FloydBishop
02-26-2007, 02:45 AM
A bit of an upset this year, but "Happy Feet" wins the Oscar for Best Animated Feature. Congratulations to Animal Logic and the whole "Happy Feet" crew.
View Full Version : Happy Feet Wins the Oscar for Best Animated Feature!!
|
|
agreenster
02-26-2007, 02:50 AM
CGTalk! YOUR source for up-to-the-minute oscar news!!
On the ball there Mr. Bishop ;) Hehe
Congrats to all the people who worked on Happy Feet!! Thats a distinguished honor!
On the ball there Mr. Bishop ;) Hehe
Congrats to all the people who worked on Happy Feet!! Thats a distinguished honor!
DuttyFoot
02-26-2007, 02:54 AM
its nice to see that they won an oscar for happy feet.
gio
02-26-2007, 03:36 AM
Yes, congratulations to all involved in "Happy Feet"! I'm really glad it won since it was just a damn fun movie to watch. More than any other animated film last year, this one really
gave me a big fat smile as I exited out of the theatre. Again, congrats!!
gave me a big fat smile as I exited out of the theatre. Again, congrats!!
cresshead
02-26-2007, 04:49 AM
who were the other nomenees?
well done indeed!
well done indeed!
gunslingerblack
02-26-2007, 06:32 AM
sux considering that only 1 of the 3 nominated films were actually ANIMATED
but oh well i guess happy feet had a better story... that or it could have just been that it had penguins
btw im the farthest thing from a pixar fanboy, it's just that i like my animated films to actually be animated and not acted out by men in suits with dots on them, oh well though next year there will be a whole slew of animated movies to fill the category out, looking forward to it.
but oh well i guess happy feet had a better story... that or it could have just been that it had penguins
btw im the farthest thing from a pixar fanboy, it's just that i like my animated films to actually be animated and not acted out by men in suits with dots on them, oh well though next year there will be a whole slew of animated movies to fill the category out, looking forward to it.
eek
02-26-2007, 06:42 AM
Rahul, you did good man - congrats!
raffael3d
02-26-2007, 07:47 AM
sux considering that only 1 of the 3 nominated films were actually ANIMATED
but oh well i guess happy feet had a better story... that or it could have just been that it had penguins
btw im the farthest thing from a pixar fanboy, it's just that i like my animated films to actually be animated and not acted out by men in suits with dots on them, oh well though next year there will be a whole slew of animated movies to fill the category out, looking forward to it.
the claim that because some mocap was used in a feature to call it "not animated" is just silly.
but oh well i guess happy feet had a better story... that or it could have just been that it had penguins
btw im the farthest thing from a pixar fanboy, it's just that i like my animated films to actually be animated and not acted out by men in suits with dots on them, oh well though next year there will be a whole slew of animated movies to fill the category out, looking forward to it.
the claim that because some mocap was used in a feature to call it "not animated" is just silly.
FloydBishop
02-26-2007, 07:47 AM
sux considering that only 1 of the 3 nominated films were actually ANIMATED
That's like saying the computers make the computer animation. How about some respect for the guys and gals at Sony and Animal Logic who animated on "Monster House" and "Happy Feet"?
That's like saying the computers make the computer animation. How about some respect for the guys and gals at Sony and Animal Logic who animated on "Monster House" and "Happy Feet"?
vfx
02-26-2007, 08:07 AM
A bit of an upset - Ummm no!! Let's not have a world where PIXAR win hands down every darn year! I actually enjoyed Happy Feet more than Cars - definitely wasn't the strongest Pixar film. Also I think it's very good for Pixar to see theirs competition out there - animators and studios that can rival their supermacy. Sure the rats will pick something up next year.
:) Well done animal logic!!
:) Well done animal logic!!
anishmations
02-26-2007, 08:40 AM
That's like saying the computers make the computer animation. How about some respect for the guys and gals at Sony and Animal Logic who animated on "Monster House" and "Happy Feet"?
well said bro!
Me too loved the Penguin movie more than the Car movie as an entertainer.
Congrats to Animal Logic for winning it for their 1st full CG feature...
Please do come up with more awesome stuff!
Pixar's Ratatouille mite get to the top next year..lets wait.
By the way, can anyone help me find a place where I can download/watch "The Danish Poet", which won the oscar for the best animated short film ?
well said bro!
Me too loved the Penguin movie more than the Car movie as an entertainer.
Congrats to Animal Logic for winning it for their 1st full CG feature...
Please do come up with more awesome stuff!
Pixar's Ratatouille mite get to the top next year..lets wait.
By the way, can anyone help me find a place where I can download/watch "The Danish Poet", which won the oscar for the best animated short film ?
Obraxis
02-26-2007, 08:41 AM
Congrats guys - I had an old College friend who worked on that movie at Animal. Great stuff!
Pixar not winning might be a good thing, as it might get them to up their game :) Long live competition!
Pixar not winning might be a good thing, as it might get them to up their game :) Long live competition!
FloydBishop
02-26-2007, 08:52 AM
By the way, can anyone help me find a place where I can download/watch "The Danish Poet", which won the oscar for the best animated short film ?
You can visit the AWN Oscar Showcase (http://www.awn.com/oscars07/).
The way the rules are set up, you can't have the entire film online before the Oscars. These clips are probably your best bet for now, but the full films may show up online sometime soon, now that the Oscars are over.
You can visit the AWN Oscar Showcase (http://www.awn.com/oscars07/).
The way the rules are set up, you can't have the entire film online before the Oscars. These clips are probably your best bet for now, but the full films may show up online sometime soon, now that the Oscars are over.
almux
02-26-2007, 08:52 AM
Yeah! Wen't with wife and 5 years old son andit was just beautifull!
Great 3d, great scenario and... great ground philosophy!
Everithing for a great and awaykening entertainement!
Great 3d, great scenario and... great ground philosophy!
Everithing for a great and awaykening entertainement!
siouxfire
02-26-2007, 09:21 AM
Here. Here. Congratulations to the Happy Feet team.
mdee
02-26-2007, 09:40 AM
Congratulations to everyone at Animal Logic, way to go!!
CoolCalb
02-26-2007, 09:47 AM
Congrats to Animal Logic!!!
I must say I was so surprized by Happy Feet, it was by far one of the best movies
I have seen this year... animation or live action..
Cars was the most boring Pixar movie ever.
The thing that most impressed me in Happy Feet, was the eyes animation on those pinguins... by far the best eye animation I've ever seen in an animated movie.
I must say I was so surprized by Happy Feet, it was by far one of the best movies
I have seen this year... animation or live action..
Cars was the most boring Pixar movie ever.
The thing that most impressed me in Happy Feet, was the eyes animation on those pinguins... by far the best eye animation I've ever seen in an animated movie.
MrPositive
02-26-2007, 10:00 AM
I called it! woohoo The movie shocked me at it's quality and amazing graphics. The scene where they are walking through the blizzard will be emblazoned in my mind forever. Awesome!
streetsy
02-26-2007, 10:14 AM
Well Done fella's.
A lot of people gave all they had for this film. It was... an experience!
And to all the animators who worked on Happy Feet. Remember not everyone thinks you don't exist. (Yeah there was Mocap but there also an absolute truckload of real keframed animation)
Good on ya!
A lot of people gave all they had for this film. It was... an experience!
And to all the animators who worked on Happy Feet. Remember not everyone thinks you don't exist. (Yeah there was Mocap but there also an absolute truckload of real keframed animation)
Good on ya!
SimonPickard
02-26-2007, 10:17 AM
Wooohooo! Happy Feet won! Amazing!
Congratulations to everyone who had a hand in the making of this movie, including the other Studios outside of Animal!
It seems so long ago now that we were all sat there working our socks off, and now look at what it's done, everyone should feel very proud. :)
I bet there are going to be some sore heads around the world today! Hic!
All the best,
Regards,
Simon.
Congratulations to everyone who had a hand in the making of this movie, including the other Studios outside of Animal!
It seems so long ago now that we were all sat there working our socks off, and now look at what it's done, everyone should feel very proud. :)
I bet there are going to be some sore heads around the world today! Hic!
All the best,
Regards,
Simon.
artisanfx
02-26-2007, 10:34 AM
Congratulations to everyone who worked on this film http://forums.cgsociety.org/images/icons/icon13.gifhttp://forums.cgsociety.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
The scene where they are walking through the blizzard will be emblazoned in my mind forever. Awesome!
Yes me to it was amazing :)
The scene where they are walking through the blizzard will be emblazoned in my mind forever. Awesome!
Yes me to it was amazing :)
Njen
02-26-2007, 11:14 AM
I called it! woohoo The movie shocked me at it's quality and amazing graphics. The scene where they are walking through the blizzard will be emblazoned in my mind forever. Awesome!
That shot was lit and composited by a very talented Mr. Max Liani. Well done Max, it too was one of my favorite shots of the entire film!
Working on Happy Feet was a great experiance, there were lot's of growing pains for Animal Logic, but I am sure that in the end it was all worth it. There are not many companies who do an animated film for the first time and win the Oscar for it :)
That shot was lit and composited by a very talented Mr. Max Liani. Well done Max, it too was one of my favorite shots of the entire film!
Working on Happy Feet was a great experiance, there were lot's of growing pains for Animal Logic, but I am sure that in the end it was all worth it. There are not many companies who do an animated film for the first time and win the Oscar for it :)
requiem2d
02-26-2007, 11:46 AM
That's awesome, still have to see it :D
Slurry
02-26-2007, 03:24 PM
That's like saying the computers make the computer animation. How about some respect for the guys and gals at Sony and Animal Logic who animated on "Monster House" and "Happy Feet"?
No it isn't. It's nothing like that. He said specifically what he meant. It was a bunch of actors in suits driving the performance. Not animators. Not to say animators were not involved and crucial to the performance.
I don't think he's disrepecting anyone. Just making a distinction that the movie that won the best animated Oscar had less animation in it than movies that were completely animated and didn't make the final cut.
That said, Happy Feet was a great movie and on the merits of the entire film and all the hard work that everyone did on the film, it deserved the recognition it got from the Academy.
There is a lot more to an animated film than the animation. Models, lighting, texturing, rigging, etc...All were top notch in HF and blew me away.
Congrats Animal Logic and Sony (didn't know they were involved!) for a wonderful film. One of the best I saw from last year (all genres).
No it isn't. It's nothing like that. He said specifically what he meant. It was a bunch of actors in suits driving the performance. Not animators. Not to say animators were not involved and crucial to the performance.
I don't think he's disrepecting anyone. Just making a distinction that the movie that won the best animated Oscar had less animation in it than movies that were completely animated and didn't make the final cut.
That said, Happy Feet was a great movie and on the merits of the entire film and all the hard work that everyone did on the film, it deserved the recognition it got from the Academy.
There is a lot more to an animated film than the animation. Models, lighting, texturing, rigging, etc...All were top notch in HF and blew me away.
Congrats Animal Logic and Sony (didn't know they were involved!) for a wonderful film. One of the best I saw from last year (all genres).
cresshead
02-26-2007, 03:53 PM
''Happy Feet Wins the Oscar for Best Animated Feature''
let's clear couple of things up...see this>Best Animated Feature
i think everyone has a good grasp of the meaning of the first and last word but there seem to be some confusion with the word 'animated'
so let's go and read the definition of 'animation' as found on google.
1.Animation is the technique in which each frame of a film or movie is produced individually, whether generated as a computer graphic, or by photographing a drawn image, or by repeatedly making small changes to a model unit (see claymation and stop motion), and then photographing the result with a special animation camera. ...
2.A simulation of movement created by displaying a series of images through frames. Digital animation is a primary component of multimedia presentations. One example of animation software is Adobe Premiere.
3.Animation is the creating of a timed sequence or series of graphic images or frames together to give the appearance of continuous movement.
4.Using single-frame filming of objects to create the impression of movement. Most animations will also belong to other categories – for example, drama, pilot.
5.Any change of a parameter over time. Generally refers to a change in position of the video frame, moving the video over a background while it plays.
6.The use of computer instructions to simulate motion of an object on the screen through gradual, progressive movements.
7.Technique by which inanimate objects seem to come alive by flashing a series of minutely changed images, called “cells,” at a rate which the brain interprets as movement. See also, Cell and Persistence of Vision.
8.A technique where successive still frames of a particular object appear to constitute a seemless sequence of movements.
9.Use for person(s) responsible for the arts, techniques, and processes involved in photographically or electronically giving apparent movement to inanimate objects or drawings, often by means of photographing the objects or drawings one frame at a time, each time so slightly different that, when projected in sequence, they appear to move. Use this term for directors and producers of animation.
10.A series of changes to an item over time. This can be position, scale, rotation, color, etc. The author defines a set of Key Frames over an interval divided by time steps. The browser interpolates or calculates the intermediate positions between defined key frames.
11.The movement of elements through time and space. Also, the process of creating and recording images that change over time. Everything in a scene is represented by numeric values and, as such, animation is also the process of changing these values-position, color, or any other property-over time.
12.Movement of either light or mechanical action.
so...read that?
good!
now we're sorted!:thumbsup:
seems to me that a few ''3d hand keyer animators'' only believe that hand keying can be called animation and that motion capture/performance capture/ and maybe even the tweening a computer does in between handkeys is NOT animation...
well todays the day to enlighten everyone as this ANIMATED film won an oscar.
i've yet to see the film but will do so as soon as it's out on dvd.
i can see where they're coming from but unless there's new oscars for hand drawn, claymation, motion capture, hand keyed etc we'll have to make do with a single catergory!
let's clear couple of things up...see this>Best Animated Feature
i think everyone has a good grasp of the meaning of the first and last word but there seem to be some confusion with the word 'animated'
so let's go and read the definition of 'animation' as found on google.
1.Animation is the technique in which each frame of a film or movie is produced individually, whether generated as a computer graphic, or by photographing a drawn image, or by repeatedly making small changes to a model unit (see claymation and stop motion), and then photographing the result with a special animation camera. ...
2.A simulation of movement created by displaying a series of images through frames. Digital animation is a primary component of multimedia presentations. One example of animation software is Adobe Premiere.
3.Animation is the creating of a timed sequence or series of graphic images or frames together to give the appearance of continuous movement.
4.Using single-frame filming of objects to create the impression of movement. Most animations will also belong to other categories – for example, drama, pilot.
5.Any change of a parameter over time. Generally refers to a change in position of the video frame, moving the video over a background while it plays.
6.The use of computer instructions to simulate motion of an object on the screen through gradual, progressive movements.
7.Technique by which inanimate objects seem to come alive by flashing a series of minutely changed images, called “cells,” at a rate which the brain interprets as movement. See also, Cell and Persistence of Vision.
8.A technique where successive still frames of a particular object appear to constitute a seemless sequence of movements.
9.Use for person(s) responsible for the arts, techniques, and processes involved in photographically or electronically giving apparent movement to inanimate objects or drawings, often by means of photographing the objects or drawings one frame at a time, each time so slightly different that, when projected in sequence, they appear to move. Use this term for directors and producers of animation.
10.A series of changes to an item over time. This can be position, scale, rotation, color, etc. The author defines a set of Key Frames over an interval divided by time steps. The browser interpolates or calculates the intermediate positions between defined key frames.
11.The movement of elements through time and space. Also, the process of creating and recording images that change over time. Everything in a scene is represented by numeric values and, as such, animation is also the process of changing these values-position, color, or any other property-over time.
12.Movement of either light or mechanical action.
so...read that?
good!
now we're sorted!:thumbsup:
seems to me that a few ''3d hand keyer animators'' only believe that hand keying can be called animation and that motion capture/performance capture/ and maybe even the tweening a computer does in between handkeys is NOT animation...
well todays the day to enlighten everyone as this ANIMATED film won an oscar.
i've yet to see the film but will do so as soon as it's out on dvd.
i can see where they're coming from but unless there's new oscars for hand drawn, claymation, motion capture, hand keyed etc we'll have to make do with a single catergory!
Njen
02-26-2007, 07:06 PM
No it isn't. It's nothing like that. He said specifically what he meant. It was a bunch of actors in suits driving the performance. Not animators. Not to say animators were not involved and crucial to the performance.
I don't think he's disrepecting anyone. Just making a distinction that the movie that won the best animated Oscar had less animation in it than movies that were completely animated and didn't make the final cut.
Ok, first of all, you sound exactly like the 2D animators when 3D started to hit the big time. They were all like: "but it's not animation when a computer does it for you!" I am sure you know that is not the truth. People like you are just scared of change, so you throw all these 'rules' as to what animation must be, much like the 2D animation who threw the same argument at the entire 3D production process. There are are no 'rules' to animation. You do what you must to make it.
When motion capture is used more and more, in the future we will see complex AI that will do the movement for us, and the motion capture actors will use the same argument you are using, against the AI programmers, which was the same argument that the 2D animators used: "that's not animation! Because it must be like this and that!". LIke I said, there are no rules, just adapt.
Congrats Animal Logic and Sony (didn't know they were involved!) for a wonderful film. One of the best I saw from last year (all genres).
Sony involved with Happy Feet? Where did you get that info?
I don't think he's disrepecting anyone. Just making a distinction that the movie that won the best animated Oscar had less animation in it than movies that were completely animated and didn't make the final cut.
Ok, first of all, you sound exactly like the 2D animators when 3D started to hit the big time. They were all like: "but it's not animation when a computer does it for you!" I am sure you know that is not the truth. People like you are just scared of change, so you throw all these 'rules' as to what animation must be, much like the 2D animation who threw the same argument at the entire 3D production process. There are are no 'rules' to animation. You do what you must to make it.
When motion capture is used more and more, in the future we will see complex AI that will do the movement for us, and the motion capture actors will use the same argument you are using, against the AI programmers, which was the same argument that the 2D animators used: "that's not animation! Because it must be like this and that!". LIke I said, there are no rules, just adapt.
Congrats Animal Logic and Sony (didn't know they were involved!) for a wonderful film. One of the best I saw from last year (all genres).
Sony involved with Happy Feet? Where did you get that info?
FloydBishop
02-26-2007, 07:55 PM
Sony involved with Happy Feet? Where did you get that info?
That's probably from my previous, poorly worded post.
Sony worked on "Monster House", which used motion capture in some degree. I mentioned them and their movie in the same sentence as Animal Logic and "Happy Feet".
Sony did not work on "Happy Feet".
That's probably from my previous, poorly worded post.
Sony worked on "Monster House", which used motion capture in some degree. I mentioned them and their movie in the same sentence as Animal Logic and "Happy Feet".
Sony did not work on "Happy Feet".
cresshead
02-26-2007, 08:55 PM
here's an oscar question, has any animated film [cartoon etc] won the best picture catergory in the past?
..okay just searched google and no animated film looked to have won a best feature oscar.
..okay just searched google and no animated film looked to have won a best feature oscar.
FloydBishop
02-26-2007, 09:13 PM
here's an oscar question, has any animated film [cartoon etc] won the best picture catergory in the past?
http://www.oscars.org/aboutacademyawards/images/honorary6.jpg
Walt Disney and presenter Shirley Temple with his unusual 1938 Oscar for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. At the time the Honorary Award was known as the Special Award. It was Disney's second Special Award and his ninth Oscar. He had a third Special Award, the Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award and fifteen more Oscars to go.
I think that's as close as any film has gotten. The came out with the "Best Animated Feature" award in 2001 when "Shrek" came out.
http://www.oscars.org/aboutacademyawards/images/honorary6.jpg
Walt Disney and presenter Shirley Temple with his unusual 1938 Oscar for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. At the time the Honorary Award was known as the Special Award. It was Disney's second Special Award and his ninth Oscar. He had a third Special Award, the Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award and fifteen more Oscars to go.
I think that's as close as any film has gotten. The came out with the "Best Animated Feature" award in 2001 when "Shrek" came out.
Slurry
02-26-2007, 09:44 PM
Ok, first of all, you sound exactly like the 2D animators when 3D started to hit the big time. They were all like: "but it's not animation when a computer does it for you!" I am sure you know that is not the truth. People like you are just scared of change, so you throw all these 'rules' as to what animation must be, much like the 2D animation who threw the same argument at the entire 3D production process. There are are no 'rules' to animation. You do what you must to make it.
When motion capture is used more and more, in the future we will see complex AI that will do the movement for us, and the motion capture actors will use the same argument you are using, against the AI programmers, which was the same argument that the 2D animators used: "that's not animation! Because it must be like this and that!". LIke I said, there are no rules, just adapt.
Sony involved with Happy Feet? Where did you get that info?
Whoa! Easy there big boy. I am not criticizing or putting down mocap. I've worked with both. And when I worked with mocap, even though my title suggested otherwise, I do not believe I was doing animation. I was augmenting it, fixing it, etc but I certainly wasn't animating.
I just think they are different and I don't agree that they should be called or defined the same.
People like me...? Man, you are way too sensitive and insecure. You should really watch the generalisations. Keep in mind this is a message board and it can be difficult to read somebody's tone or point of view. Just because somebody has a different opinion, it doesn't mean they are trying to pick a fight or create a hostile environment. It's just a discussion.
You see it one way, I see it another.
To me, animation is a process and an artform. Mocap is an entirely different process used to achieve similar results.
To use an anlogy (which is also dangerous on a message board because it can be easily misinterpreted) You can fly to San Franciso from New York. I can drive to San Francisco from New York. We arrived in the same destination but you took one method of transportaion, I took another.
Flying is different from driving.
And Floyd is correct, I mistook his post about Sony working on Happy Feet. Trouble with forums I tells ya! :)
When motion capture is used more and more, in the future we will see complex AI that will do the movement for us, and the motion capture actors will use the same argument you are using, against the AI programmers, which was the same argument that the 2D animators used: "that's not animation! Because it must be like this and that!". LIke I said, there are no rules, just adapt.
Sony involved with Happy Feet? Where did you get that info?
Whoa! Easy there big boy. I am not criticizing or putting down mocap. I've worked with both. And when I worked with mocap, even though my title suggested otherwise, I do not believe I was doing animation. I was augmenting it, fixing it, etc but I certainly wasn't animating.
I just think they are different and I don't agree that they should be called or defined the same.
People like me...? Man, you are way too sensitive and insecure. You should really watch the generalisations. Keep in mind this is a message board and it can be difficult to read somebody's tone or point of view. Just because somebody has a different opinion, it doesn't mean they are trying to pick a fight or create a hostile environment. It's just a discussion.
You see it one way, I see it another.
To me, animation is a process and an artform. Mocap is an entirely different process used to achieve similar results.
To use an anlogy (which is also dangerous on a message board because it can be easily misinterpreted) You can fly to San Franciso from New York. I can drive to San Francisco from New York. We arrived in the same destination but you took one method of transportaion, I took another.
Flying is different from driving.
And Floyd is correct, I mistook his post about Sony working on Happy Feet. Trouble with forums I tells ya! :)
lostpencil
02-26-2007, 10:17 PM
I agree with Slurry. Happy Feet, to me, is not an animated film and therefore is not in the same category as Cars. Mocap and animation are two different beasts. When talking about what animation is, you do get a lot of definitions - most of them are technical. The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft (more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process. Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
siouxfire
02-26-2007, 11:02 PM
Wow. Is this really the right time and place to get into this kind of debate?
MrPositive
02-26-2007, 11:28 PM
Sometimes, I just wish that 'computer animation' was not used to describe 3D in general. By saying the movie is nothing but animation is a discredit to everything else that helped Happy Feet win. I enjoyed the blizzard shot, not so much for the animation (ok somewhat) but also the ambiance and intensity of the scene. Which were categories of modeling, particle effects, lighting, etc. The category should simply be Best Cartoon (or 3D) Movie of the Year, regardless of how it was created. It's the end product and it's entertainment and storytelling value that counts in the end, not whether Ramon was motion captured or not.
leftyfallat
02-26-2007, 11:33 PM
I agree with Slurry. Happy Feet, to me, is not an animated film and therefore is not in the same category as Cars. Mocap and animation are two different beasts. When talking about what animation is, you do get a lot of definitions - most of them are technical. The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft (more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process.
Yes Happy Feet used mocap...so what. I know for a fact that alot of the animation was key-framed without the use of mocap. I've seen that some of the dance sequences used mocap where there were a large number of characters. I would see this as more of a technique to preserve the choreography and to keep continuity rather than having a handful of animators try and hand-key a few dozen penguins. It's just not nearly as efficient. I'm not sure how much of the movie used mocap but I know there was alot that was hand-keyed.
Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
That's like saying DiCaprio can't be nominated for best actor in Departed because he didn't really get shot in the head.
Yes Happy Feet used mocap...so what. I know for a fact that alot of the animation was key-framed without the use of mocap. I've seen that some of the dance sequences used mocap where there were a large number of characters. I would see this as more of a technique to preserve the choreography and to keep continuity rather than having a handful of animators try and hand-key a few dozen penguins. It's just not nearly as efficient. I'm not sure how much of the movie used mocap but I know there was alot that was hand-keyed.
Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
That's like saying DiCaprio can't be nominated for best actor in Departed because he didn't really get shot in the head.
JoshBowman
02-26-2007, 11:44 PM
I really don't care about the mo-cap/animated debate but quite frankly I can't understand how (unless you look at box-office numbers) Happy Feet could be considered a good film. It was LAME, had bland backgrounds, bland characters, had a haphazard story, and tried to push a rather pathetic view point.
Moster House was a far more enjoyable film and really should have won because it didn't try to shove and environmental/religious view point down my throat and was just a fun experience. Pixars film was rather predictable and I didn't really enjoy it so I wasn't suprised when it didn't win but HAPPY FEET, come on.
Moster House was a far more enjoyable film and really should have won because it didn't try to shove and environmental/religious view point down my throat and was just a fun experience. Pixars film was rather predictable and I didn't really enjoy it so I wasn't suprised when it didn't win but HAPPY FEET, come on.
artifish
02-27-2007, 12:07 AM
The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft (more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process.
But it's an award for an animated film - not for character animators. Some of the animation was created using the captured performance of actors (who are part of the team, too - and I doubt they'd agree that their work is not a creative one and they are just moving their limbs around). But I agree it makes for a different style.
Congrats to the whale sequence team, too - how did you manage to glue those markers onto the beasts so they'd stick under water? :-)
But it's an award for an animated film - not for character animators. Some of the animation was created using the captured performance of actors (who are part of the team, too - and I doubt they'd agree that their work is not a creative one and they are just moving their limbs around). But I agree it makes for a different style.
Congrats to the whale sequence team, too - how did you manage to glue those markers onto the beasts so they'd stick under water? :-)
jewalker
02-27-2007, 01:06 AM
Beauty and the Beast was nominated but didn't win.
here's an oscar question, has any animated film [cartoon etc] won the best picture catergory in the past?
..okay just searched google and no animated film looked to have won a best feature oscar.
here's an oscar question, has any animated film [cartoon etc] won the best picture catergory in the past?
..okay just searched google and no animated film looked to have won a best feature oscar.
Njen
02-27-2007, 02:15 AM
I agree with Slurry. Happy Feet, to me, is not an animated film and therefore is not in the same category as Cars. Mocap and animation are two different beasts.
2D and 3D are two different beasts, yet no one seems to have trouble putting them in the same category. Go and have a chat with the 2D animators who are saying exactly the same things about your 3D animation job. You are repeating word for word what they have said in the past. History repeats.
When talking about what animation is, you do get a lot of definitions - most of them are technical. The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft(more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process.
Firstly, you are stepping a fine line by insulting the animators who worked on Happy Feet. I bet they did a lot more than just "copying". How do you know for sure what percentage was animated and motion captured? You don't.
But like I said before. It matters not what you or I think. Happy Feet is an animation, as was created by animators, modelers, lighting artists, etc who crafted a performance from motion, form and light.
Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
Ok, now that's being silly, and you are insulting all the modelers/texture artists/lighters/story writers/compositors/the director himself/and animators who worked hard on the film. I am sorry to say that pure caracter animation alone does not a film make, you need everyone, else you simply don't have an animated film. Now try telling everyone else who worked on the film that Happy Feet was not an animation and you will be hard pressed to find agreement amongst anyone of us.
Though I think artifish said it best of all:
But it's an award for an animated film - not for character animators.
And that is the bottom line.
2D and 3D are two different beasts, yet no one seems to have trouble putting them in the same category. Go and have a chat with the 2D animators who are saying exactly the same things about your 3D animation job. You are repeating word for word what they have said in the past. History repeats.
When talking about what animation is, you do get a lot of definitions - most of them are technical. The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft(more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process.
Firstly, you are stepping a fine line by insulting the animators who worked on Happy Feet. I bet they did a lot more than just "copying". How do you know for sure what percentage was animated and motion captured? You don't.
But like I said before. It matters not what you or I think. Happy Feet is an animation, as was created by animators, modelers, lighting artists, etc who crafted a performance from motion, form and light.
Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
Ok, now that's being silly, and you are insulting all the modelers/texture artists/lighters/story writers/compositors/the director himself/and animators who worked hard on the film. I am sorry to say that pure caracter animation alone does not a film make, you need everyone, else you simply don't have an animated film. Now try telling everyone else who worked on the film that Happy Feet was not an animation and you will be hard pressed to find agreement amongst anyone of us.
Though I think artifish said it best of all:
But it's an award for an animated film - not for character animators.
And that is the bottom line.
Rick May
02-27-2007, 02:18 AM
You can visit the AWN Oscar Showcase (http://www.awn.com/oscars07/).
The way the rules are set up, you can't have the entire film online before the Oscars. These clips are probably your best bet for now, but the full films may show up online sometime soon, now that the Oscars are over.
Actually, I believe the rule is that you cannot show the film online before it meets the requirements to become eligible for nomination. After you meet those requirements (most likely met months and months ago on that particular film) you can show it online in its entirety.
The way the rules are set up, you can't have the entire film online before the Oscars. These clips are probably your best bet for now, but the full films may show up online sometime soon, now that the Oscars are over.
Actually, I believe the rule is that you cannot show the film online before it meets the requirements to become eligible for nomination. After you meet those requirements (most likely met months and months ago on that particular film) you can show it online in its entirety.
EvilGnome
02-27-2007, 02:56 AM
Congratulations and well done to Animal Logic for Happy Feet.
What stood out for me was the often stunning lighting and cinematography, brilliant stuff.
I think the issue with 'motion capture' that many are failing to put into words is this: Performance capture lessens the contribution of the animator to the performance of the character.
It's obvious that performance capture is here to stay, but it is also obvious that it cannot deliver all that many have promised and so there will always be a place for animators to fix/enhance/contribute.
For my personal taste I find performance capture doesn't achieve the same aesthetic beauty of posed and keyframed animation, but it does deliver more realistic motion and spontaneity for directors.
To me it's another tool for the tool box, it doesn't replace the other tools, but gives more options.
What stood out for me was the often stunning lighting and cinematography, brilliant stuff.
I think the issue with 'motion capture' that many are failing to put into words is this: Performance capture lessens the contribution of the animator to the performance of the character.
It's obvious that performance capture is here to stay, but it is also obvious that it cannot deliver all that many have promised and so there will always be a place for animators to fix/enhance/contribute.
For my personal taste I find performance capture doesn't achieve the same aesthetic beauty of posed and keyframed animation, but it does deliver more realistic motion and spontaneity for directors.
To me it's another tool for the tool box, it doesn't replace the other tools, but gives more options.
robinteo
02-27-2007, 06:44 AM
I think Happy Feet has a bit of misfortunate perception that the whole film is done with mocap. Certain parts were mocaped and some parts were purely animated by the looks of it. When I first watched Happy Feet, I did not know much about the process behind it, only knew it was a cg feature. There were certain parts of the dancing which had a mocap feel, and there were some parts of the film that were greatly animated. I certainly enjoyed the part that were well animated. The mocap, esp. with some of the dancing routine, looks a bit floaty for the big penguins, as if the feet didn't have a hard contact or enough contact on the ground or snow. Story wise, Happy Feet is different, refreshing and flawed in some ways. Towards the end it felt disjointed or rushed. As an audience I didn't know what to make of it when live footage of humans were introduced to contrast against the cg penguins and the cg world. I understand the intend or the effort to make humans look more like aliens to the world of the penguins. I felt that somehow its not working as well. Perhaps something can be done there to improve it. The cinematography and the richness of the visuals were great. The short penguins were really enjoyable, and much of that I believe was animated.
Maybe much of Happy Feet's reputation among certain group of the animation community is misjudged due to Miller's own comment about how even the greatest animators in the world could not capture the nuances of tap dancing's performance, and only mocap could do a better job. In that light I would disagree since animators can use reference well to their advantage even to create subtle moves. After looking at Mary Poppin's very successful segment on tap dancing penguins as an example, there's no doubt about the strength of well made animation vs just motion captured motion.
I guess the controversy lies in that some people wants to see animated films remain purely in the animated category but others would say there's no difference. Whether mocap should be part of it, and I don't have any conclusion on that. But if mocap can be used to make great animation shots, why not? If it distracts audience, well, its just mediocre or worst bad animation in the end right?
I figure as well that the category shouldn't be taken as seriously since the way the Academy goes about categorising film for nomination just from a brief observation is inconsistent. Arthur and the Invisibles was left out even though it was what seems to be an animated film, it was said to have too many live action footage to be considered as an animated feature nominee. In the end, the category shouldn't matter as much as whether the story was well told and well made as a cg feature. Having said that, you don't even need to win Oscars to be affirmed the film is good or not. Take Monster's Inc for example, that's one of the most beloved animation, pack with great fun and emotions, well paced and well crafted story, and great animation but didn't receive an Oscar.
Happy Feet to me has flaws in some parts of its story telling, but it was enjoyable along the way. Overall there were many parts of the production that was well made and animated. More than anything else the visuals were beautiful, and that's the trademark of Animal Logic.
Maybe much of Happy Feet's reputation among certain group of the animation community is misjudged due to Miller's own comment about how even the greatest animators in the world could not capture the nuances of tap dancing's performance, and only mocap could do a better job. In that light I would disagree since animators can use reference well to their advantage even to create subtle moves. After looking at Mary Poppin's very successful segment on tap dancing penguins as an example, there's no doubt about the strength of well made animation vs just motion captured motion.
I guess the controversy lies in that some people wants to see animated films remain purely in the animated category but others would say there's no difference. Whether mocap should be part of it, and I don't have any conclusion on that. But if mocap can be used to make great animation shots, why not? If it distracts audience, well, its just mediocre or worst bad animation in the end right?
I figure as well that the category shouldn't be taken as seriously since the way the Academy goes about categorising film for nomination just from a brief observation is inconsistent. Arthur and the Invisibles was left out even though it was what seems to be an animated film, it was said to have too many live action footage to be considered as an animated feature nominee. In the end, the category shouldn't matter as much as whether the story was well told and well made as a cg feature. Having said that, you don't even need to win Oscars to be affirmed the film is good or not. Take Monster's Inc for example, that's one of the most beloved animation, pack with great fun and emotions, well paced and well crafted story, and great animation but didn't receive an Oscar.
Happy Feet to me has flaws in some parts of its story telling, but it was enjoyable along the way. Overall there were many parts of the production that was well made and animated. More than anything else the visuals were beautiful, and that's the trademark of Animal Logic.
mr Bob
02-27-2007, 06:52 AM
Njen .... it was great working with you and all the other people on the show. funny about the bitching here though looking forward to their Oscar winning animation show next year.
B
B
eek
02-27-2007, 07:20 AM
I agree with Slurry. Happy Feet, to me, is not an animated film and therefore is not in the same category as Cars. Mocap and animation are two different beasts. When talking about what animation is, you do get a lot of definitions - most of them are technical. The point is that many character animators believe that animation is more than a craft (more than just a technique of just moving things around), rather it is an art form that, by abstraction and distillation, creates motion based on the thoughts and intent of a character - that is much more than just moving things around. This means it is a creative process and not simply a copying process. Happy Feet winning for the best animated film is like a photograph winning at a painting contest.
Motion capture isnt just a silly process of copying motion, its bloody complicated to setup, plan, shoot and clean-up. Let alone all the pipeline stuff you have to deal with and animation work, so to say its just copying and not a craft is a major slam to our industry and my profession. Where all trying to achieve a memorable performance, whatever process it needs and takes. Hats off to the Animal Logic guys - you did a stella job.
Motion capture isnt just a silly process of copying motion, its bloody complicated to setup, plan, shoot and clean-up. Let alone all the pipeline stuff you have to deal with and animation work, so to say its just copying and not a craft is a major slam to our industry and my profession. Where all trying to achieve a memorable performance, whatever process it needs and takes. Hats off to the Animal Logic guys - you did a stella job.
cresshead
02-27-2007, 11:54 AM
it's been a very interesting year in advancements for 3d computer generated films [i'll skip the word animation!]
seeing monster house and happy feet deliver good stories and motion plus happy feet winning that oscar i think that mo cap /performance capture has finally arrived as a major 'tool' in the computer generated film production.
also note there;s several performance capture films being made as we speak and also james cameron's avatar about to go into production....looking over at pixar who have said in the past ''we don't do mo cap'' i wonder how long that will remain over at pixar?
as others have stated mo cap is another tool to use when needed and nw it can deliver
a good on screen performance...good enough for an oscar!
intersting times ahead for the likes of pixar and the makers of shrek, iceage etc...
seeing monster house and happy feet deliver good stories and motion plus happy feet winning that oscar i think that mo cap /performance capture has finally arrived as a major 'tool' in the computer generated film production.
also note there;s several performance capture films being made as we speak and also james cameron's avatar about to go into production....looking over at pixar who have said in the past ''we don't do mo cap'' i wonder how long that will remain over at pixar?
as others have stated mo cap is another tool to use when needed and nw it can deliver
a good on screen performance...good enough for an oscar!
intersting times ahead for the likes of pixar and the makers of shrek, iceage etc...
beaker
02-27-2007, 12:55 PM
By the way, can anyone help me find a place where I can download/watch "The Danish Poet", which won the oscar for the best animated short film ?Itunes has them
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/02/26/oscar-nominated-short-films-in-itunes-store/
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewCustomPage?name=Oscar+Short+Films
http://www.tuaw.com/2007/02/26/oscar-nominated-short-films-in-itunes-store/
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewCustomPage?name=Oscar+Short+Films
elektronaut
02-27-2007, 12:58 PM
thanks for the links beaker!
congratz to the guys of "happy feet"!
congratz to the guys of "happy feet"!
Shaderhacker
02-27-2007, 03:25 PM
I'm not going to waste forum space arguing the definition of 3d animated feature, so I'll leave that to you guys..:sad:
Congrats Animal Logic!! Ben, if you're on here, I'm very happy for you! I wish you all the best for the next project you put your hands on!! :thumbsup:
-M
Congrats Animal Logic!! Ben, if you're on here, I'm very happy for you! I wish you all the best for the next project you put your hands on!! :thumbsup:
-M
Buzzoff
02-27-2007, 03:32 PM
I agree with Slurry. Happy Feet, to me, is not an animated film and therefore is not in the same category as Cars. Mocap and animation are two different beasts.
So setting every key, like doing stop motion on the computer, is true animation as opposed to having someone sit in front of the computer and setting keys every so often and letting the computer do the tweens?
Cutting up the animation category makes as much sence as merging all the others like comedy/drama/documentary into a non-animated category.
So setting every key, like doing stop motion on the computer, is true animation as opposed to having someone sit in front of the computer and setting keys every so often and letting the computer do the tweens?
Cutting up the animation category makes as much sence as merging all the others like comedy/drama/documentary into a non-animated category.
Rick May
02-27-2007, 06:33 PM
I dont think there is any reason to make different categories. To most of the world, Happy Feet is just as animated as Cars. The problem lies within the character animators working in the community.
The process of motion capture is NOT animation (imo). However, the subsequent work massaging the data and making it look better is animation. I'd argue that it isn't quite the same animation work as doing it from scratch, like what you see in the Pixar films. But, those are just my feelings. To each their own.
I'm fine with who got the Oscar. I haven't seen the movie, so I won't comment on the story or if it was better or worse than the others. However, I think it is silly to argue about whether the film is animated or not or whether it should or shouldn't be in the animation category.
My personal feelings (not like anyone asked!)? Motion capture is better suited for characters in live action films where realism is needed. Or stylized, like what was used in Pirates. That was an awesome reason to use it. I just don't see the value in doing it for cartoon projects.
The process of motion capture is NOT animation (imo). However, the subsequent work massaging the data and making it look better is animation. I'd argue that it isn't quite the same animation work as doing it from scratch, like what you see in the Pixar films. But, those are just my feelings. To each their own.
I'm fine with who got the Oscar. I haven't seen the movie, so I won't comment on the story or if it was better or worse than the others. However, I think it is silly to argue about whether the film is animated or not or whether it should or shouldn't be in the animation category.
My personal feelings (not like anyone asked!)? Motion capture is better suited for characters in live action films where realism is needed. Or stylized, like what was used in Pirates. That was an awesome reason to use it. I just don't see the value in doing it for cartoon projects.
phobos78
02-27-2007, 07:09 PM
nice job everyone!! There's more in the world of animation than pixar! (sorry, not a huge fan of cars, or the pixar style of animation)
I know about 30 animators here at rhythm that busted their ass animating...thats right..animating...
congrats animal, as well as Rhythm and GKR on their sequences in the movie. The whales rocked!
I have to agree with alot a people here.. Character animators aren't the only one involved in an animated film. So how about you jump off your high horses, cause you are not the most important job, its completely a team event.
I say this as a Character animator. (and yes i have worked both in keying and mocap, its all good stuff!)
I know about 30 animators here at rhythm that busted their ass animating...thats right..animating...
congrats animal, as well as Rhythm and GKR on their sequences in the movie. The whales rocked!
I have to agree with alot a people here.. Character animators aren't the only one involved in an animated film. So how about you jump off your high horses, cause you are not the most important job, its completely a team event.
I say this as a Character animator. (and yes i have worked both in keying and mocap, its all good stuff!)
Slurry
02-27-2007, 07:23 PM
Man, forums are like mob mentality sometimes. I am not sure how this turned into an US vs THEM thing, or how people got the idea that people are insulting or belittling their work.
Maybe we ALL are a little too insecure and sensitive.
I think just about everyone here recognizes the effort and quality of work that went into creating Happy Feet.
The result is a wonderful film that deserves the recognition it is getting.
I think some people were making a distinction between animation and mocap. They are different. One is not more worthy over another. There is nothing wrong or negative about being different. Regardless of the process used to tell the story, it is the end result that matters so can we all just try and respect eachother and get along?
I've said it already but will say it again so people are CLEAR that I am not putting anyone or anything down...I really enjoyed Happy Feet and think EVERYONE involved with it did a spectacular job.
Coming from a character animator who has also done both keyed and mocap. ;)
Enjoy the moment!
:beer:
Maybe we ALL are a little too insecure and sensitive.
I think just about everyone here recognizes the effort and quality of work that went into creating Happy Feet.
The result is a wonderful film that deserves the recognition it is getting.
I think some people were making a distinction between animation and mocap. They are different. One is not more worthy over another. There is nothing wrong or negative about being different. Regardless of the process used to tell the story, it is the end result that matters so can we all just try and respect eachother and get along?
I've said it already but will say it again so people are CLEAR that I am not putting anyone or anything down...I really enjoyed Happy Feet and think EVERYONE involved with it did a spectacular job.
Coming from a character animator who has also done both keyed and mocap. ;)
Enjoy the moment!
:beer:
lostpencil
02-27-2007, 08:52 PM
Mocap is not animation. Simple, really. One captures motion (even though it may be a highly detailed, complicated technical process) and the other does not. If you massage the motion capture, how much massaging does it take to make it animation? As I've written elsewhere - I dunno. But to me if it still feels like mocap it is still mocap.
I've animated in 2d, I've animated in 3d, I've cleaned up motion capture data and I've even rotoscoped... which one would I rather do? Animate. If you let the computer do the inbetweens for you in 3d, does that make you a non-animator? No, it just makes you a lazy animator and the computer the bad inbetweener (unless you own every frame and it's doing what *you* want it to every inbetween). In 3d the computer doesn't somehow automatically set up your key poses. But (and here is the rub) mocap does. Mocap gives you all your poses and inbetweens and you have to clean up the noise and mess. There is a huge difference in (1) the process between setting your golden poses, setting up timing, adding breakdowns, and then inbetweening - all based on what you believe the character is feeling - as compared to (2) cleaning up mocap data. Animation is both creating convincing motion *and* acting. When you have mocap you have no voice in acting and the convincing motion isn't even created by you - both the acting and motion are provided. That isn't animation. That's clean up. Which, if it's what you want to do, then great. But it's not character animation.
For me, the Polar Express had beautiful backgrounds and environments, but the performance capture killed the movie. Monster House would have made a great movie if it had been live action with some CG special effects. The performance capture killed it. It was like watching zombies trying to interact. Yuk.
Sure, mocap has it's place. Lord of the Rings (Massive and crowd scenes) and other special effects shots requiring realistic motion (Titanic, where the camera pans over the ship and people are walking around on the deck - beautiful work). Mocap is great for games where you need realistic motion for your army buddies that you are trying to protect with covering fire... but let's get real that isn't animation. Let's call a spade a spade.
A problem occurs when you try to use mocap (which is inherently purely realistic motion) for something that is expected to have non-realistic or more exagerrated motion (i.e. toons). Then it's incongruous. People feel uneasy with the film as if something is wrong and they can't put their finger on it.
I don't knock anyone for working on Happy Feet. I don't knock anyone for working with mocap. I don't belittle the amount of effort put in by lighters, modelers, texture artists etc. Personally I couldn't care less about the Oscars or who wins them or what categories there are... it bugged me that a film claimed to be animated when I believed it was mainly based on mocap. If it wasn't mostly mocap, I stand corrected.
I've animated in 2d, I've animated in 3d, I've cleaned up motion capture data and I've even rotoscoped... which one would I rather do? Animate. If you let the computer do the inbetweens for you in 3d, does that make you a non-animator? No, it just makes you a lazy animator and the computer the bad inbetweener (unless you own every frame and it's doing what *you* want it to every inbetween). In 3d the computer doesn't somehow automatically set up your key poses. But (and here is the rub) mocap does. Mocap gives you all your poses and inbetweens and you have to clean up the noise and mess. There is a huge difference in (1) the process between setting your golden poses, setting up timing, adding breakdowns, and then inbetweening - all based on what you believe the character is feeling - as compared to (2) cleaning up mocap data. Animation is both creating convincing motion *and* acting. When you have mocap you have no voice in acting and the convincing motion isn't even created by you - both the acting and motion are provided. That isn't animation. That's clean up. Which, if it's what you want to do, then great. But it's not character animation.
For me, the Polar Express had beautiful backgrounds and environments, but the performance capture killed the movie. Monster House would have made a great movie if it had been live action with some CG special effects. The performance capture killed it. It was like watching zombies trying to interact. Yuk.
Sure, mocap has it's place. Lord of the Rings (Massive and crowd scenes) and other special effects shots requiring realistic motion (Titanic, where the camera pans over the ship and people are walking around on the deck - beautiful work). Mocap is great for games where you need realistic motion for your army buddies that you are trying to protect with covering fire... but let's get real that isn't animation. Let's call a spade a spade.
A problem occurs when you try to use mocap (which is inherently purely realistic motion) for something that is expected to have non-realistic or more exagerrated motion (i.e. toons). Then it's incongruous. People feel uneasy with the film as if something is wrong and they can't put their finger on it.
I don't knock anyone for working on Happy Feet. I don't knock anyone for working with mocap. I don't belittle the amount of effort put in by lighters, modelers, texture artists etc. Personally I couldn't care less about the Oscars or who wins them or what categories there are... it bugged me that a film claimed to be animated when I believed it was mainly based on mocap. If it wasn't mostly mocap, I stand corrected.
cresshead
02-27-2007, 09:14 PM
by what your saying here then you believe that motion capture/performance capture should fall into a similar catergory as say marianation...string puppets..as the puppets are 'performed' and not keyed like in stopframe?..or the same as a muppets movie?
however, if you take the definitions of 'animation' then motion capture does quite neatly sit in there as animation.
in the end the ''customer'' couldn't careless...they'll call it an animated movie...or more usually a 'cartoon' made by computers [not people!...just a load of intel chips!]
however, if you take the definitions of 'animation' then motion capture does quite neatly sit in there as animation.
in the end the ''customer'' couldn't careless...they'll call it an animated movie...or more usually a 'cartoon' made by computers [not people!...just a load of intel chips!]
Wiro
02-27-2007, 09:47 PM
I notice that it's only the animators here who really care about fanning this keyframe vs mocap conflict. The rest of us have probably realized that "Best Animated Feature" is a catchfrase for anything not live action.
Maybe you should stop being so precious about your craft and realise that this award also covers the lighters, riggers, layouters, art directors, concept artists and numerous others behind the scenes who worked so hard at making the movie not live, i.e. animated.
Congratulations to Rythm & Hues and Giant Killer Robots as well. We should not forget about their great contributions.
It's a shame that HF was a collaboration of people who were hired from all around the world for this project only and who have now mostly returned to their home countries. I hope Animal Logic will be able to gather an equally amazing team for their next project (I'm sure this won't be hard now)
Wiro
Maybe you should stop being so precious about your craft and realise that this award also covers the lighters, riggers, layouters, art directors, concept artists and numerous others behind the scenes who worked so hard at making the movie not live, i.e. animated.
Congratulations to Rythm & Hues and Giant Killer Robots as well. We should not forget about their great contributions.
It's a shame that HF was a collaboration of people who were hired from all around the world for this project only and who have now mostly returned to their home countries. I hope Animal Logic will be able to gather an equally amazing team for their next project (I'm sure this won't be hard now)
Wiro
jludwick
02-28-2007, 01:46 AM
First, I think that computer animation is an art form all it's own, separate from hand-drawn 2-D because of the amazing artistry in it - lighting, texturing, programming, modeling, a literal freakin' army of artisans - all working in their respective areas.
I'm not a member of the Academy, but I think that there needs to be a further split between 2-D and 3-D animation. They're just a different breed.
I liked the story in Happy Feet more than I did in Cars. The animation or mo-cap in Happy Feet wasn't obvious; the story was my primary concern as a viewer, and always will be. A story-driven mo-capped movie, in my mind, will beat "Black Cauldron" every time. Let's not defend a bad story just because it's traditionally animated. I know "story" is a real bastardized term these days (a banking website does not freaking 'tell a story'), so listen to the Brad Bird Splinecast if you want to know more about that.
But I do think the character animators have a point - it's hard to fake real animation in mediums like traditional stop-motion or 2-D. If you don't have the artistry and observation intact, nothing is going to save you. The Oscar for Animated Feature was created because a fantastic 2-D animated movie was overlooked: "The Iron Giant" (it contained the 3D, but hand animated, Iron Giant). The Academy acknowledged that the craft of animation was different from filming an actor who already lives and breathes, and they must have known it was in danger of disappearing. And herein is the problem: Motion Capture dances on that fine line between technological, indifferent recording and the observation of an individual with an opinion - which is the soul of all art. I think we need to step lightly and be on our guard - if all the mo-cap people are replaced by a recording AI, I anticipate an equally loud outrage about it.
Oh by the way, Congratulations on the Oscar win.
I'm not a member of the Academy, but I think that there needs to be a further split between 2-D and 3-D animation. They're just a different breed.
I liked the story in Happy Feet more than I did in Cars. The animation or mo-cap in Happy Feet wasn't obvious; the story was my primary concern as a viewer, and always will be. A story-driven mo-capped movie, in my mind, will beat "Black Cauldron" every time. Let's not defend a bad story just because it's traditionally animated. I know "story" is a real bastardized term these days (a banking website does not freaking 'tell a story'), so listen to the Brad Bird Splinecast if you want to know more about that.
But I do think the character animators have a point - it's hard to fake real animation in mediums like traditional stop-motion or 2-D. If you don't have the artistry and observation intact, nothing is going to save you. The Oscar for Animated Feature was created because a fantastic 2-D animated movie was overlooked: "The Iron Giant" (it contained the 3D, but hand animated, Iron Giant). The Academy acknowledged that the craft of animation was different from filming an actor who already lives and breathes, and they must have known it was in danger of disappearing. And herein is the problem: Motion Capture dances on that fine line between technological, indifferent recording and the observation of an individual with an opinion - which is the soul of all art. I think we need to step lightly and be on our guard - if all the mo-cap people are replaced by a recording AI, I anticipate an equally loud outrage about it.
Oh by the way, Congratulations on the Oscar win.
circusboy
02-28-2007, 05:40 PM
The Oscar for Animated Feature was created because a fantastic 2-D animated movie was overlooked: "The Iron Giant".
Mostly 2d. The 'Giant' and much of the props he interacted with were 3d...done in Maya I believe...
Mostly 2d. The 'Giant' and much of the props he interacted with were 3d...done in Maya I believe...
MaxL
03-01-2007, 12:21 AM
Thank for everybody enjoied this movie. It has ben a pleasure working in that crew, made by very talented people! Thanks to everybody.
There is an other thing I would say...
Oh my GOD!
people here are fighting becuase someone thinks motioncapture is aniamtion and someone doesn't? Like if an animation movie is made just by pure hadn or keyframe animation. Are you kidding?
First of all have you ever worked with motioncapture? The one who says mocap is not animation probably don't know motioncapture at all, but just because they heard bout it. Let me explain before to criticize.
Motioncapture doesn't do the whole job, it just sets up a first rough performance. Motion capture have to be cleaned and almost all the time it have to be re-animated by motion editors or animators, becuase it wasn't good enough.
Immagine what it would happen if animators woudn't animate characters hands, and face, eyes, lips and tongue... what a beautifull movie with zombie pinguins!
Without hand made animation Happy Feet would be a disaster movie. Animators gave souls to characters, not motioncapture!
Once you understand this you will understand that motioncapture was just a way to cut down the production costs where there were thousands and thousands of animated characters. Could you anymate everything by had, do you? Some performance in Happy Feet has been animated by hand from scratch. There was more than 50% of hand made animation in this movie.
Is it Disney who invented rotoscoping?? Isn't rotoscoping using a motion reference to simplify the animation drawing and in-betweening? So isn't rotoscoping a way to simplify and cut down the procution costs?
I feel rotoscoping is somehow comparable to mocap. But nobody says: "hey that animated movie is not animation, it's rotoscoping!". Even if there has been lot of hand animation.
EDIT:
Just to be precise, an movie is considered animation movie just if it does contains more than 85% (i'm not sure about the percentage) of generated footage, not matters if the footage is had drawn, CG, or made by funky people that trown paint on the film strip. "Animation" is simply something that is not shooted with a real camera.
EDIT END.
my 2 cents
Max Liani
There is an other thing I would say...
Oh my GOD!
people here are fighting becuase someone thinks motioncapture is aniamtion and someone doesn't? Like if an animation movie is made just by pure hadn or keyframe animation. Are you kidding?
First of all have you ever worked with motioncapture? The one who says mocap is not animation probably don't know motioncapture at all, but just because they heard bout it. Let me explain before to criticize.
Motioncapture doesn't do the whole job, it just sets up a first rough performance. Motion capture have to be cleaned and almost all the time it have to be re-animated by motion editors or animators, becuase it wasn't good enough.
Immagine what it would happen if animators woudn't animate characters hands, and face, eyes, lips and tongue... what a beautifull movie with zombie pinguins!
Without hand made animation Happy Feet would be a disaster movie. Animators gave souls to characters, not motioncapture!
Once you understand this you will understand that motioncapture was just a way to cut down the production costs where there were thousands and thousands of animated characters. Could you anymate everything by had, do you? Some performance in Happy Feet has been animated by hand from scratch. There was more than 50% of hand made animation in this movie.
Is it Disney who invented rotoscoping?? Isn't rotoscoping using a motion reference to simplify the animation drawing and in-betweening? So isn't rotoscoping a way to simplify and cut down the procution costs?
I feel rotoscoping is somehow comparable to mocap. But nobody says: "hey that animated movie is not animation, it's rotoscoping!". Even if there has been lot of hand animation.
EDIT:
Just to be precise, an movie is considered animation movie just if it does contains more than 85% (i'm not sure about the percentage) of generated footage, not matters if the footage is had drawn, CG, or made by funky people that trown paint on the film strip. "Animation" is simply something that is not shooted with a real camera.
EDIT END.
my 2 cents
Max Liani
yellowcello
03-01-2007, 01:11 AM
"Remember, comrades, your resolution must never falter. No argument must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of the others. It is all lies. Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades." Animal Farm
Animals... sticking it to the man. Woohoo :)
Animals... sticking it to the man. Woohoo :)
ReMen
03-02-2007, 08:38 AM
So...why wasnt Open Season in the list?
beaker
03-02-2007, 10:11 AM
So...why wasnt Open Season in the list?Because there are only 3 nominations allowed in the best animated feature catagory and it wasn't picked.
cresshead
03-02-2007, 11:53 AM
why wasn't hoodwinked in the list....no...don't answer that one!:D
Dogway
03-02-2007, 05:29 PM
Congratulations!!!
I knew this was going to be a great movie since the first teaser I saw. Just to begin with, nice subject. And now I can say, maybe the best movie of last year.
About all the animation vs mocap thing. as MaxL said, I was thinking almost the same. Ive never done animation but I felt that mocap works just as a base to start to build and refine the animation from. as production costs and time saver.(in this case) Also, what about face, hand animation? besides other characters. Resuming, Great Job Animal Logic!!
I knew this was going to be a great movie since the first teaser I saw. Just to begin with, nice subject. And now I can say, maybe the best movie of last year.
About all the animation vs mocap thing. as MaxL said, I was thinking almost the same. Ive never done animation but I felt that mocap works just as a base to start to build and refine the animation from. as production costs and time saver.(in this case) Also, what about face, hand animation? besides other characters. Resuming, Great Job Animal Logic!!
blakshep
03-02-2007, 06:20 PM
sorry i tried to watch it but i couldn't make it after the first half. my girlfriend was suffering too. how can this won an oscar? i agree cars isn't pixar's best shot ,but way better in a tehnical and entertainment level too.
the peunguins had really ugly heads without the slightest possibility to express some emotion. really boring envirionments(under the water the background is blue in lots of shots and thats all) lame story, uninteresting characters, really embarassing singing parts, somewhere the shadows were missing, somewehere the same shots were used again. i didn't know it was mocapped, but the animation wasnt used an artistically way like pixar or aardman do it was sure.
i don't want to hurt anyone but i dont understand how can this film be better than cars
don't take this as an insult, it's only my opinion.
the peunguins had really ugly heads without the slightest possibility to express some emotion. really boring envirionments(under the water the background is blue in lots of shots and thats all) lame story, uninteresting characters, really embarassing singing parts, somewhere the shadows were missing, somewehere the same shots were used again. i didn't know it was mocapped, but the animation wasnt used an artistically way like pixar or aardman do it was sure.
i don't want to hurt anyone but i dont understand how can this film be better than cars
don't take this as an insult, it's only my opinion.
yellowcello
03-04-2007, 05:43 AM
Don't worry, I'm sure no one who worked on the film is insulted by your opinion. Some people can never be pleased and after all you didn't vote and that is what really matters :)
(no offence of course:thumbsup:)
(no offence of course:thumbsup:)
MaxL
03-07-2007, 08:34 AM
sorry i tried to watch it but i couldn't make it after the first half. my girlfriend was suffering too. how can this won an oscar? i agree cars isn't pixar's best shot ,but way better in a tehnical and entertainment level too.
the peunguins had really ugly heads without the slightest possibility to express some emotion. really boring envirionments(under the water the background is blue in lots of shots and thats all) lame story, uninteresting characters, really embarassing singing parts, somewhere the shadows were missing, somewehere the same shots were used again. i didn't know it was mocapped, but the animation wasnt used an artistically way like pixar or aardman do it was sure.
i don't want to hurt anyone but i dont understand how can this film be better than cars
don't take this as an insult, it's only my opinion.
I agree the first 20 minutes of the movie are a bit slow...
I would really love to watch this movie with you to understand what are you talking about.
I'v got some ideas!
1) Perobably you are a great singer.. much better than the famous actors used in the movie. This is why you find the vocal performance so poor.
2) Probably you never got diving underwater, otherwise you should know that when the ocean is deep enough you don't see anything but blue :)
3) Shots used twice?? Are you sure you wasn't watching the trailer in loop??
I hate cars and in general vehicles with a fuel engine, but for this reason I don't say the movie "Cars" is terrible. I think it's a good product at a very high technical level.
I think Happy Feet pushed a bit the visual quality level of an animated movie. There were lot of details never seen before, like very detailed foot prints, and in general a good level of photo-realism.
the peunguins had really ugly heads without the slightest possibility to express some emotion. really boring envirionments(under the water the background is blue in lots of shots and thats all) lame story, uninteresting characters, really embarassing singing parts, somewhere the shadows were missing, somewehere the same shots were used again. i didn't know it was mocapped, but the animation wasnt used an artistically way like pixar or aardman do it was sure.
i don't want to hurt anyone but i dont understand how can this film be better than cars
don't take this as an insult, it's only my opinion.
I agree the first 20 minutes of the movie are a bit slow...
I would really love to watch this movie with you to understand what are you talking about.
I'v got some ideas!
1) Perobably you are a great singer.. much better than the famous actors used in the movie. This is why you find the vocal performance so poor.
2) Probably you never got diving underwater, otherwise you should know that when the ocean is deep enough you don't see anything but blue :)
3) Shots used twice?? Are you sure you wasn't watching the trailer in loop??
I hate cars and in general vehicles with a fuel engine, but for this reason I don't say the movie "Cars" is terrible. I think it's a good product at a very high technical level.
I think Happy Feet pushed a bit the visual quality level of an animated movie. There were lot of details never seen before, like very detailed foot prints, and in general a good level of photo-realism.
mr Bob
03-07-2007, 08:48 AM
I just want to know when do I get the picture of me with the Oscar hehe......
B
B
CGTalk Moderation
03-07-2007, 08:48 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.