Cameras Options

[NoFetusJesus]

I am relatively new to 2-D line animation and was wondering what type of cameras were best to start out with that was capable of capturing a single frame at a time for the use in hand drawn, line animation. I want one that is pretty versatile with use in pencil tests and just shooting in general, if at all that was possible in a single camera, due to the fact that cost is the biggest factor in this endeavour, and by that I mean endless flood of hate.

I'm not really into digital cameras (I'm not sure why, but anything that's slept with my mother I don't trust) but I'm somewhat intrigued by super 8, and was wondering if that would be reasonable within a cheap budget of camera purchase, developing costs, etc. .

Also, what kind of camera is pictured here don's old pencil test camera. I was thinking something like that might be what I'm looking for? Am i just lying? I've been searching for days and this knowledge still eludes. This isn't one of those JVC models in the GR-AX line is it?

[yardko]

I use a security camera with a 70's tv camera lens and an ati all in one capture card, and a very cheap tripod. As far as cheap goes that's about the best you can do. or get a scanner (slow but all you need for 2d). you only need to get 640X480 sized images for TV resolution. I would shy away from digital cameras unless you can get one really cheap and at least 1 megapixel. the reasons being 1. they eat batteries and 2. they aren't designed to have pictures taken by that I mean they break by having too many pictures taken. Well it might be ok for you, just don't do any time lapse. I doubt any digital camera will take more than 50,000 pictures. that may sound like a lot but it's not a 7 minute film could have up to 10,000 pictures or so. the biggest reccomendation is to get something with manual focus and aperature. Auto focus, lighting will look very poor/jittery/jarring. you could get a cheap handicam at a pawn shop and a computer video card that has inputs and you'd be set, at least on the hardware side. b'sides its xmas.

[Ray Pointer]

I am relatively new to 2-D line animation and was wondering what type of cameras were best to start out with that was capable of capturing a single frame at a time for the use in hand drawn, line animation. I want one that is pretty versatile with use in pencil tests and just shooting in general, if at all that was possible in a single camera, due to the fact that cost is the biggest factor in this endeavour, and by that I mean endless flood of hate.

I'm not really into digital cameras (I'm not sure why, but anything that's slept with my mother I don't trust) but I'm somewhat intrigued by super 8, and was wondering if that would be reasonable within a cheap budget of camera purchase, developing costs, etc. .

Also, what kind of camera is pictured here don's old pencil test camera. I was thinking something like that might be what I'm looking for? Am i just lying? I've been searching for days and this knowledge still eludes. This isn't one of those JVC models in the GR-AX line is it?

If you want to shoot pencil tests, or finished animation on film, you can pick up several good 16mm cameras that will give you remarkable results. The main point is that you need to be in an area where there is a film lab that can develop the film. WIth video and digital taking over, there are few film processing labs left, but they do still exist.

If you visit a professional, or semi-pro camera shop, you should be able to find a number of 16mm cameras that have single-frame capabilities, Two of the most common are the Bolex-16 or Bolex-Rex-16(Reflex), and Kodak Cine Special.

There are tips on constructing a camera stand in various books, including the instruction booklet we sell with THE KEN SOUTHWORTH BASIC ANIMATION PROGRAM.
You can see this at inkwellimageink.com under Courses.

[yardko]

16mm is ideal as it's thousands time more resolution which pays off on the big screen but if you're aiming for less than $500 digital will have to be the way to go. heck, get an 8mm, at least in portland you can get them from a thrift store for $30 and a little editing stand for $20 but the developing will cost a pretty penny. Wish I had a bolex :( :< . I've made more than 3 hours of animated film and never touched a real camera.

[NoFetusJesus]

thank you both. i just did a bouncing ball animation with my scanner and stop motion pro and it did not turn out that bad, although i had to use 3-ring binder paper and a 3-ring holder so it woldn't move around so much during the scannings.

i think i'm just going to mess around with one of the super 8's on ebay that i've been eyeing and just see where it goes from there. i live in the los angeles area so i think it will be pretty easy to get it developed. the issue of sound and editting and how to go about it have been crossing my mind these past couple of days, but that is a whole different issue.

but again, thank you both for your input.

[Ray Pointer]

The trouble with small gage film stocks like 8mm and Super8 is that the film is not a available now. Second, film has to be developed. There are few labs to send it to.
Considering these factors, the price goes up because it is a specialty item requiring special handling. For this reason, you are ahead to to for 16mm, which will cost about the amount of money and give superior results. There are still labs around that will
process 16mm film. And there is a wider range of film stocks in color and black and white. You also have the means of making professional film to tape transfers if you wish, or making prints with soundtracks.

So simply resigning oneself to the 8mm level with the thinking that you are going to save money will really be self-defeating. Such WalMart cheapness-thinking
will work against you.

[Ray Pointer]

The trouble with small gage film stocks like 8mm and Super8 is that the film is not a available now. Second, film has to be developed. There are few labs to send it to.
Considering these factors, the price goes up because it is a specialty item requiring special handling. For this reason, you are ahead to to for 16mm, which will cost about the amount of money and give superior results. There are still labs around that will
process 16mm film. And there is a wider range of film stocks in color and black and white. You also have the means of making professional film to tape transfers if you wish, or making prints with soundtracks.

So simply resigning oneself to the 8mm level with the thinking that you are going to save money will really be self-defeating. Such WalMart cheapness-thinking
will work against you.

Corrections: (The risk of having household interruptions)

The trouble with small gage film stocks like 8mm and Super8 is that the film is not as available now. Second, film has to be developed. There are few labs to send it to.
Considering these factors, the price goes up because it is a specialty item requiring special handling. For this reason, you are ahead to use 16mm, which will cost about the same amount of money and give superior results. There are still labs around that will process 16mm film. And there is a wider range of film stocks in color and black and white. There is also a wider range of quality cameras around designed for shooting animation. You also have the means of making professional film to tape transfers if you wish, or making prints with soundtracks. After all, you want to consider preserving the camera original.

So simply resigning oneself to the 8mm level with the thinking that you are going to save money will really be self-defeating. Such WalMart cheapness-thinking
will work against you.

[CaptGeorge]

In the long run, it'd probably be better to break down and go digital now.

It depends on what you want to do with your animation.

If you want to show it at film festivals, go the 16mm route.

If you're doing it for yourself and are only going to show it on TV, stick to VHS. There are some VHS camera recorders that allow frame-by-frame shooting, but there probably more expensive than average camera systems which is generally true for anything related to animation production. I'd hesitate to recommend DVD burning since it DOESN'T seem like the format has completely stabilized as far as home recording is concerned. The only DVD player a DVD-R or DVD-RW will play on for sure is the one it's made on. There are tons of compatibility problems with homebrew DVDs software and hardware that may make it not worth the potential headache it is.

If you do enough films, digital production will ultimately be cheaper than 16mm film. If you're just a hobbyist, spending a couple of hundred dollars on a good used 16mm camera probably makes more sense. Getting a good computer system with the processor speed, memory, and a big enough, fast hard drive that would allow a few minutes of animation will still run over $1,000 dollars. (Getting a capture card to transfer digital animation to VHS costs at least $400 on top of all the other hardware costs.) The programs available that would allow homebrew animation would run at least $500-$3000 dollars a piece and you need programs that allow scanning, coloring, and audio track mixing/placement -- and that's not even factoring in a program that would allow virtual camera movement! (That's unless you WANT to draw every piece of camera movement in by yourself.)

You do want to be sure that the film camera can shoot a frame at a time and that's where you MAY run into trouble. Unless it's specifically built for animation or customized, there are not many 16mm cameras (as far as I know) that can shoot a single frame at a time. From what I remember of film school, the animation cameras had specialized motors that allowed exposure frame by frame that costs hundreds of dollars by themselves -- without the camera or camera stand.

The main reason for this cost was the fact that not a lot of studios and schools have animation programs/production so there was a limited market for the equipment in the first place! Heck, the cheapest animation paper punch on the market now probably costs at least $400; average price for what amounts to a lead paper weight (most of the time) is $600!

[Ray Pointer]

You must consider your long term goal. What is your eventual purpose in making your animated film. Self experimentation of line tests, or finished color with rendered backgrounds,etc.? Although digital/computer scan is the current fad, you need to look at the overall expense involved with the equipment of digi/video over film. You most likely will find in the long run that going to 16mm film will still ultimately be less expensive and less complicated. The other dilema is that the electronic world is always changing. Film is constant and easily convertable to whatever medium comes along to replace what came before. And since VHS is on the way out in favor of DVDs, this is something to consider. But you can also buy a VHS system that includes a camera, stand, and special tape deck that will shoot on tape in the same manner as film for $3,000. This may prove less expensive than augmenting your computer to do the same.

The film route may still be less expensive and more practical. As stated before, there are a number of 16mm cameras available at used camera stores such as the Revere, Bolex 16, BolexRex-16(Reflex), and Kodak Cine Special 16. These can be bought for a fraction of the cost of the computer equipment necessary to do the same thing. There are books available that show how you can build a functional animation stand. This is included in one of my products, by the way, THE KEN SOUTHWORTH BASIC ANIMATION PROGRAM, if you will pardon the plug.

Again, you need to do carefull research to see what will be the most affordable and practical for your final outcome. My instincts tell me that a camera system either on tape or film will be the best solution both in terms of expense and execution. There is one thing that I'm not aware of in many of these consumer animation programs: the ability to make camera moves on the art. or shift fields. This can abe done easily with a camera on a stand with a moveable carriage. This is another detail to consider, since most beginners do not consider details such as aspect ratios, fields, and camera movements that enhance their animation.

[CaptGeorge]

Yeah, for whatever reasons (probably the whole resolution problem again), I don't think camera pans and zooms look good on the consumer grade digital camera programs. That I concede looks better from a traditional animation camera stand where you don't have to worry about file storage space and the effects of high-resolution on digital playback.

However, the one thing even Ray would have to admit is that video capture and playback is infinitely faster for line test than having to develop camera film for that. You can also tweak the animation timing and exposures faster once you have scanned in/captured all your drawings into a computer.

That is one thing a traditional camera set-up will NEVER be able to beat a computer animation set-up at.

It's true that the first time you scan in drawings for an animation test that it can be as slow as using a video pencil test or traditional camera test -- unless you have a large scanner set up for auto-feed --, but that ability to infinitely tweak and retime your drawings WITHOUT having to re-photograph them is something that a traditional set-up can't beat. I found that out REAL quick...!

But yeah, all other things considered equal, it's a heck of a lot cheaper to buy a camera used now than to invest in a computer that at best is going to be top-notch for two years if even half that if you're mainly going to do pencil tests and experimental animation that doesn't require a lot of shading.

[yardko]

But yeah, all other things considered equal, it's a heck of a lot cheaper to buy a camera used now than to invest in a computer that at best is going to be top-notch for two years if even half that if you're mainly going to do pencil tests and experimental animation that doesn't require a lot of shading.

I'd have to disagree from personal experience that "buying a camera" is cheaper. I have developed a full fledged produciton studio for less than $1500. my computer's three years old but its still very fast. I can make feature length animation, stop motion shorts using state of the art techniques and traditional camera techniques, I can do crazy digital things that noones dared to imagine before. I built my dolly gear our of legos. I can output to the web, multimedia cd's, dvd or VHS. computers are the way to go.

[Ray Pointer]

As I suggestied, you will need to look at the long term plan. What is your final purpose? So you intend to enter your film in festivals? Use it to pitch to a network? If you go the computer route, you will need some sort of medium, either VHS or DVD for the output. You will need to be sure of compatability with whatever the final purpose may be. You need to think this out and plan accordingly.

Based on what has already been presented, is $1500 within your budget?

You do have your choices. It's all up to you. But before you jump off the pier with both feet, make sure of what you are jumping into.

[NoFetusJesus]

1500 bones is a little big for my budget and since I am just starting out, I think I will just import the drawings onto my computer and then export it to vhs for pencil testing it, watching it, etc. . I would eventually like to go the route of buying a super8 or 16mm camera, but since I am technically in the beginning stages of animating a project I think just going digital may be cheaper for now.

I've been eyeing something like this Pinnacle AV/DV, for capturing and editting on my computer since I only have an analog camcorder. Although I am not familiar with the software included in the package, I do have access to premiere and whatnot. Plus, I also have a stopm otion program that I have used with animation before to allow me to get 1 fps.

Alas, I would like to go into using traditional film but with my very limited budget (think high school student), I am just going to have to go with something like that.

Comments? Suggestions?

[yardko]

$1500 figures in the cost of the computer, scanner, camera, trippod, dvd-r recorder, wires, table, tv, lights, vcr, etc. so once you have most of that crap the cost is zero here on out. I can't say that I will ever really be big on the "festival circuit" but I have my eyes set on being an indie animator and I wouldn't have the oportunity unless I had my cheap digital means. I don't have rich parents and I work joe-jobs. I do not have thousands of dollars to fritter away on real film. If I ever bothered to make anything good enough the fests would convert it to film for me. You'd be suprised how good a dvd looks compared to 16mm on the big screen any way. I have had my work shown in local theatres and it looks fine as dvd or vhs.

As for good tools in the free dept I would reccomend
- gimp for windows - the best photoshop clone that's easier to use than photoshop
- blender - can sequence images into an AVI, kind of combersome to use tho. I used it once.
- anasazi stop motion animator - free with onion skinning but it only makes .avi files (it's better to work with image sequences IMO)
- ulead movie editor thingie (i forget the name but it's the movie editing prog) edit avi videos and shoot frames from a camera. It doesn't let you sequence frames tho.. you can get it with a cheap digital camera.
- sometimes digital cameras have twain stop motion software..
- video capture cards (at least ati) have their own tv tuners - much quicker/easier to use than scanning but lower resolution. bonus part is it renames the files fil001, fil002, fil003 for you.

Personally I use stop motion animator (educational discount was $100) - I even built a little breakout box with a big red button to shoot the frames from radioshack. I also use premiere 6.5 (it's the best for stop motion IMO) but flash would do an OK job as well (with image sequences not avi's). a little birdy tells me you could probably get premiere if you searched for it with kazaa or overnet.

[Ray Pointer]

1500 bones is a little big for my budget and since I am just starting out, I think I will just import the drawings onto my computer and then export it to vhs for pencil testing it, watching it, etc. . I would eventually like to go the route of buying a super8 or 16mm camera, but since I am technically in the beginning stages of animating a project I think just going digital may be cheaper for now.

I've been eyeing something like this Pinnacle AV/DV, for capturing and editting on my computer since I only have an analog camcorder. Although I am not familiar with the software included in the package, I do have access to premiere and whatnot. Plus, I also have a stopm otion program that I have used with animation before to allow me to get 1 fps.

Alas, I would like to go into using traditional film but with my very limited budget (think high school student), I am just going to have to go with something like that.

Comments? Suggestions?

Looks like we're back at square one. However, I was making animated films when I was in high school, and had been since I was 11. I had the money to make my films because I got jobs and worked for the money. I was a high school student once, and
I was still able to persue my private studies of animation through my own efforts. So if you have enough of a desire, you will find a way of doing it as others such as myself did.