digitalspook
01-21-2003, 01:49 PM
Its something I guess we all aspire to, and here (http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,57298,00.html) is a worthy example, proving it really is possible.
View Full Version : One Man Animation Studio
|
|
beaker
01-21-2003, 06:25 PM
Bill Plympton has been doing it for over 20 years in traditional animation. I don't see why people can't continue to do it in cgi. Very cool link, thx.
RobertoOrtiz
01-21-2003, 07:45 PM
Funny I always have thought that Bill Plympton is a very complicated acronym for a very advanced British supercomputer.
That is they only way I can explains the amazing quality of his work.
-Roberto
That is they only way I can explains the amazing quality of his work.
-Roberto
BalaBok
01-21-2003, 09:31 PM
Yeah, I remember having lunch down in Soho with Bill Plympton in '96. I was trying to get an intern gig with him. His small apartment was his studio. If I remember correctly, his kitchen was use for painting and dying cells. He had a couple of assistants painting and checking cells. His old wood animation table was next to his living room. Above the table was his colored pencil story boards. When it was time to put to film, he had a friend with an Oxberry across town.
Leonard
01-22-2003, 01:24 AM
Hey guys,
Wired has a great article on Andy Murdock's production 'LOR'. 3D Festival and CGTalk gets a nice mention in the article too! :thumbsup:
http://www.3dfestival.com/stories/2002_11/lor/robopede.jpg
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,57298,00.html
Leo
Wired has a great article on Andy Murdock's production 'LOR'. 3D Festival and CGTalk gets a nice mention in the article too! :thumbsup:
http://www.3dfestival.com/stories/2002_11/lor/robopede.jpg
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,57298,00.html
Leo
Gentle Fury
01-23-2003, 05:15 AM
no offense if the writer of that article posts here.........but......poorly done.... im sorry.....first off a feature length animation has to be at least 70 mins long...... land of robots is not near that length......30 mins tops if i recall and i dont think it was even that long.......secondly, isnt it usually a good idea to have some sort of story in a "feature" True....LOR is a gorgeous animation and a technical one man feat.......it is the same as The Minds Eye......its all eye candy...there is no real substance.....and the fact that it isnt a feature length animation makes that perfectly acceptable.....even at its much longer than standard length it is brilliant.....but in creating something like Shrek and Monsters Inc like this article referenced a LOT more is involved........those types of films can be in pre-pro for a year! There is a story and characters that you have to deal with and make believable before the first bit of animation is done!
With shorts like LOR it is fun to watch and a great stoner toy....but to compare it to monsters inc is like comparing watching a fish tank of beautiful fish to watching Finding Nemo......true they are both beautiful......full of fish......and entertaining...but im going to assume that Nemo took a LOT more to create!
and then of course the part that really pissed me off about the article :
"Final Fantasy (cost) $120 million, and about 300 people worked on it, and it was a horrible film. Throwing a whole bunch of people and money at (a film) doesn't guarantee success."
FFTM was a freakin masterpiece!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And seeing as how it is being compared with LOR then that means the story (that is the cause of so much bitching) means nothing to the discussion.......visually alone FFTM was that of a higher caliber than anything that had been produced before then!!!!
Im just really tired of people bad mouthing that movie simply because they didnt get it and the characters werent squishy and cartooney enough!!!!!
With shorts like LOR it is fun to watch and a great stoner toy....but to compare it to monsters inc is like comparing watching a fish tank of beautiful fish to watching Finding Nemo......true they are both beautiful......full of fish......and entertaining...but im going to assume that Nemo took a LOT more to create!
and then of course the part that really pissed me off about the article :
"Final Fantasy (cost) $120 million, and about 300 people worked on it, and it was a horrible film. Throwing a whole bunch of people and money at (a film) doesn't guarantee success."
FFTM was a freakin masterpiece!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And seeing as how it is being compared with LOR then that means the story (that is the cause of so much bitching) means nothing to the discussion.......visually alone FFTM was that of a higher caliber than anything that had been produced before then!!!!
Im just really tired of people bad mouthing that movie simply because they didnt get it and the characters werent squishy and cartooney enough!!!!!
beaker
01-23-2003, 06:47 AM
It says in the article that it is a works in progress:
>>By building an audience online (he estimates that 250,000 have viewed the film at his website) and releasing the finished film on DVD, he believes he can do it all himself, even if it takes 10 years.
>>By building an audience online (he estimates that 250,000 have viewed the film at his website) and releasing the finished film on DVD, he believes he can do it all himself, even if it takes 10 years.
Gentle Fury
01-23-2003, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by beaker
It says in the article that it is a works in progress:
>>By building an audience online (he estimates that 250,000 have viewed the film at his website) and releasing the finished film on DVD, he believes he can do it all himself, even if it takes 10 years.
right, but even if he can somehow build enough of a fan base....and he can come up with over 70 mins of animation.....there is still no story or characters.......who is gonna wanna watch 70 mins of animation with music in the BG (can we say Fantasia..........zzzZZZzzzZZZZzzzzzz) I could see a feature length LOR being big on the club scene (as the minds eye was...and still is in some cases)....but i couldnt see it being anything anyone would go to a theater to watch.
It says in the article that it is a works in progress:
>>By building an audience online (he estimates that 250,000 have viewed the film at his website) and releasing the finished film on DVD, he believes he can do it all himself, even if it takes 10 years.
right, but even if he can somehow build enough of a fan base....and he can come up with over 70 mins of animation.....there is still no story or characters.......who is gonna wanna watch 70 mins of animation with music in the BG (can we say Fantasia..........zzzZZZzzzZZZZzzzzzz) I could see a feature length LOR being big on the club scene (as the minds eye was...and still is in some cases)....but i couldnt see it being anything anyone would go to a theater to watch.
Leonard
01-23-2003, 07:46 AM
Posted this yesterday and merging the threads...so the above posts may not make sense.
Leo
Leo
puddlefish
01-23-2003, 08:24 AM
gentle fury: to say that the people who didn't like final fantasy didn't get it is extremely arrogant. i didn't like it. sure it looked nice blah blah blah, but as a movie it was terrible. in my opinion this was down to two main factors:
first, a second rate scriptwriter trying to find some common ground between the more spirituality driven plots of games and cliched as hell western action films.
second, some very bad character acting. the animation itself was ok, but the acting (ie. the movements that the animators chose to give their characters) was awful for the most part.
while being a technical milestone, don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
first, a second rate scriptwriter trying to find some common ground between the more spirituality driven plots of games and cliched as hell western action films.
second, some very bad character acting. the animation itself was ok, but the acting (ie. the movements that the animators chose to give their characters) was awful for the most part.
while being a technical milestone, don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
fabman
01-23-2003, 10:53 AM
what I think that it's really arrogant it's that a guy that it even hasn't finished his own film it's talking sh** about another`s film, but maybe he didn't even said that, you can't never trust the WIRED articles because they're made for people that doesn't have any idea of this subject... anyway.... I didn't like FF story either, but I have to agree with 'gentle fury' about the quality of the film.
btw. I haven't seen any lip sync sequence or anything like that in LOR, maybe he's not able to do even that.
btw. I haven't seen any lip sync sequence or anything like that in LOR, maybe he's not able to do even that.
Nurb'd
01-23-2003, 11:19 AM
Woa
that was very inspiring :applause:
that was very inspiring :applause:
noisewar
01-23-2003, 12:50 PM
Bill PLympton owns Final Fantasy the Movie.
FFTM was the biggest disappointment FF fans have had, and we're talking fans that even liked FF8, which was the first of the series to be too terrible to play.
FFTM was the biggest disappointment FF fans have had, and we're talking fans that even liked FF8, which was the first of the series to be too terrible to play.
Solesurvivor
01-23-2003, 01:24 PM
don't generalize pls, im' a FF fan too, and I think FF8 is one of the best they ever made... haven't played FFX though...
I think a lot of FF fans don't want their favourite serie to evolve with the game market, and that's why they say FF8 and later sucked....
And as for the movie, i can understand Gentle Fury about the understanding-part, when I saw the movie I was puzzled with all the different things they brought up from the games, and for someone who hasn't played the games, it is impossible to understand... Even for me some parts are still unclear:hmm:
I think a lot of FF fans don't want their favourite serie to evolve with the game market, and that's why they say FF8 and later sucked....
And as for the movie, i can understand Gentle Fury about the understanding-part, when I saw the movie I was puzzled with all the different things they brought up from the games, and for someone who hasn't played the games, it is impossible to understand... Even for me some parts are still unclear:hmm:
puddlefish
01-23-2003, 01:42 PM
which parts???!!!
it's hardly rocket science.
fabman: what?!
it's hardly rocket science.
fabman: what?!
Gentle Fury
01-23-2003, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by puddlefish
gentle fury: to say that the people who didn't like final fantasy didn't get it is extremely arrogant. i didn't like it. sure it looked nice blah blah blah, but as a movie it was terrible. in my opinion this was down to two main factors:
first, a second rate scriptwriter trying to find some common ground between the more spirituality driven plots of games and cliched as hell western action films.
second, some very bad character acting. the animation itself was ok, but the acting (ie. the movements that the animators chose to give their characters) was awful for the most part.
while being a technical milestone, don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
well, your opinion is that you didnt like it.....my opinion is that it was brilliant.......incredible story......awesome animation......in almost every way....perfect.....
wouldnt you saying :
don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
also be clearly arrogance?
dont call me arrogant for saying something was good then go and say it sucks! that isnt arrogance it is ignorance.
gentle fury: to say that the people who didn't like final fantasy didn't get it is extremely arrogant. i didn't like it. sure it looked nice blah blah blah, but as a movie it was terrible. in my opinion this was down to two main factors:
first, a second rate scriptwriter trying to find some common ground between the more spirituality driven plots of games and cliched as hell western action films.
second, some very bad character acting. the animation itself was ok, but the acting (ie. the movements that the animators chose to give their characters) was awful for the most part.
while being a technical milestone, don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
well, your opinion is that you didnt like it.....my opinion is that it was brilliant.......incredible story......awesome animation......in almost every way....perfect.....
wouldnt you saying :
don't fool yourself into thinking that it's a clever film. it's not, it's a film trying to be clever.
also be clearly arrogance?
dont call me arrogant for saying something was good then go and say it sucks! that isnt arrogance it is ignorance.
tOd
01-23-2003, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by Gentle Fury
well, your opinion is that you didnt like it.....my opinion is that it was brilliant.......incredible story......awesome animation......in almost every way....perfect.....
LOL Final fantasy a perfect movie. Man thanks for the laugh.
well, your opinion is that you didnt like it.....my opinion is that it was brilliant.......incredible story......awesome animation......in almost every way....perfect.....
LOL Final fantasy a perfect movie. Man thanks for the laugh.
eliseu gouveia
01-23-2003, 10:13 PM
Good god, please tell meI donīt have to explain yet again why FF8 was less than stellar...
vorlon
01-24-2003, 01:39 AM
I am amazed at a lot of the imagery created by artists I saw here, and I hope to create imageries as good as theirs' someday.
But being good at creating good visual imagery does not equal to being good at writing with words on paper.
Writing itself is as complicated, if not more, then creating a stunning picture. Learning to write well can take years by itself even if one concentrate on it.
One might argue that writing is harder than creating visual imagery, consider the amount of bad writing with superb VFX put out by Hollywood. Without a story, the most beautiful imagery remains just that. Final Fantasy might appeal to a few hardcore fans, but that movies fail to communicate to the public in any significant ways, except how magical Aki's hair is flowing in the air (and I agree it is stunning to watch!)
I admire a lot of people's desire to create beautiful imagery and try to write a engaging story at the same time, but I doubt most of us (including me) will ever be able to master both, due to time constraint or any other reasons. :surprised
One of the few companies out there that I think have mastered combining this task is Pixar. However, they have the best animators, AND producers, and writers, work together to produce a master piece, because each of them is good at one particular task at hand. Afterall, they are a company with many individuals (and of course they can afford to hire the best!)
But for an individual to be good at every task, from creating beautiful imagery to writing the entire script, conservatively speaking, I am not so sure at this point in time there are anyone out there who have done that. The result might be the imagery is amazing, but the story might not reach the same level as the visual (sorry to bring it up again, Final Fantasy!) There might be a few individuals out there who are exception, but I doubt most people can do both at the same time, as much as we try. I could be wrong though ;)
But being good at creating good visual imagery does not equal to being good at writing with words on paper.
Writing itself is as complicated, if not more, then creating a stunning picture. Learning to write well can take years by itself even if one concentrate on it.
One might argue that writing is harder than creating visual imagery, consider the amount of bad writing with superb VFX put out by Hollywood. Without a story, the most beautiful imagery remains just that. Final Fantasy might appeal to a few hardcore fans, but that movies fail to communicate to the public in any significant ways, except how magical Aki's hair is flowing in the air (and I agree it is stunning to watch!)
I admire a lot of people's desire to create beautiful imagery and try to write a engaging story at the same time, but I doubt most of us (including me) will ever be able to master both, due to time constraint or any other reasons. :surprised
One of the few companies out there that I think have mastered combining this task is Pixar. However, they have the best animators, AND producers, and writers, work together to produce a master piece, because each of them is good at one particular task at hand. Afterall, they are a company with many individuals (and of course they can afford to hire the best!)
But for an individual to be good at every task, from creating beautiful imagery to writing the entire script, conservatively speaking, I am not so sure at this point in time there are anyone out there who have done that. The result might be the imagery is amazing, but the story might not reach the same level as the visual (sorry to bring it up again, Final Fantasy!) There might be a few individuals out there who are exception, but I doubt most people can do both at the same time, as much as we try. I could be wrong though ;)
My Fault
01-24-2003, 05:59 AM
Originally posted by Gentle Fury
Im just really tired of people bad mouthing that movie simply because they didnt get it and the characters werent squishy and cartooney enough!!!!!
As long as your cool that many of us didn't like it because the story was trite and predictable and much of the human animation came off as stiff and unrealistic.
I did the love the creature animation and design...sweet!
Im just really tired of people bad mouthing that movie simply because they didnt get it and the characters werent squishy and cartooney enough!!!!!
As long as your cool that many of us didn't like it because the story was trite and predictable and much of the human animation came off as stiff and unrealistic.
I did the love the creature animation and design...sweet!
puddlefish
01-24-2003, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by Gentle Fury
dont call me arrogant for saying something was good then go and say it sucks! that isnt arrogance it is ignorance.
you've missed my point. of course you can think it's the best movie ever made if you want to, just as i can think it's the worst (which i don't, btw).
what i was referring to as arrogant is the fact that you suggested that the people who didn't like the film simply didn't 'get it.'
dont call me arrogant for saying something was good then go and say it sucks! that isnt arrogance it is ignorance.
you've missed my point. of course you can think it's the best movie ever made if you want to, just as i can think it's the worst (which i don't, btw).
what i was referring to as arrogant is the fact that you suggested that the people who didn't like the film simply didn't 'get it.'
Gamoron
01-24-2003, 05:02 PM
LOR is a work in progress. He states this in his website. he also stated that there will be characters involved. The story has to progress. 70 min is a long time, and we just saw the beginning. Take the first minute from a lot of films and you don't get much. I thought his imagery was beautiful and that 1 guy did it is inspiring. I love the FF games. I haven't watched the movie. I saw the trailers, all I saw were very human looking models moving like either puppets or Mickey Mouse. You can't caricature a human with a realistic human, it looks unatural.
Gentle Fury
01-24-2003, 05:20 PM
Back to Land Of Robots........yes i agree, i think what he has so far is incredible....and if there is actually going to be a story then that is awesome! I would love to actually see a small animation team (i dont care how over zealous he is......he's NOT gonna be able to do it all himself) make a feature animation........would be really cool to see it compete with the big boys.
beaker
01-24-2003, 06:10 PM
>>he's NOT gonna be able to do it all himself
Why not? Bill Plympton has done feature length cell animations by himself.
Why not? Bill Plympton has done feature length cell animations by himself.
Gentle Fury
01-25-2003, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by beaker
>>he's NOT gonna be able to do it all himself
Why not? Bill Plympton has done feature length cell animations by himself.
no, Bill Plympton has always had people helping on big projects.........even if only a few people helping in coloring, he always had people helping.
To decide to take on a feature all alone seems just too righteous an act.....whats the point, there are plenty of people out there willing to help....even if for free. every little bit helps. Anyone that is truly serious about doing a feature length animation would WANT to have others helping......while yes, in the article he said he would be willing to work on it for 10 years to get it done....is that really wise....you think what is awesome by todays standards wont be antiquated 10 years from now....thus rendering his entire effort useless.
BTW, comparing someone doing cg animation alone and someone doing cell animation alone is silly........cell animation is a timeless look....someone could take 30 years to make a cell animation (ie The Thief and The Cobbler) and it would still look nice! But trying to do a CG animation over a span of 10 years is just silly as it would kinda be like someone releasing something in par with The Minds Eye today, and saying.....well it looks like crap cuz i started it 10 years ago. I dont think anyone would really be interested anymore.
>>he's NOT gonna be able to do it all himself
Why not? Bill Plympton has done feature length cell animations by himself.
no, Bill Plympton has always had people helping on big projects.........even if only a few people helping in coloring, he always had people helping.
To decide to take on a feature all alone seems just too righteous an act.....whats the point, there are plenty of people out there willing to help....even if for free. every little bit helps. Anyone that is truly serious about doing a feature length animation would WANT to have others helping......while yes, in the article he said he would be willing to work on it for 10 years to get it done....is that really wise....you think what is awesome by todays standards wont be antiquated 10 years from now....thus rendering his entire effort useless.
BTW, comparing someone doing cg animation alone and someone doing cell animation alone is silly........cell animation is a timeless look....someone could take 30 years to make a cell animation (ie The Thief and The Cobbler) and it would still look nice! But trying to do a CG animation over a span of 10 years is just silly as it would kinda be like someone releasing something in par with The Minds Eye today, and saying.....well it looks like crap cuz i started it 10 years ago. I dont think anyone would really be interested anymore.
ed209
01-25-2003, 05:25 AM
The bigggest question I have is where do these people get the time and funding to put together projects like this. I don't know about the rest of you, but after I get home from a long day at work I find it extremly hard to motivate myself to sit down in front of a computer. It's an inspiration to see these people so dedicated to their craft.
Gentle Fury
01-25-2003, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by ed209
The bigggest question I have is where do these people get the time and funding to put together projects like this. I don't know about the rest of you, but after I get home from a long day at work I find it extremly hard to motivate myself to sit down in front of a computer. It's an inspiration to see these people so dedicated to their craft.
definatly agree :thumbsup: :beer:
The bigggest question I have is where do these people get the time and funding to put together projects like this. I don't know about the rest of you, but after I get home from a long day at work I find it extremly hard to motivate myself to sit down in front of a computer. It's an inspiration to see these people so dedicated to their craft.
definatly agree :thumbsup: :beer:
vorlon
01-25-2003, 11:51 PM
Originally posted by ed209
The bigggest question I have is where do these people get the time and funding to put together projects like this. I don't know about the rest of you, but after I get home from a long day at work I find it extremly hard to motivate myself to sit down in front of a computer. It's an inspiration to see these people so dedicated to their craft.
After working during the day in front of computer all day, when I go home I just want to lie on the sofa and watch DVDs or read a book instead of more computer in front of my face :drool:
The bigggest question I have is where do these people get the time and funding to put together projects like this. I don't know about the rest of you, but after I get home from a long day at work I find it extremly hard to motivate myself to sit down in front of a computer. It's an inspiration to see these people so dedicated to their craft.
After working during the day in front of computer all day, when I go home I just want to lie on the sofa and watch DVDs or read a book instead of more computer in front of my face :drool:
Jozvex
01-26-2003, 09:06 PM
Just in case anyone cares, it's titled 'Lots of Robots' not 'Land of Robots' hehe.
Gentle Fury
01-26-2003, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by Jozvex
Just in case anyone cares, it's titled 'Lots of Robots' not 'Land of Robots' hehe.
oh yeah thats true.....lol.....guess land of robots just flows a lot nicer than lots of robots......sounds a little more like a title should sound....lol
thats ok everytime i see LOR all i can think of is Lord Of The Robots......lol
Just in case anyone cares, it's titled 'Lots of Robots' not 'Land of Robots' hehe.
oh yeah thats true.....lol.....guess land of robots just flows a lot nicer than lots of robots......sounds a little more like a title should sound....lol
thats ok everytime i see LOR all i can think of is Lord Of The Robots......lol
Jozvex
01-27-2003, 07:12 AM
hehe yeah me too!
anieves
01-28-2003, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by Gentle Fury
right, but even if he can somehow build enough of a fan base....and he can come up with over 70 mins of animation.....there is still no story or characters.......who is gonna wanna watch 70 mins of animation with music in the BG (can we say Fantasia..........zzzZZZzzzZZZZzzzzzz) I could see a feature length LOR being big on the club scene (as the minds eye was...and still is in some cases)....but i couldnt see it being anything anyone would go to a theater to watch.
Remember the "Minds Eye" video series?
animation with no storyline... it was pretty successful, wasn't it?
right, but even if he can somehow build enough of a fan base....and he can come up with over 70 mins of animation.....there is still no story or characters.......who is gonna wanna watch 70 mins of animation with music in the BG (can we say Fantasia..........zzzZZZzzzZZZZzzzzzz) I could see a feature length LOR being big on the club scene (as the minds eye was...and still is in some cases)....but i couldnt see it being anything anyone would go to a theater to watch.
Remember the "Minds Eye" video series?
animation with no storyline... it was pretty successful, wasn't it?
Titus
01-28-2003, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by anieves
Remember the "Minds Eye" video series?
animation with no storyline... it was pretty successful, wasn't it?
Yeah, 12 years ago.
Remember the "Minds Eye" video series?
animation with no storyline... it was pretty successful, wasn't it?
Yeah, 12 years ago.
vorlon
01-28-2003, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by Titus
Yeah, 12 years ago.
LOL so true! :thumbsup:
Even now, a gloriously render movie without an actual story like Final Fantasy is a bust
Yeah, 12 years ago.
LOL so true! :thumbsup:
Even now, a gloriously render movie without an actual story like Final Fantasy is a bust
puddlefish
01-29-2003, 07:43 AM
final fantasy did have a story, just a bad one.
i think it is very possible (and kind of desirable) to have an animation with no narrative story. take a look at the film baraka. fantastic visuals and soundtrack, with no 'story' as such. it's an amazing film.
same goes for koyanisquatsi (spelling?).
a display of accomplished choreography and visual interest can hold interest for a long time. i think it would be somewhat refreshing. computer animation is becoming so much more a technical forum than a creative one, i think it would be nice to see a well done piece carried out in a much more impressionistic manner.
i think it is very possible (and kind of desirable) to have an animation with no narrative story. take a look at the film baraka. fantastic visuals and soundtrack, with no 'story' as such. it's an amazing film.
same goes for koyanisquatsi (spelling?).
a display of accomplished choreography and visual interest can hold interest for a long time. i think it would be somewhat refreshing. computer animation is becoming so much more a technical forum than a creative one, i think it would be nice to see a well done piece carried out in a much more impressionistic manner.
CGTalk Moderation
01-14-2006, 05:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.