When you shouldn't animate at all.
Not every story wants motion. Three kinds of scientific communication where a still image, or even plain text, will beat a 90-second 3D sequence every time.
Motion is for change
Animation earns its cost when something changes over time and that change is the point. If the thing you need to communicate is a structure, a comparison or a hierarchy, motion adds nothing and costs a great deal.
Three cases where we say no
- A static structure. If the viewer needs to study a shape, give them a still they can look at for as long as they want.
- A dense comparison. Tables and small multiples beat any animated reveal for anything the reader must compare item by item.
- A regulatory document. Where every claim is scrutinised in writing, a figure that can be cited beats a film that cannot.
We have talked more clients out of animation than into it. That is why they come back.— Dr. María Lamprecht
What we suggest instead
Usually a single strong figure, built with the same rigour we would give a film: one claim, one visual hierarchy, every element sourced.
