)

what exactly do you mean that it draws the tweens for you? suppose you were to animate a 2-D character walking -- can it do that automatically? i find that the best way is with bones, but does tweenmaker support them?

Re:TweenMaker is where it's at (1)

Elecorn (979612) | more than 8 years ago | (#15473210)

TweenMaker does use bones, but in a different sense. Rather than moving a character around by moving the bones, you draw the character how you want it in each key frame. Then, as you want better control over the motion of the inbetweens, you add bones in one key frame that automatically get fit to the drawings in the rest of the key frames. Then you play around with the arcs of motion for the joints of the bones.

This helps avoid the puppet like animation of Moho, Flash, Animo (really old version when they actually did automatic inbetweening), and Toon Boom.

Really, just download it and give it a try and you'll see what I mean.

http://www.tweenmaker.com/ [tweenmaker.com]

Thanks!

Mirage (1)

tonsofpcs (687961) | more than 8 years ago | (#15442661)

I use Bauhaus Software [bauhaussoftware.com] 's Mirage. I use it mostly for compositing, although it is designed as a raster animation app.

Moho worth the price (1)

Tuna (14770) | more than 8 years ago | (#15444954)

As someone who's used Moho with BeOS, Windows, and now on my Slackware Linux machine, Moho is really stable and is constantly getting better. I'm not an professional (far from it), but 2-D animation has always fascinated me and Moho seems to be the best value out there. This is especially true for those of us hobbyists who can't/don't want to spend multi-hundred dollars for a program just to "play with".

Tuna

http://www.foosballdiaries.com/ [foosballdiaries.com]
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>