Category: AnimSchool Interview

AnimSchool Interview: Animator Aaron Gilman

Thank you Aaron, for taking the time to answer some questions for us. 
 Can you tell us a little a bit about your background, and where it all 
started for you?

My career in animation started pretty late compared to most. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life while I attended university, and this confusion carried on for many years afterwards. I spent a while working in film production as a P.A; I sold ladies shoes, worked as a video store clerk for ages, and was an assistant wedding photographer. I’ll never forget the day I discovered animation. I was 26 years old and sitting on a bus, thinking about how much money I had in my bank account (it was about 13 dollars), when I saw an advertisement on the bus wall. It was for the Vancouver Film School’s 3D program and it had a picture of a CG dinosaur. That got me thinking, but it didn’t truly seal the deal in my mind. A little later, I was visiting family in Montreal and went to see my sister at her new job. She was working in a VFX studio. I sat with a guy who showed me a CG model he was working on of  a cool looking dragon.  And that was it. I went back to Vancouver and enrolled in the 3D program. In about 2 months at VFS I was completely hooked on animation and knew that was what I was meant to do. Looking back, it’s very easy to understand why animation goes so well with my personality, and yet it took me so long to find it. Growing up I had always had a passion for film, acting, photography and computers (my mom bought a Commodore 64 in the early 80’s when I was about 12 years old). Animation was essentially the culmination of all of my interests.




In another interview, you mentioned you studied philosophy before making the career switch to animation.  Do you find that your past education in philosophy has benefited your development as an animator, and if so, how?

Let’s just say I wouldn’t recommend aspiring animators go out and get a degree in philosophy. I chose to do philosophy because it was quite simply the only thing at the time I kind of liked. I knew while I was in the program at the University of British Columbia, that it would never amount to anything like a career. But epistemology and metaphysics were interesting subjects, and while I wanted to be a professional actor prior to going to university, I decided I loved money too much and wouldn’t survive as a waiter with endless rejections.

 But all that said, philosophy has helped me enormously in my life, and in my animation career. Creating animation and working on complex shots within a very advanced pipeline is often more about problem solving than being a great artist. The VFX pipeline is very complicated, and you’re constantly being barraged with technical issues, whether they be creature problems, complex constraint systems, or simply working out how you are going to build a crazy shot in the most efficient way.

Philosophy concerns itself with problem solving, where arguing through an issue towards clarity is the end goal. Of course, in philosophy you never really achieve clarity. The arguing never ends and the issues never get sorted. It is the debate that is the source of the joy. But, in animation and VFX, finding a solution to the problem is the goal. As you become a Lead and Supervisor, being good at problem solving becomes even more critical to your success. Philosophy helped me with my problem solving abilities, and being able to rationalize my way through an issue, categorize and untangle technical messes, and ultimately achieve the final goal of completing the performance. Mixed in with all of that you must find room to be artistic. Juggling artistry and technical expertise is what makes a valuable and successful animator.

I’m really impressed with your underwater chase sequence with Abe Sapien in Hellboy. What type of reference did you
 draw upon to help you with that? Were there any challenges with animating an underwater shot?

Animating realistic characters underwater is actually very forgiving. The reason for this is because the density of water makes everything more floaty, and the timing is therefore more even between actions. Animating realistic weight is always a challenge because the timing required to make it believable needs to be very specific, and being even a frame or two off can ruin the illusion. Most animators who have problems with weight tend to key the object too slow or soft, and you get this “man-on-the-moon” type of feeling. Floaty is usually the kiss of death for realistic animation, but this is not the case with swimming. Now that’s not to say that swimming shots are easy. In my experience, most shots are never easy! You still need to design a believable performance, and the physicality of navigating through water needs to be mechanically correct. For this you need to research and reference, and understand how the body creates propulsion, changes direction, etc.



For the Abe chase sequence, we had one primary source of reference, Patrick Duffy’s Man from Atlantis. This was a very popular TV show in the late 70’s, where Duffy played a man with webbed hands and feet who could breathe underwater. Duffy did all of his own underwater stunts, and he designed a very unique and dynamic swimming style. We used his movement as our main reference, paying very close attention to the circular actions he did with his arms. The other source of reference was video footage I shot of myself from various angles with the help of Tippett Studio’s cameras and stage. Obviously, I couldn’t recreate the underwater effect, but acting out the movement and getting it sent to my computer for analysis was very helpful.



For
a student animator who wants to get into creature animation, or
even just develop realistic motion for their show reel, where
would you recommend they start their learning?

All learning should start in school. The program you’re in should ideally have a Creature Component in the curriculum where you will be taught the do’s and don’t of realistic motion. The workflow of animating realistic performances varies in certain small, but fundamental ways than animating emotive cartoony characters. So first off, having teachers who can guide you through this process is critical.

You hear this time and time again from professionals and teachers: reference is the single most important tool you can use to create realistic believable animation. It’s also a staple question in interviews. “What reference did you use to support this performance?” You better know the answer to this. Not using reference almost invariably reflects negatively on the animation. Any Animation Supervisor worth their salt will look at your reel and know right away that the performance was created in a vacuum. Whether it be Youtube, BBC Motion Gallery, Animal Motion Show DVD’s, footage you shot yourself, or any other direct or inspired representation of the performance, you  must ground your work in believable content. I don’t suggest using other animator’s work as reference. Go to the source. And for those characters that are fictitious, like Banshees, Dragons, Demons, etc, use real world reference that captures the spirit of the creature. It may be Hyenas or Lions, Eagles, or Cats. It really is your bread and butter, and VFX studios rely on it every single day, and so should you.

Being able to work on big blockbuster projects like Avatar and The
 Adventures of Tintin, what excites you about animation today? And, where would you like to see the direction of animation head towards?

Throughout most of my career, I have worked as a visual FX artist on live action films, where I’ll animate a creature that gets digitally integrated into a live action environment. But since arriving at Weta, I have had the opportunity to work on entirely CG projects, where the artist has enormous amounts of creative control over the environments, the camera, and the performances. We’ve now seen Weta and ILM create fully CG worlds with projects like Rango, Tintin, and Avatar. From a creative and technical standpoint, this has allowed us to sink our teeth into amazing challenges. Most people don’t realize that in Tintin, we created a 3 minute shot with no cuts! When working with a fully CG world, the director’s imagination can run free, and every artist involved gets to be a part of bigger and more impressive shots. Weta has an incredible motion capture pipeline, ground breaking facial capture technology, onset virtual cinematography, a team of very skilled senior character animators, and a pipeline that can make anything look real. As we continue to get the opportunity to work on these kinds of projects, it means bigger shots, more advanced camera work, cooler creatures, and simply more opportunities to expand our vision of the impossible. That’s what excites me most about the future of the VFX industry.

In many shots you’ve animated sequences where character’s are either flying, gliding, swimming, galloping, etc. Do you always get into deep research and study of the mechanics of the creatures before you even 
consider acting choices?

There is definitely a process of comprehending the mechanics of a creature prior to animating shots. This is where referencing becomes so important. Many studios will gather online references to build an in-house library of footage. If a character needs to fly like an eagle or barrel-roll like a jet plane, then a studio and its artists will go out of their way to gather footage of those things for the animators to refer to.

Most often, the critical acting choices an animator makes in a given shot are dictated by the narrative. For example, a creature needs to enter frame right, jump onto the log, and then roar. These are acting choices dictated by the script, the storyboard, the director, etc. With foundational reference material, and the acting requirements of the shot, the animator can get started. All of the extra animation nuances that go into the shot, for example, how the creature rears its head when it roars, or how it jumps up onto the log, is left to the animator’s creative voice and the critique of his superiors.

This questions a bit touch and go, but do you think Mocap data could ever be used as the foundation for more cartoony styles of animation?

Motion capture is an incredibly powerful tool. But as a tool, it must be used for a specific type of job, and that is creating realistic motion. Using motion capture to create Tintin or Avatar was a very conscious creative choice. Motion capture data has a certain look to it that you will not achieve through key frame animation created from scratch by an animator. The quality of the data is extremely detailed, the movement highly precise and organic feeling. This is why motion capture data is so dense.

  It is important to understand that like any tool, it will not always be best suited for every job. For example, if Woody from the Toy Story series had been a motion captured character instead of key framed, the style of that particular character would come across as vastly different than the Woody we all know and love. The choice to use key frame animation on that particular project gave the flavor of the animation a distinct look. So too with How to Train Your Dragon, or many other Animated Features. When the director makes the choice to use key frame animation as the methodology to execute his vision, he engages in a very specific type of relationship with the animators to generate hand crafted motion with a certain style in mind. For example, Madagascar reminds us of classic Warner Bros animation, and the choice to do that was motivated and not accidental. The same applies to Motion Capture, where the director is able to achieve a relationship with his performer and have that performance in the film. Certain projects would have had very different results if motion capture had not been used. Take Gollum for example. You can see Andy Serkis in every performance. Similarly with Captain Haddock, the essence of his acting persona comes through in the way the character performs. Rather than having 20 animators all working toward a common style of motion, through Mocap you can achieve an extremely clear realistic vision with a talented actor.
I believe that between these two very different styles of creating motion lies a bit of a chasm. In other words, each methodology can be successfully blended with the other, where through great artistry and talent the animator can infuse motion capture data with great key framing and vice versa; but each style has a breaking point in this regard, where you can go too far and risk having neither style serve your purpose.

On the one hand, creating realistic motion from scratch, without the use of motion capture, is an incredibly costly and time consuming effort that in the end, despite a talented animator, may never completely sell the viewer on the idea that the performance looks and feels completely real. While on the other hand, using motion capture means the performance of the actor is locked so deeply into the data, that trying to edit it to create a completely new performance can result in ruining the look of the original motion; and you may never achieve an acceptable new performance because, much like hammering a square peg into a round hole, you end up creating something that feels disjointed and broken, and it would have been better to start form scratch in the first place.

So ultimately, I think motion capture is not an ideal tool for cartoony performances, unless the essence of the actor’s motion gets you as close as possible to the intended result without pushing the data past its breaking point. When I say breaking point, I mean the animator has used everything at his creative and technical disposal to change the performance, but despite his efforts, the mocap data still looks disjointed and not believable. Most shots will have some creative combination of motion capture and key frame, but when the performance needs to be pushed to a realm too far beyond the fundamentals of the actor’s movement, it is often better to key a new performance from scratch, or simply reshoot the actor on the stage. The more stylized the performer, the more motion capture can be an excellent tool. But if the character needs to squash and stretch, or bend and jump in unrealistic ways, then using motion capture will not be the best way to go.

What was the best advice your predecessors/past mentors, passed down to you
 when you were starting out your career as an animator? If you could provide a few words to student animators today, what would they be?

Sing through your blocking. Yes, I said sing! One of my supervisors would hum when he would review my work. It was his way of understanding the pacing of the performance.

Some clients will consistently reject everything you show them. The best way I have learned to accept this reality was from taking the advice of another supervisor I worked with. He would say, “They were all good [animation versions], but none of them were right.” The fact is that you will almost never hit a home run with your animation the first time you present it. Having your work heavily critiqued and even rejected outright, is not intended to damage your ego. But that’s naturally how we want to react because we put so much time and emotion into it. Just remember to tell yourself that you are not a mind reader. You are a craftsman paid to execute someone else’s vision. That takes time and numerous iterations. So smile, take a breath, and enthusiastically let your boss know you will create a new version for review tomorrow.

Don’t be a Bubble Boy! Some animators work in a vacuum. They don’t interact with other animators, they don’t share their work, they don’t ask for critique, and they don’t show their stuff very often. You can be a very talented Bubble Boy animator and make a great career for yourself. But I believe all animators are constantly growing and no one should ever plateau. The Bubble Boy tends to hit a ceiling with the quality of their work. They don’t grow as fast as those animators who seek critique, whether it be from their peers, or regularly from their supervisors.

Finally, what’s next for you personally & professionally?

I’ve just come off a very full year supervising animation at Weta on The Avengers and Sequence Supervising on Tintin. While I had supervised and directed animation at smaller studios in the past, this was really my first opportunity to work at the highest level of animation in a major studio, and I loved it! I am itching to get back to it. Until that opportunity comes again, I am happily working on The Hobbit now and enjoying getting back to animating shots 100% of the time. However, my ultimate goal is to one day direct animation on a major feature, and work directly with the client to help execute their vision.

To view Aaron Gilman’s reel, visit his website: http://www.aarongilman.com/

I would like to thank Aaron for taking the time out to partake in this 
interview and I would also like to thank AnimSchool, for providing me this 
opportunity to continuously interview some of the top artists in the
 business. Thanks for reading!




Interview by: Andrew Tran

AnimSchool Interview: Tim Kallok

First off- big congrats Tim, on winning the March competition of the 11 Second Club! What was your immediate reaction, and what was running through your mind when you heard the news?

Thank you very much for the congratulations! On the day the results were released, I was totally in shock when I went to the 11 Second Club site and saw my animation on the front page. I had participated in the voting process and so I knew I was up against a lot of tough competition. There were many other great entries last month and I was really hoping just to finish in the top 11. Winning the competition and all the resulting positive feedback I have received has definitely been a big morale booster for me.

 

Can you tell us a little bit about your background and how you got into animation?

Animation has long been a passion of mine. Like many others, growing up I was glued to the television watching Disney films, Looney Tunes and Saturday morning cartoons. I was introduced to theater and acting at a young age. My dad is an actor whom participates extensively in local community theater and independent film. He used to take me along to his rehearsals and performances on weekends. I loved watching my dad and the other actors transform into different people and assume personalities contrary to who they were in “real life.” I actually didn’t decide that I wanted to be an animator until my senior year of high school. I had some great teachers that got me interested in science and engineering, so I was considering studying to become an engineer. That soon changed when I started taking art classes and my art teacher nurtured my creative side and got me really passionate about creating art. When I started researching colleges and career choices, I found schools that were offering degrees in computer animation. Until then, I had never realized that you could make a career out of doing animation, but it turned out to be a perfect fit for me because it married all the things I was interested in: art, performance, and technology. From that point on, I have devoted myself to animation and constantly push myself to improve my craft. I have had quite a bit more animation education/training that most people have, but animation has not always come naturally to me, and I have had to work really hard to get to the level I’m at now. I’m still pushing my self to improve, but that’s the beauty of animation; you can never stop learning and you can always continue to grow as an animator. My ultimate goal is to work as an animator on a feature film. I haven’t reached that goal yet, but I am determined not to give up. Hopefully, one day, that dream will come true.


My 11 Second Club Entry – March ’12 from Tim Kallok on Vimeo.

What influenced your decision to use AnimSchool’s Malcolm rig for your entry, and did the rig deliver to your expectations?

First of all, I would like to thank AnimSchool for making such an awesome rig available for public use. I really love Malcolm’s design and his overall flexibility. He can be pushed and pulled further than any other rig that I have used. His facial setup is awesome; it’s really easy to get appealing shapes and expressions. Because of the nature of the competition’s dialogue, I didn’t get to utilize the rig to its full potential, but for my shot, the IK elbow pinning and the IK/FK switching came in very handy.

Were there any challenges or difficulties you faced when using the Malcolm rig, and if so, how did you overcome them?

Upon first opening the rig, it can be a bit daunting, because there are so many controls! Once I learned that you could hide controls in the picker by using the basic, most, and all buttons, that made it much easier for me to approach the rig. That feature also helped streamline my workflow by letting me concentrate only on the controls that I need at the time. So, in blocking, I only used the basic controls. Once I moved onto the anim pass and polish, I could turn on the other controls to really refine the poses.

The technical hurdle I faced with Malcolm was in the modification process, trying to figure out the best way to add on his collared shirt and suspenders and have them be tucked in his pants. In order to do that, the first thing I did was use the shirt controls near his waist to “tuck” his shirt in to his pants. I also used the “Narrow Pants Tp” attribute on the “ctlHips1” control to widen the waist of his pants. I then modeled his shirt and suspenders as separate polygon objects and used a wrap deformer to have them follow the rig.

Other than that, the only other challenges I faced were really just standard animation issues like making sure his hands and fingers were not going through the table or cleanly switching his arms from IK to FK. Up until Sam gets up, both arms are IK. Once he stands up they switch over to FK. The IK/FK switcher in the picker, made that process much easier.

You mentioned in the brief description, you couldn’t achieve the level of polish you were hoping for. What were some of the extra things you had to leave out to meet the deadline?

I know I’m not alone in saying that it’s really hard to stop working on an animation and know when to say it’s “finished.” If I would have had more time to work on it before the deadline, I would have spent some more time polishing the face, making sure the corners of the mouth had clean arcs, adding in some more eye movement, and refining the brows. I actually made a big change the day before the deadline. Originally, I had Sam put both arms on the chair as he gets up, then grab the gun as he exits. I showed my progress to one of my friends and he suggested that I have Sam go for the gun as he stood up. I made the change and it really helped, because it made him feel more determined and focused on the task at hand. Because that change came up so late, I didn’t have the time to get the spacing in the hand right or the fingers working well as he grabs the gun.

You were able to gets some really appealing mouth shapes, did you experiment with that before going into lip sync?

I didn’t really experiment with any mouth shapes prior to animating the lip sync. During the planning phase, I broke down the dialogue in to phonemes, so I knew, more or less, what shapes I needed to hit. I have a mirror on my desk, which I use quite extensively while animating. For the first pass of lip sync, I start with the opening and closing of the jaw. Once I have that in, I move on to the corners of the mouth and how they move in and out. From there, I concentrate on the secondary mouth controls, to fine tune the shapes, add in pucker and compression, and break up the symmetry as much as possible.

In the beginning of your animation you pulled off your character, Sam, having limited movement. What did you do to keep the pose alive during this time, and what were some of the extra things you did to sell your idea?

The beginning section was definitely a big challenge. This was my first attempt at doing subtle animation and I found that there’s a real fine line between the character feeling dead and moving too much. One of the things that I work out during planning, is figuring out the least number of poses I need in order to tell the story. While Sam is talking, I felt that I only needed one pose and that I could act within the pose to hit the accents in the dialogue. Even though the accents are not too big, I incorporated the whole upper body into each one. I offset a lot of the movements so the parts of the action settled at different times. Moving holds were also very important throughout in order to keep him alive. I spent quite a bit of time tweaking splines in the graph editor, trying to find just the right amount of movement needed.

I could be really off base on this, but the present Sam, holding the photograph, looks a little bit more aged and withered then the character we see in the photograph. Apart from the body, did you modify the facial features to help sell that idea?

That’s a good catch. I did a few subtle things with the face to make him feel a bit more unkempt and distressed. One was to keep the mid brows pushed together so you could the crease/wrinkle between them. I also increased the “Naso Crease” slightly, so the wrinkle between the nose and corner of the mouth was a bit more prominent. The last thing I did was add a custom texture map to his face so he has a 5 o’clock shadow.


Lastly, what’s going to be next for you? What’s in the pipeline?

At the moment, I’m finishing up my reel. I have some older unfinished projects that I have been revisiting and trying to get up to par with my newer work. I also have a few ideas for a new personal piece that is in the works.

To see more of Tim’s work visit his website: http://timkallok.com/

Interview by: Andrew Tran

To download the Malcolm Rig, just visit our website: www.Animschool.com

AnimSchool Interview: Animator Cameron Fielding

Thanks you Cameron, for taking the time to answer a some questions for us. One word to describe your reel is: amazing! What was the most difficult shot you accomplished?



It depends what you mean by difficult. I’m discovering that every shot has some element that seems really problematic as you are sitting in the shot working on it. Whether it’s a wide shot, with things interacting, or a 20 frame reaction shot, it seems there’s always a period in the process where I`m thinking “oh man.. this is looking horrible.. another failed shot”. Funny enough, it seems that shots I find especially difficult are usually the ones I ending up liking the best when all is done. It’s a hard question to answer in short.

The shot I was most scared of was in Transformers 2, where BumbleBee rips the arms off a Decepticon then kicks him up towards the camera. They cast me that as my first shot, and I was just thinking “how am I going to be able to do this?”… I wasn’t so worried about the physicality and the staging, but more so because I was used to animating in a very layered way that would be very difficult to present as a complete “blocking” idea early on to the director. So, my fears were mixed with not only what I was going to do, but how to do them on a very fundamental workflow level. I ended up planning it on paper as much as I could (this is not usual for me) then blocking it in very roughly in spline. To make matters worse, I got signed off on the blocking, then I was taken off it to work on another shot for a number of weeks. In the back of my mind I was constantly afraid of going back to that shot and making it actually work to the level of detail and realism that was required. In the end, I just layered through it in a way I was used to, but killed myself over a small 30 frame section in the middle that literally took me about a week to get right!

I usually find the most “difficult” thing is getting what the director wants, and even more difficult is getting the shot to a level that they really like. Working in video games allowed me a lot of creative freedom with respect to animation choices. In feature animation, you have a broad range of freedom, but hitting someone else’s idea is never easy because it’s not imprinted on the fabric of how you think things through, solely because you didn’t think of it yourself. That I think is the biggest challenge – getting the shot to work as best it can for the few seconds it flashes past on the screen, when “as best it can” is defined by someone else. When you do get it, its incredibly satisfying.

Many top animators focus more on physical or acting shots, but you’re great at both. How have you balanced those areas of expertise?

I started off animating physicality and I’m glad I did because it’s the foundation of a believable performance. I don’t think it’s anymore important than the acting choices and ideas you use in the shot, but it’s the first place to start learning animation in my opinion. It’s also usually the most obvious to the audience if something is done incorrectly or even just “not quite right”. Even with a subtle acting shot, I still lock down the blocking of the characters physicality, before I start working on the facial animation.

The most critical tool I think I have is a workflow approach that has evolved from two distinctively different ways of working. As I mentioned before, I used to animate very layered, not using full body poses at all, and starting with the body parts that drive the performance and basically animating them fully before moving onto the next body part. The other approach is thinking more traditionally, like drawings, and creating poses and breakdowns that describe the performance in a lower resolution (usually ending on two’s as the maximum resolution before going to spline). The truth is, it was very difficult to learn how to animate that way after animating layered for so long, but now I use a hybrid of both approaches which I believe is the best mindset. I animate in stepped, creating poses on the full body of the character and keying everything through the main keys of the shot, then instead of progressively breaking down those keys, I work in a layered way in small sections, from start to finish, but keeping everything in stepped and everything keyed on the same frames- but basically still in a layered way. Using this approach, I find I can quickly get down to two’s (if I trust my keys and they work nicely) and can get very clear blocking in front of the director without an insane amount of time. Having a good understanding of both these approaches is great because each “type” of shot has its best approach- a physical shot usually benefits from the layered approach, where an acting shot needs the poses and the clarity to communicate the complexities of the attitude, and to be able to fully control the characters design and appeal.

How do you usually decide on your acting choices?

That’s a pretty easy one to answer. With an acting shot- I always use extensive reference to determine my choices. Before I start reference, I check the shot to clarify more technical things like how far the character has to move, the size of the camera lens and that sort of thing so I understand more of the constraints in which I have to move the character, and what the staging needs to be. As far as the subtext of the shot- I make sure I get that clear during the launch with the director, so then I understand what attitudes I need to act within. After that, its pretty much full on reference time, and depending on the length of the shot, I can record a huge amount of takes until I find what I want. It seems to me to take that long to really get into the character and find what feels natural. The “natural” acting is what I’m looking for… something I would never have thought of just in thumbnails.

I soon learned that I needed video reference myself for acting shots. In fact, if I can use reference for any shot, I will. I find with acting I just can’t make that stuff up in my head, I need to actually see it. I also make sure I get at least three or four “good takes” and then I watch them in continuity with the animated shots around it. Even though I’m looking at myself (and not the character), it can quickly reveal an acting choice or gesture that looks great by itself but somehow doesn’t feel right in the scene.

It’s become a balancing act with how much I use the reference and how much I don’t. Sometimes I get caught up trying to find the “perfect take” only to realize that I simply don’t have the skills to act it. I still look for one continuous take (just so the physicality and the transitions make sense) but I’m teaching myself to combine different takes and figure out transitions manually, and be more creative with how I interpret the reference and change it for the benefit of the shot as I start blocking… but its still very new to me animating these kind of scenes.

That was a great shot in Megamind where he’s facing off against Hal, did you end up shooting video reference and choreographing that sequence?

The beats of the sequence had already been figured out in Layout, so with regards to choreography it was more about figuring out the details of the interactions between Hal and the Megamind robot. On the whole it was a tough sequence because of the size difference between the two characters… I shot reference of myself doing “sword-fighting” moves for the robot- but for Hal I just had to work through the shot in stepped, figuring it out in my head (I did the body and the lamp post first, then the arms and the legs). In the end Hal had to do big broad movements to get the battle to feel like they were really fighting, and he was at least some kind of challenge to the robot. A bi-product of this was that his motion seems somewhat fast, but this further adds to the feeling of miniaturization and helps make the scene a little more funny to watch.

What’s the best way for student animators to strengthen their understanding of body mechanics?
The best way for students to strengthen their understanding of animation is just to animate what they love the best. I would say that every animated shot, even a subtle acting shot are riddled with body mechanics, so you can pretty much animate whatever you like and you’ll end up dealing with physicality in some form. If you just animate that thing in your head you’ve been waiting to animate for so long, it’s almost guaranteed to be good just because it’s driven by your own passions and interests. 


You can animate the ball bounce and box lift and that kind of thing if you like, but I would put much more return on animating something more complex, and studying reference of yourself doing it. My experience tells me that the classic exercises will teach you exactly that- how to animate a very simple and contained set of physical motions, whereas actual production shots require much more complex movements. You could say there are two types of physicality- the really broad stylized motion, and a more realistic natural motion. I would suggest studying how natural physicality works by trying to animate it yourself before going all out and animating abstracted physicality, which in truth takes a lot longer to learn and understand (in my opinion).

How did you find the transition from VFX to animated features? What are the differences and similarities you’ve discovered?
My experience in the VFX field is somewhat marginal. I was lucky to work at ILM for about 4 months, and it was an amazing experience. Something I learned very fast was that the VFX industry can be very tough for a family man like myself… short contracts and gaps in work are not the best combination, even more so if you’re not native to the US and have to deal with immigration issues in tandem. ILM was great, and looked after me very well however.
Concerning the work, at least the one project I worked on at ILM, was more concerned with the broad visual impact and raw entertainment value than any real character driven moments (at least the shots I worked on)… which was really fun, just to concentrate on making it “look cool”. Animated features on the other hand, deal much with story and character, and this is a different skill set that has to be learned- not just how to animate those shots, but even more so to understand what is important about the shot, and how to construct it from a film making perspective. I also find that shots for a feature are much more open to changes and notes from the director, and in general the process of completing the shots seems a lot more iterative.

 
As for similarities, you still have to think about a lot of the same things. Continuity is a big one, and not with respect to just making sure that things don’t appear or disappear and that kind of thing, but more to do with the flow of the shot and the feel that the action is taking place consistently when the camera is not looking at the characters (i.e the world exists and continues even when the camera is not looking). As with all shots- we are still mainly reaching for entertainment. How do we make the shot as entertaining as we can, and that doesn’t change between VFX and feature stuff at all.


It’s a double edged sword. Sometimes I miss the “coolness” of the VFX type shots, and sometimes I’m very happy to animate the intricacies of a feature shot. I can never make up my mind which I like best, and the truth is, I have a drive to animate both types, that swings like a pendulum on steroids!


I very much want to return to VFX in the future. We’re all artists, and need variety and varying challenges to keep us fresh.
You’ve worked in the entertainment industry for the past 10 years. In those years have you ever felt the effects of burn-out, or days when you don’t feel like you’re an animator?
I have to say that almost every day when I come to work, or sit at home, or just play with my kids I feel like I’m “not an animator”. It’s very hard to describe why, and sure I work on shots for my day job and actually spend more time animating than not animating, but creative fulfillment is very hard to come by, and I don’t think I’ve ever really had it… weird hey?
I have times where I feel like my shots are going well, usually during the later parts of blocking where the main shot is roughed in and working…basically when all the hard work is done. Strangely enough however, it’s hard to hold onto that satisfaction you feel from watching your own work, probably because of the sheer amount of times you watch it and you get numb to it. I tell myself this is a symptom of the strive to do my best, and as long as my colleagues and peers are telling me the shot feels great, I can trust their objective opinions. I usually find seeing a shot much later on, after I’ve had time to forget about it, allows me to see it with fresh eyes and appreciate it. This doesn’t always happen, from time to time I have shots I feel work really nicely and I enjoy watching them, but these are the little gems we have to dig for. 
I think the thing we struggle with as artists is that we constantly compare ourselves to others, and vastly over criticize the work we complete ourselves. The reality is that art is an ongoing journey, trying to reach a goal that we constantly shift further away as we get closer to it. This is what makes us strive for better work and improves us. Part of being an artist is learning how to manage these feelings and understanding that anxiety is part of the process.
I strongly believe that a great way to get closer to artistic satisfaction is to work on your own projects at home. I try as hard as I can to do this, but my work and family life leaves very little room, and it’s incredibly tough to complete anything at 11:30 at night when you’re tired and you have another long day in the morning. I’m currently in the very early stages of a “cool” creature sequence I’m working on – just simply for my own education and fun, nothing more.

You made a script, a very random one called the ‘Animfood’. What were you thinking that day?

AnimFood is awesome. I wanted to create something that could inspire me, or make me think about my shot, or a particular problem in a different way.. without having to do much more than press a few buttons a couple of times. The truth is that the actual content for AnimFood (its called “randoFlip” on the website) took a long time to compile and is from numerous sources, so it was fun to research and ultimately is really helpful to me from time to time.



I love building scripts and tools. The beauty of code is that it works or it doesn’t. No inbetweens, it’s not subjective. If I can create tools to help make my animation easier or allow me to experiment more easily, then I do it. I like being able to do two completely different things, but be able to use them together to get me closer to my creative goals.

One thing I’ve taken away from your incredible site was when you said, don’t force animation principles to guide how you construct a scene, or as a checklist to your work. Would you mind elaborating this further for all the new animators who scratch their heads over this.

I think what I meant by this was to try and think of principles after the fact. So, if you had a character that was picking up a ball, you might not want to think like this “ok… so I need an antic, some squash as he bends down, some overlap in the back as he comes back up, and some lead in the head at the start”, I think that approach will allow you to think about principles rather than the story you’re animating. I would like to approach the shot thinking about an interesting way to perform the action, and then use principles to further the communication of the ideas I already have for the shot, and as a tool for clarity (which is really all the principles are about anyway).

Lastly can you tell us what’s next for you? Are we going to see more flip reviews on your blogs, more workflow demonstrations and more possible random scripts?

I desperately try to keep my personal work and the Flip site going as much as I can. The thing with the Flip site is that I still stand by my “mission statement” that I only post stuff on there that feels substantial and has educational purposes for me, and the readers. Unfortunately, I think it might not be obvious to people how long those kind of posts can take to create.. its tough. The video review thing went on hold as soon as I realized that my five year old laptop can’t handle them at all.. so I need to rethink that, as it was pretty fun for the few that I did. I definitely plan to do an updated workflow tutorial that discusses, in useful detail, how to create a shot with my layered and stepped mix. Hopefully I`ll have some new creature animation to show when I get around to completing that too. I know my Flip blog gets rarely updated, but I would like to keep it relevant, and not just post links, or stuff that I don’t feel benefits the community. If people want to drop me an e-mail with questions or topics to discuss that would be cool!

Cameron it’s been a pleasure doing this, I hope we see more awesome stuff come out of http://fliponline.blogspot.com/. If you guys haven’t head over there. Cameron has some great animation tutorials spanning over 10 years in the business. This man’s a genius. Thanks again mate!

Interview by: Andrew Tran

AnimSchool Interview: Animator Daniel Zettl


Daniel Zettl Reel 2012 from Daniel Zettl on Vimeo.


We would like to welcome Weta Animator, Daniel Zettl. Thank you Daniel for taking part in this interview. Can you tell us a little bit about your background and when you decided you wanted to be an animator? Did you have any traditional 2D animation background when you started?



I’ve drawn and painted since I was little. When I was around 16, I started to do graphic design and graffiti professionally. At the age of 20, when I finished my secondary school, I had an interesting portfolio to apply for an internship at a 2D animation studio in Munich. For me it was the closest to illustrating comic books I could imagine back then. Waiting for a spot to study communication design, I worked my way up within 6 month from a storyboard assistant, to a prop-location and character designer for an animated TV series called Lilly the Witch. My hand drawn animation skills were very basic; I hadn’t worked in a production as 2D animator yet. I must say 2D animation was somehow inaccessible and very abstract for me to get interested at first. But, once I understood that drawing for animation is the complete opposite of illustration, and I learned about acting and how to bring a character to life over a series of drawings, animation had my heart and soul! 

After various design pitches I had done for the studio, I taught myself 3D as a generalist and I had the fortune to get boosted by several animation veterans there. By then, I wanted to learn everything about 3D and get my hands on modeling, rigging and animation. I was offered my first animation position for the German feature film Hui Buh when I was 21 years old. I was part of the character design for the two CG characters, and I even designed and modeled the second character for the movie, a cartoony ghost designed like a pillow. This was also the first time I learned about FACS based facial blendshape systems and implemented this system for the cartoon character. I had the great luck to get under the wings of Tahsin Özgür, a 50-year-old animation director who brought tremendous knowledge from years of experience at Disney. His sense for appeal and cartoon acting resonated immensely with me. 


I think your shots from CA Scanline, which can be seen on your latest showreel, are amazing with solid acting, great poses and timing. What were some references or materials you drew upon that influenced you on this shot?
 What were some of the questions/thoughts going through your head while working on this shot? 

Lissi, this female character is well known from comedy sketches in German TV. The director of this movie is one of the biggest German comedians. He established the character of this princess over many episodes in his TV show, so I kind of knew already a bit of her story. I’m a huge fan of appeal, and that was my main priority for her. I wanted to portray her as the cutest and most girly character I could imagine. But interestingly enough my only reference was the director acting her out for some shots. I absorbed his gestures and timings, his personality and charm. Because in the TV sketches he plays the princess himself, and everybody knows that it’s him in the dress.

In your past blog posts you really hammer in timing, while staying really rough in your first pass, have you always had this mentality as an animator or did you work differently when you were starting out?

I definitely started out less flexible. In the beginning I was heavily influenced by my 2D upbringing. I animated some of my shots in 2D before I stepped to the computer. I would thumbnail and film myself or I dug through film reference so much that when I did my first blocking in 3D, I knew each pose and timing already and I went mostly with my first idea. I drew lots of reference from Disney and Dreamworks movies back then. But, this was for productions that had extremely short schedules and didn’t leave room for lots of iterations. I still do a ton of reference shoots and drawings today and would pitch these, but now it’s more important to react quickly to new ideas about a performance until we found the perfect one. Good timing is the baseline for any concept though, so this still accompanies me. 

You spoke very highly of Shamus Culhane’s book “From Script to Screen”, what were some of the things you extracted from his book and how did it affect your creative process?

By no means am I a Shamus Culhane expert, I’m just an insanely big fan of his work. I my eyes Culhane found, through several specific exercises, a way to tap into your unconscious. One of these exercises teaches how to switch your creative or logical brain half on and off at will and go wild with ideas, or be as analytic as possible. He provides 3 characters of different designs, brothers I think. You pic one emotion or a specific action, say joy, or anger or shopping- whatever. And once a day you sit down for one hour with a timer and do 1 drawing per minute. That is at least 60 drawings per hour, soon you’ll be doing heaps more and in a quality you thought you could only do with a model. After a few weeks or a month, you’re a completely different craftsman. It’s indescribable. You literally can span pages full of poses of one specific topic within a set amount of time in a crazy quality. Along these lines I want to recommend Kimon Nicolaides “The Natural Way To Draw” and Constantin Stanislavki’s books about method acting. The first one teaches you to put your thinking aside and draw only what you see by not looking at your paper while drawing. And Stanislavski teaches how to immerse yourself fully into a character by creating the emotions inside of you and basing them on real experience memory.




In your personal blog, you encourage animators to be comfortable with deleting their work if it’s not working out. Can you share with us any personal experiences where you put in a lot of effort on a shot, then scratched it, and had a better outcome? 

This can happen on every second shot I work on. I pitch a good solid idea, interesting and nice texture but once I hit the polishing phase or once the prior/next shot falls into place and I notice there’s one beat to much or the distance the character covers is too long and the shot is too long or too short and the cut doesn’t flow as good, I need to make big changes or delete maybe already polished beats. The cut and flow of the story is really what dictates a change of the performance. In general, when I work really intensely on a shot and want to get it perfect, the best thing is a couple of fresh eyes, who are entirely detached from the shot. Since I started out, and every day again, I try to acquire this “always objective eye” towards my work. I try and preserve this first impression of a shot. This usually leads to the right intuitive decisions, but it can often mean to do big changes.


Well thanks for being apart of this latest AnimSchool interview. 

To view more of Daniel’s work and current reel check out his website:

 Interview by: Andrew Tran

 

AnimSchool Interview: Rigger Sabine Heller

Thank you Sabine, for taking the time to answer a few questions for us. Can you tell us a little about your background, what schools you’ve attended and why you decided to become a rigger?

Everything started with my studies in Media System Design at the University of Applied Sciences in Darmstadt, Germany, in the year 2000. At that time, 3D animation had not yet been integrated into the program, and instead, my classes were a mix of design, economics and information technology. After I discovered that I was mainly interested in design and programming, I decided to do a summer internship at IBM: Java programming. Somehow, I realized that this was too dry of a subject for me and I tried to find a field that combined technology and creativity. Since I was fascinated by the early 3D animated movies and short films, I found it in 3D animation! More precisely, in 3D Studio Max which I was learning at home besides my studies.

Excited by this medium, I decided to put all my efforts in getting an internship in Hollywood, which I though would be the best place to start. Of course, I didn’t have any connections nor idea which companies where out there, so I looked up a whole bunch of effects companies in the internet and sent over 100 application letters via email. I was lucky and Gentle Giant Studios offered me an internship in 3D scanning.

Afterwards, everything went straight towards a career in animation. I returned to Germany, to finish my studies in Media System Design. After my graduation, I decided that I wanted to deepen my knowledge in 3D animation even further and moved to New York to study towards my Master’s degree in Computer Art at the School of Visual Arts on a Fulbright scholarship. After I received my degree in 2006, I returned once again to Germany and worked there for three years as Technical Director at Spans & Partner, an advertising studio in Hamburg. My responsibilities included the development of pipeline tools, special effects, set supervision and also character rigging. Funny enough, even though I always wanted to be an Effects TD, it turned out that rigging was actually what I enjoyed most of all my responsibilities! So, I decided to apply for a Character TD position at Blue Sky Studios when they had an opening in 2009 and voilà, I was lucky and got accepted.

You’ve worked in commercials and now film. What are some differences you’ve experienced in the two industries?

One of the major differences is the duration of a project. At a commercial studio for example, you might have a month or even a couple of weeks to finish a project. Also, the commercials are extremely short and whatever character you rig only has to hold up for this short amount of time. At a film studio, it’s possible that you work for more than a year on one movie. (By the way, this also means that after three years of working at a film studio you might only have one project to add to your demo reel.) The movies are normally 90 minutes long,  so whatever you do, your character better hold up for a large number of shots.  The quality of your rigs in film has to be much higher than in commercials. Summarizing, working in commercials has the advantage of being able to work on many different projects within a short time. However, the commercial industry is definitely faster paced with less time for detail, and can be quite exhausting.
You started your career working in Germany and currently you’re working in the United States. Did you experience any differences with working for an European company vs US company? Were there any programs you had to learn and how hard was it to make the transition?
It is hard to answer this question since there are many cultural differences not only between Europe and the United States, but also within Europe, between Germany and France or the U.K., for example. Taking those out of the the equation, I think it mainly comes down to the difference in size. Most of the studios in Germany are small, especially compared to the enormous companies like Blue Sky, Pixar and Dreamworks. Working in a small company is definitely quite different. Normally, one has to be more of a generalist with a specialization to be able to take over other tasks when needed. Often, the responsibility of one single person is much larger than in a company where you are one of a thousand since the hierarchies are much smaller. This is just to name a few…
For me personally, the difference between Blue Sky and my work in Germany was all of the above plus the transition from a commercial to a film studio. At first, I was a little nervous about being able to fulfill the expectations, especially, since I had to switch from XSI to Maya within a week. But luckily, it turned out to be not such a big deal at all.

Congratulations on recently being promoted to Creative Lead for Faces. What new responsibilities come with this role?

Thank you! I am very excited that I have been given this new responsibility. The role of a ‘lead’ in the rigging department is alternating for every show. Normally, we have four leads, each one responsible for a certain area. The creative face lead, together with the technical face lead and the character development supervisor, determines the standards for all the face rigs on a movie. This basically means, that all the basic controls and functionalities of the face rig are laid out before the actual character rigging starts. This is often done by developing a prototype. The work on the prototype also helps to define the rigging workflow. In addition, the creative face lead creates and updates all the documentation necessary for the rigging workflow. Once this is done, the face lead supports and accompanies every rigger in the rigging process of their character.

In Rio you rigged Marcel and in the upcoming release of Ice Age 4, you rigged Shira, a Saber Toothed Tiger. Are there any different challenges that come with rigging a bipedal vs a quadrupedal character?


Yes, one of the main differences is that quadrupedal characters have another leg setup. For Shira, the main difficulties were her front shoulders and upper arms. Shoulders are generally not an easy area in rigging and Shira required very special attention, because of the way the shoulder blades move under the skin when tigers, for example, walk. Since Shira is a girl, she had to look elegant and female. Still, she is a tiger and needed to be strong. This turned out to be especially tricky, not only in her shoulder, but also in the face. For example, she needed to be able to show anger, but at the same time you didn’t want to loose her femininity. This resulted in a lot of subtle back and forth until it felt right.

Lastly, what is your favorite type of character to Rig and why?

My favorite characters are the ones which provide a challenge. For example, this could be a technical challenge caused by the design which requires some out-of-the-box rigging approach. I have a particular liking for villains or the funny, odd characters. Most of the time, you can give the face a much more extreme range than when rigging a ‘good’, more ‘normal’ character.

In AnimSchool’s Introduction to Rigging class, Sabine explains the difference between IK and FK.

To view more of Sabine’s work visit:
www.sabine-heller.com/ 

Interview by: Amber Dempsey Shikuma

Page 3 of 3