“…When compared with traditional animation production methods, motion capture has the following advantages: its low latency means it obtains results in near real-time, which can effectively reduce the cost of action production; the workload does not vary with the complexity or length of the performance content, and is only limited by the actor ' s ability to perform; it is easy to reconstruct complex movements and real physical interactions in a physically accurate way, such as secondary movements, weight, and force exchanges; it is compared with traditional animation action production methods, the amount of animation data that can be generated per unit time is large, which helps to meet cost-effectiveness and production deadline requirements [18,19]. Motion capture technology also has shortcomings and deficiencies: it depends on specific site, hardware, and software program conditions [20], and requires high up-front investment costs; the way of recording frame by frame is not easy to modify and edit, and it is easier to recapture in case of error than to modify the action file; it is impossible to capture movements that do not follow the laws of physics, and the difference in proportions between the performer ' s structure and the digital model ' s structure can easily lead to movement errors. It is impossible to capture the exaggerated action style in the traditional animation motion law, and action effects such as elasticity, squeezing, and stretching must be added in the subsequent links.…”