Search form

Question of VFX vs. Animation

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
Question of VFX vs. Animation

Hello,

I posted this in the general forum as well, but no response.

I have some questions for all of you, I am just beginning to learn about visual FX, although I've been interested in 3D modelling/animation for a while. Hope someone out there can give me some insight!

1) Is it usual for an artist to have experience with both 3D modelling and VFX / Compositing?

2) Do effects usually require some 3D modelling skills? How many effects would be combinations of both?

3) What is the difference between the different software packages Shake, Combustion, Digital Fusion, etc.

4) Are effects always done in post-production, or are they sometimes done concurrently with 3D animation?

Basically, I guess what i am trying to get to is how much of an overlap, or how much synergy is between 3D animation/3D modelling and visual effects? For example, say we want to do a thunderstorm scene, with trees blowing and lightning flashing. Where is the split betw/ 3D animation and VFX here?

Thanks, hope my questions arent too basic!

-Alfa

Hi Alfa22,

if you work as a freelancer in the biz, it is important to be flexible as a modeller, animator, compositor and effects work. It used to be you could specialise more in a specific area, say animation, but the freelance industry is evolving now into less of a 'master of one' and rather a 'jack of all' as a preference. Studio's get more for their money this way and to be fair makes you a more rounded artist by widening your skillset and thus, expanding your employment opportunities. This isn't necessarily true if you work full time at a major production house where specific skillsets are perhaps more important. You'll naturally always lean toward one area more than another as a personal preference, but the more you work in the industry the more skills you'll pick up along the way.

All the compositing packages essentially do the same thing, which one you choose is again down to preference and what you can afford.

The scene you specify with the lightning, wind and rain would require a lot of compositing seperate elements together to ensure you get your desired result. Essentially and without going into too much detail, the more dynamic and particle driven elements you introduce into your scene, the more you'll need to composite.

Hope that helps.

G.

It used to be you could specialise more in a specific area, say animation, but the freelance industry is evolving now into less of a 'master of one' and rather a 'jack of all' as a preference.

I'm glad to hear this - I've always been more comfortable doing more than just one specific thing. Too limiting, and with a huge potential for boredom.

So...

So in a visual FX house (i.e., not a 3D modelling house), animators would still need to be able to do a lot of the modelling and texturing functions for VFX, as well as have a good understanding of compositing.

But, I had the impression that these were done at different points in the production process (i.e., modelling is done during production, and compositing is done during post-production). I guess I am still a bit confused about how this works from a process standpoint, and how an effect like what I described above comes together.

On another point, did anyone see that movie of the Rythm & Hues Jor-El animation? That is so amazing! And I guess requires both 3D animation and compositing skills.

1) Is it usual for an artist to have experience with both 3D modelling and VFX / Compositing?

No, but as Gav mentioned senior freelancers are the exeption. Most juniors start out in a specialized role. It also depends on the type of company you work for. Smaller Boutiques (like Lost Boys) tended to have more generalists whereas the larger studios find it more efficient to run a very structured pipeline. The staff at larger shops will more than likely be contract based and depending on the job id they may wear multiple hats from project to project. (ie. One gig you may be a modelor and on the next maybe a texture artist.)

2) Do effects usually require some 3D modelling skills? How many effects would be combinations of both?

This depends on your definition of "effects." Effects Animators tend to focus more on things like fire, water, dust, rain, explosions, etc... So no, not alot of modeling is necessary. Where as in the Film industry Visual Effects Artists handle a broader range of tasks that would more likely include modeling duties.

4) Are effects always done in post-production, or are they sometimes done concurrently with 3D animation?

I consider "Effects" from an Animated Film/Series as part of the production process whereas "Visual Effects" for Film/TV are still considered part of the post production process.

M

This depends on your definition of "effects." Effects Animators tend to focus more on things like fire, water, dust, rain, explosions, etc... So no, not alot of modeling is necessary. Where as in the Film industry Visual Effects Artists handle a broader range of tasks that would more likely include modeling duties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfa22
4) Are effects always done in post-production, or are they sometimes done concurrently with 3D animation?

I consider "Effects" from an Animated Film/Series as part of the production process whereas "Visual Effects" for Film/TV are still considered part of the post production process.

Ah, I didn't know there was this distinction between effects and visual effects. Let me see if I get it. So the differences are:FX
-Explosions, dust, fire (i.e. single pieces of one scene)
-No modeling necessary
-Animated film or series
-During production process

VFX
-Entire scene
-Usually in non-animated film
-Modeling intensive
-Post-production

So then I'm a bit confused. It would seem that VFX, because they are more modeling intensive, would be done during the production process, rather than post-production.

Ah, I didn't know there was this distinction between effects and visual effects. Let me see if I get it. So the differences are:FX
-Explosions, dust, fire (i.e. single pieces of one scene)
-No modeling necessary
-Animated film or series
-During production process

VFX
-Entire scene
-Usually in non-animated film
-Modeling intensive
-Post-production

So then I'm a bit confused. It would seem that VFX, because they are more modeling intensive, would be done during the production process, rather than post-production.

Yes, you're getting there!

And yes, it is confusing... Frustratingly the term VFX has recently come to have two entirely separate definitions depending on which industry you're speaking of. I tried to fight it for a couple years but now I've accepted that this occurance is here to stay.

"Visual Effects" had it's roots in post production for the film industry. So usually we are working with live action (filmed) plates (backgrounds) and creating things that couldn't be achieved "in camera." Sometimes it can be making a monster run down a hallway and sometimes it can be painting out a boom mic that accidently dipped into frame. It's a pretty broad umbrella term for many fixes/enhancements done after filming. Not to be confused with "Special Effects" for live action which are usually handled physically in camera. (Blowing up cars, blood squibs, wind machines, etc...)

Now there is a relatively recent trend of relabelling what has traditionally been called "Effect Animators" in regards to fully animated production to "Visual Effects Artists." I have a feeling it came from the industry going digital and someone seeing the parallel and making the shift... (Don't quote me.) I wouldn't say that there isn't a modelling requirement as you most likely would be working with 3D geometry on a common basis but it is a different style all together. (ie. modelling chunks of debris, tornado funnels, meta geomentry for collisions, etc...) Commonly you'll be working with particles, cloth, and other physics based solutions. Safe to say you'd be doing a little scripting from time to time as well. These types also can cross into the film industry but there they would be relabelled back to an "Effects Artist."

Does that help? It's a bit tricky to describe in a short forum post...

Have fun with your exploration!

M

Yes, you're getting there!

And yes, it is confusing... Frustratingly the term VFX has recently come to have two entirely separate definitions depending on which industry you're speaking of. I tried to fight it for a couple years but now I've accepted that this occurance is here to stay.

So to see if I'm thinking of this the right way (please correct me where I am wrong)

Visual Effects in the animation industry (that is, entirely animated 2D or 3D films or shows) include things like animated weather effects, cloth effects, other particle effects, etc. and are usually done during the production process. Artists here are called "visual effects artists."

Effects in the film industry (that is, live action movies), include things like removing wires, mics, etc., can also include particle effects, smoke, fire, lighting, physics, some limited 3D models or characters. These are usually done in post-production. Artists here are called "effects artists". The process includes compositing, as well as 3D modeling.

Is that the right way to think about it? So, Rythm and Hues does primarily "effects work" for film, not "visual effects"

Thanks for all the help, this is a great discussion!

Visual Effects in the animation industry (that is, entirely animated 2D or 3D films or shows) include things like animated weather effects, cloth effects, other particle effects, etc. and are usually done during the production process. Artists here are called "visual effects artists."

Right! Also known to us old dogs as "Effects Artists."

Effects in the film industry (that is, live action movies), include things like removing wires, mics, etc., can also include particle effects, smoke, fire, lighting, physics, some limited 3D models or characters. These are usually done in post-production. Artists here are called "effects artists". The process includes compositing, as well as 3D modeling.

ALMOST!

some limited 3D models or characters.

I wouldn't say "limited." Gollum is a Visual Effect. Cool CG Davy Jones Henchmen in Pirates of the Caribbean are too. Entirely CG battle scenes from King Kong or Lord of the Rings are also examples VFX Shots. So there really is no limit to the complexity.

Artists here are called "effects artists".

Not quite... An "Effects Artist" would be just one of MANY possible roles under the Visual Effects umbrella. (ie, previs artist, modelers, texture painters, riggers, animators, effects artists, match movers, lighters, matte painters, rotoscopers, compositors, etc...)

So, Rythm and Hues does primarily "effects work" for film, not "visual effects"

The opposite... R&H does "Visual Effects" work for Film.

Thanks for all the help, this is a great discussion!

No problemo, I need to practice my explanations for class anyways!

Cheers,

M