Rodney

Will Pickering have a great birthday? Tune in tomorrow and find out! Have a happy one Will!

What is the next community project and when is it going to happen? (You're welcome. ) Steve, You and Chris most definitely need to blog more about your experience whether here in the forum or elsewhere. I know I'd love to hear more about it. You may think some of it is trivial but it all adds up to inspire the next generation of animation masters. David, It's rather unfortunate (I think) that we've not been able to do an adequate post mortem on TWO and SO. I know it's easy for folks to nitpick but... people are entirely too sensitive about this stuff. The folks that worked on TWO and SO have done good stuff and they know it. A few words that suggest it could be better here or there shouldn't bother anyone a bit. Feedback is how we learn and folks around here would learn a ton from the TWO and SO experiences. (IMO we should start releasing some of the TWO and SO assets along with that post mortem as well) As for community projects, my suggestion (other than short ads for A:M) would be to push those special topics for everything they are worth. Don't have a special topic? Get one. Promote the heck out of it. When the special topics get to the point where folks see them successfully moving into production with cool stuff flowing out and onto the screen, others will be comping at the bit to join in and be associated with the project. We can itemize and rationalize and speculate and theorize but the real secret to success is... (ahem) success. Hit 'em in the head with success before they even know what has hit 'em.

Keep in mind that one reason folks may be reluctant to get involved is that they've been around this track before. I've lost count of the projects I've supported over the years. In most cases (all cases?) the originator has left their own dream. There is an unfortunate aspect of this that I hope we can avoid here in the forum (and I think the Special Topics help with ownership on this) and that is that after a project peters out the originator often has a hard time interacting with those that joined in the effort. They've ran into reality and thereafter had a hard time facing those who they had convinced to join their dream. In my estimation it would be better to just apologize and move on to the next project but in many cases that person has real and imagined pressures that cause them to leave completely. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that isn't the best way. A story I'm now thinking of two kids I worked with (on two different projects) that I still communicate with once in a while that were convinced that they could put together an animated series (or... maybe a movie). I said, 'Okay, let's do it' and off we went. At an inevitable point their interest faded and I was left with that old familiar feeling of "We've been here before, haven't we?". As such things are complicated, I won't attempt to capture what made them move on to other things. But here is the point of what I am saying, NO ONE is going to believe in your idea more than you do. If you lose interest in your own idea don't expect someone else to fulfill that dream. If you can't convince others that your idea will work, why fault them for not having adequate vision? I don't see those past efforts as failures... Everyone involved learned a lot from the experience. But it does help if we have realistic expectations going in. Periodically someone pops up in the forum with high hopes and dreams. What else can be said but, "Let's do it!" Most folks are highly prepared for failure but few are ready for success. This community can help them gain that experience. Firstly and foremostly by failing faster. Then by failing spectacularly. Finally, by setting achievable goals and succeeding beyond their wildest dreams.

Heck, I do that with every kickstarter I support. Who actually wants to spend real money! Which reminds me... I've got a supercomputer on a chip that is suppose to be arriving one of these days...

You may have a point here but I wonder... I wonder if his eyes could be this small in the first act but a second version of the model created with slightly larger eyes for the third act. My rationale for thinking this is that initially having the audience not be able to see the Father's eyes might be a good thing. In the first act we want to downplay the audience's ability to connect with Father and Mother and to fully connect with Latimer. In this way it might be good for the audience to have to search for the eyes of Mother, Father and even Geeves (the Butler) but see Latimer's eyes as fully expressive. In the third act this is no longer the case as we want the audience to be a little confused as to what direction Latimer should take. Accenting the eyes of the parents at that stage would certainly do this. Why would Latimer want to leave his family when they are together again? Having this change would also in a subtle way suggest that these characters have grown, something about them has changed. Change is a good thing in animation. Aside: One thing Don Bluth always stresses is that in any given camera angle the eye sizes should not be the same. I can elaborate on that more but it's something to think about especially with regard to symmetry/asymmetry. Whaddya think?

An interesting thing about collaborative efforts is that individuals (and groups) already have full creative control so it's hard to have more than everything there is already. They can create anything they want. They don't have to adhere to the script. They don't have to stick to their assigned time/frame limit. They don't have to meet deadlines. They don't have to match up their shots with the preceding and subsequent sequences. They don't have to do any of these things. But when they do... wow... magic appears on the screen. One of many reasons why Martin set out to make a community film was that there had already been a host of individual efforts both here and elsewhere that resulted in short films and animation tests. But none had that longer term cohesive vision such as one would find in a typical 90 minute film. Martin had to sacrifice his vision when folks began to design and create the characters, props and sets. Others had to set their's aside when those were refined, detailed and textured. And the voices... how likely was it that the voices were exactly what those creators had heard in their heads? Everyone involved sacrificed something to achieve completion of the final film. I know of one talented artist that left TWO primarily because he was getting physically sick at the idea of working with newbies that he knew for a fact couldn't produce at the level of quality he envisioned... that he craved... that he needed to have in order to be associated with the film. He was right in many ways but his sense of community revolved entirely around him with very little room for deviation. Personally, I think it was inevitable that he would eventually leave. It was just a matter of where and when. I do hope he matures enough in his other collaborative efforts to be able to return some day and rejoin the community he helped create. Denying the self is a tough thing. Especially for highly creative people. This is a tough nut to crack and if it were easier we'd be seeing a lot more completed collaborative features both here and elsewhere on the internet. Like most folks, I have a few theories.

Love the additiona to your video with Tar walking forward and the montage of drawings. Very nice! Best of luck to you in your endeavor! I'll be supporting but look for my contribution a bit later as I've maxed out my kicks and starts for the next few days.

Hehe! Wow. I never thought I'd be able to hire the likes of Mark Largento. I'm really liking the sound of that.

Some folks have contacted me to let me know they can't respond to this topic. I'm looking into it. If you can't post here, please bear with me as I run through all the settings. Update: I tweaked a few settings and hopefully that'll fix the problem. Update2: I've moved this topic to the Community Projects forum because I'm not smart enough to figure out why some couldn't post to it before. I'll investigate more as I find time to dig deeper.

No issue here. Might it be something to do with screen resolution that interferes with the size of the dialog box?

Wish we would have thought to videotape your reaction as the final moment crept in.

By my count... you've made it! (with 1 minute to spare) Congratulations! Celebrate tonight... but then GET BACK TO WORK!

I upped my pledge... only a few hundred $ to go. I don't see my change reflected in the tally. How in the heck can I contribute twice at the same level. Perhaps I can't?

Agreed, but (as you say) how else can a feature film be accomplished? Collaboration really is the only way to get such a thing accomplished. More collaboration means... or at least should equate to... getting more accomplished. Here's the thing I focus on: I love to be creative and do my own thing but I enjoy working with others just as much if not more (just not at the same time... sometimes I just wanna be left alone!). I've found other artists/animators to be social creatures as well. That's why we have a forum here. But while the vast majority of A:M users may be social that doesn't mean they move in the same circles that we do here. There is only so far you can spread yourself before you find you've spread yourself too thin. TWO was like that for me. On the one hand I was trying to learn to animate... on the other I was a bit distracted in the middle east. Something had to give. Sometimes our motivations change... what feels completely honest today may not ring as true some other day. I hope no one went into TWO planning to fail. I think one area that we should have accounted for more carefully is where a task is considered finished. That's not always an easy thing to assess. Early in the process everything is full of energy and creativity. The ideas flow easily. Later on the tasks become more mundane.... "Why is that color shifting?!?" This is where it can help to have a finishing team already lined up that hasn't been involved in the earlier stages. But... there is danger here. Anyone that arrives on scene late in the game is not going to have the same attachment that did the earlier creatives. And yet this process of finishing is so absolutely necessary. It's not enough to take a project only 2/3rds of the way. Someone has to make the tough choices that will deliver this thing. So, either the old team has to make those tough decisions (which is hard to do when you are too close to them) or they have to let go and let others finish the game. This commitment beyond our own contribution must be deliberated. It's like letting our kids grow up, launch out on their own and pray they'be be successful and safe. I would go so far as to say that every shot and sequence needs to play out the same way, even if only one person is producing the animation. The hats that are being worn must change. When ideas aren't executable in the real world... something has to change. Time is a factor as well. How long should a sequence be delayed because 'artist at work here'. The importance of meeting deadlines cannot be overstated because of how delays effect everyone and everything downstream. If time allows at the end perhaps additional improvements can be made. (This 'extra' time at the end should be budgeted in from the beginning) In the end there is a lot of give and take and more often than not the artist working on the shot is going to feel they've given everything. But this effort may not be enough if it doesn't fit in well with the rest of the film. We see this as true to a point but primarily from the perspective of the individual (i.e. the non-collaborator). The vision that collaborations allow to come to fruition is that team effort where all involved agree to disagree so that a common vision may prevail. This is what the Disney studio did/does so well. (and yet artists still continue to feel shorted on that 'ol give/take) So whose vision is it anyway? I submit to you that ultimately it is the audience's vision we are trying to fulfill as we endeavor to entertain them. In my estimation the best stories (also the most commercial?) engage everyone in the audience (no matter who they are) to the maximum degree. The audience must be the first and the last character in every story ever conveyed.

Perhaps they are off basking in the glory of their success? Artists are sensitive creatures. There seems to be two primary approaches to working with them: 1) Handle with care. 2) Bash them atop the head. In this I'm finding that the use of both is appropriate but as in animation itself, timing is everything. A little inbetweening also helps.

I'm liking that. It's interesting... when I thought of Latimer's father I thought primarily of his jaw for some reason... and there it is. Fancy that! Outlook: You are on the right track.

Bruce, I'd like to think enough time has passed that everyone could share their experience in making TWO like you just did. And delve even deeper also. Everyone struggled through the gamut of emotions during TWO as it came to fruition. It was an impossible task... that still got done. There is a considerable difference between working on an animation alone and collaborative works. Lloyd, I had to laugh at myself a little when I read your words about not being thrilled by the Oz books. Initially the main thing that kept me going was the thought that, "at least it's not 'Alice in Wonderland'". It didn't help that...animation-wise.... I really didn't know what I was doing. That can be really reality check when you know others are relying on you. Compound that with the inevitable frustrations that occur when we are confident something will work a particular way only to find out it won't. I'll requote this line again by Bruce because this is points to the core of why we embark on community projects in the first place. By sharing the process and end product of each other's workflow we learn. If one looks at the cartoons of old it's fairly easy to see where one artist's hand left off and another one started. Sometimes the change can be startling. For some reason, perhaps our more sophisticated tastes in these times, makes those subtle shifts in quality and approach a bit harder to swallow. Quality is like that though. Quality is highly subjective and lies in the realm of the beholder. This is still an obstacle however to making films collaboratively because a goal is to blend each disparate element into a cohesive whole. In order to do this in a complex project individuality gets sacrificed so that one vision can shine through. Artists struggle with this concept because we all want to put our personal stamp onto our work. I'll tell you the number one reason why folks struggled with TWO... communication. While an effort was made to use skype and every other means available the technology wasn't quite mature enough to keep the (mostly visual) information flowing. Where communication fails misinformation and guesswork flourish and so we have some folks zigging while others are zagging. But this alone isn't necessarily a bad thing. The problem lies when we perceive that we have wasted our time due to some unfortunate communication. I believe I can illustrate this point via an experience I had on TWO. In the scene just after departing Nimmie Aimee's cottage TW, Scarecrow and Woot have a dialogue exchange that I was assigned to work. I got my marching orders and began to storyboard out the scene and realized some of it wasn't flowing. As it was written it felt like a scene that needed to be cut. Rather than redraw the scene I used Bob Taylor's drawings from the initial storyboard and manipulated them to quicken the pace and motivate the three characters toward the next scene... arrival at Mrs. Yoop's castle. A motivating device I used was to enhance the elements of thunder and lightning that appeared in the already rendered test scenes from the arrival at Yoop's castle. The real challenge of the sequence was to incorporate a song, that of TW pining for his lost love, into the sequence. It was at this point that the new storyboard was green lit by Martin and Dhar Jabouri was signed on to principally animate the sequence. Here's where we went wrong. Now we had three visions that were very different all thinking of how the sequence would play out. The only one that should have been valid was Martin's (but he was reluctant to be directorial) and I thought the vision was captured in the storyboard. Dhar's was the vision that was important because he was doing the work. My failure... and Martin's if he's willing to join me... was to stop communicating. But some of this was inevitable because as I saw that parts of the sequence were deviating from what I thought was in the storyboard my attempts to communicate got worse. Poor Dhar! He was just trying to animate his scene and here he's got my deviation from the original script to contend with. So were those new storyboards green lit or not? In the end it no longer mattered and where it came to that scene my vision had to go. Because I had invested so much into developing that scene, this was a painful experience. Herein lies a problem with collaborative work. Each individual has a unique perspective, approach and workflow. The best way to get to the common vision is to have crystal clear direction to follow. This is not as important in the case of 'One Man One Computer' wherein there is only one vision but it is considerably more important in collaborative projects. The folks who are working on the project need to know that their efforts won't be wasted or (unless absolutely necessary) cast onto the cutting room floor. For what it's worth, I'm really glad I had that experience with that TWO sequence. I learned a lot from it. Firstly and foremostly not to take any of those painful moments personally. Just do your best, plus things up where you can, and be ready to move on. Amen Nancy. All hats off to those folks!

My gauge is that another community-wide feature film is several years off. Most folks in the community currently have too many irons in the fire. Of course, much can be accomplished in that interim and that certainly doesn't mean ideas for features can't be pitched/offered. The more ideas the better. There are an amazing number of short films/projects in the works at this time. To embark on another community feature film at this time would be to encourage everyone to place those aside and work on something else. When you consider most feature film can take five years from start to finish that is a considerable sacrifice. To place this timeframe into proper perspective, how willing would you be to set 'Woke Up Dead' aside for five years to fully commit yourself to such a long term community project? Things I see coming up*: - More general collaboration and more emphasis on the Special Topics (two or more people getting involved in shorter/less stressful projects - One or more Animation:Master ads/demos Ad work in general provides amazing opportunities to polish skills (and tell stories) within a limited scope and in a limited timeframe with a limited budget. The subject matter can also be very broad without a lengthy personal commitment being tied to any given project. The ads could be for A:M but they could also be for local stores, charities, or even imaginary products. As long as the participants are gaining experience and having fun, that is what counts) - Where there is interest... perhaps a few community shorts/contests (ala Rear View Window or the contest you initiated). *Note: This is what I sense but it certainly is not going to be what happens. The A:M community will dictate that.

I'm liking that. It could be useful for many different effects.

Hopefully this isn't too far afield... I really like the idea of creating a world and inviting others to tell stories in it and the shared assets that can make that world a very interesting place. I'd be interested in your take on one aspect of the creative aspect in derivative characters. Let's say someone like Sergio Argones or Stan Sakai wanted to tell a story or two in the Tar of Zandoria setting. How would the terms of ownership work there? Obviously, this isn't going to fall into the 50/50 split you mentioned before because they would likely be using already established characters (i.e. Groo and Usagi Yojimbo). Likewise, I'm curious as to how this works with other significant characters that might start out as bit players but develop a following and become major characters themselves. (It will happen. Bet on it.) I've got a few thoughts in this area but I'm more interested in yours ideas. I do think that folks might like to avoid any legal issues similar to those that arose back in the days where Lee/Kirby/Ditko and other created a common space for superheroes to live. I guess my question is this: Where does the 50/50 split come into play? Is that specifically for characters that you have created that others would use to create continuing adventures? You may have already explained this and I missed it. Good luck on your Kickstarter! (My suggestion would be to point the potential supporters at some of your other high quality work... the balrog for instance. Perhaps you could also mention the other high profile projects you've been involved in.) Edit: Images like this one will go a long way.

If I were only a rich man... I have not discounted the idea of eventually going into business and supplying all who work with me with a copy of A:M. But it takes money to do that kind of thing. This ain't no charity. For volume discounts I suppose I'd be haggling with Hash Inc to get the optimal deal. I figure that won't be until the year 2020 so we've still got a few years. It would take some doing to get me to go back to those platters. Now if we were talking USB sticks or portable harddrives...

You may want to research that. I understand some folks have lost their shirts on kickstarter due to the high cost of shipping overseas. The primary story I recall reading involved a successful kickstarter who had to go back to their supporters and change the terms of the deal afterwards. The contributors were understanding but the folks running the kickstarter had stress they had hoped they would have avoided. $5.00 will likely not be enough to ship to some overseas locations.

Most definitely. I can see some nice improvements in many places. And of course, the face is very impressive (and expressive). I'm not sure where I was when you originally posted this topic. Obviously not paying attention!

Hey, Mark! Not to distract you from you current focus on the Wobbling Dead but... Did you ever do anything with this character? Perhaps you morphed him into the design of your current characters? Nice economy of splines!

You learn something new every day. Who knew that these two illustrious gentlemen shared the same day? Happy Birthday Shelton and Jason!