Woes of Hollywood VFX Animation Companies: Why Rhythm & Hues closed its doors | |
abhie (OP) User ID: 15253380 India 02/28/2014 10:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | [link to www.youtube.com] (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |
terrorista User ID: 48562161 Canada 02/28/2014 11:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
abhie (OP) User ID: 15253380 India 02/28/2014 11:06 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Did you see the part where they play the Jaws music to cut out the thanksgiving speech by the Rhythm & Hues VFX crew during the Oscars? Last Edited by abhie on 02/28/2014 11:07 PM (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |
abhie (OP) User ID: 15253380 India 02/28/2014 11:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 48520488 United States 02/28/2014 11:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
terrorista User ID: 48562161 Canada 02/28/2014 11:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Did you see the part where they play the Jaws music to cut out the thanksgiving speech by the Rhythm & Hues VFX crew during the Oscars? yes it definitely was rude & disrespectful. It would be interesting to see all the VFX artists on strike, united together to send a message to the greedy film companies. But unfortunately there will always be those low-ballers that will take the work for peanuts. which is sad, really. todays modern movies wouldn't exist without the VFX team. the idea that so many have gone bankrupt is absurd. it should be a symbiotic relationship with mutual profits shared. but instead we get to see how corrupt the whole industry really is. wish there was a solution because I'm a huge movie fan. |
ErinTarn User ID: 23154143 United States 02/28/2014 11:50 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. "Brawndo! It's got electrolytes!" |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 6136393 United States 03/01/2014 12:00 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Rhythm & Hues did the visual effects for the movie Life of Pi. Quoting: abhie It recieved two nominations , one for Life of Pi, and the other for Snowwhite & the Huntsman. Sadly on the day of the Oscars, although they recieved the awards, the company itself was almost shattered. Watch to find out why: > [link to www.youtube.com (secure)] Sorry, it’s really hard for me to feel sorry for Rhythm and Hues or any other computer generated FX company. Why? Because I was part of the FX industry before computers, when effects were drawn and animated by hand. When computers and the amazing software that made our talents obsolete were developed, we were cast aside. No one cared. Because we understood the dynamics of animation we were encouraged and given training to created FX with computers but very few could make the jump. Why? Because all the joy was gone. Now anyone can create effects on a computer in their garage. So why not give the work to the cheapest worker? Anyone can do it with a little training. You don’t have to be an artist, only a geek. We were striking and demonstrating against out-sourcing as early as 1976. Where were you? (even born?) Where was the rest of America? No one cared. It used to be that I’d wait till the end of a movie to watch the credits because I knew so many people in the FX departments. Now, I know no one, except for maybe a few sell-outs, who went to India to teach. You want me to cry for you for losing your job? Sorry, it’s really hard. No one cared when I lost mine. It‘s the way of the world. Deal with it. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 19157644 United States 03/01/2014 12:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1036480 United States 03/01/2014 12:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 53169320 United States 03/01/2014 04:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 7128666 United States 03/01/2014 06:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
abhie (OP) User ID: 55039825 India 03/01/2014 10:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Pre-cgi FX was pure art! Brought character & life to the screen. Now everything looks fake :( Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1036480 This technology is pretty awesome too. We can't be stuck in one technology right? We need to move on to something that is more expansive. (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 38426109 United States 03/01/2014 10:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 38426109 United States 03/01/2014 10:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 19157644 United States 03/01/2014 10:48 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 38426109 United States 03/01/2014 10:51 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn Yes I'd rather watch this than 99% of the cookie-cutter-crap in the movies today |
abhie (OP) User ID: 55039825 India 03/01/2014 11:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn Yes I'd rather watch this than 99% of the cookie-cutter-crap in the movies today (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 34807283 United States 03/01/2014 11:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn It actually does have more to do with bad business practices than anything else. My neighbor worked for Sony's VFX department and always said the whole VFX industry was not sustainable the way it was being run (which is why he ultimately left a few years ago). That doesn't change that you are essentially correct. The effects nowadays take it too far over the top. When I was an editor, our rule was always that you never know a good editor is there; as in, you never stopped to think about the "edit", you were too caught up in the action and flow of the film to notice. This should also be a rule with animation effects - and to add to it, frankly, the camera should NEVER be able to do something a camera in real-life couldn't. That's the single biggest technical flaw in a lot of these cases that gives away the effect. The other part of it is that no matter how hard you try, there is still a minor disconnect in the compositing between CGI and film (or digital substitute). It's still mostly at the mercy of the artist to get close to a dead-on match. The absolute best effects are the ones that are so good you never even knew they were there, and they are very rare. I think, and this comes from a lowly hobbyist who's done this professionally a time or four (though not for movies or TV), you will start seeing a trend back to model-based effects work with animation effects in a supporting capacity for a little while. I think everyone's a little burned out on the production levels on everything, and the highest level of reality can only be accomplished (for now) by a combination of the two. |
terrorista User ID: 48562161 Canada 03/01/2014 11:49 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
abhie (OP) User ID: 55039825 India 03/02/2014 12:02 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn It actually does have more to do with bad business practices than anything else. My neighbor worked for Sony's VFX department and always said the whole VFX industry was not sustainable the way it was being run (which is why he ultimately left a few years ago). That doesn't change that you are essentially correct. The effects nowadays take it too far over the top. When I was an editor, our rule was always that you never know a good editor is there; as in, you never stopped to think about the "edit", you were too caught up in the action and flow of the film to notice. This should also be a rule with animation effects - and to add to it, frankly, the camera should NEVER be able to do something a camera in real-life couldn't. That's the single biggest technical flaw in a lot of these cases that gives away the effect. The other part of it is that no matter how hard you try, there is still a minor disconnect in the compositing between CGI and film (or digital substitute). It's still mostly at the mercy of the artist to get close to a dead-on match. The absolute best effects are the ones that are so good you never even knew they were there, and they are very rare. I think, and this comes from a lowly hobbyist who's done this professionally a time or four (though not for movies or TV), you will start seeing a trend back to model-based effects work with animation effects in a supporting capacity for a little while. I think everyone's a little burned out on the production levels on everything, and the highest level of reality can only be accomplished (for now) by a combination of the two. What I don't understand is; why do VFX companies do the changes after delivery for free? Why can't they charge for it instead of paying for it from their own pockets? Why do they agree for the fixed-bidding? Hoopefully now they are united, the fixed-bidding concept should be a thing of the past? (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 19157644 United States 03/02/2014 05:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn It actually does have more to do with bad business practices than anything else. My neighbor worked for Sony's VFX department and always said the whole VFX industry was not sustainable the way it was being run (which is why he ultimately left a few years ago). That doesn't change that you are essentially correct. The effects nowadays take it too far over the top. When I was an editor, our rule was always that you never know a good editor is there; as in, you never stopped to think about the "edit", you were too caught up in the action and flow of the film to notice. This should also be a rule with animation effects - and to add to it, frankly, the camera should NEVER be able to do something a camera in real-life couldn't. That's the single biggest technical flaw in a lot of these cases that gives away the effect. The other part of it is that no matter how hard you try, there is still a minor disconnect in the compositing between CGI and film (or digital substitute). It's still mostly at the mercy of the artist to get close to a dead-on match. The absolute best effects are the ones that are so good you never even knew they were there, and they are very rare. I think, and this comes from a lowly hobbyist who's done this professionally a time or four (though not for movies or TV), you will start seeing a trend back to model-based effects work with animation effects in a supporting capacity for a little while. I think everyone's a little burned out on the production levels on everything, and the highest level of reality can only be accomplished (for now) by a combination of the two. What I don't understand is; why do VFX companies do the changes after delivery for free? Why can't they charge for it instead of paying for it from their own pockets? Why do they agree for the fixed-bidding? Hoopefully now they are united, the fixed-bidding concept should be a thing of the past? They get paid based on completed shots. The bidding process is ridiculous. Work is also farmed out and subcontracted. |
abhie (OP) User ID: 38250418 India 03/02/2014 09:03 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the ultra-saturation of VFX-laden movies we see today. I think people are ready to see 'real' these days. Like in the 80's where creatures were built, not drawn. Quoting: ErinTarn It actually does have more to do with bad business practices than anything else. My neighbor worked for Sony's VFX department and always said the whole VFX industry was not sustainable the way it was being run (which is why he ultimately left a few years ago). That doesn't change that you are essentially correct. The effects nowadays take it too far over the top. When I was an editor, our rule was always that you never know a good editor is there; as in, you never stopped to think about the "edit", you were too caught up in the action and flow of the film to notice. This should also be a rule with animation effects - and to add to it, frankly, the camera should NEVER be able to do something a camera in real-life couldn't. That's the single biggest technical flaw in a lot of these cases that gives away the effect. The other part of it is that no matter how hard you try, there is still a minor disconnect in the compositing between CGI and film (or digital substitute). It's still mostly at the mercy of the artist to get close to a dead-on match. The absolute best effects are the ones that are so good you never even knew they were there, and they are very rare. I think, and this comes from a lowly hobbyist who's done this professionally a time or four (though not for movies or TV), you will start seeing a trend back to model-based effects work with animation effects in a supporting capacity for a little while. I think everyone's a little burned out on the production levels on everything, and the highest level of reality can only be accomplished (for now) by a combination of the two. What I don't understand is; why do VFX companies do the changes after delivery for free? Why can't they charge for it instead of paying for it from their own pockets? Why do they agree for the fixed-bidding? Hoopefully now they are united, the fixed-bidding concept should be a thing of the past? They get paid based on completed shots. The bidding process is ridiculous. Work is also farmed out and subcontracted. (I'm male, mid-40's, and live and work in India as a designer. Writing is a passion of mine, as is painting. My avatar represents my protagonist against the Illuminati -a female warrior.) :laotszungb: |