The Great Footage Fallacy

Gene Deitch believes that measuring animation in footage does not help the creative process or make much sense in these global times, therefore, he proposes to make time the global unit of animation production.
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld | Columns: Career Coach

An excerpt from Gene Deitch's book, How To Succeed In Animation (Don't Let A Little Thing Like Failure Stop You!).

Here is something that few animators seem to think about, but which has bugged me for years: Are we animating foot-long strips of film, or are we animating increments of time? If we are all into globalization, let’s work in a global standard. I would like to foment an animation revolution in the dimension of time!

Footage. We were all weaned on it. Every American filmmaker, certainly every American animator, is trained to think in terms of feet of film. How many feet of film an animator can turn out per week is often his measure of productivity and measure of pay.

This Doesn't Work
When I first arrived in Prague, with the initial purpose of developing co-production with my New York studio, I ran into an immediate snag. Czech animators measure their output in meters! One meter of film equals 3.2808 feet. But what the hell does that really mean? I saw the promise of endless complications and calculations in the process of co-production. I began to realize that the whole idea of measuring animation in terms of the length of a strip of film was meaningless and madness, and I wondered why we in America had never realized this before?

Look. Movie film goes through a theater projector at the rate of 24 frames per second. So how many frames of film are there in a foot? 16! 16 frames equal two-thirds of a second! No one watching a movie is at all aware of feet of film whizzing by. If one is interested in the length of a movie, or the length of a scene, and wants to measure it, they will use a stopwatch. They will measure minutes, seconds and increments thereof. As I constantly point out in lecturing about filmmaking, we have a medium that exists in the dimension of time. Footage is especially nonsense in digital computer animation, where there is no such thing as a reel of film or even spool of tape. There is not a physical length of anything! The only length is time. Nearly everyone these days has a VCR at home, and perhaps a DVD player. Does anyone know how many feet of the reel of tape inside the cassette, or of the spiral groove on a DVD, is needed to record one minute of action? How many are aware that the tape in the same VHS cassette spools out 30% faster when recorded in the American NTSC system than in the European PAL system? But who cares? The important thing is that the action produced on the TV screen plays at the exact same speed, and that is what counts!

Time in Your Hands
If most of the world outside of North America measure film lengths not in feet but in meters, what is it that every filmmaker on the entire planet has in common? Seconds, minutes and hours! — TIME! Movie making exists in the dimension of time.

So I had printed up a new type of animation exposure sheets. The traditional exposure sheets have horizontal ruled lines down their length, each line representing a frame of film. The numbered animation drawings for the various levels are entered on the lines representing the frames of film they are to be photographed upon. Every 16th line, representing a foot-length of film, is usually a heavy line. This is an arbitrary measurement, as it actually represents just two-thirds of a second. We certainly don't measure our work in three-quarter seconds. Of course not. We measure our scenes in whole seconds, and increments thereof.







Comments


We have had production companies and studios in 5 countries (including the U.S.) and have worked in many more. Our X sheets have always been 100 frames. But then, we've always been mavericks.
Jean Mathieson (not verified) | Mon, 03/24/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
Finally someone making sense! Some European countries, where there's not much of an animation industry usually work in seconds & frames. So when I came to Canada from Europe (Holland), I went through a similar struggle. It was a fight to have the crews switch to work in seconds & frames rather than the arbitrary and definitely non-universal feet. Traditions are tough to change, even though they don't always make sense.
Hubert den Draak (not verified) | Wed, 02/26/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
Gene, Thank you for bringing this to light. When I started my animation studio in the 60s I had never worked at or even seen one and had to teach myself everything. So natuarally my X-sheets were in frames, with a colored line after every 24th frame. Seconds was the way my stop watch worked. I managed to fit one hundred frames (roughly four seconds) on each page so the number at the top of the page also told you what the first digit was. The measurement in feet must have been started by a film editor.
Steve Segal (not verified) | Mon, 02/24/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
Gene, We have similar experience as NZ. We use 100 frame x sheets ( 4 second in PAL time). Even so, many veterans like to quote in Footage. We slowly are stripping it out of the vocabulary for TV series. Working in frames and seconds is the way it is going but the PAL and NTSC variations sometimes do cause trouble in Co- productions with US/Canada. Globilzation of TV systems is not there yet and its hard to see North America adopting PAL (superior in resolution) as it is a massive expense ( Example: Imperial and metric conversion ccosts). This is one area that the US lags behind the world. Adopting sytems that are global is political and business oriented and It is often a topic of discussion within our studio and the industry, (often with humor attached). Regards Rodney Whitham
Rodney Whitham (not verified) | Sun, 02/23/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink
Good on ya Gene. Down here in New Zealand we have been using a range of second based X sheets since the late 1970's. We mostly animate to PAL TV so we work in 25 frames/sec. The American footage sheets were a waste of time for us. I know of 3 studios here who made up their own 50 or 100 frame sheets way back then. My guess is that the same may have happened in England and Australia when TV commercials started.
Euan Frizzell (not verified) | Wed, 02/19/2003 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.