Underbidding Visual Effects

Underbidding Visual Effects

One of the most problematic issues in the VFX industry, besides subsidies, is underbidding

This is where a company knowingly underbids what the company  estimates it will actually cost to do the proposed work.  It's also known as 'buying a project'.

This isn't done by just up and coming companies. Large, well established companies even in subsidized areas underbid frequently.

It doesn't take a financial wizard to see intentionally losing money on a project is not a good long term plan. In fact it's not even a good short term plan.

Why do companies underbid?

1. Subsidies
If a company in a location with no subsidies is bidding against a company located in an area with a subsidy (paid by a government) then they will likely have to underbid just to have a competitive bid to make up for the 20-60% difference. It's not like there's a 40-60% markup so that reduction has to come from the actual costs. Even companies in subsidized areas have to compete against other companies in more subsidized areas. That 20% subsidy looks good until you need to compete against a company with a 40% subsidy.

2. Competition 
Currently there are too many VFX companies for the amount of work available. If there weren't then most would be busy most of the time and would have no need to underbid. That's why the notion a lot of people have about starting a VFX company because they're not working, is flawed. And too many VFX companies in turn means that there are too many VFX professionals. Those considering a career in VFX should rethink because the odds are very much against you, despite what the for profit school ads may say.

3. Poor management
Many running VFX companies have no business training or background so will make these types of decisions based on a feeling of desperation. They'd rather be bailing water rather than considering fixing the leak. Rather than try to make decisions based on long term issues they are making rash decisions.

The thinking
Companies think they need to underbid the work to make sure they have work. They look at the dozens or hundreds of people at their company and the large cost that incurs. Larger companies can be burning through $1 million dollars a week in payroll costs alone. So the thinking is even if they lose a few million on the project it's better than losing even more by not doing so. The money offsets a large portion of the losses.

And underneath the decision to underbid is the notion that somehow they can make up for it. The crews can work a bit harder, they can be a bit more efficient and that things will go well on this one project to turn an underbid project into a break even project. That never happens. Directors do not stop changing or adding shots until someone with authority (the client) tells them they can't due to time or money. What ever budget and time allowed will be filled.

The hope is also that even though they are losing on this one they can make it up on the next one. That type of thinking can work in some industries where there are very big hits to offset some losses (films, products), but in visual effects there are no big hits. A company may be in the black on the next project but the tight margins in visual effects are hardly enough to fund that one project, impossible to make up for losses on one or more other projects. And that means any profits that might be made on the current project have already been spent on the previous project just to cover the losses.

And unlike some industries (contractors to the government) it's impossible to make up for the loss from underbidding with change orders and extras. Most vfx companies are reluctant to even submit valid change orders, the fear being if a client feels they were charged more than they expected, that company will never get work again from that client.

Impact of Underbidding

Company 
No company can continue to lose money indefinitely. While underbidding may seem like it's slowing the bankruptcy of the company, it is still going bankrupt. At some point the investors or the creditors will have enough and make radical changes or will simply close the company.

Some people think that's up to each company and if they wish to underbid where's the harm in it other than the company that goes out of business. But it certainly affects more than just the one company.

Workers
When a company goes out of business it likely will mean the workers will not only lose an employer, they will likely lose at least one pay period, possibly more. Any accrued health care, vacation or other benefits will be instantly gone.

Clients
When a company goes out of business because its been operating in the red it is likely do so at a very inopportune time such as the middle of a project or even worse on the major crunch period right before completion.

We've seen this scenario played out and affecting both workers and clients a few times just in the last year or so and it's a painful process for the workers.

Industry
When companies underbid it not only affects that company, it affects all other companies and the people who work for them. A company that underbids erodes good companies who are attempting to operate a visual effects company as a real business instead of a lemonade stand. A company that is bidding using actual numbers is now losing business not due to true competition but because a business is choosing to commit long term bankruptcy. A good company can only lose business for so long before they close.

And that's when other companies start jumping in with the same idea. Now instead of one desperate company, underbidding may be creating a half dozen companies that are getting anxious. Once they start doing the same thing, which some are, the quicker the race to the bottom happens not only for those companies but the entire industry.

Clients also get a very skewed sense of what the actual cost of doing visual effects is when companies underbid. Some clients will assume the company knows what's its doing and others will be aware but will feel compelled to take full advantage of the situation while they can. Money is a compelling substance and can cause loss of reasonable thinking on both sides.

What can be done
1. Don't underbid. Even Kansas arborists have a code of ethics that prevents them from learning other bids from clients and underbidding each other. No such ethics exists in the visual effects business. It's been said some companies have a 'we'll beat any bid' agreement with the studios. If managers can not operate a company morally then they should not be running a company.

2. Operate the company as a real business. Any idiot can run a business and lose money. When millions are at stake along with hundreds of workers, it can no longer be run by the seat of pants and wishful thinking.

3. If the company is unable to make money then the owners and investors should examine the problem and consider making improvements or they should consider closing or merging. Taking other companies down with you to bankruptcy is not a plan.

4. Lay off workers when there is no work for them. Keep a small group of key people to keep the company running between projects. The reality is film and other media work are project by project. The studios do not keep crews employed between projects. If the company is located near similar companies (real VFX hub) and the industry is healthy then the workers would likely be able to find other work as it shifts from project to project. It's when companies set up in a distant location or when the actions of a few make for an unhealthy industry that this becomes a problem. Now it may seem to be better employing the workers and get some funding but that is simply eroding the industry and its better to have workers make a short term change rather than trying to work long term in an unsustainable industry.

5. Have the visual effects companies form a trade association like other industries. Put aside petty, non-business issues and work together to stabilize the industry. Have a basic code of conduct and ethics for companies to abide by.


Individuals
The same problem of underbidding happens with individuals. Graduates and those starting out think they have to work for free simply because a company posts a job offer saying so on Craigslist. Too much competition makes them more than eager to work for nothing which in turn causes companies to consider lowering all wages. When companies start dropping experienced professionals to hire cheaper labor (another poor business plan) then what do the newer workers think will happen to them in a few years?

Some workers go out on their own with the intention of truly being independent contractors but these people almost always underbid as well. Frequently they charge less than they were making while working for a company. Some may choose the same rate but they fail to understand even the basics of business. When you're working for a company it costs the company more than simply your pay check.  Most of the time there are benefits, taxes or other costs that you may not be aware of these. These may be another 20-40% above your pay. As someone working for themselves now all taxes will need to be paid by you along with health insurance, your computer, software, etc. It starts adding up quickly. Vincent Laforet has written about the cost of doing business as an independent photographer. 

Summary
Place a value on what you do. Do not underbid. Consider the long term consequences. If both companies and individuals are only focused on being the cheapest above everything else, then the quality and the creativity will fail along with the business.

Related:

Bad Visual Effects Business Practices

Should I work for free chart

Why do visual effects costs so much?

Why do visual effects costs so much?

This question comes up constantly even from those who should know better. Many simply wish to ignore the reasons. If you haven’t done so yet please read The Value of Visual Effects post to put this perspective. Discussing costs doesn’t mean anything unless you place a value on it.

Here is a typical response in Hollywood:

Peter Berg, Director of BATTLESHIP, was interviewed on a podcast recently.

Berg: But the money is all going to… the business to be in is ILM. That’s whose making all the money..

Masters: The effects houses.

Berg: Yeah in particular ILM. I mean and they do great work but its what these films cost because you’ve got these giant visual effects components and they dictate the prices on them.


There a number of flaws in this thinking.

Myth 1: Visual effects are the majority of the costs. This may or may not be true depending on the specific project. Normally visual effects are less than 1/2 of the project even for 'visual effects films'. 1/5 to 1/3 is a more likely scenario. But if a movie is made almost entirely with visual effects in every shot and they’re complex visual effects it will be a correspondently larger portion of the budget.

Myth 2: High costs means high profits. Just because a line item is expensive doesn’t mean that there is a corresponding profit. Amount of costs and profit are independent issues. Just as a movie itself may be expensive but that doesn’t guarantee a huge profit.

Myth 3: ILM or any other visual effects company dictate the prices. Obviously they have to quote a price but they can hardly charge whatever they wish or make huge mark-ups. The market doesn’t allow it.  If that price is too high the studios simply go elsewhere.

Myth 4: All visual effects have huge mark-ups and profits. Even in the days before digital effects producers were all convinced that visual effects companies were raking them over the coals because they had what the producers wanted. Producers were (and still are) convinced visual effects companies were simply adding huge markups because they could. These people are convinced if they only knew some of the mystic technobabble they could get the work done for a fraction of the price.


Reality:
Short version: Visual Effects is incredibly time consuming and labor intensive work done for very little profit. In some cases it may actually cost less for the studio than the real costs incurred. Changes and compressed schedules  increase the costs further.

Related posts:
Visual Effects are inexpensive
The Miracle of Visual Effects

Full version:
Visual effects is a very competitive market worldwide. There are a lot of visual effects companies and all of them eager to get work so competition alone does not allow any company to have huge mark-ups.

The visual effects industry suffers from tax incentives in other states and countries. Some as much as 40% off. Note that these figures are not reduction of taxes but actually funds applied directly or indirectly to a movie. That means it’s not a level completive field and any visual effects company in California has to drop their prices if they wish to compete with other companies on the basis of price. Many visual effects companies actually underbid the work when required to try to keep money coming in. This means in some cases it’s costing the studio less than it actually costs. Same thing with the tax incentives. In those cases the local tax payers are in fact helping to fund the movie and thereby lower the studios expense for the visual effects.

The amount of work for visual effects companies fluctuates widely so when it’s all said and done on a yearly basis most visual effects companies make razor thin profits or may be further in debt. Many visual effects companies have gone out of business. Some of the ones still operating do so because they have the backing of a large corporation or individual with deep pockets. Some companies are able to stay afloat because they are in a country or area with tax incentives. There’s good work done all around the world and price is not the only factor studios look at but the visual effects industry would be much different if there were no tax incentives.

If visual effects were really such a profit center the studios and investors would be breaking down the door to buy or create their own visual effects companies. Some studios have had their own visual effects departments in the past. Disney had Secret Lab and Image Movers at different times. They closed both. The only major studio currently with a visual effects component is Sony with their Sony Imageworks. Sony had moved a number of jobs to Albuquerque, New Mexico a few years ago in an attempt to get in on the New Mexico tax incentives. They’ve now closed that and are moving many jobs to Vancouver for the tax incentives there. There may be a future where all visual effects for Hollywood based movies are all done out of this country simply due to tax incentives. This is the outsourcing that isn’t talked about.

See the Digital Domain IPO documents showing one of the more successful California companies. They’re trying to make animated films, getting involved in for profit schools and getting money from Florida in an attempt to make money since visual effects is not cutting it for them.

[Update: 7/21/2012  New Digital Domain news item
Textor said investors are punishing Digital Domain because of the low-margin nature of its visual effects business.
...
In the first quarter of 2012, Digital Domain reported a loss of $14.8 million on revenue of $31.1 million.  

Digital Domain is one of the largest and more successful visual effects businesses in the U.S. And it lost $14.8 million in a single quarter. Hardly the idea of a big profit center. What if they had billed the full out of pocket costs? ]

[Update: 9/11/2012 Digital Domain has closed it's Florida facility and has spun off their visual effects group for a much smaller amount and filed for chapter 11 for the main holding company. This after going with a full IPO less than a year ago. No, visual effects is not a big profit center. ]


Most of the larger animation companies create their own content and receive the profits from how well the films do. Visual effects companies at times have a small percent of a film but most of the time the companies are doing work for hire.

Live Action Movies:
The blame for high priced movies seems to be placed directly on visual effects by some people but lets look at non-visual effects films.
Why are movies so expensive to make even without visual effects?

That’s a common question for laypeople. Why should it costs millions to make a movie let alone $100 million or more? How long can it possibly take to shoot a 2 hour movie? And isn’t it all done by a handful of movie people?

Time:
A movie typically takes a year to make from green light (approved funding) to theaters. That’s after possibly spending years in development. There’s a pre-production stage (building sets, casting, working on the script, finding locations, etc) that can be a few months, production (filming) can take 40 to 100+ shooting days. A 100 shooting day schedule is 20 weeks. The shoot days are the most expensive days of the film because there’s a large crew working so the more shoot days the more expensive the film, all things being equal. And time is the gold standard for shooting such that production is guiding the director to do it as quickly as possible and to remain on schedule. Once shooting is finished the film goes into post-production. This is when editing happens along with sound mixing, composing, recording of the music and this is when most of the visual effects work is done. This is also the most likely compressed stage since the movie has already been booked into theaters and that date cannot be changed. So studios tend to provide shorter post-production schedules than in the past. sometimes this requires the director to edit and lock sequences even before the filming is finished just so there is enough time to do the visual effects.


Costs:
Even non-visual effects films can be very expensive. Ignore high actor salaries and marketing costs. Even looking at just below the line costs (crew) on a large production. Camera crew, grips, electrics, wardrobe, makeup,  audio crew, etc. And consider all the people not on the set that are required to make a movie - art dept. with carpenters, painters and others making sets, orchestra, sound mixers, sound effects, etc. Watch the credits of a large non visual effects film and see how many people are listed. Those are skilled, experienced, talented people being paid a reasonable rate for the services they provide in this freelance world. That’s hundreds of people. It’s as if you started a company, staffed it up and ran it for a year before any revenues appear. That’s expensive.

Labor:
Few people actually sit down and consider the enormous cost of labor.  I’ll be making up some numbers so don’t take these as actuals or even averages. Let’s suppose we had 300 people working on a project at an average rate of $80,000 a year. The average income in the US in theory is around $30,000-$55,000 a year but most in the film industry don’t work full time over the year and this also has to take into account overtime which most jobs don’t have so don’t assume even someone making $80,000 rate ends up with $80,000 at the end of the year.  That’s 300 people at $320 a day = $96,000 a day in expenses just for labor. Now you can adjust the number of people or the income either way but the fact is labor is more expensive than most people realize. Even in this example that’s $480,000 a week (almost 1/2 million dollars) A 6 month project with these people will rack up $12 million just in labor costs. It would be $15 million if the average rate was $100,000. Add all the extras costs (building, supplies, support, rentals, etc) and adjust for overtime and work required. In the case of a movie add in the high priced talent, directors and other above the line costs along with transportation, locations, equipment and other costs as well as marketing.

Take a look at the company you work for. How many people work there and what’s their average pay? This will help you calculate how much money needs to be coming in just to break even on labor alone. Don’t forget most workers get benefits so the cost to the company per person is above and beyond just their rates.

The visual effects work:
Each visual effects shot (5-8 seconds typically) is unique. It's the same as having to do a complete new setup in live action which requires changing the camera position and the lighting. In many cases even shots can be equivalent to the doing a full 'company' move where the live action crew has to travel and setup at a new location. a time consuming and expensive process.

In a previous article I noted that shots are like snowflakes since no two are identical.  I compared them to oil paintings. Another analogy is to consider the visual effects crew is constructing a building based on nothing but a sketch on the back of a napkin and the specifics of where walls go and what carpet is selected for each different room is in constant flux. Creativity combined with technically challenging work, fixed bids, changes and deadlines does not make the process easy. I don't think there is another industry like visual effects that has this same type of business model.

Visual Effects expenses:
Beyond what most businesses have as basic expenses (buildings, desks, basic services, etc) visual effects companies have to provide at least one high end computer per worker. These tend to be top of the line fast computers with a lot of memory, large hard disks and advanced graphics cards and graphics tablets. Each needs  to be loaded with high end graphics software. In addition there’s typically at least one large room with racks and racks of computers for rendering the images you see. These are the render farms and usually have special power and air conditioning needs that make them very expensive. All of these computer systems require advanced and costly wiring along with an IT department to support it all. Hundreds or thousands of shots at 24 high resolution images a second times dozens of elements equates to a lot of storage space that needs to be maintained and archived to avoid losing critical work.

Visual effects companies have screening rooms and editors with editing systems so they can be synced to the production. They have special security systems as mandated by the MPAA to keep all studio materials under safeguards. Many companies have at least a small insert stage to shoot elements and odds and ends as required. A visual effects company may also have a motion capture stage, 3D scanners and model shop or have to sub-contract this type of work when required.

Hidden crew:
But even with these expenses the labor is the largest cost for doing visual effects. This labor is the hidden crew. Most directors and producers seldom see much of the visual effects crew because these crews work away from the studio. Even for those directors that visit the  companies they likely only see part of the crew and since most visual effects these days are spread out over multiple companies (shorter time schedules) the work is being done all over the world (thanks in part to tax incentives).

On a live action set most of the crew is standing there, ready to work. It’s obvious that decisions need to be made to keep these people productive and there is a schedule for what needs to be accomplished everyday. Since most of the visual effects crew is out of sight, they’re out of mind. There’s a disconnect to making decisions and changes and what that relates to in terms of costs and time. On a set if the director turns the other way and wants an elaborate set built the cost and crew time is evident to all. In many cases the notion may be dismissed as not being worth it. A director is constantly making decisions and makes a number of compromises at all steps of production. Should the director shoot another 10 takes of the actor to try to get a better take? Should they try a totally different angle or camera move? Make adjustments to the set? At some point the director has to move on if they want to make their day and complete the film in the number of shooting days budgeted.

Disconnect:
But none of that is evident when working with visual effects. Adding a 100 shots or doing 100 takes of an animation only takes a request. What impact it has on the schedule and costs is seldom considered. Because of the competitive nature of visual effects and the fact that the number of potential clients (the studios) is less than a dozen, companies forego many change orders, thereby lowering the price of doing the actual visual effects work even more.

And this is another disconnect. Just about everyone else working on a production is  employed by the production company directly. Should they be required to work more days or hours they tend to be paid. And crew members are union members except for visual effects workers. Visual effects people are primarily employed by a visual effects companies and not the production companies. Most are freelance and have to switch projects to keep working. Artists may or may not be paid overtime. They also may or may not get benefits. All depends on the company and location.

Color correcting, making film prints and other services are done at a lab. Sound mixing is done at a sound company. These types of companies typically work on a time and material basis. If the director wishes to spend another day making adjustments then that cost is obvious and billed accordingly. A visual effects company bids on a fixed bid even with partial information. Even with accepted change orders this tends to whittle down any planned profits.

Visual effects crew size:
The number of people working on visual effects varies with the scope of the work. It's not unusual for a major visual effects film to require hundreds or more people. On larger projects the size of the visual effects can easily eclipse the size of the rest of the crew. Next time you're at a large visual effects film sit through the entire credit list. There are a lot of people listed under visual effects. And usually there will be quite a few companies listed. Note that you won't actually see the full list of all visual effects people who worked on a film. The end credits is usually a partial list since the studios only allow so many credits to each company depending on the contracts. There may be people from visual effects not listed that worked for a year but it's likely someone who was an assistant to an assistant getting coffee for a week on the set is in the credits.

What do all of these people do:
(I'll have a post in the future listing the various positions. The Visual Effects Society lists over 200 job titles) [Update: Here's that post that sits many, but not all, key positions. In some cases there may be a few dozen people in the same position, working on different shots. ]

A visual effects company is like a mini-studio with a wide range of artists and craftspeople.  In pre-production artists are drawing and designing, modelers are sculpting every set, actor, prop and location required to be rendered. Everything is built from scratch. Every computer graphics actor or creature needs a skeleton and skin that moves correctly. Texture painters are painting everything down to the finger nail or leaf. Specialists are focused on how the clothing moves.

If the project was shot on film a small team will be going through every frame and painting out the dirt. Yes, there are a number of jobs in visual effects that require working on every frame. By hand. Others are hand tracing actors in specific scenes so new backgrounds can be replaced. Anywhere something had to be removed (stunt rig, etc) needs someone to hand paint it out. Remember that film is running at 24 images a second. Visual effects on a 2 hour movie could be  a lot of frames (172,800 frames). Most movies probably around 2000 shots - visual effects films likely have at least 500 or more shots. In some cases every shot in the film is worked on.

Match movers have to create a computer camera that exactly matches what the real camera did. Animators have to animate any computer graphics actors or creatures. Lighters and others will have to light scenes just like a cinematographer. All of these images have to be calculated and rendered. And then compositors work to combine all of these images into the final shot to be used in the movie. In addition visual effects requires a supervisor, producer, editor and numerous other support people.

Visual effects time:
Visual effects is one of the first departments involved on a project in pre-production  (or should be ) and continues until the end of post-production. This can be a year or more on large projects. Remember that a large animation film probably averages 3 years. Post-production time is frequently being squeezed into 4 to 9 months. Because post-production time is less than it used to be most of the crews start working overtime from the start. The films release date is locked so it's not unusual for the last few weeks or even months require working 80+ hour work weeks. 24 hour work days are not unheard of.

Computers:
The question of computers comes up as well. Don't computers do all the work anyway? NO. A camera doesn't film a scene by itself and a word processor doesn't write a script. The computer is simply a tool. And no, there is no magic button on the keyboard to do the work.

Computers are getting faster so why aren't visual effects a lot cheaper and faster to make? Just as a faster computer doesn't allow a writer to now create a novel in a day it doesn't allow a visual artist to do a shot in a shorter time. Much of the time is spent thinking, planning and working. Any speed ups or reduction in costs due to improvements of techniques and people is eclipsed by the next project since it requires more shots that are even more complex in a shorter period of time. Many movies are about taking it up to the next notch for the audience. That next notch absorbs any gains. Newer requirements also demand extra time and labor - 3D, 4k resolution, and/or higher frame rates.

Base cost:
All of this totals up to a  large price to have a very large crew of very talented, skilled and experienced people working long hours over this length of time. Consider  that the companies had to provide a fixed bid based on how many people and how much time was required, simply based on storyboards and some previs. (rough animations) They also have to estimate how much a new and never before seen effect for the film will cost. Calculated in these budgets is the assumption of how many takes will be required by the director.

The reality:
If the company estimated 4 takes per shot it's just as likely the director will require 12 takes for every shot. And that's just the start of things that happen to the 'profits' of visual effects. On a location in a forest clearing the director may decide to replace the sky for the entire sequence. Seems a simple enough task given all the other work the companies are doing but now people have to try to separate the existing sky in every shot. Some of that may be possible using semi-automated techniques but more than likely it will require a team of rotoscopers (artists who trace to create mattes). Every leaf and branch needs to be traced and any actor (and their hair) have to be separated. Maybe a prop doesn't work. That's added to the list as well to be added or replaced later in visual effects. If a stunt or special effects action doesn't quite work or isn't as big as the director wanted, that's added to the visual effects shot list.

When projecting the dailies in a theater after the shoot is finished, the studio may notice they don't care for the makeup or may spot wig netting or other flaws in the footage. That's added to the list of visual effects shots. Boom mics and crew members in shots are also added to the list. Some shots that were originally planned to have no visual effects now require them based on the edit. Based on test screenings there may be a need for reshoots or new scenes to be shot. Since the sets may have been struck or the actors may not have time to go back the location, these are shot as greenscreens with the visual effects company responsible to add the backgrounds and match all the other footage.

There are times when visual effects are held to a different standard than live action. On a location if a stunt car rolls over for a couple of takes the director may accept it and move on. The shot works fine in the movie. It may not be exactly what the director had in mind but it tells the story. Since visual effects can control everything down to the pixel with precise adjustment the director and studio may wish to tweak and adjust down to the last minutia. If the stunt car was done as a visual effects shot it may be requested to make it roll 6 frames earlier and to roll 5 degrees more. On the 20th take it may be decided to hit a specific parking meter which needs to bend at a specific angle.

Most of this feedback and the changes requested are sent to the hidden visual effects crews. Since these people are seldom seen (with the exception of some people in Skype conferences) it's easy to lose sight of the labor costs being incurred daily. Also unseen is the amount of work and overtime being put in to making the visual effects.

The need to get all of the shots done by the finals deadline drives the pacing. It's easy to spend months on a small number of shots and tweak them and then end up rushing the last batch of shots. The quality of visual effects shots in most cases is directly proportional to the time allowed to finish and polish them. Rushed shots will have flaws and that's why companies sometimes push for a CBB (Could Be Better) shot status. It's not perfect but it can work in the movie. If time permits some or all of these will revisited but that's better than the alternative of tweaking shots the first batch of shots and having a week to finish half the movie.

Remember this all started with a fixed bid for a specific number of shots in a specific time frame. The deadline never changes so the companies now find themselves having to do many more visual effects shots with increased complexity all in the same time frame. In some cases there may be clear changes that enable submitting change orders. But in many cases such as increased noodling and takes, it's a gray area. That tends to erode much of the profits the company was able to build into the original bid.

The amount of work flowing into a visual effects company can also fluctuate a lot. They may finish a very large project and then have a few months with no or little work. Many of the crew are laid off but there's still a need to keep a core team along with paying for all the overhead costs. Any profits made on projects will have to pay for these lulls in production.

Extra costs:
But that's not the end of the story. Many decisions may be delayed. There's usually no one keeping the post-production moving in the manner that the live action was. Sequences aren't turned over while edits and re-edits are done. The studio and director may have conflicting ideas. Test screenings popup with little notice. Results of test screenings require more changes. Sequences are added. Shots and sequences that had been approved 2 months earlier need to be redone with major changes. In some cases the majority of the visual effects happen in the last month or two of the film. What had been scheduled for 6 months must now be done in a fraction of that time and it must be done well. The deadline remains fixed since it must be in theaters as scheduled. And it's not like they can just hire another 1000 people to help out at that stage and make up for the added work. No, the original team will have to put even more hours a day and work 7 days a week. The more hours worked the lower the productivity of the workers. Some work may be farmed out to other companies when possible as 911 emergency calls are made. But that comes with a price of time and money as those companies get up to speed.

To put this in perspective think how much it would cost a live action production to scrap a month of shooting and be required to build new sets and reshoot on new sets, all in the period of a week.

If the artists are compensated for the overtime then prices really start to skyrocket. And more than likely after this big push most of these artists will be laid off until the next rushed project comes through the door.

And that is why visual effects cost so much.



Related posts:
Visual Effects are inexpensive
The Miracle of Visual Effects
Visual Effects - The Big Picture
VFX Business Models
How VFX is perceived by at least one DP
People, not computers, create visual effects
Getting the most out of your VFX Budget

The Value of Visual Effects

The Value of Visual Effects

There’s often discussions about the costs of visual effects. But for now let’s take a look at something seldom discussed and that’s the value of visual effects.

What are the benefits of visual effects? - Story telling freedom.
Freedom for filmmakers, writers and directors to tell any story they like.  Humans have been telling stories since communication made it possible. Verbal and written story telling can and does cover everything imaginable. A writer has full freedom to do anything including having their main character turn into a giant cockroach. Myths from around the world describe actions and creatures that don't exist in real life. Even the Bible has a number of stories that would be difficult to realize beyond the written word and paintings.

The various mediums of story telling all have their place and good stories are tailor made for each medium. Converting a novel to a film script takes specific writing skills to boil the essence down to 2 hours. It also means that writer descriptions that would form images in the readers mind now need to be generated in photographic reality for the movie viewer.

Visual effects
Visual effects have been used in films almost from the beginning of movies. Méliès used visual effects extensively in the early 1900's. (More info on Méliès) Since that time visual effects have been used frequently and not just for special purposes. Some movies used matte paintings to add ceilings that were non-existent on the sets. Visual effects continued to evolve and provide sights not viable to actually film. Their style tended to be in keeping with the film styles of the day (shooting outdoor scenes on sets, rear projection, etc). But visual effects were not without their limits. Camera moves and other restrictions were simply due to the limits of the technology at that time.

With the advent of digital and computer graphics as tools for visual effects, artists are now able to have full control over their images in a way not possible before. These are in addition to their toolbox of previous techniques including models and miniatures when desired.

Almost all films coming out of Hollywood use visual effects to some extent and even many independent films have visual effects. Keep in mind that visual effects is not just for science fiction and fantasy films. They can be used extensively in period films and even in present day comedies. FIVE YEAR ENGAGEMENT used visual effects. WAR HORSE used visual effects extensively including some of the field shots, leaping horse, etc. FOREST GUMP showed an actor missing a leg.

Visual effects cover such things as:

Creating entirely virtual shots
Changing the background
Creating the background
Adding actors, characters or creatures
Changing actors
Adding objects or props
Removing objects
Obscuring objects
Specialized speed changes
Fixing problems on the set, adding eye effects, removing wig netting, etc.

The visual effects team works closely not only with the director but also the cinematographer. Working with the production designer we can expand the sets that are built or build sets that would be impossible to build for real. Working with the stunt team we can remove their rigs (car ramps, wires), help to provide the visuals needed while trying to maintain reasonable safety and can extend or create a stunt if it’s not possible. Working with the special effects* team we can hide their rigs if required and expand and enhance what they’re able to provide. Working with the wardrobe department we can expand the capabilities of their costumes when required (IRON MAN, BLACK SWAN, etc) Each of these departments are very helpful in providing visual effects with what we require to get the best material.

Visual effects is normally focused on the augmentation or modification of live action but visual effects artists and tools are also used for:

Computer graphics animated films (Pixar, Dreamworks, Sony Animation, etc)
Video games
Previsualization
2D to 3D conversion
Titles
Logos
Special venues and multimedia (in addition of course to films, television and commercials)

Now to those of you who may hate visual effects or computer graphics keep in mind you’ve already seen an incredible number of visual effects shots and never even noticed. Much of the work done is not over the top theatrics. In many cases it’s to allow productions the option of shooting something elsewhere or to fix problems on the set (boom mics, makeup, etc). Even television shows like Ugly Betty did a couple of years with green screen to place the characters in New York. Unlikely that most viewers even noticed.

Next time you watch a period film consider that many of the buildings you see may not exist or may be currently covered in tv satellite dishes. The bay you see in the background filled with ships was likely added.

Visual effects artists and craftspeople have been developing and refining their tools for decades. Digital Intermediates (DI) is used for color correcting films. These and many of the digital tools that film productions use daily were pioneered by visual effect artists.

So we are now at a point where just about anything that can be imagined can be created on the screen and look good. Realistic when required or fantastical when required depending on the production.

When visual effects don’t look good these days it’s likely:

Too little time (changes or additions to visual effects from the director or studio can happen up to the final week of work). This means there’s no final polish or in many cases not even a chance to do a good take. And these days many productions start with too little time to begin with.
Selecting a visual effects company or people that may not be up to the task or lack experience with specific aspects.
Poor shot design
Poor creature design
Not being able to shoot the required elements as planned
Not enough time on set to gather necessary images and data

Freedom
In the end studios no longer have to leave scripts on the shelf for years because they’re not doable (DRAGONHEART, WATCHMEN, BENJAMIN BUTTON, LORD OF THE RINGS, etc). Directors and writers have complete freedom to bring their imagination to the screen and to tell just about any story in the manor they wish to. At least as far as visual effects is concerned.

The amount of control and freedom for a director is almost unlimited. That along with the fact many movies are concerned with pushing the envelope creates some sequences where the believability is pushed too far. Where the onslaught of in your face imagery causes audience overload or eye rolling. This happens with stunts and special effects when they are pushed too far as well and the audience says ’oh come on’.


Box-office

In addition to allowing filmmakers freedom of story and flexibility to change or modify scenes, visual effects certainly help the studio’s bottom line. Film is a visual medium that can be shown and appreciated all over the world. Visual effects can provide unique worlds, views and characters that ignite the imagination of those that see them. They can provide the spectacle that goes with specific types of stories.

If you look at the top box-office list of 25 or 50 films you’ll notice almost all of them required visual effects and in many cases they are full of visual effects.

Here's US top films
Here's the Worlds top films

Hard to find non-visual effects films, especially in the world list.

Studios choose to visual effects heavy films as tent pole films because they’re profitable. With some of the top films earning over a billion dollars the sum total of successful films in which visual effects played a significant role is staggering.

[Note that I’m not saying all films need visual effects or that the film world revolves around visual effects. I’m a fan of well told stories of all types. I’m simply documenting the current state of visual effects and what the potential is. Visual effects do not make a story better or worse, just that they allow bringing certain types of stories to the movies.]

A world without visual effects
Try to imagine many of the top films without visual effects. STAR WARS without space, spaceships, lasers. TRANSFORMERS without the Transformers. The MATRIX without bullet time and impossible physics. AVATAR without it’s world, without it’s plants, creatures and Na ‘vi. TITANIC without the water and the entire ship. ALICE IN WONDERLAND without the world and characters. HARRY POTTER without the magic. JURASSIC PARK without the dinosaurs.

Look at this year so far - AVENGERS, SPIDERMAN, MEN IN BLACK 3, SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN, BRAVE, PROMETHEUS and a number of other films with 5 months still to go.

It’s hard to begin to imagine these films without visual effects. Needless to say these films would have not done nearly as well without visual effects. It’s likely they wouldn’t have been attempted without visual effects. Showing an actor saying ‘You should see what I’m seeing right now, it’s fantastic’, seeing actors jumping around in front of a green screen or painted cyc or adding a Prologue at the start of a film to ignore certain aspects (such as tv dishes in a period film) would not tend to make for a great movie going experience. A play, musical or opera tend to be confined to a live stage and as such the audience accepts the limits as they’re presented. These days however most film audiences are looking for a sense of reality in the movies (even if the movie is a fantasy).

As we can see visual effects provide both monetary and creative advantages to the studios and filmmakers. They play a very important role, especially today, in not only the movie industry but in television, commercials and other content.

Visual effects and the shooting process
Many directors in Hollywood not only accept visual effects but embrace them for being able to provide the vision they need for their film projects. These directors usually get the most out of their visual effects budget. However not everyone agrees. Some directors would prefer to consider effects a necessary evil and put them lower on the priority list, even when working on a super hero or talking goat movie. In this case the super hero powers or the talking goat are likely the key things in the trailer and one of the main reasons the audience is interested to see the movie. But some choose not to acknowledge the value that visual effects can bring to their project.

In some cases the directors don’t interview potential visual effects supervisors but simply let the studios or someone else make that selection for them. Do they approach hiring of the cinematographer and other key creatives in the same way? Unlikely.

The attitude of the director, producer and 1st assistant director has much to do with how successful the shooting process is to the visual effects crew. One of the aspects of creating great visual effects is to shoot the footage correctly for visual effects to begin with. This means typically having the visual effects supervisor and a small group of people to take references. Because we have to create and very precisely combine multiple images together we want to make sure we know exactly where we can place the objects and make sure to light them to match. Shooting references involves holding up a gray and silver sphere in front of camera or shooting with a special camera setup.

When shooting, a large amount of time is spent setting up to get the shots. A 2 hour movie may have a shooting schedule from 40 to 100+ days. Each day can cost $100,000-$300,000 or more depending on the size of the project. Each setup takes time. The grips may lay down dolly tracks or a ‘dance floor’ to shot. The cinematographer spends time lighting the set and the other departments prepare. The audio department records 30 seconds of silence at each location to make sure they have the raw materials they need in doing the final sound mix and edit later. The entire crew is silent during these takes. When an airplane flies overhead it’s likely the crew holds until it passes so they can record good audio. Yet when the visual effects team needs to spend a minute shooting a reference it’s not unusual to get eye rolling and gnashing of teeth. “You’re slowing us down. We’re trying to make a movie here.” are common phrases heard at that time. They easily forget that most of the movie is being completed later in visual effects and visual effects are critical to the success of the movie. As pointed out visual effects may have enabled the project even to be made but some crews look at visual effects as the lower department. On the better projects it’s all part of the process from the beginning and not a problem.

There may be times during shooting that the visual effects crew is not scheduled or have been released for the day. But that doesn’t stop production from sometimes attempting to shoot visual effects on their own. They don’t try to shoot shots if the camera crew isn’t there. They don’t try to do a stunt or start a fire without their respective departments being there.

On shows with a lot of visual effects there’s the notion that anything can be done and that it’s all in the budget. Rather than removing something from set or location (8 x 8 ft silk, compressor, truck, etc) the crew will sometimes ask if visual effects can simply remove it. They suggest they can cover it green as if that provides us the magic fix. If production is running behind schedule, something isn’t working (such as a prop), or hasn’t arrived (contact lenses, etc) then production has a tendency to push that onto the ever growing visual effects list. We barely have enough time and money to do the planned work let alone this ‘extra’ work but since the studios typically have visual effects and live action as different budgets that is not of concern except to those who see the big picture.

And of course the cost of visual effects is brought up frequently.
So why use visual effects (in addition to the reasons provide at the start):
1. It’s cheaper than the alternative. Consider how much it would cost to destroy a city or a planet. Visual effects don’t look as expensive in that context.

2. It offers more precise control. Since time is money on set and the director may want exact control or the option to precisely change it later, visual effects may be the correct option.

3. Not enough time. Maybe you have the money to build an entire castle but do you have enough time to do so before shooting starts?

4. It’s not possible any other way. Floating space ships, talking dragons, people flying and shooting lasers are not exactly easy things to obtain. How long would it take and how much money would it require to build the Transformers? How long would it take to genetically produce a dragon?

Keep in mind visual effects models and environments have to be created from scratch. We can't rent a house to shoot in or props to fill it. We can't rent a field to shoot on. We have to build and paint everything from scratch. When we move our characters or creatures we have to make sure their feet touch the ground without going into the ground or floating above it. Many of the things taken for granted in live action has to be worked out in great detail in visual effects.

Summary
Visual effects allows filmmakers an incredible freedom to bring any story they wish to the screen from a creative and technical standpoint.

Visual effects  are used in just about all films, above and beyond just science fiction and fantasy films.

Visual effects film do very well all over the world. The top box-office films of all time use visual effects and most use visual effects extensively.

Visual effects artists are the only group involved in Hollywood filmmaking that don’t have a union. Most are freelance project to project just like other film jobs. Visual effects craftsmen work long hours like other film people and at times are likely to be putting in 80 or 90+ hours a week for weeks or months at a time due to compressed schedules and last minute changes. Much of visual effects is outsourced around the world due to film tax incentives just like some of the jobs in Hollywood. Some artists have to uproot their families and move to other countries in an attempt to remain employed. I believe to get the best out of people you should respect them.  Given all that visual effects brings to films, the people who make them and the people who watch them, I think visual effects artists deserve the same respect as the other departments and workers in the film industry.

Related Post

The Miracle of Visual Effects, will it continue?  - images show what visual effects can do

Why do Visual Effects cost so much?
Visual Effects are Inexpensive


*Special effects are explosions, breakaways, wire rigs and other on set work as opposed to visual effects which is about images and primarily done in post-production.

Visual Effects Tips 2

[Visual Effects Tips 1 post]

Time is important in visual effects. There’s never enough of it so make every attempt to minimize wasted time and simple mistakes.

Many of these examples are animation or compositing but most apply to the majority of visual effects work from texture or matte painting to lighting.


Checking materials
When starting a task or shot check the materials you’ve been provided.
Are all the materials correct?
Does the live action match the count sheet?
If there’s a match move is it correct?
If you’re composting are the supplied renders correct with correct alphas?
If there are problems flag them immediately. If you don’t check you may not know that there are problems until well into the shot, at which time trying to correct the mistakes will take longer and be more difficult.

After confirming everything is ok become familiar with the material. If it’s a greescreen take a look at the screen and potential problems extracting the mattes. If you’re going to roto the live action run the clip a few times to see what’s happening so you can plan your approach.

Note to visual effects companies: Make sure your contracts include explicit details for deliveries to your company. File formats, schedules, naming, file organization, size, etc. Sometimes it’s amazing the amount of incorrect material received from a client. On one project I worked on the editorial dept seemed to have a PA who was simply recopying everything onto hard drives and shipping them with no information and no organization. The visual effects company then would have to spend hours sifting through the material to determine what was new and what had changed. In other cases I’ve heard of some editorial departments constantly providing incorrect count sheets. By having this info in the contract the first time this happens flag it to the client and inform them that additional lapses that require rework or unplanned man hours correcting will be billed on a time and material basis. Additional costs seem to be one of the few ways to get a clients attention unfortunately but it also means that the meager profits will be less likely soaked up by these types of sloppiness or errors on the clients part.


Thinking
Now that you’ve reviewed the materials take a moment to think through the task at hand and how this will be accomplished. What are the critical elements, what are the steps that will need to be done, what tasks will have to be done by other departments, etc. What are the items that will likely change or that will need special care? If this a stereo shot or will be converted to stereo after the fact then you will have to consider the implications of working in real 3D space. If you’re compositing you’ll need to think of the layering process.


KISS
Keep it simple stupid. In your plan for the task try to keep it simple. You have to anticipate the areas that will need to be controlled independently and break it up accordingly but avoid going crazy with layers or keyframes if possible. A complex shot will probably require more than simple work but don’t needlessly make the project or the work complex.


Sharing
As you start thinking of the shot and the steps required keep in mind it’s likely you will have to pass the work on to someone during the course of the show. That someone could be you having to re-open the project and make changes two months after it was finalled or it could be you re-starting the shot after it was put on hold for three months. Or it could be a co-worker who has to take over the shot while you finish something else or the shot may have to be split up because of an impending deadline.

With that in mind you want to make it so no one, including yourself, has to spend hours reverse engineering what you were doing and why. (I’m not even going mention the possibility that a sequel may mean some of these files and projects are opened years later)


Fundamentals
Start with the fundamentals. If you’re an animator then you want to make sure you have the proper poses at the correct key frames. Don’t get lost in trying to do the secondary animations, just focus on the fundamental animation. If you’re a compositor adjust the black levels and adjust the basic color of the assortment of elements you’ve been provided before throwing in all the layering atmospherics and other enhancements.

Once these are done and approved then you know you have a solid foundation to build on. It allows the supervisor or director the ability to review the work before you spend a lot of time on it. There may be radical changes that would make all the additional work worthless.

There will be times when it will be useful to do slop or rough animation, renders and composites. Frequently it’s necessary to block in an entire sequence so the director and editor can review before proceeding. Other times it may be necessary to provide shots for test screenings that were scheduled to be done in the future. Regardless you’ll get notes on the shots and the first impulse will be to take these quick and dirty versions and start making adjustments. However it’s almost always best to get back to the foundation and the basics before addressing the notes. If the black levels are off or the basic timing of animation is wrong, it will still be wrong even tweaking the other aspects of the shot. And in the end it’s likely you’ll waste a lot of time and have to scrap it to get back to where you should have started from.


Priorities
You should have a To Do list for every shot you work on. With feedback from the supervisor or director you may be changing the order of priorities. Neither the director nor supervisor will want to ask multiple times for the same thing. Let them know if there is an issue accomplishing that.

If you’re reviewing yourself play the shot through and note the items that stand out to you as not in keeping with what the final shot should be. Determine the priority based on which issues truly jump out the most and which ones are fundamental issues versus getting sidetracked and spending time noodling with a few pixels in the corner. If it had to go in the movie tomorrow what are the top 5 items to be fixed or changed?

As you work on each item mark it off your To Do list so you always know how much you’ve done and how much is still to be done.


Monitor
Is your monitor actually calibrated? Are you using the correct lookup table and gamma settings? Are you seeing the same results you see in dailies review and that the supervisor and director see? If not check with your company to see if your system can be calibrated or you’ll have to develop an eye to compensate for the difference. Be aware if your system or playback has limited color depth.


Reviews
If you’re presenting to the director or supervisor it’s usually worthwhile having the previous version loaded and ready to review since many times it will be used for reference and comparison. If you’re showing with and without results in something like Nuke then wire up the viewer so you can quickly cycle though the different versions or variations if possible. Having to zoom out, find the areas, relink the viewer, etc are time consuming and should have already been done ahead of time.  Sometimes it’s worth putting in a switch to quickly change the composite flow. Create snapshots in After Effects or other apps.


Reviewing your work
For your own reviews crank the gamma up and down and the exposure up and down to spot any inconsistencies or level issues. Try the alternate lookup tables (make sure to return to normal once done reviewing). Will the shot hold up in the DI or once it’s transferred to video? Are areas being clipped or is there a mismatch of blacks and levels? Is there any quantizing? Check the blue channel for grain issues. Have you added the proper amount of grain and does the whole shot match?

Play it slow, fast and in reverse to see if everything is working as it should. This can sometimes show flaws in the animation or simply allow you to spot fluctuation problems.

When you’re staring at something a long time you may not spot some of the flaws that might be obvious to others. Painters sometimes look at their work in a mirror to give them a different feel for the painting. This was common in the pre-digital days with matte painters. Flopping the image in the viewer or composite will provide this same option of seeing the shot in a new light.

Be honest with yourself. If the animation or whatever you're working on isn't working consider how to fix it. Discuss with a co-worker, lead or supervisor if you know it's wrong but aren't sure how to proceed.


Organize
Do your work in an organized fashion that follows logical thinking. If your company has templates or guidelines be sure to follow those. It’s easy in some apps such as Nuke to end up with something that looks like a mess of spaghetti. This will chew up your time daily to maintain and change and it will mean that anyone else who needs to work on the composite will spend extra time digging through the composite.

Come up with some basic conventions yourself if none is provided by your company or lead. Try to be consistent about the approach and naming. Group parts of the shots as modules. This makes it easy to enable/disable sections or to switch sections. If you’re working in Photoshop you might want to put sections in folders to keep it more organized. Likewise with some roto packages and other apps there are opportunities to group related items.


Document
It’s not always clear what your project file is doing. It may seem totally obvious to you now but to others or even yourself a few weeks from now it will likely be a totally mystery. If you’re writing software code then include comments. If it;s a complex process with multiple files consider writing a Read Me file or some basic document describing what the process is and how it works. By including some forms of documentation it will be easier and faster to keep track of what is what. Many software packages offer methods to document the work as you’re doing it. Label layers in After Effects and Photoshop. This minimizing the amount of guess that is done or the toggling of layers to determine exactly what each is doing. Label key nodes in Nuke.

Some apps allow adding comments. Nuke provides Sticky Notes so you can mark a specific area with a reminder to yourself or an explanation why you’re doing it this way. Their backdrop can be placed behind a number of nodes with text and with user defined colors making it easy to spot key areas even on a large and complex composite. Nuke also provides No Op nodes that can be labeled. Take a look at the software you’re using to determine how you can use labels and other built in documentation. If none exists consider writing up a short text file in the director with your notes.

Add slates to your rendered images and add useful comments there. These are going to become very valuable when you have to dig back through them for yourself or a client.


Save often
Many software packages have autosaving functions. Make sure these are turned on but also get in the habit of saving yourself to make sure your work is being saved where it needs to be saved.


Save versions
Save your files and projects as you go along with version or take numbers. Use the company defined file structure and naming conventions. Especially important if you’ve made major changes. It’s very frustrating when the client or supervisor likes a test or previous version you did but you didn’t save the project. Now you have to spend time trying to recreate what you already did once before.


Optimize
When you work on a shot you will likely have to render quite a few takes on your machine and/or on the render farm. If for some reason your render isn’t optimized that can equate to quite a few hours of lost production time and processor time.  As you manipulate, test and review interactively an unoptimized configuration can mean the difference of trying multiple changes in a short time or become a slog of spending most of your day making a few simple changes. It may mean the difference of producing a great result on a short turnaround or a mediocre result since you didn’t have time to manipulate and render a better version.

Optimize your renders when possible. Know the application you’re working in and know what options there are when rendering. Here’s a list of optimizations for Nuke. There’s likely more than a few lists for all visual effects software packages. Avoiding things that slow down the app and doing more of the things that speed up the app may have a big impact on the day to day work. Consider using low resolution proxy models or elements when you can for working on animation or basic testing. Consider pre comps and caching when working on the top layer. Consider rendering just a frame range of the shot and combining it previously rendered frames to check the new frames in context.

For specific tasks you might turn off some of the advanced settings - motion blur, fur render, etc. as long as you know what you’re evaluating. You might be able to disable specific areas of a composite or render if that’s not what you’re working on. Just make sure to restore all of the settings for the final render and another other renders that require full reviews.

There’s no point in spending 3 days trying to shave a few seconds off the entire shot render but if your render is running much slower than it should due to simple changes, then it’s a waste of time and resources.

The other thing to consider optimizing is yourself and your approach. If you’re working a lot in one software package then get to know all the keyboard and mouse shortcuts. Configure the app keys or your Wacom to take advantage of specific and frequent tasks. Use macros or scripts as needed for repeating common tasks. In Photoshop use actions for tasks that you do a lot of.


Check your results
Check all the renders or tests you generate and consider them in terms of the request from the director or supervisor. Make sure to check your work before passing it on to others to use. Do NOT assume that its correct. If you’re an animator check the final animation for any stray keyframes or oddities. Rotoscopers should make sure the motion and coverage is correct. If you’re rendering simulations make sure they’re the required length and have correct alphas. If you’re a TD make sure there aren’t any glitches or bad frames rendered.

It’s far better to find out now and fix it rather than getting a frantic call late at night two weeks later.

Once you’ve checked the results make sure everything has been correctly entered int whatever asset database your company may be using. Make sure to prep the files for archiving if you’re finished.


Keep a log
Keep a log of the time you work and the shots and tasks you’re working on. You likely already do this for your timecard or for production but it’s worthwhile recording it as well for yourself. It can be a real eye opener to see how much actual time was spent on a shot or given task or how much linear time it took by the time the back and forth happened with the director. Use this as a reference when you’re asked to bid on a shot or when you’re asked how much time you think is required to get the version done. All of us in visual effects are eternal optimists. We assume we can whip out the next version in a couple of hours. Time after time of saying that with a client waiting and disappointing them with something two days later is a problem. It’s also a problem for the visual effects company who bids on the amount of time required and unknowingly underbids the work simply because everyone is optimistic. The company should in fact be doing their own reality check of what the typical shot requires but most companies don’t work that way. No point in budgeting 2 hours of roto per shot on a new show if the company average was 8 hours of roto per shot on the last show.

Also keep a record of the bids you provide when bidding a show. Don’t be surprised if the numbers changed quite a bit when you go to do the actual work months later. Especially problematic when they try holding you to it. The supervisor or producer may think you were pessimistic and ‘adjusted’ the amount of time much lower. Or in some cases they may have added a lot of padding.


Check the next phase
Once you’re done with your tasks and passed the files or elements on it’s usually out of your hands. And the company probably wants you to be focusing your efforts on the next task. But when possible it’s worth checking the next step, the next render or task. You can check to make sure the correct version is in fact being used of your animation. You can make sure the root elements or renders are the right ones and are being used correctly. It’s possible there’s been a mixup or confusion on the next step and by viewing the 10 second shot you can flag an error that may not be evident to others.


Check the final
If a shot you worked on in any form is finalled check it out. Its worth doing a reality check of what you did and how it was used in context of the shot and project. Did you over build details of the model that never show up given the action or smoke levels? Did texture map you painted work? Did that elaborate 30 second shot get cut down to 2 seconds? Would you have done more on a specific aspect that would have made the shot better? There may not be much you can do about some of these things but it’s worth getting the experience and understanding how things come to be. It’s also worth considering how would you approach this same task or type of shot next time. Would you change anything? Have you learned anything you can apply to the remaining shots or to future projects?

[I'll have future tips posts. Feel free to add your own tips in comments]

People, not computers, create visual effects

There's an impression that is perpetuated in the media that visual effects are created entirely by computers. The human artists are left out of this narrative. The term CGI is now being used interchangeably with visual effects. The feeling among the layperson is visual effects must be easy because it's being done using computers.

These days’ writers use computers to write both novels and scripts. Computers are now in many cameras that cinematographers and photographers use. Yet we don't say the computer created the script or that the computer did the photography.

Computer graphics is one of the tools used in making visual effects and it is powerful tool with a wide scope but it’s not the only tool or only ingredient to creating effects. We also use the live action with the actors, footage of bits and pieces to combine, miniatures as necessary, our hands (with a mouse, tablet, keyboard, pencil, paint brush, etc) and our most important tool, our eyes.

The truth is visual effects is an incredibly labor intensive process.  There is far more effort and time put into each shot than most people imagine, including those in production. It's inconceivable to the average person that at 24 frames per second there is still some handwork done on individual frames and people are tasked with tracing images among other time consuming work.

When BACK TO THE FUTURE 2 came out people thought that there really were hover boards being developed by Mattel. They were convinced there was no way people were tracing and painting on every frame. After all, computers were available so all of that handwork surely had to be automated by then. This was in 1989.

Years ago visual effects artists had to make fake computer graphics. For ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK we used wood and plastic blocks with white tape to represent a wire frame New York. Motion graphics cameras layered and moved artwork to give the illusion of metal logos and glints. Robert Abel's did extensive hand animation to simulate computer graphics for commercials. The public at that time were lead to believe computers were creating some great visuals. Even the motion control systems used on CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and STAR WARS didn't use true computers. They were all built from pure hardwired electronics.

Computers eventually were able to catch up to the fake computer graphics images we were creating. Computers and related software now have become one of the main tools for visual effects artists but they're still just tools that must be used by those skilled enough to do so. Anybody can type on a computer or pickup a paint brush but the ability to truly create something of professional quality in nay field takes hard work, skill, experience and some talent to master.

And yet we in the visual effects industry and the software vendors tend not to make that distinction clear. We enjoy showing off our newest tools and typically have images prepped for doing demos or dog and pony shows that don't involve the time consuming work. This leaves the press or those being presented, the impression that’s it’s easy and simple. When people see a painting they know what's gone into it to create the final results. When they see a finished visual effects shot they have no idea how much work was involved. Usually it's just wiped away with a 'it's CG' comment, as if the tool represents the work involved. The media doesn't credit brushes for the work the painter has done but they are quick to congratulate the software and hardware for creating the visuals.

With each new feature in Photoshop or new image processing demo done on YouTube people think another problem for visual effects has been solved. Many of these types of processes may work fine on a still image but can be of little value when done for a moving image projected 40 feet across. While some of these developments have made things faster and easier (I can remember hand tracking on a rear projection digitizing screen for BLUE THUNDER before we had digital compositing), they have yet to solve all of our technical issues. The computer is excellent at doing many things but most of what we do still takes a trained eye of an operator to achieve the results necessary.

The reality is it takes a lot of skilled and hardwork to create visual effects shots. In many cases the visual effects crew may eclipse the size of the live action crew, yet producers and studios still don't know why it costs so much. Few actually see the full effects crew working on their projects. Take a look at the number of credits on a visual effects film and know that this doesn't actually cover all the people that worked on the effects, just the ones that were contractually required.

Yes, computers are getting faster every year but just as a computer running twice as fast doesn’t allow a writer to create a script in half the time, it doesn’t mean shots can be produced in half the time. It’s the time reviewing, thinking and modifying that tends to take the most time. Same as on a live action set. The time the cameras are rolling is only a tiny amount of the time required to shoot a film.

Computers have made certain tasks quicker but the complexity and finessing of the work has continued to outpace the speed of the computer. It still takes hours or days in some cases to simply render certain shots. And this helps explain why a major change to a shot is a setback in terms of time and amount of man hours lost. We understand there will be creative decisions as the film is being fine tuned in post but filmmakers should be clear it's no different than asking a live action crew to do several days of reshoots at different locations. Part of this problem as mentioned before is the entire visual effects crew tends to be hidden from view so this amount of time and effort is not obvious to those outside of visual effects.

In the end thank a visual effects person for the work you see on the screen, not the computer.

Sad but true..

A cautionary tale:

 From @VFXSoldier twitter

Art Institute graduate spent 70K on degree, can't find video game job, takes up stripping instead.

Believe me,  you don't want to see most vfx artists stripping.

---
Unfortunately most VFX companies end up going through the following.  These would be funny if
they weren't so realistic.  I've seen the same things almost verbatim so they're not exaggerated. 
Note that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing since there are times when the client feels they need to define how the vfx need to be done to the experienced vfx people they hired.

And from @alba twitter:
VIDEO:  VFX Guy versus commercial producer video "This is a fixed bid"

    Caution: Explicit Language

The unrealistic portion here is the client reminding you it's a fixed bid.  They don't even bother saying that. 

Here's another example how clients work with VFX companies and vfx artists

VIDEO: The Vendor Client relationship - in real world situations

Overtime?  What's that?

VIDEO: Do you like fighting robots? The interview. 

Globalization and VFX

Globalization and VFX


One of the issues facing VFX companies and artists is the issue of globalization. Given the tax incentives and cost of living variance around the world most film studios are looking beyond the borders to find a better price for doing film work, including visual effects.


This blog is read around the world. This article will have a California slant but I’m trying to as always document the current state of affairs in visual effects.


In the golden age of movie making most Hollywood films were shot in Los Angeles with some being done in New York. The studios were setup as film factories to be as efficient as possible. If you finished a film on Friday, you'd start another film on Monday. The stages, sets, back lots and rear projection allowed them to shoot a wide range of film settings within the confines of the studio lot. If you want New York in the 1890's you go to one block of the back lot. If you wanted a1940's Midwest town you'd make a left into that back lot street. Many 'locations' were within easy driving distance of the studios, which also had ranches and other outdoor areas where they could construct western towns or other special settings.


With films like Easy Rider studios started to reconsider what they needed. Many back lots were sold for short-term gains and more true location shooting was done. In some cases if a film could be shot at a lower price in a different location that made sense. In other cases it made sense to go to another location if that truly was the location in film.


When films like Star Wars and Close Encounters were filmed the majority of visual effects were done in Los Angeles. When ILM moved to northern California that spread the work a bit but still the majority of the big, Hollywood vfx work was done within California. VFX companies were on a relatively level playing field. The jobs were awarded based on ability, quality and costs.


As the digital age of visual effects got underway some countries and states started offering tax incentives that included vfx. The digital age enabled the use of computers and software to be setup anywhere. VFX artists can be brought in from anywhere else and setup with little effort. VFX artists can be trained in the basics locally. The internet allows images to be sent anywhere quickly for work to be done and reviewed anywhere else. The studios, always eager to save money on things that weren’t under their umbrella, were more than happy to start sending out work. In their view, vfx are a commodity that can be done anywhere.


At this point a number of countries offer tax incentives, rebates or even pre-investments in films in exchange for a certain amount of work to be done in that country. Various states also have tax incentives as well to try to get millions of dollars of production costs to come to their state. The details vary greatly and can be a smart or bad investment depending on the details.


From the various governments viewpoint (state and country) an incentive means that they can draw film production to their location. A film production can bring in millions of dollars to a given locale fairly quickly. A factory doesn’t have to be built over time before people can be employed and there usually aren’t a lot of ecology studies required. All the products, services and rentals that can be had are paid for by production (hotels, catering, car rentals, hardware stores, etc). The crew spends a fair bit of their money locally on things like restaurants, bars and leisure time activates. If a location is portrayed well it may mean extra tourists in the future. When long-term incentives are in place then an entire film studio infrastructure can be built in that location and crewmembers of all types can be developed, including visual effects artists. Many third party companies develop to service the motion picture industry at these locations.


Companies in Vancouver, London and similar locations are doing well since they don’t have to compete on a level playing field. With a 20% or more savings via the government it’s difficult for vfx companies in the U.S. to compete directly.


From the studio perspective their main aim is to do a film as cheaply as possible and still make it work. If the film is a major VFX tent pole movie with a lot of difficult or new vfx then they will pay top dollar to make it and to ensure it will be done on time and to the quality required. But this only applies to those shots and sequences they feel need to be done at expensive vfx companies. One step down from those types of shots (certainly simpler compositing and roto shots) or lower level vfx film and price becomes one of the highest priorities.


A Hollywood studios first choice is usually Vancouver simply because it’s in the same time zone, is just a 3 hour flight away and they all speak English there. Second choice would probably be London since it’s the next closest location, they speak English and studios executives and key personal enjoy the London life. Next would be Australia. (New Zealand with Weta is primarily on the big projects and not so much a cost saving measure). India, China and other locations are further down on the list if the studio executives and key personnel think they will have to go there. If they don’t have to personally travel there, then the studio is all for sending the work anywhere in the world.


Obviously some studios now have infrastructures setup in various locations and their choice will be dictated by their established suppliers. You’ll notice most editing and sound mixing still happens in the U.S. since the filmmakers and studios spend a fair bit of time involved directly in these activities. They’re also not at the same level of expense as vfx.


Some people think that the studios won’t go anywhere just based on price but it’s very dependent on the nature of the work. There was an article a few months ago where most of the studios were now sending out their subtitling work (as done on the DVD’s). The cost savings to the studio? $600. A $100 million dollar movie and they send out the subtitling to a different country to save $600. I’m not a studio accountant but I suspect there might be a few other budget items that would yield larger savings but since subtitling (and vfx) are done by third parties it’s an easy win for any studio person to make that decision.


Unfortunately the location that has the most to lose (and gain) from subsidies is California. They have done too little, too late. A large revenue stream for California (especially southern California) comes from movies. There are a lot of people employed in this business and they in turn spend their money locally on services and products.
Runaway product continues to suck out revenues from California and unfortunately most of the California legislation can’t get a simple grasp of the obvious. Motion pictures are one of the U.S.’s largest exports.


People (and politicians) assume since movies bring in huge revenue that everyone who works in movies are ‘gazillionairs’ to quote another internet forum. What they forget is the vast majority of people involved in movie making are making working wages. The median income for writers in the Writers Guild is $44,000 a year. Most VFX people make more than this but if it’s averaged over all vfx artists and dry spells it may not be as much as you think.


Some US companies are opening satellite companies in other countries that are able to offer a better price break. There are multiple arrangements. In some cases they simply outsource the work they feel can be outsourced such as Roto. In other cases they have a full working relationship where the foreign company does a fair bit of real work on the actual product. Some companies operate independent shops in different countries that can be leveraged, as the work requires it.


Part of the issue is what is to be gained for everyone involved. If the focus of the studios is purely on the cost factor, having a US based VFX company doesn't necessarily gain them much. They're willing to pay top dollar today for certain projects with a lot of R&D but what happens in a few years when those techniques and software are more readily available in off the shelf products? If your California vfx company has some specialty (water, fire, etc) what happens when that’s all in the next major update of a software package? Will you continue to get work? What happens when vfx production management elsewhere is brought up to the same level? Will the studios continue to be willing pay more to a U.S. company to act as an intermediate?


Will most of the work being done in the US move out of the country and the only thing remaining be the vfx company executives and accountants?


If you live in a country that is currently doing well (healthy vfx production) because of the incentives or reduced expenses what happens when that changes? At some point your government may reduce or eliminate the incentive. Another country may offer a higher incentive. The world and local economy may increase the cost of doing business such that the incentives aren’t enough or another location may end up being even a lower expense because of changing cost of living factors. The studios will quickly move to the lowest priced area that can provide them what they need. Can you and the company you work for compete on a level playing field if it had to? Is your company truly efficient? Does it have the talented artists and R&D people required?


If you live in California (or starting here) what can you do?


1. You can work at some of the larger companies such as ILM, DD, etc. These still get large projects but they still lay off massive amounts of people and still go through cycles of feast or famine work so there’s no guarantee of long-term employment even if you’re considered on staff.


2. Consider working at a small to mid-size shop that continues to maintain a reasonable balance of work. Many of these do all television work (which is usually done here or in Vancouver) or that at least do some television work to help balance the work.


3. Consider moving out of country to where the actual work is being done. This sounds like a simple fix to anyone who doesn’t consider the implications.


a. There are already people working there. Are there enough job openings to make it worth moving there?


b. How long is the project? Is this a permanent move or will you have to shuffle off again in few months to somewhere else?


c. Can you qualify to work elsewhere? Many countries require work visas and other paperwork. Some incentives require crewmembers to be living in the country for a given length of time. Just because there is technical and creative work elsewhere doesn’t mean you can just move there and start working.


d. Can you work at reduced wages if that’s the reason the work is located in that country? If you’re at a location that is getting work based mainly on the cost of living can you work there yourself at the reduced rate and feel comfortable? Does the local taxes and other issues reduced the income even further?


e. What happens if you have loved ones, family, house or other connections here? If you’re young and single it may be fun and exciting to move to another location. For those of us with families do we sell the house and uproot all family members (taking children out of school and away from their friends) to go work in another country? Do we leave the family for long periods of time? (6 months to a year or longer) Do we try to rent out the house and hope to return someday?


It’s a sad state of affairs when experienced vfx artists, with all of their creative and technical skills, are likened to migrant farm workers moving to where the work is. At least there’s a real reason farm workers move is because of locations of the crops and growing seasons. In the case of the vfx artist a cubicle is a cubicle, no matter where in the world it’s located. The only reason for moving is purely at the whim of the counties incentives and the studios.


Unfortunately I can’t offer any real solutions. The unions can’t prevent work from moving out of the country. The politicians seem to be the few who have much control over this so they’re the ones to contact. I know that there are some organizations trying to make this better. If you’re in a location doing well then enjoy it while you can. If you’re in California it’s likely you’ll have to do what you have to do. There are now some vfx supes that spend months shooting in one country and then do the post in another country and spend most of the year away from their families.


Will there be enough of a demand and balance that all the vfx companies and artists throughout the world can keep reasonably busy and can enjoy the fruits of their labor?


(Links added 7/12/10 based on VFX Soldier comment posting. See comments for my basic response at this time.  The links all make interesting reading and really get to the heart of the matter.)


VFX Soldier  VFX Subsidy War Grows Into Global Trade War

How to Make an American Job Before It's Too Late

The Vanishing American Consumer and the Coming Trade War

(If you're viewing this on a page with other posts then please click on the Comments link below to see the comments and responses)

Update 8-9-2010
Every week there seem to be new updates on state or country incentive programs.
Clint Eastwood makes UKFC plea - Entertainment News, Top News, Media - Variety


Here's a snippet:

Scottish-born producer Iain Smith, whose credits include "The A-Team," "Children of Men" and "Local Hero," expressed the need for the government to quickly form a plan or risk producers looking elsewhere to shoot films.

"While we have a fantastic infrastructure, we have to protect that as much as we can and in order to do that we have to compete against industries in other countries," said Smith. "There's no doubt we need to tighten purse strings but we need to be careful we don't asphyxiate the film industry in general."

But in an article written for Blighty's Observer newspaper on Sunday, culture secretary Jeremy Hunt hit back at critics.

"If we are going to face budget cuts I have a duty to ensure that taxpayers' money is spent where it gets the most bang for its buck," he said. "It is simply not acceptable in these times to fund an organization like the U.K. Film council where no fewer than eight of the top executives are paid more than £100,000 ($160,000)."

Hunt added: "Stopping money being spent on a film quango is not the same as stopping money being spent on film."

NY RENEWS TAX CREDIT, ADDS POST INCENTIVE Snippet:

"This new credit will give New York post production services a much needed competitive edge," explains Rich Friedlander, co-founder of Brainstorm Digital. "We increasingly saw visual effects post work going to Canada thanks to their their Digital Animation or Visual Effects tax credit (DAVE). This new program will allow work that was filmed in New York to stay through its entire production cycle. It's a major move that will attract and keep top talent here in state."