Animation is an ever changing medium. The first evidence of anyone recording the motion of movement can be found in paleolithic cave paintings and was also found on a 5,2000 year old earthen bowl in Iran. It wasn’t until people explored new technologies and created the appropriate equipment that the beginnings of animation really began.
Animation and new technology have always gone hand in hand. George Melies, was one of the first people to use animation to create special effects within his films. He was famous for his technical and narrative developments in film making.
What I find interesting is George Melies explorations into film and special effects didn’t deter the development of more traditional methods of ‘theatre’ and it still doesn’t. It is an amazing visual and aural medium but does the invention of such a fantastically versatile and imaginative story telling device prevent more traditional narratives. Books still exist and so does theatre. So why does the invention of digital technologies mean the end of more traditional methods of animation? Surely they will exist side by side in the same way photography and painting do.
There is already a resurgence of more traditional methods of special effects. Take a recently released film like Moon directed by Duncan Moon, staring Kevin Spacey, it is a tribute to seventies sci fi films and uses models instead of digital animation.
Should Universities embrace new digital technology and preserve more traditional methods or should they just ditch the tradition in favour or the ‘new’? Is there anything to be learnt from the patterns of history or does the invention of digital technologies mean a blanket ban or anything even vaguely traditional?
14 Comments
Industry needs to know “what’s over the hill” We have our ideas and we live or die on what we do. We what your ideas never mind if they are wrong; you won’t suffer. Industry needs ideas from academia; we don’t take it as gospel; but it would help to make decisions for the future. Digital past and present we know about and the trends are well documented; it’s the new stuff we need to know or know of the possibilities.
OPEN09 opened my eyes. Industry have to spent enormous amounts of time on R&D while academia say tell us what you want us to do and we will do it!! Wait a minute you are given money to tell us, not us to tell you the future and pay for it?
In response to Hayley Dawn, “I think the foundations of animation should continue to be taught traditionally, the artistic genius on 2D films such as disney classics or the 3D plasticine models in Aardman creations are timeless. ”
I’ve just ordered two copies of Richard Williams 18 dvd full set of Animation lectures for our University library.
There’s no substitute to learning true tried and tested techniques from an expert such as this. His stories and demonstrations are fascinating and offer a life time of experience on a plate. Being human, we also have to learn from our own experience and take what advice we can from others, but gems such as these are so valuable. We can use them to build upon from our own perspective. They light us up creatively. A lesson in Adobe After effects doesn’t often do that !
During my time in the animation industry I spent many hours cutting out frisk film with a scalpel and wearing a gas mask while airbrushing large areas with acrylic paint which could be tedious and hazardous. Adobe Photoshop has freed us from these time intensive constraints and given us an opportunity to use that time creatively.
I believe that often the best results come from a combination of hand drawn and digitally modified artwork.There should be no preference for one of the other, but more emphasis on using the most appropriate tool for a job. There’s no replacement for good drawing skills, which need to be at the heart of it all. Students often try to build in 3d without considering sketching their ideas first, but 3d models can be badly drawn too. Modelling an object in 3d doesn’t improve it’s proportions if it’s badly designed in the first place.
Surely film animation is a yesterday media! With all the new Immersive Internet (II) ideas we should be focussing on in-world 3D animations for non-linear products of the future. Film animation is a dinosaur industry.
I think there will always be a place for traditional animation and I believe it should continue to be taught throughout schools. As John Lassester expressed, all animators should have the ability to draw, as computer programmes can be taught to them. For it is more difficult to teach a technologically advanced person to draw. I think the foundations of animation should continue to be taught traditionally, the artistic genius on 2D films such as disney classics or the 3D plasticine models in Aardman creations are timeless.
I actually think that there is a boundary where 3D digital aimation can go too far. The skills behind the production and graphics used are impeccible, however, the viewer is left asking why wasn’t it just filmed in live action? It would looks almost the same, be less costly and save time. I also don’t think you can beat the classic 2D cartoons. No matter how many computer generated animations come onto the screen, there will always be room for the traditionally drawn ones. I like the appeal of the characters looking like cartoon characters, being drawn and brought to life-3D animation can not overshadow nor replace the unique visual appeal of drawn medium.
I think it is essential to keep traditional methods of animation in teaching so it does not become a lost art. The amazing thing about animation is its variety of mediums and styles which can be used to captivate an audience. I think the animation industry will go back in a circle, employing more traditional methods in the future as animation would look too “samey” if everything was done on computer! I don’t really think it matters what method is used, as long as the audience is captivated both through content and on a visual level.
Animation… the future? I agree with some of the previous comments… core skills need to be maintained in understand and expressing storytelling and narrative. Equally, to be skills employable, students (and staff!) need to be software and hardware savvy. The underpinning of understanding and ‘creative visualization’ transfered 2 Dimensionally are essential…drawn to digital, back to drawing, then back to digital. Creative industry depends upon this… type designed and annotated … scamps to mac-ups in advertising…it’s a balance of skills defined by ‘process’
We see the bulk of animation work in the future will be for immersive Virtual Worlds. This means converting maya to work inside a commercial 3D Game engine.
Can anyone provide animation files for the “Jinty” steam engine in the MellaniuM Dome re: http://ec3v3.projectchainsaw.com
3D animation in Virtual Reality Worlds will become more popular. Animating machines and everyday items to inform, educate, and entertain will be an essential component of Virtual Reality.
How we teach the core skills of story telling, acting, timing, editing and sound design are indeed the essentials for any animation course. Why is then that most students are obsessed with learning software and not the key skills of film making? Software and technology are constantly changing and will continue to do so in the future at an ever increasing rate. The only constant in this equation are these core skills. Should students learn to take some responsibility for their own software development if it is likely that software will change again as soon as they leave?
I feel the Traditional versus New Digital is a false dichotomy we really have to move away from. The term ‘Preserving’ is loaded too. There are core (pre-digital) skills in animation that are as vital today as ever, but are evidenced and utilised now in different ways.
Life Drawing, study of gesture, expression, understanding of motion as dramatic performance- all these are as valid and as vital to a digital 3D animator as they ever were before. To me, Animators work with the expression of motive and emotion.
It’s not traditional methods we need to preserve, rather core skills, and it’s a matter of applying these across a range of media, depending on effectiveness.
Surely, there is no such thing as traditional animation methods? Coraline? Shot digitally, (alternate frames were assigned to L + R eyes interestingly, since a single camera had to be used to create the stereoscopy; a technique which would be madness to execute on film), heavily composited (the hairline crack of the replacement mouths/eyes were digitally removed from every face), and graded. The subject matter was the only thing that wasn’t digital. But the core animation skills made it great. We don’t need to preserve these. They should be alive in any great animator whether they use Sand, Plasticine or NURBs. How we teach those core skills through the new tools is where the action is.
The opportunities that digital technology gives to the animator are incredibly exciting, but clearly there are some things that new technology can’t improve on e.g. the simplicity and directness of drawing on paper with a pencil. Obviously one should move with the times, but don’t discard what’s useful from the past. The most innovative and inspiring animation of recent years combines old technology with new.
It’s all a big tool box and we should be open to whatever is the right tool for the job. By all means, use new technology if it means it’s easier, better, quicker, etc. Old technology can be good, but even simple cut out can be done better using new technology whilst maintaining an old style look. And don’t talk to me about the virtues of cels and cel paint, because there aren’t any! Definitely time to move on in that department.
Still, film done entirely by hand still has a valuable place. It’s a different look and feel, so like anything, it’s important to judge the most appropriate tool for what you want to achieve in the end. I like new technology for giving more creative flexibility and options which was not as easy before. Even using digital assist in traditional model animation is a great tool.
The best thing we can do is to teach the fundamentals of film making: story, character, design and originality and then let the rest go from there.
‘Fantastic Mr Fox’ (can’t wait for this to come out) and recently ‘Coraline’, are big productions which demonstrate traditional stop motion puppetry and all the traditional skills that term implies, enhanced by that elf dust that digital technology can supply. I think this is the ideal combination and have no intention of ditching ‘old’ for ‘new’ at NUCA! I would blench at going back to analogue film compositing, remember A and B rolls, give me After Effects any day!