Doesn’t look quite right to me even after adding interior dark edge and interior highlight. Open to suggestions.
In a top view it should be spinning counter-clockwise. But from the front view it looks like it is compressing and decompressing instead of spinning.
I really struggled with this particular exercise. Not sure how to improve it, but there must be a method. Any suggestions?
Thanks for the idea. That was actually something I thought of earlier; I was going to put a ‘P’ for powerup on the opposite side.
I was also thinking of using an irregularly-shaped (non-symetrical) shape instead of a symmetrical coin or disc. However, I decided not to just because I figured that there is some other fundamental problem I am overlooking.
I have a theory, and that is the coin’s edge needs to be defined better as the coin is spinning. In other words, it can’t be portrayed as a 2-dimensional, paper-thin coin. In the very middle frame when the coin’s edge is directly facing the viewer along the z-axis, it has thickness. But in the other frames, the edge’s thickness might not be adequately portrayed.
Anyways, thanks for your suggestions, and like you mentioned maybe I need to not be overly concerned with realism, this is pixel-art after all. However, particularly with animation, for some reason in order to resonate with the game player it seems to me that there has to be a certain degree of “realism” or consistency, in order to make the game as a whole believable or plausible to the player, even though of course it is just a game and only fictional. Thanks again!
On reviewing the animation again, I think I see something now that I did “wrong” / incorrectly:
The outside edge of the coin facing the player should become the ridge connecting the face of the coin to the band (thickness) of the coin.
I have totally neglected to paint that ridge and the band it borders with. I did paint and emphasize an inside edge of the coin as the coin makes its spin. But this inside edge is not a substitute for the ridge of the coin. Because of this oversight, the coin is actually portrayed as a paper-thin 2-dimensional object, with the only exception being the middle frame which suddenly shows the coin’s thickness out of nowhere. The other transitional frames totally omit the coin’s thickness, the coin’s band.
The viewer’s eye correctly initially follows the outside edge, but expecting (as it should be) it to be positioned as the ridge of the face that connects with the band. To correct this omission, I would probably have to redo the whole animation from the start.
Hmmm, I never thought that such a simple animation of a spinning coin could be so challenging! Maybe I will do a 2nd attempt at some point in the future, including this time a ridge and band.
But, I guess it’s good enough for its purpose as is, at least as an academic exercise. I did learn a few things doing this exercise.
Okay, I think I finally got it to work now. Here are a few minimalist animations of a spinning coin, but they include a distinctive band / ring for thickness. This seems to make all the difference for giving an illusion of spinning, instead of a 2d compression and decompression.
These are deliberately low resolution and minimal frames. Adding a greater resolution for more detail, and adding more frames within that greater resolution, would make it look even more convincing that a spin is occurring.
This one shows the distinction. One has a z-axis band, and the other does not. Notice how the one (on the right) without a band seems to be shrinking and expanding instead of actually spinning (reminds me of the guided missiles in an old classic Intellivision game Astrosmash!):
This one has more frames for smoother and more convincing animation:
I’m sure these could be tweaked and made better, but they do demonstrate the principle of having a thickness band for rotation animations.
Good study!