After completing the Gala project with the animated spheres, I wrote a short review about the information that I gathered during this study. It was my conclusion that my thesis is going in a direction that has 2 sides: using 3D media and animation as a generative research tool, and using the same media with interaction for the purpose of educating about the questions and information it generates. I think animation is working on both sides of this. In my study, animation was more of a catalyst for the generation of new questions and aspects that I had not noticed in the painting before. However, 3D was the real reason I was able to recognize them. Animation pointed me in the right direction while 3D allowed the investigation to commence. The “Learning with Animation” resource talks a lot about the use of animation as an active research tool versus passive. I like the idea of animation as more participatory and less “sit and view.” I think this will be further developed in time as I look into the educational product side of the thesis more deeply. For now, my priority is fully understanding the generative side of this work and how 3D and perhaps animation can work with realism painting to bring attention to formal elements that can be overlook, and also the manner in which the media supplements draw attention to those elements.
In the Galatea of the Spheres project, the animation was the perspective in which I approached this painting. After analyzing the motion of the spheres, the 3D allowed me to see that the use of depth, which was I was less aware of previously. Animation and 3D worked together, but 3D is the priority for now. Below is a video of the many views that demonstrate and highlight the motion of the spheres in various manners. A full screen view may be best to see details.
If animation was not used, I doubt I would have notice these colored paths and observed their relationship to the whole. I found a similar project in which someone focused on 3D only. The result was quite fascinating, but I can’t help to think that the information gathered during the process just wasn’t the same. I think this painting is using motion to tie 3d and 2d elements together, and without observing the use of motion, it is hard to recognize these things. The relationship between the spheres is less considered, and I certainly don’t consider the motion paths or suggestive movement in this project:
It gives an extremely intimate look at the 3D space in this painting, more so than I would ever have attempted. But there is still something missing from it… and I think that thing is the element of motion.
I began the process of the 3D construction of Galatea of the Spheres last week. As I mentioned before, the process is quite simple as it only uses spheres for the most part. For now, I am looking past the small squiggle geometry that represents hair. I copied the sphere in a grid system to mimic that of the painting. I set a camera up pointing directly down the center of the grid (matching the painting’s viewpoint), and I placed the spheres by watching this camera in a separate window. I projected an image of the painting with a spotlight. It hit a plane the spheres were touching so I could properly match them up. I put the plane’s transparency rigged to a slider so I could go back and forth to see the spheres behind the front surface.
The full grid of spheres in perspectiveThe grid from the painting’s viewpoint camera
I tried to maintain equidistant placement, as suggested in the painting. I would first take one sphere, and move it directly backwards until it lined up with the sphere depicted in linear perspective in Dali’s painting. Using the camera’s default Angle of View attribute, Dali’s perspective is nearly dead on. However, moving a horizontal row downwards only in the Y axis in equidistant spacing, the rows seem to be a tad off; almost crooked. I really didn’t want to nudge some of the sphere into place, because with linear movements down rows and columns, these would be noticed in a seamless loop. I decided to keep them in the perfect grid. I should note that Dali’s vertical columns of spheres could, in fact, be perfect and not skewed as shows in my scene. I have to remember that I am using a photograph of the painting. Unless the photo was taken in the absolute dead center of the depicted viewpoint, there will be some foreshortening. In this photo, I believe the camera was slightly below, because the left edge of the spheres tilts to the right, suggesting that it is moving towards a vanishing point that is upwards versus halfway between. Think of viewing a skyscraper from below, the top is narrower in perspective, causing one edge to look as if tilted inward.
Vertical line drawn tangent to bottom left sphere. Not touching top sphere, either imperfection or camera’s perspective.The image projection on the grid of 3D spheres. You can see how they don’t quite line up. It’s hard to tell if it is from Dali’s natural imperfections or the additional perspective of the camera photographing the painting.
From here, I took an entire panel or vertical cross section and copied it back in equidistant until the depth seemed to go on forever. I did increase this distance slightly as it got far enough back so to save a bit of processing and reduce the total number. At some point the eye cannot notice the difference and at enough depth the spheres seem indistinguishable. I originally wanted to use motion paths to move the spheres around, but decided it would be very difficult to maintain a curve that was linear in some spots and curved in others and also intersected the centers of the spheres. Instead I set up them up for a seamless infinity loop, where the first and last frames of the animation are the same and when duplicated in compositing, it appears to cycle continuously and any amount of duration can be set. The actual render would only be 1 second (30fps) and save a lot of time.
I observed the painting and started mapping paths that the spheres could move, mimicking the suggested flow in the image. I would go through a series of them, select, and assign a color to observe the spacial relationship between them and keep track of them for keying.
I color coded the flow of the collarbone, up the neck, and 2 hair flows. I would select these in the straight-on camera that mimicked the painting so I was sure it was the correct sphere. Here is the flow:
An interesting view of this is the 3D perspective in another location:
Note the white spheres is where her nostrils and eyes are.
It certainly demonstrates some depth in this. The interesting part is that I am not choosing by my will which spheres are part of the motion; the selection comes directly from the painting matching with that sphere, so this really does depict the depth of suggested movement throughout by Dali. It is very interesting to see how he is suggesting these curved paths on a 2D surface, but also integrates them into a 3D environment. Rather than using spheres on the same XY plane, he uses depth, the Z position to convey the X and Y position.
In summary, there are 2 subjects of interest going on in this painting, the 2D face of Gala, and the depicted 3D grid of spheres (referencing atomic structure). So he is taking the depth of the 3D space to reference some of the positioning in the 2D. For example. the hair does not simply flow from one sphere in the same XY plane to the next, it weaves forward and back making use of the Z axis. The effect results in the one point perspective and 2D surface only communicating an X and Y position and that is where they can come together to form the 2d reference of the face.
This is very complicated in my head but clear at the same time. It is more complicate to communicate than anything. I should also note that this is more about taking advantage of the 3D medium again, and not necessarily motion.. Motion was the reason that I evaluated it, but 3D was the tool that let me realize this. The last image was really the one that got me to say, “okay I didn’t realize that before, what could its significance be..?” Regardless this investigation and discovery is very exciting, and I am thrilled that the experiment is producing similar results to the Horatii.
After choosing Dali’s painting as the subject of my final project experiment, I wanted to take a closer look at it, partly to observe the painting as is, and also as a way to think through and plan my steps of what I wanted to do with it. As I mentioned in a previous post, I am taking a dual perspective on this: what questions are generated through the application process of motion, and how might those be activating this new perspective. As an open investigation similar to the Horatii project, I am curious about what is happening when I “reenact” or “replicate” the suggestive motion that he is communicating in the painting. This was similar to the Horatii by saying I wanted to replicate the suggested 3D space in virtual space to see what would happen.
So I took a closer look and observed that the suggestive motion is being used as a way to accentuate the features of the subject. The two lower spheres that are appearing to move towards each other in the lower center of the painting are mimicking the flowing line of her collar bones. Another path moving up accentuates her neck muscles and others follow her flowing hair. I didn’t actually notice this until I considered the image in the context of motion. So even before I began the project, the process of internally animating the suggestive movement has changed my perspective of this painting and has gained me some information about it. I am calling on a skillset of consideration when it comes to viewing paintings; paying attention to the linear flow, depth of space, ect: mostly formal elements. I also try to consider where these formal elements come together with the theme of the painting. This can often take a bit of pre-research before analyzing the formal elements. It’s very difficult to be a master and knowledgeable about the meaning and intentions behind every painting. You remember some and forget some and some are never really known until an effort is made to get to know them. Once you sort of “know” them, that’s when the analysis becomes really valuable. I can notice these formal qualities of motion and construction, but just recognizing them doesn’t always give meaning to them. I think the real magic comes when you can create meaning from formal elements and identify their purpose and the decisions being made by the artist. It always feels like a right of passage when you can bridge the two aspects of visual and thematic and brings me closer in understanding to the mind of the artist.
So where does my process and experimentation come it? I think the things that I’m doing are a way to build up that bridge of understanding and creating meaning. I can only vouch for this hypothesis based on the experiment with the Horatii. The process revealed certain things that I didn’t notice before; made me ask questions that I wouldn’t have doubted before. This prompted an investigation of the formal elements that already exist.. but in a new way, a new perspective, a new purpose. The 3D provided a gateway to a new realm of analysis that my mind had yet to access. It generated a new area to focus on, which in turn triggered this instinct to find or create meaning from the new things that I found. It was amazing what can come from a small question of “why..?”
Anyway, the shift of perspective and mentally animating may not have happened if I had not been focused on the subject of motion. However, based on what I have been reading, the process of internal visualization can greatly differ from external. There is a small inconsistency here because what I am internally visualizing will be close to identical in the external because the external is created based on my internal interpretation. I think this is why this process will differ from the Horatii. In this, I am interpreting the motion to an extent whereas the Horatii I had more information to take straight from the painting and couldn’t “see” what would happen until it was put in virtual 3D. Granted I interpreted some of that space, but in comparison to the suggested motion in Dali’s work, the Horatii had much more information to rely and base my creation on. I feel like I have to do a lot more internal visualization when it comes to the motion aspect, which can sort of give me this preview of what it might generate. However, I am continuing forth with the animation of the painting and staying open to new things that I still have yet to recognize.
I want to create something as a conclusion to my summer research on the use of motion and animation in regards to paintings. I have had the Dali painting: Galatea of the Spheres in my head for a while since I did a project with Alice. We were looking up a lot of surrealism work and I came across this painting and its remarkable implications of movement.
I plan to create a scene that represents this painting. A 3D scene should be easy to interpret, as there is a strong use of one point linear perspective in this. Also, there is only 1 or 2 primitive geometric shapes, and it will be quick to replicate. From here, I want to experiment with the lines of motion and figure out if there is anything that add or generate about the painting.
I did a google search for just “Moving Painting” and oddly, not a lot showed up. The top hit was a video for a Halloween prop that looks like a painting but actually has a loop of a portrait that moves. The result is very fascinating and well kept within the painterly look. It doesn’t look like it is computer generated; the effect is quite good. Although frightening, this was a really cool example of looking into that question of mine: “what does motion do to a painting?” Although I need to stay open to how motion can act as a generative tool to form new questions about the construction of the painting, I am still curious about the general relationship between motion and painting and how it is used by others.
The effect is similar to when I animated the Julius Caesar head sculpture. There is something magical and unclear that draws the attention and makes me want to look for extended periods of time. This warrants another reflection of this phenomenon and an attempt to apply my previously explained approach of the dual investigation; what is motion doing (1) to create new questions and perspectives about this painting (2)?
Another artist that I found doing moving paintings is Steve Matson. He creates these nature-themes paintings that he digitally edits to create the illusion of a living scene. His intentions are mostly expressive and therapeutic, but can serve as another place to exercise my approach.
After talking with Maria, I have started to think about the relationship between motion and paintings. I have been continuously curious about what motion can offer a painting. What can animation bring to the table to change the way a painting is viewed? I kept thinking in this mindset of “what does motion do to this painting.” It is very animation-centric, when Maria encouraged me to be painting-centric. I think I should be waiting to see what questions come up when motion is introduced, similar to how 3D was introduced to the Horatii project. I sort of had a question in mind when I started, but it changed drastically when things unfolded in the 3D scene. These weren’t questions about 3D, but questions about the painting, its construction, the painter’s choices, and the method of our viewing and analysis. The experiment became very painting-centric while the use of 3D was used as a generative research tool more than an additive enhancement. I think my mindset is in the right place, but it needs to stay open to change. I am still curious what motion does to the painting; curious in a motion-centric way that would inform the functionality of the nature of movement. However, I anticipate it to lead to a painting-centric discovery where the inclusion of motion will generate new questions to arise about the painting, and not about motion.
In other words, I think this a dual-facing investigation that can inform both parties. It can inform about the nature of motion and its additive functionalities, but also the aspects of painting; things that we don’t necessarily see right away. In this sense motion is acting as a generative research method (hopefully similarly to the way 3D generated questions on the Horatii). However, I hope to generate questions using the inclusion of motion, and also try to understand why they are generating them, or at least document the process of how they arose.
In my head I express it as X is introduced to Y to lead to a new Z. Where X is motion, Y is paintings and Z is a new question or perspective. I hope the investigation to result in a explainable conclusion of: The new Z leads to more knowledge of Y because X does this when added to Y to lead to a new Z. Hopefully I can find a way to illustrate this or explain it in a better parable. Perhaps next, I can demonstrate this by applying it to the Horatii project.
After reading more of “Learning with Animation,” I passed over an important section about several experiments done with animation and an evaluation of the information gathered, I was shocked to find out that animation is not any more effective than static diagrams.
In these experiments, a mechanical process of a toilet cistern flushing was the topic of interest. The process was taught using several different methods with vocal information, static diagrams, and animation, and in many combinations. The bottom line was that, in this situation, animation had no advantage for all types of people. The subjects tested were of different quality of spacial ability, prior knowledge, and practical experience. Still, no effect was drastically different between the animation and static diagram.
Some interesting conclusions brought up after the experiments with animation were questioning the efficiency of animation since it is much more time consuming and costly to produce than static diagrams. If it is no more effective, is it necessary to use? Also, a concern about key frames was brought up. One advantage of the static diagrams is their ability to show significant moments in a moving process. If the animation is played at a continuous rate, important moments may not receive the necessary attention compared to other moments in the process. I thought of the potential and kinetic energy example so many of us have encountered in standardized testing. There is an image of a ramp and a ball is drawn at different locations as we are prompted to find where kinetic and potential energy are at their maximum. Obviously we need to freeze frames of motion and time to identify these locations. A constant rate animation would be counter productive in this situation because it fails to draw attention to key moments in time, which is suggestively achieved by allowing more time for one to view an image or frame. However, if the animation was interactive and a viewer could pause and move between frames, it could have potential to be equally as effective as static diagrams. But again, if it is equally effective, why spend more time and money producing a cheaper, quicker option.
Some of the findings, however, did show that text or some form of verbal instruction accompanying the animation were beneficial. Also, it was more beneficial to learning when the content was viewed more than once. The next section that I have dove into is about the use of multimedia: basically how we can mix animation with other sources and presentations of information to achieve a learning system.
I hope to find more information that supports and brings light to the advantages animation can, in fact, offer. As I am not using it for mechanical or scientific processes, I have to be flexible and open to this research. I am also curious about the categorization of learning. What does it mean, exactly, to learn? The research described explained that the subjects’ success in learning was measured by describing the mechanical process again after viewing the material, and answering short questions about the process, like if something were to malfunction, what their prediction or troubleshooting would be. This sounds very scientific and nearly the opposite of what I wish to use animation for. The interaction and analysis of artwork is very subjective and the information is not always set in stone like a mechanical process. This is something I will have to keep in mind as I take in this information from this book, and try to apply the research implications in a less scientific environment. This is not to say that someone cannot learn something from a painting, but the learning being done is very different and personal; something I need to think about and elaborate on later.
I’ve been wanting to make sure I document my thoughts and summary of the book “Learning with Animation” I got from Maria. This way when I need to reference some of it, I can go back to my journal and know what area I am thinking of rather than trying to dig through the book.
The first section about the effects of spacial ability and knowledge was very interesting to me and something I had not quite considered. The section basically describes how animation has different effects on different types of people. The way the authors ‘categorize’ these people are through their spacial abilities and prior knowledge. Spacial ability was described as the ability to visualize concepts and motion specifically in the mind. It was also referred to as internal visualization (versus external, which is content your eyes see). I mentioned this before in a post about how we have to infer motion from static diagrams, which is internal and this relies on our spacial abilities. I will have to go back and document exactly what the relationship is, because it seemed that there were many studies referenced that all had different or even contradicting conclusions regarding this aspect of visual processing.
Knowledge was another aspect. Similar to spacial ability, a viewer’s prior knowledge about the communicated subject had an effect on the animations effectiveness. This also had many research conclusions, and I would prefer to look them over and try to make a small diagram or visualization of the relationship.
The summary was: our mental visualization and knowledge coming into the animation or visual content determines how that content will effect us. Granted, this text was using mechanical processes as the visual content, but I am convinced that it applies to many different types of content when they serve as the subject of the animation. I will begin thinking about this in terms of paintings, which had already ran through my mind while reading.
To me, it sounds like I should target those who have a high spacial ability and a decent amount of prior knowledge coming to the visual content. Based on the conclusions for people with low spacial and low knowledge, it does not sound like I want to create content that would be beneficial for that type of viewer. It is not to say content to benefit these people could not be created, but my research momentum is more aligned with the opposite; viewers who know about painting and can internally visualize motions.
After reviewing the sources about animation and timing, I wrote earlier about the use of poses and sequencing poses as a way to compare displacement and interpret motion. At the end of this post I mentioned that I would be applying this concept to a painting.
I chose “The Sacrifice of Isaac” by Del Sarto. This painting has a particularly strong pose and implied motion through the lines of action. Abraham in red wields a knife while holding his son Isaac, as an angel descends. Here is a quick evaluation of the lines of action in green, and the interpreted “momentum” lines in red that suggest where some of the limbs are coming from in comparison.
You can see how Abraham’s body is contorted and twisted to the left, where the force seems to be suggestively directed. The angel’s action line is pointing downward and towards Abraham. Through my interpretation (this calls on some knowledge about the scene; Abraham is about to sacrifice his son, Isaac, as an angel stops him just before his knife descends) the red lines suggest that Abraham’s arm is coming from above his shoulder and continuing with momentum downward. One line I didn’t put was a line from Isaac, who I believe is coming from a more crouched position, as a result from Abraham’s force shoving holding him. These lines suggest where the positions were in a moment in time shortly before this static frame.
Taking this analysis, I made a short 3 frame sequence that illustrates the implied motions. I used Photoshop as a quick and dirty way to move some limbs and bodies around to give an obvious sense of displacement through comparison.
You can see how in the first frame, his arm is up higher, about to descend, and Isaac is held lower with more force downward. The angel is yet to call out to Abraham. In the last frame, Abraham’s grip on the knife weakens, and Isaac is standing upright. One of the difficult things to do is show a change in the direction the face is looking. I would imagine Abraham’s face to be looking down at Isaac, even though a simple flip of those pixels keeps it looking up. Again, this is just a concept to show an animation idea applied to paintings. It is enough to get a clear sense of the action in a bit more detailed way than the static frame. That specific pose is chosen as the static frame of the painting because it is the precise moment that illustrates divine intervention stopping Abraham from killing Isaac. However, it can help to understand the significance of that moment by comparing the actions that came before and after.
One of the efforts that I make every day in any moment whether consciously or not is trying to make connections and find parallels with other interests and events in my life that are related to my research interests. This is something Alice and Maria and I talked about: how no matter what we do, we always benefit and find some perspective on things in life that is related to our interests. This is why its so important to take advantage of every opportunity during this time because you never know what connection you are going to find. Some of the best ideas and thoughts I’ve had on my work have come from totally unexpected occurrences. Anyway, this is an example of one of those moments.
Today I drove to accad and parked further away because it was nice out and wanted to walk. as I was walking past the Oval, I’m always fond of some of the trees there and the different shapes and structures. I started to realize that I don’t really pay attention to this sort of thing. I’ve enjoyed nature with moderate interest, but never really thought much of trees or vegetation unless it was on a biology test. In fact, I’ve found trees sort of monotonous and boring. However, lately I’ve been really interested and participating in Bonsai, the art of growing miniaturized trees in pots. Part of this practice is recognizing good aesthetic structure and form of a tree and visualizing that potential in order to make the right decisions over time. I’ve become really nearly obsessed with viewing different types of bonsai trees and analyzing what makes them look so good and the different styles that are possible. When I started to pay more attention to the natural trees on campus I immediately knew it was because of my bonsai interests. But it wasn’t just about reading about them or seeing them. It was about actively participating in the act of bonsai. Seeing, evaluating, visualizing the potential of the tree made me more aware of the different species of trees, their growing habits, their natural habits, their unnatural oddities, and so forth. It was the act of being part of this that made me more aware of these aspects in natural trees. I started to appreciate the forms and structures that natural trees made, especially the ones that are aspired in bonsai. Being able to see a form that is aspired and achieved through intervention, exist in its natural form without interference is truly spectacular. I notice these aspects of trees all the time now and I can’t change this new perspective and appreciation. It is really wonderful to see this interest expand and effect other parts of life.
The parallel here is obviously with paintings. What if I could find some way that create that same improved perspective and awareness for paintings? If active participation in bonsai achieved this, perhaps a type of active participation in animation could as well. Clearly, participation in painting is the optimal way to create awareness of painting components, but not everyone has the time, money, or patience to invest in the practice of painting. So what if an adjacent related viewing experience could do a similar thing?…
Winegardner Design Journal and Portfolio 