I was just a little curious about drawing today in field dominated by 3d animation these days. I was reading Richard Williams book and he discussed his unhappiness with the lack of skilled draftsman in the animated field. Of course, that was a quite awhile since the publishing of that book and I was wondering...is a lack of skilled draftsmen still a problem in animation today wheter it's 3d, traditional stop motion or whatever? With the majority of traditional animation companies moving into 3d..is there still a need for individuals with strong draftsmanship skills these days? Certainly solid draftsmanship plays an important part in the traditional process, but have you found your drawing skills to be helpful in the 3d realm and if so how, other than thumbnailing out your scene. Does the knowledge you gain from your study of anotomy still help you in 3d realm at all, and is there a large emphasis these days on good draftsmanship in the educational arena directied for students pursuing and education in 3d animation? In short how do you feel the move to 3d animation has effected the need in animation for good drawing skills? This is just a discussion I wanted to start and wanted to get input from professionals, teachers, students, and any aspiring animators out there.
Whisper
My credo is that animation always starts on paper, whether it's designing characters, drawing storyboards or planning scene layouts. But what's also important in my opinion is that drawing for animation requires an understanding of masses in three dimensions just like computer-generating animation does. Animation drawings aren't just lines forming a motif in the same way CGed images aren't just an accumulation of pixels. Both are sculpted constructions and the thought process behind moving a character through a computer-generated, three-dimensional space is the same as moving it through a hand-drawn scenario. (Which is a three-dimensional stage.)
I think being able to envision in your head that three-dimensional reality so clearly you can render it with a pencil on paper helps animating the same reality on a computer tremendously.
In my opinion, a 3D animator who lacks drawing skills is not as horrible as lacking a sence of timing and action. Some of the 3D animators I have met don't really have the "excellent drawing skills". However they are able to manage the program as the their drawing media to create great animations. Today more people turn towards 3D animation but there are still 2D animators who believe in soild, accurate drawing created by hands. Somehow I like to compare 2D and 3D animators to bus and taxi, both transportations have been serving the patron's needs..
Traditional drawing skills provide a intuitive tactile/esthetic experience--that's invaluable for developing better artistic skills.
A piece of paper and a pencil are inexpensive, easily wielded, yield immediate results and can be utilized in a variety of ways.
The means of exploring lines, shapes, forms--and all the design aspects-- are more deeply ingrained in a artist by drawing--in my opinion.
Because the computer can generate virtual imagery and has a enormous array of tools to do so, the undisciplined use of these tools can create a "false crutch" with weaker artists.
As an intructor and long-time professional, I've seen a large number of students mistakenly believe that drawing isn't necessary--this despite being told otherwise by other instructors, industry persons and other noted talents.
A great number of my teaching colleagues continually scratch their heads as to just HOW students accquire this notion because they seem to get it before they enter school.
Its almost as if the notion arose that chimpanzees could do this work--so easy its supposed to be.
Oh, if that were only true.
There's a real and palpable trepidation amongst students about drawing--almost as if its some painful discourse they have to endure, thinking it will soon be over and they can concentrate on the "real" work.
I've seen 3D art by students that have drawing ability, and by those that don't ( both using the computer) and there's a measurable disparity/difference between the two groups.
Those with acomplished drawing skills have a finer sense of design, a much more intuitive understanding of appeal, structure, expressions, movement. A artistically 2D trained/skilled 3D artist can visualize items in their heads and convey that down on paper or the screen.
Oh, sure there's a few folks that have used the computer from day one and can make a fine piece of art with it.
I'm telling you though that they are the exceptions.
In my opinion, there's no argument in this; traditional 2D drawing skills are an indeniable asset to a 3D artist
"We all grow older, we do not have to grow up"--Archie Goodwin ( 1937-1998)
There Ken goes again, saying exactly what I wanted to and not missing a single point, but doing it in a way I can't, keeping it under 14000 words =)
Nice post, Ken. Sums it up nicely.
I'd add that the basics of drawing can be picked up pretty quickly, relatively speaking. With practice and perseverance, anyone can learn to draw. You may not be brilliant, but you'll be able to express yourself graphically with the simplest of tools.
Learning to draw is really about learning to see and learning to capture what you see, or express your vision graphically. If you're planning on a career in the graphic arts, aren't skills like that worth the investment of your time?
Yeps, its all about learning to see, and training the eye to duplicate what you see. Once you can do that competently, then the challenge is to extrapolate all that to create new designs and new esthetics.
All those artists we admire progress this way.
That ability to extrapolate is the real gift, its the fun part--but it has to be earned.
A famous quote:" There are no miracles without works"--sums this all up nicely.
I had a student make the blind accusation once that pushing all this drawing was to create a hierarchy of talent. That us "old hands" insist the newcomers have to take the "long way" to gaining their skills so as to keep our place in jobs and the skill pool.
That's a load of poppycock I say. ( or bovine scatology as H. Norman Schwarkopf once said)
I want the new talent coming up behind me to be as talented or more than my contemporaries, peers, and the masters I admire.
I want them prepared to take on the challenges of entertaining the next few generations and keeping up the tradition of "wowing" them as I was wowed.
I genuninely feel that we carry a mantle on our shoulders--flowery as that sounds. Anyone who aspires to do this kind of craft professionally ,or even just well, does so because SOMETHING they saw before caught their eye and fired their imagination.
That means someone before, with talent, did their job right. They inspired us.
We inspire you. You will inspire them.
There's a tradition there, something worthwhile.........almost noble.
That cannot be done if its approached only half-assed.
Yea, it can take time, it will take sweat......for those that perserve, and those waiting for what we do--it'll be worth it.
"We all grow older, we do not have to grow up"--Archie Goodwin ( 1937-1998)
I agree with you on every account in that last post, because that's where my heart is too, so don't take this the wrong way...but who are you teaching? Those students sound so misplaced, almost as if they don't know what they've gotten themselves into, which leaves you questioning why they're there. On many occasions you've written about the general student mind and it seems like for every degree of interest and tradition and passion you speak of, the majority of college kids deviates one more degree out of touch with the idea that -that's- what it's all about.
As an aside, I can vouch for the importance of drawing skills. I've gained and lost and gained again, and just like Larry says it controls how far you go. You're leaving a record of visual information when you draw. If you make bad or inaccurate records, the right information isn't there and suddenly people aren't knowing what they could know or feeling what they could feel if you'd only gotten the right thing up on the screen (or paper if it's a still drawing). If I had one wish to give to animation right now it would be to bolster the draftsmanship of the whole collective.
One of my all-time favorite bumper stickers sums it up: "Hire a teenager, while they still know everything". ;)
To be sure, I was guilty of that too back in the day, and the tradition continues. Lots of students are so self-assured about their own "brilliance" that they see any attempt to make them do what they don't want to as an assault to their "artistic voice", ignoring the fact that what's going on is an attempt to broaden their vocabulary.
I'm teaching adult-aged students at private post-secondary (trade)schools
Their "misplacement" is probably due more to marketing influences than anything--the promise of glitter and dazzle of a "great career" in animation.
I'm noticing the same trends on forums like here as well. The steady streams of "frequently asked questions" to which the answers are often well known and easy discovered with 5 minutes work using a search engine.
The schools offer something that, heretofore, has been larger hidden in years before--easy access to knowledge of the insides of the creative industries--knowledge that was really only open to the genuinely talented before.
If there's a criticism of the schools ( including the ones I teach at) it is in the reluctance to screen students. Oh, its given lip service, but as a business--the customers are most needed for the business to thrive. What business is going to turn away paying customers?? The non-talented student's money is just as good as the talented ones. Ugly truth, but its one that needs facing.
Marketing for these programs pushes the technical aspects--very little is said ( if at ALL) of the need for self-exploration to develop as an artist. That is a unquantifiable thing--so its often ignored by marketing people that simple do not understand its importance.
So.........what ends up happening is students enter the programs having VERY LITTLE idea as to what is involved or what it entails. The hype in the brochures talks about careers, friends and family probably see the student as being "creative" and nudge them towards it and its all a big lure.
There's a certain prestige to being a animator, or simply working in the entertainment/creative industries. The average schmoe has no idea what we do--its like alchemy--but they do understand that it involves talent.
There's a big attraction in that.
Even if that talent is minimal.
Granted, even students with minimal talent can be developed--I've seen it happen. It takes a lot of effort on their part--some really hard thinking and doing--it can be done.
Most students, however, fall into the trap of complacency and simply strive to meet the academic standards--to simply pass the course.
That is ultimately meaningless, as we know.
I'm increasingly encountering students that are exploring BASIC drawing skills for the very first time. My conclusion is that these schools make REACHING for the dream too easy--but reaching is not grasping.
As I said before, there's a tremendous lure in this--the lure of this prestigious "job title". This is a common thing in ALL post secondary schooling, that I have noticed.
Alot of students pursue courses they are unsuited for--hence they want the job titles, but are not ready (or willing) to take on the job.
This isn't always the students fault--its shared by the schools as well.
Programs are often too short to develop skills and cram in far too much technical material to be mentally processed in too short a time.
Because these schools are businesses, some look at the bottom line first, hence instructor time means paying out wages. Increasing "study blocks" reduces instructor time (or spreads it too thin) and that means that there is often no-one for students to consult with.
Increasing the program times is often unattractive--because its extra tuition, and reduces the profits of the schools because facilities are taken up for longer times. Students also like the concept of " in and out in a year"-so they can start their careers.
Another disturbing trend I have seen, is the influx of foreign students.
Disturbing in the sense that these often very talented people have a language barrier. This prevents them from fully participating in class and understanding their instructors--they have to work twice as hard. Across the board, foreign students tend to grade lower because of that attribute.
Its very frustrating.
While I'm at it---let's talk about the instructors too. Not all of these folks are top-notch. I've seen cases of "instructors" being hired simply because they've been "exposed" to a part of the craft--rather than having actual professional experience with it.
The now-unfathomable trend in some schools to INSIST upon masters degrees for their instructors ( I don't know of ANYONE in the animation biz with a masters degree in animation) is also making things bizarre. Some of them bend it just a bit so the masters degree can be in ANYTHING.
. This means that a instructor with 6 MONTHS "experience" in animation and a degree in...........finance.....could be one's instructor at these schools.
I've twenty years in the animation business. I'm self-taught and industry-mentored. I have no official document that says that I know what I'm doing.
Yet, I do know what I'm doing--I've been doing it for 20 years!
I might be oversimplifying things-but that point remains.........where are all these masters-degree holding instructors going to come from?
I've seen some schools hire their students as instructors--students who have NO industry experience ( yes, these places exist).
I've seen instructors that were gifted artists, but had poor people or teaching skills.
Most schools I've seen have some arbitrary threshold--say, 5 years of industry experience. That's usually okay.
I've seen and heard schools maintaining instructors with only a few years experience and DECLINE bringing on instructors with 10's of years of experience-and for all kinds of reasons. As with any business, there's those issues of seniority and such, I suppose.
The students aren't the only ones in this that are misplaced. The whole system has signs of it. The desire of the students and the proficiencies of the schools are admirable--but they sometimes work at cross-purposes to each other.
Spinning this back to the debate at hand........3D schools are epidemic with the above. My understanding is that its incredibly common place--and reading forums like this supports that.
My advice to students is pretty simple: BEFORE school--years before if they can manage it, to learn as much as they possibly can about what they want to go into. Draw, paint, sculpt. Develop the skills to the point where you almost do not need the schooling--because that is the level at which most of these schools are best set up to assist you.
Honestly, the schooling in animation today isn't geared towards developing nascent-talented, its geared towards REFINING the already talented. I think if students understood that then they ( and the industry) would be better served.
"We all grow older, we do not have to grow up"--Archie Goodwin ( 1937-1998)
I wasn't even speaking of arrogance or they way they carry themselves, just an ignorance (not stupidity, ignorance) of what animation really entails. To be -exposed- to what it entails and treat it superficially is in my mind a disrespect to the art and its artists. I'm not free from arrogance lol Especially since I never knew until relatively recently just how deep it all went. All I'm saying is it's a pervasive atmosphere that should really turn around.
That said I don't think it's anyone's responsibility but the students to familiarize themselves with an interest or passion and all that it deals with. I wouldn't pay eight trillion doctors toward medical school if I thought all a doctor did was smell funny and wear a mask and ask akward questions. I would pick at it and make my decision after I knew all I could possibly know from the outside.
The foundation of animation skills is no longer hidden knowledge, and yet I hear that all the time about being misdirected because they thought it was something easier, or thought it was a matter of learning the latest software. They can have as much idea as they want if they do what you say and investigate even the tiniest bit.
The bigger problem is there's either an inherent lack of motivation or they honestly only like the idea of what they know about animation to a point. That's a shame too because if they knew its true depths (and I'm not saying I do by the way -- I know I don't) they might be even MORE attached.
As far as the schools are concerned, I understand their business needs. But you know what? If you don't know anything about what it is you're teaching, don't teach it! I think there's a reason most film animators come from around 10 different schools. The rest of them teach themselves. Seeing tons of credentials all the time I'd say maybe 15% -tops- came from "Podunk U that Happened to Add an Animation Program When 3D Picked Up Speed as a Trend." I think it's irresponsible to go get an expert and plug him or her into a curriculum and expect the job to be done, like "Hey guys! We have this program now, too!"
Your instructor rant is amusing in a bittersweet way. I took a course that had animation in the title, and said it would explore the foundations of animation. I'd been duped before not following my own advice and looking into it, and wound up taking a Flash class....so I asked, and they went into detail saying it was going to use the principles in a practical manner to prepare the students for career-like situations in television animation. Pretty amazing for a community college! I get to the class and it's nothing but software tutorials, taught by their "3D animation guru" who actually was someone who watched the Sci-Fi channel and attended local expos on the subject.
What's alarming is that I can prove your student-hiring took place at some of the best schools in the world.
One of the reasons I respect CalArts (all debate on them being a mill for Disney at one point or another aside) is that they expect, almost demand fine arts skills before you get there. You'd better have a good idea on how to draw because their mentality appears to be you're there to learn how to animate, anything else really isn't there problem.
One of the things I tell my students, anyone, wanting to get into the biz, is to explore the geek-side of life.
Never ceases to amaze me how many people wanting to get into this biz cannot understand the concept of being a geek--its almost like asking some of them to change their gender. LOL!
I see, all the time, students who lack a lot of knowledge of the medium--be it television, animation, what have you.
Ask one of them to name 5 prominent TV stars prior to 1965 and a LOT of them stumble. I've had students ( North American-borne) that did not know who someone like John Wayne is.
Yeesh.
Mind you, I've worked with people that were also blithely unaware of who characters were--that they were working on--simply because it wasn't "their thing". Okay, one doesn't need to have encylopedic knowledge, but at least being exposed to the stuff is probably warranted.
This kind of work is best suited to geeks. Let me qualify "geek" though--to me a geek is a person of particular passion. They are intensely interested in a "thing" and put a lot of focus on that thing.
It doesn't mean that one need fit the classic geek/nerd image--only that one apply that same focus/passion.
Addressing this drawing issue boils down to that level of geekiness a person has.
One of the reasons I push this idea is to implore students to avoid becoming a niche talent-that is to say, someone only good at one or two skills. Using the computer is a skill I lack--but its one I can pick up. Drawing is a skill they lack, and they are often intimidated about picking it up--because they KNOW it'll take time and effort.
Hey, these days, geek is cool.
The world needs more geeks.
Pick up a pencil..............draw..............be a geek. Today.
Trust me, you will NOT have to tape the bridge of your glasses...
:rolleyes:
"We all grow older, we do not have to grow up"--Archie Goodwin ( 1937-1998)
Not to mention the world is run by geeks. Those weird guys who couldn't get a date in high school - they're the ones who invent all our new tech gadgets and get rich in the process...
Apparently Pat wasn't the only one enrolled in Bumper Sticker 101 =P
Time and effort is what brings the most reward. Who doesn't like reward?! Crazies. Almost as crazy as someone who doesn't know who John Wayne is.