This final week before the break introduced dialogue, acting, and subtext, expanding the scope of performance.
The addition of dialogue required a deeper understanding of intention and delivery. Performance became more layered, combining physical action with vocal expression.
During the term break, I conducted a professional artist interview, which provided insight into industry practices.
This week’s lecture focused on academic writing techniques, including quoting, paraphrasing, and maintaining ethical standards. We also discussed how to compare sources and develop a critical argument within a literature review.
During the break I finished writing my literature review. Instead of simply summarizing sources, I aimed to create connections between them and highlight different perspectives.
Through writing, I reached a more nuanced understanding of my topic. While visual elements do play an important role, they do not operate independently. Narrative context and psychological factors also contribute significantly to how audiences perceive and emotionally engage with characters.
This realization showed me that research is not only about confirming an idea, but often about complicating it and developing a deeper understanding.
This week included several industry talks and discussions about internships, networking, and career development within the animation industry. Hearing directly from professionals provided valuable insight into studio expectations and potential career pathways after graduation.
This week involved individual tutorials and preparation for the research proposal. We were asked to define our research area, write a short statement of intent, and identify at least five relevant academic sources.
At this point, I refined my topic into a clearer research focus:
How visual elements of character design in 3D animation influence audience perception and emotional engagement.
This revised topic allowed me to maintain a connection with my initial interests while also ensuring that there was enough academic material to support the research.
However, finding sources was still challenging. There were limited studies specifically focused on 3D character design, so I expanded my research scope to include related fields such as visual perception, media psychology, and animation studies.
This approach proved effective, as it allowed me to build a more comprehensive theoretical framework by combining insights from multiple disciplines.
This week highlighted the importance of adaptability in research. Adjusting the scope of my topic enabled me to move forward more confidently.
By this week, the Heavy Object & Change of Mind assignment was nearing completion. While the animation was largely resolved, I recognised that parts of the movement felt overly realistic, almost resembling motion capture. This raised an important reflection point: although realism can be effective, animation often benefits from selective exaggeration to enhance clarity and appeal. In this particular case, the level of realism was somewhat appropriate due to the nature of the character. However, this experience made me more aware that in future projects, I need to be more intentional about stylisation and avoid relying too heavily on realistic movement.
The Project 1 presentation marked the conclusion of this project. By this stage, I had developed a clear direction based on dance and ice skating. My research process included analysing dance animations, observing real-life performances, and studying frame-by-frame breakdowns of skating jumps. Since my test with Project 1 was successful I want to pursue this idea further for my FMP by building a story around the performance.
This week’s session continued to explore potential research topics, while also introducing strategies for structuring a literature review. The lecture clarified that a literature review is not simply a summary of sources, but a critical engagement with existing research.
At this stage, I began reconsidering my initial topic due to the lack of available literature identified in the previous week. Instead of completely abandoning the idea, I attempted to broaden and reposition it. I started exploring related areas such as animation theory and visual perception to create a more sustainable research framework.
This shift changed how I approached reading. Rather than focusing only on gathering information, I started paying attention to how different authors relate to each other, where they agree, and where they disagree.
Through this process, I realized that research is not linear. Topics evolve, and flexibility is necessary in order to adapt to the realities of academic research.
This week focused on refinement and iteration.
Facial animation continued with improvements to connecting poses. Applying feedback required careful adjustments, particularly in maintaining control over small movements. Facial animation remained a challenging area due to its precision.
This week’s feedback on Heavy Object & Change of Mind led me to focus more closely on the movement of hands and feet, particularly in relation to arcs and asymmetry. I realised that smaller details, such as hand positioning and the trajectory of movement, significantly affect the overall quality of the animation. Refining these aspects required more attention to detail than I initially anticipated. Ensuring that movements followed clear arcs and avoiding uniformity across limbs helped improve the believability of the animation.
In terms of Project 1, based on the previous observations, I experimented with creating a stepped blocking animation inspired by skating movement. This allowed me to test how real-world motion could be translated into animation.
This week’s lecture focused on defining a research question and developing a clear and achievable premise for the thesis. The session emphasized that a strong research foundation depends not only on having an interesting idea, but also on setting realistic objectives and identifying a viable research direction early on.
During this process, I initially decided to base my topic on the subject of my previous critical report. This felt like a logical decision, as it allowed me to continue exploring an area I was already familiar with. However, as I began looking for academic sources, I encountered a significant limitation: there was a lack of sufficient literature, and more importantly, an absence of opposing viewpoints.
This challenge made me realize that choosing a research topic is not only about personal interest, but also about the availability and diversity of academic resources. Without enough sources, it becomes difficult to construct a strong literature review or develop a critical discussion.
This week helped me understand that selecting a research topic is a foundational step that directly affects the entire research process.
This week focused on eye animation, which I found particularly challenging. The level of detail required in controlling eye movement, blinks, and eyelid interaction made it difficult to maintain stability in the face. Even small inaccuracies caused the animation to appear inconsistent or flowing. This highlighted how sensitive facial animation is compared to body mechanics.
Connecting facial poses added another layer of complexity. Unlike body transitions, facial animation requires subtle and controlled changes. Maintaining coherence between poses proved difficult, especially when trying to preserve the overall structure of the face.
This week, feedback on the Heavy Object & Change of Mind assignment highlighted issues related to stiffness and lack of natural variation in movement. In particular, I became aware that symmetric arm movements do not feel realistic and that overlap and offset especially in the hands and fee are essential for creating more believable motion.
As a result, moving into blocking plus allowed me to address these issues by introducing more variation in timing and offsetting different parts of the body. This process helped break the rigidity in my animation and made the performance feel more organic. I also started to explore more interesting timing choices, rather than keeping movements too uniform.
My Project 1 research developed further through analysing ice skating performances, particularly from the Winter Olympics. Observing these performances helped me understand how movement can convey both technical precision and expressive quality.
This week we continued exploring research methods, focusing on the distinction between qualitative and quantitative approaches. Quantitative research centres on measurement and statistical analysis, while qualitative research focuses on meaning, interpretation, and context. This helped clarify how research aims and objectives shape methodological decisions.
We also looked at what should be included in a methodology section, such as data collection, analysis processes, tools, and the rationale behind methodological choices. The session reinforced the importance of aligning research questions, methods, and outcomes clearly.
In addition, we discussed areas to consider when developing a research topic, including cultural representation, ethics, diversity, and industry context.
For next week, we have a Padlet task where we must post our research interests and potential thesis topics under relevant themes. I plan to choose my literature review and thesis topic in line with my previous critical report, which explored cultural appropriation versus cultural appreciation in 3D animation. This topic connects strongly to themes of representation, equality, and industry ethics. Developing it further will allow me to build on existing research while situating the investigation within a stronger academic framework, ensuring it remains balanced, critically engaged, and supported by credible scholarly sources.
This week deepened my engagement with both observation and refinement.
Facial posing progressed through the use of real-life references, requiring a more analytical approach. Unlike model sheets, real expressions are subtle and often ambiguous. Interpreting these into clear and expressive poses was challenging, as it required balancing exaggeration with believability.
For Heavy Object & Change of Mind, progressing into blocking plus allowed me to refine the relationship between acting and mechanics. However, during this transition, I realised that my initial reliance on a strictly stepped workflow began to limit my progress. While stepped mode was useful for establishing clear poses, it made the transition into more fluid motion more challenging than expected.
As a result, I decided to adjust my workflow moving forward and avoid relying on stepped mode in future projects. Instead, I aim to consider timing and spacing earlier in the process, allowing for a more integrated and efficient workflow.
After the feedback I got I became more aware of the importance of asymmetry and exaggeration in creating believable and engaging movement. I realised that overly balanced or symmetrical poses tend to feel artificial, and that pushing asymmetry contributes significantly to the sense of life in the animation.
This week also marked a more structured beginning of my Project 1 research. I decided to focus on character animation, aligning with my growing interest in performance-based work. I began exploring dance as a potential direction, watching various dance animation examples and analysing how movement, rhythm, and expression are translated into animated form. This initial research phase was exploratory but essential in defining my direction.
This week we focused on how to develop and structure a literature review. The session emphasised that a literature review is not simply a summary of sources, but a critical investigation that builds a balanced academic argument.
We discussed the importance of using peer-reviewed and credible academic sources, rather than informal material. Academic writing conventions were also reinforced, including maintaining formal language, avoiding personal tone, and applying accurate Harvard referencing.
A key concept introduced was the Golden Thread in research. This refers to the clear connection between the research question, literature review, methodology, and conclusion. Each section should logically link together to ensure the investigation remains coherent and focused.
Overall, the session clarified how to structure a literature review effectively and maintain academic integrity throughout the research process.
This week involved transitioning from planning into blocking for the Heavy Object & Change of Mind assignment. Working in stepped mode allowed me to focus on pose clarity and the communication of weight. At this stage, I found the process particularly engaging, as it combined body mechanics with acting decisions. Having already practiced body mechanics extensively, I felt more confident exploring performance within the movement.
The Stitch’s Tea Party workshop required applying constraints, locators, and parenting within a structured task. Although I had studied these tools previously, applying them in combination was significantly more challenging. The main difficulty lay in constructing a logical hierarchy deciding how objects should relate to each other while maintaining flexibility. This process required iterative problem-solving, and although it was initially frustrating, successfully completing the setup made the experience highly rewarding.
The introduction to facial posing marked a shift towards more detailed animation. While creating poses was enjoyable, I quickly realised that facial animation demands a higher level of precision than body mechanics. Maintaining structural integrity while pushing expressions proved difficult, highlighting a new area of development.
This week in class we focused on Understanding and Testing Research Viability, which has helped me start thinking more seriously about how a research topic develops over time. Rather than settling on one fixed idea straight away, I’m beginning the process of looking for possible topics that feel manageable, interesting, and relevant to the critical report topic I did for the Design for Animation unit.
We discussed how developing a potential research topic is an important step toward thesis development, especially making sure the topic is focused and supported by available resources. At this stage, my main goal is to explore different ideas, think about what questions they might lead to, and consider what kind of research would be realistic to carry out. This feels like an early but useful starting point, and I’m looking forward to narrowing things down as I move forward.
This week began with a presentation on story structure and storytelling, looking at different narrative frameworks such as the three-act structure, the hero’s journey, and other ways of breaking down story beats. This was useful in thinking about how even short animation shots still rely on clear structure, intention, and change, especially when communicating an idea quickly and visually.
We then moved on to the self-study topic of constraints, parenting, and locators, focusing on how to manage object relationships in a scene without breaking the animation. A key takeaway was understanding the difference between permanent parenting hierarchies and more flexible constraints, as well as using locators as clean, invisible anchors for props. This was both very challenging and educational. We’ll focus more on practicing this topic with an assignment in the later weeks.
In addition, we refined last week’s hunter-to-prey previs based on feedback, improving clarity between the scene and the camera movement. We tried to balance the drama level between them for each shot.
We also started planning the next assignment: a 12-second shot combining body mechanics and acting, with a clear moment of change of mind involving a heavy object. I found references for this shot and also filmed myself ”acting” as a reference.
The second session focused on short narrative, with particular emphasis on non-verbal storytelling. Through discussion and examples, we explored the unique challenges of conveying meaning, emotion, and narrative clarity without the use of dialogue or text.
The session examined different strategies and narrative structures used in short animated works, including visual pacing, character movement, framing, and symbolism. These elements were discussed as tools for communicating story efficiently within a limited timeframe.
In Week 2, we shifted focus from the camera to the story. The session broke down storytelling at its most fundamental level, emphasizing that stories are not a list of events, but a chain of cause and effect. The difference between “and then” and “therefore” became a central idea highlighting how meaning, not chronology, is what keeps an audience engaged.
By examining internal and external conflict, we learned to let character choices not coincidence push the narrative forward. The SWBST framework (Somebody, Wanted, But, So, Then) helped clarify motivation, obstacle, action, and resolution in a clean, repeatable way.
The session also introduced common story structures, from three-act and five-act models. Through an activity, we developed multiple story variations based on the SWBST framework, tested them for causal logic, and translated their strongest idea into a storyboard.
The storyboard we did:
We also got feedback on the animation of the storyboards of the guy at the bar, so this week I worked on polishing it. Here is the polished version:
We also got a group assignment that combines the last 2 weeks sessions. We will be writing a story focusing on the change of power dynamics in a story. Here is the previs of the “Hunter to Prey” assignment where the thief gets killed by an innocent man.
The storyboard:
The previs:
The first session of the module introduced the core foundations of the master’s thesis, with a particular focus on the thesis proposal. We dicussed what makes a strong research topic by considering its potential, motivation, and practical or theoretical applications. This encouraged early reflection on why a topic matters not only to the researcher, but also within a wider academic, professional, or social context.
A key part of the session focused on understanding the purpose and significance of research, alongside the ethical considerations that underpin responsible academic work. We discussed how ethics should be embedded from the outset of a project, influencing topic selection, research methods, and outcomes.
In our first session, we set the foundation for thinking beyond “coverage” and into intentional camera language. We focused on one core question: where do you put the camera, and why? Every framing choice begins with understanding what the scene is about and what you want to say visually before dialogue ever enters the picture.
We explored how focus, depth of field, focal length, geometry, and camera movement shape meaning. From deep focus that invites the audience to explore a frame, to shallow focus that directs attention with precision, we discussed how the camera guides the viewer’s eye and emotional response. Techniques like dolly zooms, handheld movement, whip pans, and arc shots were examined not as stylistic tricks, but as storytelling tools.
To put these ideas into practice, we were assigned to do the 5+5 Challenge: creating two short storyboards that tell a clear story or emotion using exactly five shots of five seconds each, no dialogue, simple acting, only camera language.
Here are my storyboards for this class:
Then we brought these storyboards to life with Maya by exchanging our storyboards with each other. The storyboard of Jingwen and the animated version (previs) :