Shrek 2 hopes to fracture the fairy tale just like its predecessor. Photo courtesy of DreamWorks Pictures TM & © 2003 DreamWorks LLC.

Computer generated imagery has become a daunting force in the world of animation. Certainly, the trend in general feature film production domestically favors semi-photorealistic computer animation. But while it is relatively natural to the medium to produce solid renditions of the world, the computer tends to lack the energy, emotion, and flexibility that traditional techniques enjoy more easily.

We’ll address innovations from the production and academic worlds of CG animation that draw directly from the lessons and aesthetics learned by traditional animators years ago. From animation studios such as DreamWorks to academic graphics research labs, we’ll explore techniques in motion, rendering and simulation that aspire to give computer animation the artistic control that 2D animation enjoys.

For an overview of traditional animation techniques, the reader is encouraged to reference Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life by Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston, as well as The Animation Book by Kit Laybourne.

Motion Control: The Principles of Animation
Animators have been fighting to achieve more emotive results in computer animation almost since the first digital animators. Generally, it is accepted that the computer doesn’t change the fundamental principles of animation as addressed by the original Disney artists. It only transports those rules to a new world (see John Lasseter’s 1987 SIGGRAPH Presentation, “Principles of Traditional Animation Applied to 3D Computer Animation”).¹

The first step seems to always come down to the proper training. As John Canemaker, animation historian and director of animation studies at NYU’s Tisch School of the Arts, observes, “Animation still relies on the principles of motion. [The computer] is a tool as much as a pencil is.”

At NYU’s animation studies program, John Canemaker makes sure that students are trained in traditional and computer techniques.

Canemaker adds that NYU has a very eclectic program, combining and intermingleing traditional and computer animation. “We feel we have to give them all those things to make them truly prepared. The more they know of all the possibilities, the better the production is going to be.”

This commitment to drawing upon the successful principles of motion in traditional animation echoes throughout many of the studios. AWN’s recent coverage of Glen Keane’s new Disney project, Rapunzel Unbraided, reports that the 2D veteran’s willingness to embrace the new medium allowed Keane and the other 3D artists to share ideas and try new perspectives.

In addition, Sony Pictures Animation evp, Sandra Rabins, told VFXWorld that the upcoming Open Season “is going to have more squash-and-stretch animation than we’ve seen or at least than [evp] Penny [Finkleman Cox] and I have been affiliated with...”

Similarly, director Vicky Jenson has stated that, with DreamWorks’ Shark Tale, “We want to go back and play with animation and do what it does best, which is the squash-and-stretch and the playfulness in the exaggerations you can do in animation.” This point has been underscored by DreamWorks partner Jeffrey Katzenberg in referring also to Shrek 2, Madagascar and Over the Hedge.

With a direction set, it comes down to an implementation problem. DreamWorks’ head of artistic development, Frank Gladstone, shares his approach at solving this problem. “To me, it’s almost a philosophical question,” says Gladstone. “You can do a lot in computer animation that can achieve the same results or those like 2D. But I don’t think in general training that those things are stressed as much as they could be. I wouldn’t develop a technology. I would develop the skills of the artists. That ability to nuance a performance rather than just [going] through the motions.

“Animation is the ability to exaggerate, to caricature life. It doesn’t mirror it. Technically speaking, we’re still not at that point when you always, easily get the performance. I think you can get the motion, but not the performance. It’s easy in traditional animation to move an eyebrow for a subtle expression. In CG, you have to fight a little bit to do that.”

Fight indeed. The benefit of being able to create reusable characters comes at a high cost of character preparation. The freedom of expression requires enormous control. For computer animation, every new control for a character requires the precious time of an articulator. The collection of controls for a character can quickly become overwhelming. For demands of exaggeration that fall beyond what can be achieved with current techniques, technology must step in.