CGI for Television: Don't End Up In The Cartoon Graveyard

DCDC's Josh Prikryl relates ten years of experience and gives us advice about how to produce a successful full-CGI show for the crushing requirements of television.

2. Producers and directors not heeding the limitations of CGI.
The hurdle of too many scenes per episode, and too many scene retakes, will cripple a CGI production. An unrestrained quantity of character and set models is often the case with "failed" productions. Writers must understand these limitations with CG animation upfront. If producers insist on not putting limits on this, they are probably going to have the episodes delivered late, no matter what any CG house tells them up front. It's easy to accept the large quantity of models in the boardroom, when budgets are being approved, as it's only theory at that point, but someone needs to be realistic. Often, we have producers requesting to remodel characters and models that were approved previously. This is another burden that is more common than one thinks, but even if it's necessary, it's a step toward failure.

3. Incorrect software choices.
It seems unreasonable to be a trailblazer at this point in CG television production. Go with what works now, or what is already proven to work on a TV schedule. Render time, the technical equivalent to "cel painting" in the older 2D days, can make or break a TV animation production even if everything else goes right. If particular software has never been used before, or should have never been used, for television production, go with a more practical solution. It's simple math when everything goes right...but most of us can only be so lucky.

4. Finally, you cannot underestimate the importance of animator morale.
To complete a production with consistent quality, you must keep the animation team intact and with good morale. A good animation team needs solid leadership to produce animated scenes week after week after week faithfully. After all, to a large degree, and whether they know it or not, the animators decide whether scenes are turned in on time and a production succeeds or fails.

Solutions
Okay, so those are the pitfalls, which brings me to how to produce a successful CGI animated television show. Let's summarize some basic points that studios can improve upon for success, or, how to stay out of the cartoon graveyard:

1. The CG studios and producers need to develop a maintainable quality, and must plan their schedules accurately if they, and CGI animation productions worldwide, are to not only survive, but become as predictable as 2D animation. Although a company might have a great looking demo, they must quickly adapt a quality that is maintainable for 13 episodes and up in order to best serve their client. The stylization of a CG design for a show is not only more maintainable for the crew, but, as we know from 2D animation, a character's body and facial antics read better with some exaggeration, which isn't as easy with photo-realistic animation productions.

Producers must be willing to accept a quality that is reasonable, and understand that the entire schedule is in jeopardy if they allow too much pride to enter the production. Shrek took 4 years -- what can we do in four weeks? This should not however be seen as an excuse to produce a low standard quality. There is a balance between the "higher than TV" quality and what I would call "low standard animation." A failure to understand this medium ground has had great consequences for even the biggest studios that are attempting television CG animation production. A production's goal is to deliver a message — the story. Unfortunately, there isn't time to finesse each and every movement when it comes to TV.











Comments


Cutting Corners in 3D Render at a lower resolution and upres in Photoshop. Render at 24 or 15 FPS. and if you need ones you can use Retimer to create them. Motion blur can be added as POST (Reelsmart motion blur for after effects) as well as DOF effects using depth maps. Good animation will cover everything else. Animate using Low res version of your high res models. then switch at rendertime. Far away objects can be less detailed. and the main thing is dont be afraid to cheat...just make sure that what does get seem doesnt suck. And while i hate to criticize anyone, and i only saw 2 minutes of BUM....the martians didnt have any life to their motions...i believe they should be animated more like ANTZ. SNAP, Squash and stretch!! hope this helped out someone.
Tom Lillehoff (not verified) | Wed, 01/30/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
Having seen Butt Ugly Martians on T.V. and been thoroughly astounded at how terribly poor it is in both story-line and animation, I cannot understand how it managed to get onto T.V. in the first place when there are so many good companies who are not getting the commissions. CGI is a tremendous and effective tool if used well and is sensitive to the context in which it is employed. Looking to the Film world, Toy Story and Antz, etc. prove this case wonderfully. So also do many commercials on U.K. T.V. Without intending any personal offence towards Josh Prikryl, I unfortunately have to fall in line completely with what Vic Debaie had to say on the matter in his letter on December 11/01, where he stated "The show is terrible, the animation is weak, the stories are lame and the characters look as stiff and dead as their movement". I would also add to his this that the lip-sync and sound effects are completely dead in the water and unconvincing. I myself am an animator and am well aware of the restrictions of time, budget and commissioning- bodies. However, if there are to be CGI T.V. shows, then please could they be good, with well developed story lines and not loosing any quality in animation. In terms of source material, one can take a good long look at British animation of the seventies with it's treasure-trove of magical gems.
Tim Chapple (not verified) | Sat, 01/12/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
I haven’t seen BUM but there is good stylized and bad stylized. I’m sure the 2d world was horrified to see Pokemon or Neon Genesis for the first time. I think these are really good examples of where we should be pushing TV 3d animation.
JAy Kyburz (not verified) | Sat, 01/05/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
Great Info: I would like to know more specifics i.e. from experience where are good places to cut corners...(rendering with no shadows, lower paid animators, modelers?)....and where are good places to spend money (i.e. storyboards, higher paid animators, modelers?)...and so on. Very good article
Scott Jones (not verified) | Fri, 01/04/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
I understand the fact that "Butt Ugly Martians" was done on time and on budget, but come on....if that is the type of show that producers want, then fine, I officialy quit the industry. The show is terrible, the animation is weak, the stories are lame, and the characters look as stiff and dead as their movement. I refuse to believe that this is the type of production that people need to work on....this is the type of production I need to stay away from. What can an animator learn by working on a series that's motto seems to be "don't worry it's good enough, and besides kids are too stupid to notice that (insert problem here)!" I have seen all of the productions that Josh Prikryl has worked on.....remind me again why motion capture is considered animation....it turns the animator into a mouse monkey "tweeker". I am sure Josh Prikryl has alot of experience and I agree with alot of things in his article, but the fact that a terrible series like "Butt Ugly Martians" has been plastered all over the net, and is use as an example on how to do a cgi tv series for kids......ill put up with the advertising of the series, but there is no way I will look at it as some sort of goal to attain.
vic debaie (not verified) | Tue, 12/11/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink
Really, it was a very interesting read. I am greatful to have such a wealth of knowlege to draw from. Re: the show itself.... we'll, it's terrible. It's fodder for the masses. I've never seen such terrible animation and production values... BUT... Kids love it. THAT's what counts. Animators (including myself) are snobs. We can't help it... Good article, terrible show, and congralations for getting it done on budget and on time! (serisouly, congrats :) We need to see more on telly (admittedly better than this, but we need more, like you say, successful productions).
Larry Dickens (not verified) | Tue, 12/11/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink
Great summary, Josh! And great job on the BUM Series. Gary Selvaggio
gary selvaggio (not verified) | Wed, 12/05/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink
Hmmmmm...this article began with what seemed like a valid and interesting topic. However, he is CG director for, IMO, the worst animated series in terms of visuals, story (everything) i have ever seen. AWN, don't put people like this in the firing line! BUM is absolutely terrible! It is guilty of all the crimes this Prikle is going on about and more! He needs to take a step back and stop congratulating himself on signing off 4 millions scenes...because most of them are awful! Sorry for all the exclamation marks. I am surprised that he cannot see what utter drivel he is involved in producing himself. On the positive side, i did wonder when i accidently was tortured by watching Butt Ugly, whether those art criminals who were involved in it realised it was poo and now I have my answer. It is a shock to me that a reasonable human being could think that it was of an acceptable standard. The strange things money does to your artistic sensibilities...please beat that guy round the head with some art and tell him to shut up.
Allessandro Del Piero (not verified) | Wed, 12/05/2001 - 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.