Showing posts with label reference. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reference. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

VES Handbook now in eBook formats

The VES Handbook is finally out in Kindle format from Amazon. It came out last fall but had issues with the Table of Contents among other things.  Currently $37.22 on US amazon store. Paperback is $41.35

[July 17, 2012 Just checked amazon and they're back to selling it at full retail price. $64.95 Not sure why. I assume the publisher requested it?]


It also is out for the Nook format as well at Barnes and Noble.  Currently $64.95 on US Barnes and Noble.

There's hope for an iBook format version as well but unknown when that will happen.

(I haven't been able to do a full check yet)

The good news:
1. Now more portable. The paperback book is about 960 pages and is about 1 and 1/2 inches thick, so it's not an easy thing to carry around.

2 Should be able to run on any device that supports whichever format you buy. That includes the iPad and other devices.

3. The Kindle version at least includes the additional articles from the website so is closer to 1200 pages.

4. Working Table of Contents to make it quicker to go directly to chapters.

5. You can bookmark, highlight text and add notes to most of the eReaders to make it fast to go to a specific section.


The bad news:
1. Some of the photos from studios have restrictions and will not appear in the electronic versions.
(I'm not sure how many at this point)

2. The printed book included sub-chapter page numbers for the actual articles.  The electronic versions only list by chapters.  Wish they had the full table of contents working.


Other info about the Handbook:
It won a Prose award which is an award for profesional and scholarly excellence for publications. The Handbook won in the Art Technique category.

Animation World Review

We are actively seeking specific feedback for the handbook since we're already discussing version 2 update.  (They're already on the 2nd printing)  More than likely we'll be augmenting the book with added articles instead of totally revamping existing articles but please submit any thoughts and ideas.
Too much? Too little? What worked? What didn't?

Focal Press has a sample online.  The page also lists the table of contents. See link lower on that page for a sampler.   This is a section of Bill Taylor's article on shooting greenscreen/bluescreen.  This article gets into a lot detail because it's a defined technical process.  In the handbook there are a mix of articles, some that deal with very specific technical issues and some that deal with broader issues.

VES Handbook companion site - Includes author bios and extended versions of some of the articles.

(extended articles should be in Kindle version)

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

VES Handbook Released

The VES Handbook of Visual Effects is now shipping. I know at least a couple of people I spoke to thought "why do we need another vfx book?" Once they saw the scope and depth of the handbook they changed their minds. It's not a tutorial. It doesn't deal with specific software or hardware. The book covers a wide range of things: budgeting, previs, shooting on set, shooting elements, color issues, digital cameras, stereo, rendering fur, video game creation, workflow, etc. We've tried to at least touch on a bit of everything and in most cases we had experts writing a detailed article. I'm hoping vfx artist of all types will find a use for it as a reference, to help fill in gaps of knowledge, tips and tricks and as a means to come up to speed on other areas of visual effects that may be outside their expertise.

If you're at SIGGRAPH this week they have some copies at the Focal Press / Morgan Kaufman booth that you can check out. (update: Told if you show your membership card you'll get the discount there)

VES members check emails for member discount.

Amazon does have it on sale at 10% less than the marked retail.

Focal Press is hoping to release the book on Kindle and as a paid eBook PDF on their site shortly. There's some conversion involved to get it into an electronic version. They are also trying to get it on the iBook store but that may take a little longer.  Kindle edition would work on any device with Kindle software - iPhone, iPad, PC/Mac, etc.  iBook version would be for the iPad and iPhone. These eBook versions will be handy to have available where ever you are.  The printed book is 922 pages.

NOTE: Focal Press did want to alert buyers that the electronic versions will be missing 70 photos that are in the printed book. These are photos from the studios or other sources that we don't have e-rights to.

PIRATE COPIES:  Please don't pirate the book.  Pirating is stealing, despite what excuses people give themselves.  Assuming you are involved in vfx you are involved in making IP (Intellectual property) that can be pirated.  I suspect you'd like to be paid for your work and the time you put into something. Respect yourself and the business you're in.  I and the other authors/editors who worked on the book chose to volunteer so the VES could provide something of value to vfx artists and that could also provide a source of revenue for the VES.   The more copies that are pirated, the less likely updates are made. This is true of any product for sale.

Focal Press will also have a place on their site that will have some extended articles which were trimmed down for the book.

I was a co-editor and did write some of the articles. I cover some of the issues from this blog but these were all re-written from scratch for the book.

Added:  Focal Press has a sample online.  The page also lists the table of contents. See link lower on that page for a sampler.   This is a section of Bill Taylor's article on shooting greenscreen/bluescreen.  This article gets into a lot detail because it's a defined technical process.  In the handbook there are a mix of articles, some that deal with very specific technical issues and some that deal with broader issues.

VES Handbook companion site - Includes author bios and extended versions of some of the articles.





10/27/2010 Update

VES Handbook of Visual Effects released for the Kindle!  Now take it with you on the Kindle, iPad, iPhone, etc.

7/20/2011 Update  Now actually out for good on the Kindle and Nook.


8/4/2010 update
I was interviewed about the handbook by fxGuide which always does a fantastic podcast.  (Subscribe through iTunes)  In the video I'm trying to blink at 24fps and as always my hands are juggling invisible objects.  Sorry. I would be remiss if I didn't mentioned fxphd, which is an great online training program created by the same team involved with fxGuide.  They cover Nuke and many of the professional packages.

One other note is someone on Amazon reviewed the book and didn't think it would help you get a shot finished.  No it won't. It was never designed to do so.  As I mentioned in the video interview if you're already an expert in any one thing and that's the only article in the book you read then you're not going to get a lot out of it.  The book is designed to provide the principles to areas outside your expertise. It does cover pre-production and production, which not all vfx artists are involved with, but are critical in seeing a shot all the way through the process.  If the live action is not shot correctly then there's less likelihood of success downstream.

There are also an infinite number of vfx shots and numerous programs and other tools that can be used so trying to come up with a solution book for all 3D rendering, compositing, animating, (etc) issues would be impossible.  You're better off getting a specific book or online class targeted your specific software applications (and kept up to date).

You can post comments here for what changes/additions you'd like to see in the next update. I view the handbook like a software application that will get updates and have improvements made to it.  If you're a VES member there's a specific area of the forums at the VES site to provide feedback as well.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

VES Handbook of Visual Effects

I'm told the VES Handbook should be available July 30 (currently listed as Aug 13 on Amazon).
960 pages of info written by 88 vfx professionals. (I wrote a few articles and was a co-editor)
Full color.

It is available as a pre-order from Amazon (10% discount) and I would expect many cinema related bookstores would carry it. The VES was exploring discounts for members but no word on this.

The current plan is to try to provide it in eBook format as well for Kindle and iBook but when those options will be available I don't know.


Update:
For full details on the handbook and it's release, please follow link below.


Latest Info: Handbook has been released posting.


Sunday, April 18, 2010

VES Handbook of Visual Effects

We're still finishing the VES Handbook but it's already listed on Amazon.

My understanding is it's supposed to be out this summer (July?).
I don't know if the VES has special rates or other options for VES members.

Co-editors included myself, Toni Pace-Carstensen and Kevin Rafferty



Update:
For full details on the handbook and it's release, please follow link below.


Latest Info: Handbook has been released posting.


Monday, February 23, 2009

VES Handbook

I wanted to let everyone know that there is a Visual Effects Society handbook being written by quite a few visual effects artists, myself included. There's already a publisher involved and the plan is to release it next year.

I have a few different articles halfway done for this blog that hopefully I'll be finishing up and posting once I have more writing completed on the handbook.


Update:
For full details on the handbook and it's release please follow link below.
Latest Info: Handbook has been released posting.

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Comparisons

When you go to an eye doctor he asks you to compare two different lens choices. “Is this better or this better?” Step by step he refines the specific lenses that you need. The visual effects artist goes through similar comparisons to arrive at the final shot. They compare their shot to real references, they compare the shot to surrounding shots and they compare of changes while they work on a shot.

If you don’t have any reference to compare you may drift off course and end up with something that doesn’t work

Real References
During each step in the process the VFX artist should be comparing their work with any real references from the original shoot or research references (stills, video). What needs to be done to match this reference? Does the creature move like the real creature reference? Does the lighting match reference photos?

Sequences
You also want to be able to reference your shot in comparison to others in the sequence. Cut the shot into the sequence and view in context. Does it match the other VFX shots? Does it match the live action shots?

Color
For color balancing, film clips are sometimes filmed out as a wedge. These show a range of color and brightness values and will be used for digital color balance reference. The DP or supervisor may make a selection to use as a guide for a sequence. This is similar to doing color variations in Photoshop. What looks good by itself may not look like the best choice when you can compare it to other variations.

Within the Shot
In the pre-digital days the visual effects artist would create wedges and shoot film tests. These might be checking settings, changes, exposure, and focus or animation tests. It’s still done for miniatures and other photographic effects.

With digital effects you have the advantage of saving multiple versions, undoing/redoing and seeing the results instantly in many cases. The VFX artist takes advantage of this by experimenting and refining. If you add a filter or element you can toggle it on and off to see the result even on a single frame. This would be like the Preview button in the filter dialog within Photoshop or the layer visibility. You also have the option to Undo/Redo to compare any change you just made.

Depending on the software you can load in a previous version or take a snapshot and do the comparison. Some software allows you to do a split-screen to compare 2 versions of an image within one image.

All of this allows the VFX artist to refine their work and make choices.

Changes
When a director or supervisor asks for changes it’s important to make large enough changes so it’s evident looking at the shot. Many artists will make minimal changes and slowly build up to the desired look, take after take. Unfortunately this wastes quite a bit of time. Comparisons are good for you but if it’s not possible for the director to tell the difference without seeing them side by side then it’s not a large enough change.

It’s best to make large steps, which ideally includes going too far. If you had to blur something instead of going by single pixel increments for ten images, it would be better to go by 10 pixel increments. By coming up with an image that goes too far (this could be color, speed of animation. filter, etc), it will allow you to know the range to work in and get a better idea of what the director wants.

A typical phrase in VFX is to “split the difference”. (ILM even had a comic poster of this). This is likely when you’ve gone too far but the previous version or another test didn’t go far enough. In this case split the difference is a way of balancing those two. From that result you might need to split the difference yet again. This is actually a fast way to hone in on the desired look and uses the same algorithm as some computer sorting routines. As you proceed with these adjustments you’ll be comparing the previous versions. If you get to the point where you can’t see the difference without doing a split then you’ve hit the point of diminishing returns.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Photo Real and Realism in Visual Effects

At the start of most projects every director requests their shots be photo real

What does Photo Real mean? Are realistic vfx shots a lot more difficult than fantasy shots?

Photo Real means to create a shot that looks as real or true to life as it possibly can. It can mean that the visual effect is so totally convincing that the audience doesn’t see it. Another term for this is Invisible effects.

The lighting, textures, detail and compositing try to mimic a scene that the audience will think is real. To do this the visual effects supervisor shoots as much reference as possible when shooting the plates (live action footage that will be augmented or modified with visual effects). This may mean filmining a physical prop in the same lighting and setup. The clock in The Mask and a piece of fur for Van Helsing were photographed for the TDs (Technical Directors) to use as a look and lighting reference.

As much information is recorded at the time of photography as possible. This includes lighting diagrams, measurements of the set, camera and lens information as well as filming of the chrome and gray spheres.

All the vfx artists that work on the shot will have access to that material and be able to use it directly as well as to use it as a comparison. From this they try to create and integrate the images as much as possible.
The visual effects animator may film or obtain reference footage of people or animals moving to use as a guide, even if it’s a fictional creature.

The trouble is you may not even be creating a shot that will ever be believed.
No matter how well the animator, TD and compositor do their job if the script calls for a pink feathered whale in the sky it still won’t be considered Photo Real by the audience. There’s nothing wrong with creating shots like this since that’s the requirements for the film. The vfx artists try to add as much of real life as they can into shots like this to give it a more solid foundation. This may mean moving the whale slowly and adding in a haze layer to set the scale.

This leads to our second question regarding the difficulty of creating realistic effects.

There’s the impression that realistic effects are very difficult and much harder than shots dealing with fantasy or science fiction. Yes, realistic effects are difficult when you’re trying to create something very complex such as a held close-up of a human, moving cloth or flowing hair. But the difficulties of a shot are usually more dependent on the specific shot and less on the context of the content.

Let’s consider an effects shot: a man on crutches coming toward camera and is missing one leg. The audience will easily accept the man missing part of his leg, especially if it’s an unknown actor. The audience knows this could be real and doesn’t require a suspension of disbelief. Now consider the same shot but instead of missing the leg this man is missing his head. The headless man however doesn’t exist in real life so the audience instantly knows it not real. It will be in the back of their minds no matter how well the vfx are done. A large part of the reality of a shot is based on the perception from the viewer. From a difficulty level these are similar and use the same techniques. The headless man is probably more difficult because you have to create and track the inside of the collar.

Suspension of disbelief plays a large role in film. To some degree everything is a bit unreal in film. The basic story is a fabrication and the dialogue is hand crafted. The director of photography doesn’t necessarily match real life. He lights it to go for a specific style and to make it cinematic. Note that this can be a real problem when you’re trying to match greenscreen people with real outdoor backgrounds). Stunt people rig ramps to make cars spiral in mid-air. Not necessarily real, but certainly visually exciting (cinematic). This is the same thing with the winged spaceships and hearing explosions in the Star Wars films. Not real but cinematic.

Hopefully the story will keep the audience engaged and there will be nothing to force the audience to fixate on the effect. Anytime you give the audience a reason to suspect something, they will find it. You could have a real shot and if the audience thinks something has been added they’ll happily point out several things that are wrong with the shot. A real shot can seem fake under the certain circumstances.

People think since something exists and they know what it looks like they could certainly judge the quality. The reality is most of these effects when correctly deigned pass by audience members unless they’re very poorly done or there’s something to arouse their suspicion.

If you have a matte painting of a stylized or haunted house and center it in frame as the only thing in the shot then it’s going to be suspect. If you add a matte painting of a normal house to fill in a vacant lot on a street and then have the actors in the foreground the audience is unlikely to think about the matte painted house, especially if it doesn’t play a promenant role. Most people think a matte painting has to be super detailed but the primary issue with matte paintings is to get the lighting and perspective right.

The advantage of creating something real is you have reference of the real object or creature to constantly compare to while working on the shot. It may take a lot work to get your CG model or other items to match the real thing but you always know how close your are and where it falls short.

With imaginary shots there are frequently doubts and changes to the design since you don’t have anything to compare to. Some people think the creature should move it’s arms in one way and another group thinks it should move them in a different way. The director may switch his/her thoughts as well. A real reference gives everyone something to lock into.

If you recreate one of the NASA rocket shots now you have reference to the original material and people will accept it. They may know that you created it but it won’t remove them from the movie. If you showed the same footage 50 years ago people wouldn’t accept it as real since they had nothing to relate to.

Old movies had shots done on stage sets that were supposed to be outside. People in cars were placed in front of a rear projection screens. By today’s standards those shots don’t hold up as well because we have a different level of realism in films. It’s not that people at that time thought they were real, it’s that they accepted it much as a theater audience accepts a stage play in front of single sheet sets.

This also applies to camera moves. If you move around a model like a helicopter then the audience will accept it more than if it’s totally static from 1000 feet up or if it moves a mile in 2 seconds. The director may have wanted a photo real effect but in the effort to spice it up by moving the camera faster and further than it could in real life, you destroy the illusion of reality you had created. If you zoom out to space and then back down thousands of miles away like on Google earth then that a style decision but not one that will help the feeling of realism.

The ‘though the engine’ shots in Fast and Furious or the slit-scan shots from 2001 are pure stylized shots. They may have had a high tolerance as to what they looked like but they would still require a fair bit of effort to make work.

Some directors want to try to convince the audience that something is real by focusing on the effect and doing what they can to show it off. In the headless man shot they want the camera to fly around the man and then down through the collar to prove that there’s nothing there. This is like the magician that moves the hoops over the levitated assistant floating over the floor. But the difference is most of the time the visual effects are used to tell the story. By trying to convince the audience the shot may actually come across as more fake.

In summary, the vfx artist tries to make every shot as real as possible. In some cases that may not be possible due to the subject matter itself and in other cases may just be a style choice. Creating invisible effects is usually more dependent on the subject matter and the design of the shot than the execution difficulty.