WHAT GOT YOU INTO MOTION DESIGN?
I started out as a video editor with an interest in UX/UI design. I was quickly drawn towards motion design/animation as a means of conveying abstract ideas, especially in an increasingly digital/virtual world. Plus I playing around with After Effects a few times and was hooked!
FORMS IN NATURE video: https://vimeo.com/155262093
The story of the piece seemed to be one that draws connections between the natural world and scientific technology developed by humans. The viewer is left with a sense that “everything is connected” and nothing is random. Also a sense of wonder and awe at the scientific, mathematical design of nature.
The design is held together by a common geometrical shape: the circle. Each scene has a very similar composition, with one element in the center of the screen, in focus, and other elements of the scene in the background, out of focus. There are many textures and small geometrical details in the background. The audio is retro and futuristic at the same time. Light, bouncy synth music, interspersed with harder hitting chords, that punctuate the scene changes. Also delicate SFX layers such as the bees buzzing, underwater sounds and the sound of the telescope moving into place. I would describe the music as “exciting,” “playful” and “epic”
The most special moments are definitely the transitions. The piece is well edited in terms of timing the transitions with music and drawing parallels between each scene, sometimes with a split-screen transition. There are also beautifully fluid character animation moments in the movement of the animals, and great use of composition. Even though each scene is centered around a centered circle, the scenes sometimes move in different directions, adding variety to a somewhat rigid structure.
I think the elements fit together very well. The cool thing about a personal project like this was that the designers were able to make up a fictitious client “National Science Programme” and design their branding/logo/intro animation to perfectly match the tone of the rest of the piece. One of the best moments of motion is 6-8 seconds in, when the line bisects the circle and the title “forms in nature” appears, setting up a structure/tone for how the entire video will go.
The first big difference I notice is timing - the left animation seems to have a clear chain of cause-and-effect for the motion. The ball always stays on top of the grey lines or in front of them. On the right, the ball will dip into the grey lines, causing it to lose the sense that the ball is rolling on or bouncing off of these lines.
Another thing I notice is how the left animation pauses when the ball is thrown up into the air, which is more realistic to how something would pause in real life. The right animation does not pause at the top of the curve, and the physics feel off because of it.
When the ball falls down, the left animation stretches the ball out, blurring so it has a more realistic fluid falling feel. The right animation still looks like a circle when it falls.
When the square levers “catapult” the ball - on the left animation, the ball bounces off the lever, moving faster right when it’s hit, and slowing down as it loses momentum. The right animation bounces the ball but it’s more of soft bounce, without the feeling of impact that the lever has.
MY ADOBE ANIMATE GIF: