Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

For the n00bs of cel collecting and production art . . . and for some of us old-timers, too. Post your questions on anything that puzzles you.
Post Reply
Pixel
Kishin - Fierce God
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:22 pm
Contact:

Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

Post by Pixel »

I've been wondering something about cels. From what I read here, cels are often layered together to build a single shot, which I guess could be considered a form of compositing. What I was wanted to know is, are accessories worn on the head such as hats and glasses drawn directly onto the cel with the character's head, or are they placed on a separate layer or layers?
User avatar
sensei
Moderator and Admin-in-waiting
Moderator and Admin-in-waiting
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:55 am
Location: Cephiro
Contact:

Re: Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

Post by sensei »

If they move independently from the rest of the character's body, yes. Otherwise, they would be painted on the same layer. Often eyes and mouth use a second layer, to animate eyeblinks and dialogue. And sometimes the hair too if that blows in the wind. But not normally something that a character wears, unless, as noted, it flutters, billows, or flaps during the cut.

Animation can be counterintuitive. The artists don't use layers to put something on a character, but simply design the image, clothes and all. In fact, I've found a number of cases in which something that appears "in front" of a character is actually painted on a layer that actually sits underneath the image of the character. And vice versa. Compare this cel with the screen cap. The cel, the B10, would have been photographed on top of another one (I'd guess an A1 END) that was placed beneath it. Spaces were left on the B-layer so the hand and shoulder of the character on the bottom layer would appear to be in front of the character on the top layer. It seems illogical, but if the character in front does not move, but the character behind does move, then it made more sense to have the camera team change out the B-layer on top and leave the unmoving A-layer alone in its place on on the light table.

It works and it saves a significant amount of time for the camera crew, plus the unmoving A-layer isn't potentially damaged by having it taken off the registration slots and put back on over and over.
Image
Pixel
Kishin - Fierce God
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

Post by Pixel »

I think I understand what your saying. I have sometimes found in my own experiences in still graphic work that it is not always simplest, or even feasible to stack elements in their apparent visual z-order. Sometimes it is less trouble to just not draw hidden overlapping parts. In more recent years, I've found myself learning things that at first don't seem to make sense, but make some tasks in drawing and shading considerably simpler.

Would effects such as glare on glasses require the lenses to be drawn on their own layer? I know it's not motion per se, but the glare effect does not always instantly consume both lenses. I've noticed that, particularly with the glowing glare the effect will sweep across the lenses, usually along a pair of diagonals, over however many frames. I'm pretty sure I've seen the dull glare simply fill both lenses like flipping a light switch, though I would have to go frame-by-frame to be sure.

(As an aside, I often think of glasses in anime that take on a dull flat glare as having "fogged up", even though I'm sure it's actually a type of glare instead.)
User avatar
cutiebunny
Yosutebito - Hermit
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:55 pm
Location: Rockin' da Cats-bah
Contact:

Re: Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

Post by cutiebunny »

It would depend on what is going on in that particular scene. If the emphasis is on the character's glasses, such as times when the nerdy character has a cunning idea and adjusts the glasses so that they reflect the light, then yes, that would be a case of where there would likely be separate layers for the reflection on those glasses. But if it's just a character walking down the street and the reflection changes every so often depending on the shadows of the trees or buildings in their vicinity, then it's unlikely that there are separate layers just for the reflection. There are always exceptions to this rule. Some studios, like Madhouse, were notorious sticklers for animation quality, often redoing an entire sequence to make sure the coloring and shading was up to snuff. Other studios were just out to sell toys, so wasting materials and manpower to re-animate sequences was pointless.
User avatar
sensei
Moderator and Admin-in-waiting
Moderator and Admin-in-waiting
Posts: 4997
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:55 am
Location: Cephiro
Contact:

Re: Question about Headgear and Cel Layering

Post by sensei »

Pixel wrote:Would effects such as glare on glasses require the lenses to be drawn on their own layer? I know it's not motion per se, but the glare effect does not always instantly consume both lenses. I've noticed that, particularly with the glowing glare the effect will sweep across the lenses, usually along a pair of diagonals, over however many frames. I'm pretty sure I've seen the dull glare simply fill both lenses like flipping a light switch, though I would have to go frame-by-frame to be sure.

(As an aside, I often think of glasses in anime that take on a dull flat glare as having "fogged up", even though I'm sure it's actually a type of glare instead.)
A dull glare would use airbrushing, and I have seen that done on a separate layer and also simply done directly on the front of the cel. That quick glare effect probably would require a layer, or it could be done on one layer if the character also moves his/her head while the glare effect is happening. That sweeping eyeglasses glint is a common emoticon-type marker of inner emotion in anime and I have a sketch where the studio thought about using it. But then they didn't and got an even eerier effect by having the character do absolutely nothing but look on and smile benignly. So I don't know how they would have animated it.
Image
Post Reply