Hey Harry,
If you remember in my previous post, I mentioned that previs and layout are somewhat of hybrid careers. They require technical skills and cinematography skills in order to be sucessful. The process of previs and layout are however, different. Previs is usually implimented in a conceptual basis to help figure out specific storytelling beats. It can be technical as well to help VFX supervisors and directors know exactly the limitations of their sets on stage and what lens to pick, where to place green screens and lighting for the best effective coverage and so on. Layout on the other hand is the centralized hub of distribution within an animation technical pipeline. Layout is normally divided in rough and final layout, which is nearly equivalent to conceptual and technical previs. Layout however has specific pipeline limitations that usually can not be ignored, where as previs is more about doing what’s necessary to either communicate the story concept or answer a very specific technical question.
All the other departments in an animation studio funnel their work through the layout department. It is grand central station. Rough layout artists work directly with the animation supervisors and directors to set up entire scenes using models published by the modeling department, block character positions, animate camera positions, select lenses, and so on. Layout artists must use models, and various tools that have been approved throughout the entire show and once a sequence is complete, it is published for distribution to the animation department, which inturn replaces the layout artists’ blocking for final animation. Once animation is complete, its sent back to layout where the final layout artist tweaks and modifies last minute adjustments and camera fixes. Once that is completed, it is published again and this time it heads off to lighting and rendering. The process of previs doesn’t have these kinds of requirements.
The reason why I listed previs and layout as methods of breaking into the business isn’t because they are necessarily “easier”, but rather, they expose you to every aspect of the cg process in some form or another. As disciplines, they are rather difficult. Constructing a shot and following the rules of cinematography isn’t for everyone.
I also mentioned they are hybrid careers because these people interface with the director and supervisors so closely that its a logical progression to use their cinematography based skills to start making their own movies. In previs and layout, its all about story. However, since previs and layout artists need to be uber generalists as well, they can easily side step into a modeling or animation career if they exhibit those skills.
As for Mr. Lucas asking if it was previs or a final shot from ILM, well…it happened once or twice, though ulimately, he knew it was previs because it was coming from us. He made comments like that because we as an independant department were recreating a mini ILM pipeline ourselves. On Episode II we actually rendered our previs which gave us more control over lighting, environmental effects, shadows and so forth, giving it a more polished look. Typically overkill for the average previs, but it is George Lucas, and he gets what he wants.
I do believe there will come a time when previs and finals will merge to a certain degree. The show I’m currently working on is being set up specifically to transfer our previs files over to the VFX house for further advanced manipulation. This doesn’t necessarily mean that disciplines are disappearing, it just means technology is catching up with the creative mind. We will eventually have a time where hardware rendering will match software rendering and when that happens, there will be another shift in the movie making process. With today’s technology, there’s no reason why a small 20 man team can’t produce a high quality animated film. I’ve done it several times already.
Large studios of course will balk at this idea stating you need their expertise. And generally this is true if you’re still making movies the traditional way. The summer blockbusters with the super effects will always require the ILMs, DDs, and Sonys out there to do it. But we all know that even though viewer sophistication demands fancy visuals, mega blockbusters are being snubbed by films with more heart. Independant films are the way of the future.
Now onto models and animation requirements of previs. Generally yes, models are getting more advanced in relationship to workstation power. This allows previs artists to start introducing facial animation and character articulation on even higher levels. Sounds like overkill and in many ways, and it can be. However, its almost always called for by directors. They want to see their movie constructed before its shot. It gives them a method to predict the movie’s general reception by an audience way in advance. I saw Episode II in previs form 3 times before I saw the movie itself. As an employer, I’d want to see a previs artist be capable of a fairly high level of modeling and animation proficiency, but I’d want my artist to work quickly. Low rez models are still the norm.
As for interpreting a director’s vision… that’s more difficult to judge. Junior previs artists normally can’t do this…no matter how good they are in modeling and animation. Finding the director’s vision is a talent that only happens with experience. Every senior previs artist must start thinking like a director themselves. We wear lots of different hats. We must think like DPs and understand cinematography. We must be directors and understand story telling. We must be technical directors to solve potential technical issues. We must be modelers and animators as well. Any junior I hire, I look for strong generalist skills and a love for film. I will mold them from there.
