SUMIDA, S.S.: Biological Principals that Drive Digital Effects and Strategies of Animation: Trading Lessons between Vertebrate Mechanics and Commercial Entertainment

Comparative morphological studies and responsible strategies of animation (both traditionally hand-drawn and computer generated) both require an understanding of structure, function, ontogenetic variation, and sexual dimorphism. Within animation, different techniques utilize slightly differing emphases. Traditional hand-drawn animation is focuses on superficial musculoskeletal anatomy. Dietary strategy (carnivory, herbivory, or others) informs the type the basic musculoskeletal patterns and locomotor behavior employed. Digitally created animal characters demand intimate knowledge of the skeleton as a first principal, as it is a skeletal wireframe that drives the movement of the character. Current standards require that the underlying skeleton (usually simplified) drive the movement of modeled soft tissue. It may be argued that restricting study or analysis to external structures, or having bones move muscles (as opposed to the converse) represent inappropriate approaches to study and representation of movement. This perspective is shortsighted. Rather, these necessary approaches present “exercises” or “problems” that may be solved with a thorough knowledge of how integrated biomechanical systems operate. More extreme “exercises” are presented by the needs of commercially driven storylines. Dinosaurs and mammals don’t speak. Puppies aren’t normally found in litters of over 100, or even 101, individuals. Graviportal elephants are incapable of galloping and an extended phase floating. Hybrid organisms composed of taxa that crisscross the range of vertebrate classes do not exist in the real world. However, if they did, how would you solve the problems? The answers lie in understanding comparative vertebrate anatomy and function.