Working directly for the studios

Working directly for the studios

Joe Harkin, Dave Rand and David Stripinis have all expressed a potential solution to some of the problems in today’s vfx industry by having vfx artists working directly for the studios on projects.  David Stripinis excellent article goes into more details.

I covered some of this in my VFX Business Models post.

The idealized version goes like this:
If vfx workers were employed directly by the studios that would eliminate some of the potential problems and disconnect going through a vfx company. The vfx workers currently can only interact with the vfx company for working issues but much of the power (including scheduling and changes) is out of the vfx company’s control. If vfx workers were directly employed by the studio then there would be a direct connection in terms of costs and schedules, especially for changes. There would be more incentive to make less changes and to stick to schedules.

Because the workers would be part of production the director would interact with them more and would be able to provide feedback sooner, eliminating waste. These would be creative and schedule wins for the workers. Since most post-production (besides vfx) is still here in California then that would mean that most vfx would remain here as well.  This eliminates the need for U.S. vfx workers to travel to other countries to keep working and earning a living.

If only it were all true.

Yes, there can be some real advantages to having vfx artists work directly for the studios.  And as with everything, there are some disadvantages.  And in some cases it may be a case of “Be careful what you wish for”.

A little background
David covered some of the changes in his article. There were other projects besides Star Wars and Close Encounters (Doug Trumbull, vfx supervisor) which setup a team under production to do visual effects. 2001 and I believe Logan’s Run and many other projects done as the studios were closing up their own vfx departments. I worked on Close Encounters out of high school and was part of setting that up. All of us were paid directly by the studio. I was lucky enough to work in just about every department.

After Star Wars, George Lucas decided having a vfx team was a good thing he set in up ILM in Marin with the intent for himself and his friends to use (Spielberg, Coppola, etc) Others from the original Star Wars team (John Dykstra) setup a vfx company called Apogee at the same location and with some of the same equipment.

After Close Encounter wrapped Universal setup a vfx facility called Universal Hartland to do Buck Rogers (TV and film projects) and Battlestar Galactica (Apogee had done the original work). A number of us went to work there. The vfx for Star Trek: The Motion Picture was setup at Robert Abels, a commercial production company that did very graphical type of work (7UP, etc). Richard Yuricich, the vfx dp on Close Encounters, called myself and a number of others to come work on that project. When it became apparent a commercial production company may not be the most suited for the vfx, Paramount brought in Doug Trumbull. He re-opened the same industrial building used earlier on Close Encounters and added another building.

At the end of Star Trek, I and five others decided to setup our own company, Dream Quest. Seeing short term facilities being setup and dismantled for each project seemed like a waste. We were able to supply vfx for commercials (CBS, Dodge, Timex, etc) , television (V mini series, Space, Amazing Stories, etc) and features (Blue Thunder, Buckaroo Bonzai, etc.) Depending on the project we might bill based on a given rate for animation camera and motion control stage. This was time and material. Or we may bid on the whole project if we felt confident and there were a limited number of options.

There weren’t a lot of vfx projects at that time but we kept reasonably busy. We also did some work for other vfx companies (matte paintings in Caddy Shack for Apogee, floating balls in E.T. for ILM). You might be doing piece meal work but if you were a mid to large size company you would likely be the vfx company doing the whole movie. And there was usually just 1 full vfx supervisor on a film at that time.

In the pre-digital days if you wanted to start a vfx company you need to have some real equipment, hard work and expertise. Stage space, room to build models, motion control system, animation cameras and optical printers weren’t cheap so you had to make a real commitment. VFX companies weren’t the problem for vfx or vfx workers.

The development of digital was the opening of Pandora’s Box. That created an explosion of vfx companies and competition. It also allowed the work to be done anywhere. There had always been some Hollywood work going to the East coast or to London but those were certainly the exceptions. The need to interact and the needs to ship and view film make those options more awkward in pre-digital era. All of this ushered in at the same time as fixed bids were becoming the new normal. Previously the studios might put out the work to bid but this involved the producer and director. In the digital age each studio now has their own vfx producer which are very involved in where the work is likely to go.

And given the size of the projects the shows are frequently broken up and sent to multiple companies. It’s not unusual to have 12-13 companies. The break up is due to having a short time for post, trying to send to the least expensive company for a given task, sending to the best company for a specific task, and/or to not put all of the studios eggs in one basket. Now each company might have their own vfx supervisor, vfx producer, CG supervisor, animation supervisor, coordinators, etc. So this creates a certain amount of redundant overhead and waste. This has led to an explosion in the number of people in these positions since there are now multiple people holding these same positions on each project. The disadvantage is this dilutes the position of visual effects supervisor and some of the other positions. On a feature film there is only one 1st unit cinematographer and possibly a 2nd unit cinematographer who follows the lead of the 1st. When you have multiple vfx supes and others on a film then the studios start to look at all of these people as being interchangeable.

So now we may have come full circle to look at working directly for the production again, either in whole or part.

Previs
Notice the development of Previs follows a similar path. Some previs is done by the vfx companies themselves but there were also a number of freelance previs artists who were hired directly by the production.  In the last few years there have been a number of previs companies setup so the production hires a previs company which in turn hires previs artists. The difference with previs is they normally bill for time and material since it’s clear the number of artists working directly for production.  Will they end up going to more of a fixed bid route like vfx companies or can vfx companies work their way back to become more time and materials companies?

Working for the Studios
Below are some of the advantages and disadvantages for the different groups affected if more vfx work was done directly for the studios. I list a number of items as potential which means it’s possible.  How likely these things happen depend on the studio, director, producer and situation.

Advantages
Studios/Director/Producer
·      Less expensive
  No paying for vfx company profit
  Potentially less overhead (no need to pay for down time or for people/equipment not in use on project)
·      More direct connection to vfx workers
·      Can prioritize and schedule work directly
·      Can setup near studio or other desired location
·      All work focused specifically on their film. No people or equipment being pulled to help on another project.
·      VFX supervisor doesn’t have to ‘sell’ work to director based on pressure from vfx company

Workers
·      Part of production, not just person in a black box (vfx company)
·      Potential to interact with director more
·      Potential for working more efficiently (quicker feedback, less changes)
·      Potential for union coverage (Studios are already union signatories so covering vfx not as big of jump as vfx companies)
·      Employer is both paying the bills and making the profits so it’s a more balanced system. The people you work for have the most to gain from you.
·      Potential for profit participation directly or indirectly (health care funding, etc)
·      More individual branding. Vfx companies tend to push their brand, not their vfx supervisors or other key people.

vfx companies
·      A vfx company could lease out a facility for $x per day/week with profit built in.  Less risk. Studio would cover the most expensive and variable cost, labor.  Direct connection makes the studios responsible for changes, not the vfx company.
·      If the vfx company is simply a lease company then they have potentially less overhead costs during slow times.

Disadvantages
Studios/Director/Producer
·      Time required to setup a facility. Pre-production already tight on most productions.
·      Preplanning required
·      Final vfx cost more of an unknown
·      Would have to hire a vfx production manager or facility manager to actually setup and run the vfx facility. Most vfx supervisors and producers these days don’t have the experience of setting up and running a full facility.  With the short schedule they’re unlikely to have the time even if they had the ability.
·      No historical data on how well a particular team will work (time, money, quality) unless they use same team over multiple projects
·      No long term R&D since this would only be for duration of the project. Longer R&D projects and related benefits would not come to fruition except as 3rd party developers.
·      Who owns the R&D that is developed on a single project? How is that able to be used on other productions?
·      Can’t point finger at vfx company for costs or schedule issues
·      Can’t ignore issues of required overtime

Workers
·      The director may not actually be any more involved. The director is usually busy with editing, sound mixing and other tasks at the same time as vfx are being done. This is the case even more so with tight post-production schedules. Most edit suites are setup at a studio or nice digs in a nice neighborhood. Typically trying to find large square footage to house vfx workers at a low rate means an industrial building elsewhere in town. This can mean 1 ½ hr drive across town in LA traffic. (Note that in London the main vfx companies and much of the editing is done in Soho so this is already convenient.  Property costs must be very high and cause a related rise in overhead costs at such companies.)
·      If you work for a company that is able to keep busy then you may not have to worry about looking for the next project and have little down time. Working for the studio directly would mean you were project to project and be forced to be a full freelancer looking for work after each project ends. And the studio isn’t looking to do another vfx project, they’re looking to do their next film project, which may or may not include vfx.
·      Even though the studios are already union they are much larger companies than vfx companies and could push even harder back to avoid a vfx union. A number of vfx supervisors are in the camera union but the studios don’t recognize this because there is not an official title of VFX Supervisor in the union contract.
·      Even though the studios are now more financially linked to the costs of making changes, the executives and director may feel freer to make changes since there’s no company between them and the people working on the vfx. The vfx company sometimes acts a buffer to some studio demands.
·      Saving money on one aspect is not always the highest priority at a studio.
·      Not all directors want to spend more time working on the details of the vfx and directors vary on the ability to review in progress takes.
·      Nothing prevents the studio from setting up the vfx team anywhere in the world so doesn’t necessarily gain more work balance in LA.  (unless an LA director wanted to truly spend more time working with the vfx team)
·      Vfx are still very labor intensive. Incentives and lower costs elsewhere are still likely to cause the studio to choose to setup a team elsewhere, even if it might not be the most efficient. If the studio spent as much money on editing and sound mixing as they do vfx, those tasks would probably go to less expensive locations as well.
·      If the studio is doing all of the vfx then there will be many vfx company personel that will be out of work including the company vfx supervisors, producers, cg supervisors, etc. since there aren’t enough films to keep all of those people busy.
·      Any type of profit participation is extremely unlikely for vfx workers, except as a form of payment into health care insurance.

vfx companies
·      Any form of additional competition makes it more difficult, especially competing against a team that works at cost.
·      Studios may not be interested in leasing your company
·      Switching to a lease type of setup may not be easy and there’s still the issue of making enough profit to cover the overhead during the time between projects.

Reality
In it’s current form the vfx business model works great for the studios.  They can send a package of storyboards/previs out to multiple companies throughout the world and get back bids.  Since the studios view the vfx as a commodity they can simply pick and choose from a menu.  All the companies they’re bidding have been around for a while and most likely already worked for the studio at one point or another so the studios know what they’re getting.  The studio can simply select based on the balance of quality, speed, size, dependability and costs among other factors. They’re selecting a known quantity in most cases and are able to validate it to anyone else in the studio.

It may cost a bit more to have it done by a third party but it’s also much less risk. That’s why studios prefer sequels and remakes. It’s also much easier to simply turn over footage to a vfx company and let them deal with the details of artists, hardware, software, and other issues, including the complexity of setting up a facility and pipeline originally. Just like when you need to change the oil in your car.  You could do it yourself but you're usually happy to pay someone else to deal with the details and mess rather than hassling with it.

Studios could also setup a longer-term vfx facility to avoid potential waste of starting up another team/facility for each project.  The problem then becomes the overhead and the need for long-term commitment. This has been the same for most studio facilities which usually closed after a small number of projects.

Unless there is a very large compelling reason for studios to do the vfx work employing vfx artists directly, it’s unlikely to change except for specific cases.

More things to think about.

-----
Just a note regarding David's mention of the VES.  There are a range of different people on the VES board, including hands on people who don't manage others. I know most of us are keenly aware of the plight of the average worker since we're usually side by side with them.

Part of the problem is that:
1. People need to volunteer and sign up to be on the board.
2. Enough people have to be aware of the person to be voted on.
These two things make it difficult for random roto and TD's to get on the board. Hopefully members will vote to balance that out.

Note the same issue will likely happen if a vfx union were to form. Best if there were a requirement for a representative from each main category of workers.

The other thing is the VES is not looking at any group (studios/vfx companies) as the enemy.  Each group is trying to do what it thinks is best. All the pieces have to be working together and the VES is trying to find solutions that help balance this out.

Getting the most out of your VFX budget

Getting the most out of your VFX budget

If you were to ask most directors, producers and studios how to get the most out of their VFX budget the knee jerk reaction would be to hire the cheapest VFX company they could find. If you planned to build an elaborate house and invest a lot of time and money into it would you really want to choose the cheapest contractor who hired the cheapest workers and used the cheapest supplies?
Well no, they'd say they wanted something good enough.

This is all false economy. In an effort to save money it's not unusual for the final results to not only cost more but to look poorer.

Work smarter, not 'cheaper'.

It's not unusual in a major vfx movie to see enough money wasted to make up the difference of cheap to good vfx and those involved in the decisions rarely realize that.

Newsflash: Each vfx company, each VFX artist, and each VFX supervisor is different and will make a thousand different creative and technical decisions than one another. The concept that any place will do the same work and achieve the exact same final results is misguided at best. VFX does not produce a standard product. There is no commodity to be sold by the lowest priced distributor.

Rather than approach the issue as if it were simply a matter of where to buy the cheapest product the real question is how to get the most of whatever money and time is available.

In order to do this one of the key factors is to look at VFX as another department in the film making process. Treating it as a 3rd party process separate from the rest of the project only hurts the process.

If VFX were approached like live action there can be a number of advantages in terms of making decisions.

1. Figure out the shots needed to tell the story. Decide on the priority of the shots.


Look at each vfx shot as the equivalent of a whole new setup on a live action shoot. There's time and money involved for each shot. In some cases the shot may be the same as moving the entire film company to another location. Make sure the shot will be worth it.

If you're working on a graphic novel you only have so many pages and panels available so you make the most of each one. Approaching VFX this same way will trim some of the potential excess shots.

Example:  2 people talking while crossing the street will likely require 4 shots- wide, establishing - a 2 shot and a shot of each actor. Replacing one of the actors with a CG character or replacing the background should not require a dozen shots of zipping cranes, ant view shots, shots from the 42nd floor window, etc.
There will be times when it may be worth turning a scene into a visual feast and times when it's not necessary. Money and time will always be limited so choose when it's worth it.

2. Design the shots so they work with the rest of the film and make sure they tell the necessary story for that shot

If there is a gag or some action that needs to be shown to the audience then make sure the correct camera angle and timing are used. This would seem to be obvious but there are times where other angles and camera motions are selected that completely lose the reason for the shot. That's a wasted VFX shot. A shot that should have had a lot of power visually and narratively was turned into filler material and whistles right by the audience.

Example: If you wanted a shot of a literally flat character you wouldn't shoot the character straight on where the effect would be lost. A 3/4 view where the motion and twisting of the character makes their flatness obvious would be a much better choice.

If you had a skilled action choreographer such as Jackie Chan you'd want to avoid the shaky cam, quick cut, random angle editing that make up some action sequences. You'd need the audience to see the setup and the action clearly to make the most of it.

A good visual effects supervisor will work with you to design the shots for the most impact.

Some directors leave the design of big vfx sequences to their 2nd unit director. This only works if the director is part of the design process since the 2nd unit director will not be part of the post-production (unless they're also the vfx supervisor).

3. Use storyboards for your main VFX shots

For standard live action it's possible to shoot a film without storyboards but if there's any complex shots that require pre-planning then storyboards are a must. Storyboards are used to communicate visually. The director is able to make it clear what they want by a simple storyboard. Stunts, special effects, visual effects and the rest of the team now have an understanding of what's desired. Miscommunication is a very costly mistake. VFX also uses the storyboards as a method to budget. Without them the shot may be budgeted higher than it should be or lower than it should be. Any errors in the budget need to be avoided, especially if the budget is tight.

Concept design of what new creatures, worlds or other new imagery will have to be done to allow the team to know what the final target is to look like.

More complex scenes can be prevised to capture the timing and action in more detail than a storyboard can convey. Just know the level required for the previs to avoid tweaking them beyond what's necessary.


4. Hire a good vfx supervisor early in pre-production.

To save money it's not uncommon for independent films to bring on the supervisor at the start of shooting or not hire a supervisor and turn all the footage over in post to a vfx company. This usually turns out to be a costly mistake.

This loses any possibility of taken advantage of the experience of the supervisor to help design the shots. It loses the ability of the supervisor to flag potential ways to save on location shooting or set building. There's no prep available at that stage and no planning so the likelihood of getting the best footage for vfx is lower.

Bringing footage to a vfx company with no supervision is like bringing a cassette recording someone happened to record during filming to a sound mixing company. It may have seemed like a money saving approach not to hire a professional sound recorder to be on the set but the result is a likely to be a very expensive and time consuming ADR process that would have more than paid to have the correct person there to begin with.

The DP may have done a VFX project a few years before or the director may have watched the making of segment of a DVD but neither of these can make up for the expertise and experience a good vfx supervisor brings to make sure the film is shot correct for the vfx required.

End result: you've just spent far more than a supervisor would have cost to begin with. And you will have lost much bang for your buck.

5. Hire the right supervisor for the project

 That means meeting with 3 or 4 supervisors. The supervisor will likely be involved longer than either the DP or the Production Designer since the VFX work starts in pre-production and goes all the way to the release print. On a vfx heavy project do you really want to select someone that will be that involved based only on a resume? The studio may want to make this decision but the director and producer should certainly both be involved as is likely in the other key roles.

You want someone that can speak to as a creative lead and won't need a technical translator. You'll want someone you can trust with your vision and getting it done.

Some directors have a fear the vfx supervisor is going to be doing their own thing. The vfx supervisors are there to serve the director and the story - same as the other creative keys. The other fear at times for a new director is to work with 'old timers' who have real world experience. This can also apply to their view of DPs and Production Designers as well. As a result they hire someone relatively new like themselves who like the same band or football team. Tip: Hire the best people you can.

When reviewing the resume it's worth noting the supervisor credits more than simply the number of films. Are there a variety of projects? Don't get caught up in the notion that the supervisor hasn't done exactly this specific picture before. Realistic versus non-realistic effects plays less of a role here than imagined simply because the same techniques and approaches are used. The only difference is the reference the vfx team is trying to match to. A good supervisor is flexible. On the flip side I wouldn't suggest a commercials supervisor for a 1500 shot feature film or visa versa. In these cases it's a much different beast with different creative workflow, schedules, budgets and approaches.

A vfx supervisor assigned by a vfx company may be based more on contracts or budgets than who is right for the project. One other issue with company supervisors is they find themselves trying to please the director on the one hand and on the other being pushed by the company to sell the shots as finaled. It's not an easy position.

6. Minimize ‘fix-it’ shots

Most films these days require some amount of vfx or post work to fix a shot or two. A boom mic in the shot or blurring out a sign that didn't get cleared by the lawyers. However the effort should be made to keep these down. If the supervisor or vfx producer suggested adding $2 million dollars for fix it shots the executives would think they were crazy. And yet that has happened and continues to happen. Make sure to occasionally check the dailies at high resolution (film or HD) on a big screen. The use of Avids means that that wig netting, makeup issue or other small problems are missed until late in post-production. The extra 5 or 10 minutes to finish the makeup or other fixes o nset can save enormously in post.

7. Shoot efficiently - no more, no less

During filming of vfx scenes the supervisor will likely need to get measurements and references. The vfx crew will be prepped to do this as quickly as possible. The supervisor knows how much it costs to shoot on the set but the loss of information on the set would mean a large increase in the time and money to the shot later and more importantly could jeopardize the quality. These will be the balance the supervisor will have to determine during shooting. And just as a stunt coordinator will flag a dangerous stunt or a DP will flag an expensive setup, the supervisor may do the same. You've hired them for their expertise so you should take advantage of it.

8. Budget time and money - production versus effects

Productions frequently deal with the live action budget differently than the vfx budget. This disparity in views and accounting can cause problems. If a big set doesn't need to be built because it's determined vfx will be doing it as a post effect, it can be difficult to move the allocated budget to vfx. This can also be a issue going the other way.

The other problem here is that to save live action time and money entire shots or sequences may be pushed onto vfx during shooting. That's fine if the time and budget can expand to accommodate it but frequently the budget doesn't move to vfx and the post-production time is likely to already be too short.

9. Techniques

It's easy to get caught up in discussions of physical models versus computer models or other issues but most vfx shots can be done using multiple techniques. Which one is very dependent on the particular film and what its requirements are. Rather than force a specific technique to work on a project it's usually best to select the most appropriate one and modify as needed.

10. Avoid having too many vfx companies

A frequent approach to saving money is to parcel the work out to multiple companies. Likely also due to time schedules. This can all make sense when selecting specialized companies but at a certain point it provides diminishing returns and can even cost more.

Just as it's useful at times to visit a couple of food markets to get the best deals and products, if you were to visit a dozen it's likely the extra gas and time would exceed any savings. The extra communication issues, mistakes and entanglement of shots can be problematic if the distribution of shots and the number of companies involved exceed a natural threshold.

11. Schedule the time accordingly

If a production really wishes to save money they may want to work with the vfx companies to determine a realistic time schedule. There is a tendency to try to squeeze this time shorter and shorter but the increased overtime pay (with no improvement to quality) means that you end up paying more for less, even from a lower priced vfx company.

12. Decisions

As with other departments, vfx requires a number of decisions. It's likely vfx will require even more decisions due to the flexibility and scope. However it's a myth to think that all vfx decisions can and will be done in post-production. Decisions on designs (such as creatures or virtual environments) have to be locked into in pre-production to insure that the work will be done. Delaying these types of major decisions until post means compromising all the original photography since there is no locked plan. Any design work will then be necessary to squeeze in the limited post-production schedule at full and overtime rates.

13. Changes

Changes are natural in the creative world of filmmaking. Frequently small changes in vfx can be accommodated very easily. However be aware that large changes are no different than changes in live action. If you’re on location and choose to shoot in a direction where no set has been built then that will likely be a costly new set. The fact that it may be done on the computer doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a lot faster and cheaper to change. If you’ve shot an entire sequence and have made a major change in the edit this may need a large reshoot (or in the case of vfx, may need tossing out a lot of work and starting all over again) The cost could well exceed the cost of a reshoot of a sequence.

(Posting written with Notes To Store for the iPad)

Update:  I can't believe there are still student films that put up postings for vfx artists to work for free on something they already shot. (Just check craigslist.org any day of the week)  I guess ignorance starts early.  Hello.  Pre-planning is even more critical when there's little or no budget.  You could have made a  great effect efficiently but instead chose to see if someone could take the bits you shot and make something with it.

Previs thoughts

Just Misc Previs thoughts from a note I had sent someone months ago.

I think previs encompasses anything that is used to get a visual sense for the final product ahead of time. The majority today is 3D but video, stills, storyboards, film snippets, etc are all possible and useful.
For Star Wars and even some pictures today existing footage (from another film or stock) is seen as a placeholder and visual guide. For Phantom Menace and other projects temp actors have been shot, sometimes against greenscreen, to block in concepts and editing ideas. For some movies such as Amelia they used videos and stills from actual locations or sets to get a sense for how the scenes will work visually.

Misc thoughts

DON’T’T CHEAT!
When working in a 3D environment it is all too easy to make a change at the director’s wish. Scaling an object, moving the camera, placing objects, etc. Usually this is done to try to make the previs as exciting and interesting as possible but these add up to real production problems.

Examples:
Fantastic Four – A major sequence was to take place at the London Eye. The previs team decided to scale the London Eye to less than ½ of its actual size to make better compositions. For months we had been looking at these and all departments were basing their planning on these only to find out that it was all fictional. Since we were to shoot the real London Eye, create accurate 3D models for the final shots as well as potential miniatures that were the correct scale this was a huge problem. We now had to have the previs scramble and redo all of the shots. By now production was in a different country and another previs team had to do the work with a different software package.

Shots moving in the tunnel varied wildly in terms of camera speed, car speed and character speed. In a simple previs it looked right but impossible to make look right if it were to be shot like that.

For Van Helsing some of previs was done in a way that couldn’t be shot. In some cases the cameras were placed in areas they couldn’t possible be or doing something that defied physics. When the production crew is half way around the world 6 months looking at a previs on a laptop and the director discovers they can’t do the shot as planned, it’s very painful for everyone involved.

You don’t want to get to a location and find that you’ll need to jackhammer the road to place the camera where the previs was ‘shot’ from’

You also don’t want to find your lead actor is now somehow supposed to be 10 feet above the ground. On the location cheats are made (actor on apple box, shooting in a different direction, etc) but everyone there knows it’s a cheat and why it’s being done. When a cheat occurs in previs the previs artist may be the only one who knows it. It’s likely the director doesn’t even know that it’s taken place.

Purpose
Determining the purpose of the previs is critical. Make sure everyone, including the director is onboard.
We just need the previs to a certain point to understand how the sequence and shots work, the approximate action and timing, etc. Yet a director can easily spends weeks ‘directing’ the ‘actors’ in the previs. “No, he should smile here and then look toward the camera”.

Previs has a tendency to become like temp tracks to the sound track. Something that the director has been looking at so long that it is the only way the director sees the shots as being. On a non-prevised show the creative team may make full use of the here and now and compose the shots to their advantage. (some feature at the location, the light at that time of day, etc) On a prevised show the director may be unwilling to consider these alternates.


Speed
It’s difficult to get a full sense for speed in a previs. In early previs a car doing a drive by might have been just a colored rectangle moving against a simple background. The director of course wants it faster, faster. If the same scene were shot for real at the original speed it would have been fast enough. All the details of the car, backgrounds and motion blur would give the sense of speed. Even with today’s rendering there’s still some visual speed discrepancies.

Accuracy
When storyboards are done everyone understands these are the basic shot designs and placeholders. It is understood that the perspective and placement of the actual location will be different in real life. One problem with 3D previs, especially the more detailed they become, is everyone thinks this is the actual shot, even if the previs was done months before the actual location was chosen.

Design
A major potential problem is a lot of previs is started before any of the key creative team is hired. It may be just the director (or even just the producer or studio executive) and a team of previs artists. The amount of visual sense the director has can varied widely and the visual sense and experience of the particular previs artist can vary widely as well. On a non-previs show the director works closely with his DP, camera operator and others (production designer, VFX supv) to determine the best compositions. This is likely also based on blocking in the actors motions. Yet the previs may well lock the creative team into design decision that were made by the director and the previs artist in a vacuum. I’ve seen shows where the stunt coordinator was told that he’s to match the action in the previs. Imagine having someone like Jackie Chan being told that some previs person has already designed all the action and action shots and that all he needs to do is get his stunt team to do it that way.

A car stunt may require a special rig be placed and the stunt coordinator may know the best camera angles to capture it but the previs artist knows nothing of this and places the camera exactly where it’s going to be a problem. The director has now grown to love this and wants the stunt team to sort it out.

The same thing has started to happen with DPs but most of them have enough clout to stop it there and do it their way. So how worthwhile is the previs if it’s totally ignored? If the VFX has been budgeted based on the previs but the director, Dp, etc ignore it completely where does that put the budget and schedule?

If the previs is done ahead of time it’s difficult to talk the producers and studios into redoing the previs so the now hired DP, production designer, etc can be involved.

Visual Effects Supervisor

Visual Effects Supervisor

In this posting (no podcast) I discuss the role of the visual effects supervisor and issues related to this position.

Definitions
Note that there is no union position for visual effects supervisor, there’s no certification process for this role and there is no standard to how any of this works so I’ll be describing what is industry practice.

A Visual Effects Supervisor is in charge of the creative and technical issues of visual effects on a project. This position starts in pre-production and continues through the completion of the visual effects in post-production. This can span 1 to 2 years on a large project. The supervisor typically works with a visual effects producer who focuses on the budget and schedule aspects of the work. If the project has a large amount of animation then there will be probably be an Animation Supervisor as well.

These days there’s likely to be multiple visual effects supervisors on a visual effects film. If the film has a large number of shots then it sometimes makes sense to split up the work with each supervisor overseeing specific sequences to provide the attention required. In this case they may be referred to as co-supervisors. Associate Supervisor is sometimes a title given to someone who is moving up into the role of supervisor and who has a smaller number of shots compared to the other supervisor(s) on the project. Senior supervisor is sometimes used as an honorary title given to someone at a company who has been at the company a long time and who is able to step in if there are problems on a show.

Given the increase in visual effects shots on a show, the reduction in post production time allowed by the studio and in an effort to count every bean by the studio, work on a large effects driven show is typically spread over multiple companies. Each company handles specific sequences or types of effects and these companies will have their own visual effects supervisor. The film production or studio may hire a vfx supervisor or at least a vfx producer to oversee the work of these companies.

A Plate supervisor is usually a visual effects supervisor who is just involved in the live action or shooting background plates. Plate is the term used for footage that is shot to be used for visual effects. This can be a foreground, background or other elements. With or without actors. (Elements are all the different images used to make up the final shot). The plate supervisor may be hired so the main supervisor can continue to oversee the work back at the vfx company or studio. A plate supervisor may also be hired to shoot specific images half way around the world while principal photography is being done.

Start up
When a film has been greenlit (approved by the studio to proceed into production) or close to greenlit then the film production (director, producer) works with the studio head of visual effects if there is one. This position is primarily a producer type of role to oversee multiple films in various stages of production. This office usually has their own list of approved vendors (visual effects companies) which they forward the script to. They would also play a role in hiring a visual effects supervisor and visual effects producer for the film if there is one.

Each vfx company has their own supervisor and producer breakdown the shots and bid on the show. If there is a show vfx supervisor and producer they review the bids and work with the studio visual effects department to award the work to different companies.

Pre-production
The supervisor works closely with the director to get a sense of what the director is looking for on each sequence and each shot. This is done by employing concept artists, storyboard artists and previs artists to create visual guides. The idea is to solidify the vision of the director and allow the supervisor to work out the technical aspects of completing the shot. The supervisor decides which techniques to use and what will be required when the live action is shot. This is usually done with involvement of the vfx departments and/or companies. If the visual effects supervisor works at a company he/she usually determines the key players (CG supervisor, sequence leads, etc) with the aid of the vfx producer.

Most visual effects work happens after filming but some things such Research and Development (R&D) and model building (physical and computer graphics) can begin earlier. The supervisor will be overseeing this during pre-production. This can be time critical if the R&D will determine the best way to photograph a sequence. The pipeline may also be developed or adjusted for the type of project during this time. Pipeline is essentially the workflow through the facility and the software tools to help that process. (databases to track elements, computer scripts to move or configure files, etc)

The supervisor works with the other film production department heads (Director of Photography, 1st Asst Director, Production Designer, Special Effects, Stunts, etc) to outline the vfx requirements during filming. This can cover bluescreen, motion control, special lighting, etc.

Production
The supervisor is involved in all the live action photography that requires visual effects. This can mean 6 months in a distant country or months on a sound stage. If multiple companies are involved with a large number of shots they each may send their own supervisor when one of their sequences is being filmed. On a large show it’s common to have a 2nd unit. This can be a full crew with it’s own 2nd Unit Director to film action sequences or other sequences and shots that don’t require a lot of the principals (main actors). This will require an effects supervisor as well if the work involves visual effects. Plate supervisors may be employed to help oversee this work depending on the volume of work and schedules.

If there are issues with the actors (eyeline, timing, action with a creature to be added later, etc) I tend to discuss it with the director for him/her to guide the actor. This avoids problems with the actors getting multiple and contradictory instructions.

This may seem like a lot of work but a huge amount of the success of a shot is based on it being filmed correctly to begin with. This means making sure the actors eyelines are correct, the lighting matches the situation when possible, clean plates and information is gathered at the time of photography (lighting references, match move markers and data, etc)

One of the most detrimental decisions a production can make (from a cost and quality stand point) is when they attempt to shoot a visual effects shot and have you just ‘fix’ it later. And believe me if the supervisor turns his/her back for moment production will try to get off a shot. This is most likely to happen when the director has done a previous effects film and ended up with good looking shots despite problems shooting. What they never see is the amount of work and extra costs any of this entails.

I’ll probably do a blog post sometime about the ins and outs of plate photography.

Post Production
Once the footage has been shot the film moves into post production. Ideally editing has been proceeding even during production and some sequences have been locked so visual effects work can begin even during production. As sequences are edited they are turned over by the director to the supervisor and the visual effects team.

How the work proceeds and how it’s structured is determined largely by the supervisor and producer. Sometimes it’s best to rough in quick animation and composites for all the shots of a sequences. That allows the director and editor see a sequence in context and see if major changes are required before you final every shot. If the director has a difficult time visualizing the supervisor may have to wait until the shots are further along before presenting them to the director. Some directors have difficulty making decisions based on ‘plastic’ animation renders so these would need a higher level of rendering.

Production may require reshoots months after production if there are editorial or technical issues with the footage. Additional background plates may have to be shot for sequences, especially if there has been a change from the original plan. Once again these would require an effects supervisor or plate supervisor.

Dailies
A supervisor’s day usually starts with review of dailies. I typically review them on my workstation and make notes before stepping through with the team or individuals involved. Even spending a few minutes per shot adds up with you have quite a number of shots in production. As much as you try to balance the schedule invariably you have a large number of shots to be reviewed as you get close to the final deadline. This can mean spending the entire morning reviewing shots. Trying to balance a pat on the back for the work done so far on a shot and encouragement with the need to list the items still need to be completed to finish the shot is a tough. Usually the pat on the back is the first thing to go as the schedule gets tighter. It’s no disrespect to the crew members, just the realities of getting a large volume of work done.

In the afternoon the supervisor may have meetings to review scheduling, budgets, new sequences, R&D status,etc. He/she may have to present the director the latest shots or sit down with individual artists to discuss any updates/changes from the morning dailies.

The supervisor usually puts in the same hours as the rest of the production crew. 10-12 hour minimum. 5-7 days a week.


Finals
The director is involved in all decisions from the approval of the original designs and through to the final shot. The director has to buy off on the animation before the final rendering and compositing is done.

One of the things the supervisor has to do is work with the director on getting shots finaled (approved) in a timely manner. It’s very easy to get too focused on every detail in a shot, especially if you’re looping the shot over and over on a computer. Matte lines and added elements can always be tweaked more. Unfortunately if you have hundreds of shots to do in a limited time and the supervisor or director becomes too picky or tweak happy then the first shots will look great but the last batch of shots may look awful. For this reason there’s usually a number of target finals to accomplish per week in order to meet the deadline. Any shots that aren’t done from the week before are now added to the number that need to be completed in the current week. The idea is to create a balance so all the shots hold up and work within context of the film. If you can view it in context (with surrounding shots) 2 or 3 times without noticing a problem then it’s done.


Projects
It’s important to note that how a specific supervisor gets assigned a specific project can be very haphazard. The studio or production select what companies to send the script to for bids. This can be based on previous experience or the phase of the moon. For a supervisor who works at a vfx company, the company acts as an agent and manager. They may assign a supervisor based on who’s available from their internal supervisors at that time or who’s under a contract with them. Qualifications for a specific project may have little to do with the assignments.

Since projects take a long time (1-2 years) a supervisor may have to turn down other projects since there’s already a commitment for the current project. Project offers come in one at a time so the supervisor has to decide if he wants to take it or pass and hope something better comes soon. How soon that next offer comes in is unknown. You’re never offered multiple projects at the same time from which you get to choose.

The supervisor has to take in to account the creative issues, technical challenges, the manner and film history of the director and the time away from their family when deciding on whether to accept a project. Is it better to accept a mainstream big project or an art film? Is it better to do a few, simple effects shots for a high quality film or is it better to do a large number of challenging shots for a simple action film? Each supervisor has to make a call given the situation at that time.


Requirements and guidelines for a visual effects supervisor
--------------------------------------------------
A good visual effects supervisor is a bit of jack of all trades.

Knowledge of a wide range of visual effects techniques and positions.

Experience dealing with a wide range of visual effects techniques and positions. As good as some training material is there’s still nothing like true hands on experience. If you’ve had to paint out a rig or extract a key from a poorly shot bluescreen you’re more likely to think twice and make sure it’s shot correctly. If you haven’t done it you may hope to just toss it into the black box and expect it to come out ok.

Ability to visualize shots and review them in detail within the minds eye before they’re shot.

Creative eye. Knowing composition, cinematic design and animation timing.

Understanding of photography and lighting. Knowing what’s looks real and what looks cinematic.

Good communication skills. Discussing a visual or technical issue with a director and also being able to turn around and discuss it with the technical team in a manner appropriate for the listener. The director shouldn’t need a translator.

Get in sync with the director’s vision. After working with the director awhile you should have the ability to predict how they will react to a given specific shots or issues.

Good working relationship with the director. The director has to have trust and confidence in the supervisor and the supervisor has to work for the director. The supervisor may provide his guidance and ideas to the director but at the end of the day it’s the director’s decision.

Know your battles. Knowing when it’s worth fighting for an extra 10 minutes on stage and when it’s not. When is it worth pushing a specific creative viewpoint or when it’s worth trying to get an updated animatic.

Problem solving. There’s always problems to solve. Technical, creative, logistic and scheduling.

Thinking quickly. Time is money on a film set and when things change the supervisor has to step in make adjustments while keeping in mind the impact in the rest of the process. You always have to be considering several moves ahead as in chess.

Management and people skills. Dealing with a number of different types of personalities (on the live action crew and visual effects crew as well as the director) and trying to keep everyone focused on the goal.

Attention to detail. Keeping an eye on large and small details that will make a shot finished.

Organized. Each shot has to be broken down into each element and how those elements are to be generated or filmed. Any feedback from the director has to be noted and executed.

Team work Film making and visual effects are both team efforts and will require everyone to work together. The supervisor has to take key responsibilities and at other times be able to delegate to key members of the team. He/she has to be open to listening to members of their crew. I try to surround myself with the best and smartest people in their jobs.

KISS Keep it simple stupid. It’s difficult enough to do the work without making everything extra complicated. Is an elaborate process or 20 extra elements worth it for a 2 second shot?

Budget and time. One manager told me it was my job to spend as much of the budget as possible and it was the producers job to try to keep me from doing that. I think that’s wrong. The supervisor has to keep in mind the budget and time when selecting the techniques and figuring out the pacing for the work. If you run out of time or money before completion the results will show it and it won’t be pleasant for anyone.

Think outside the box. The first solution that jumps into your mind may not be the best. Consider it from all angles and all trade-offs.

Living with changes. Everyone working in visual effects has to take changes in stride. The director may change his mind completely after you and your crew have spent a lot of time and effort finishing a shot or sequence. It’s a creative process so that’s the nature of the beast.

Tolerance and balance. The supervisor becomes the fulcrum of production (cost, time) and the artist requirements. If you’re at a VFX company, management and the vfx producer will want you to ‘sell’ the shot to the director as quickly as possible. Yet you’ll have an obligation to the director to make sure the quality of the work and their vision is maintained. I’ve had producers tell me to tell the director he/she can’t do something. Being placed in the middle of political film production issues is no fun. The studio can also become involved in this process, especially if the film has gone over schedule or budget. Awkward for all involved.

Thick skin. The supervisor may be yelled at for things out of their control or may be berated for doing something a specific way (even if it’s exactly what the director had requested the day before).

Keeping your cool. See all of the above.


Becoming a visual effects supervisor
-------------------------------------------------------
First you have to decide if becoming a visual effects supervisor is what you want to do. It may sound great but it involves a large amount of pressure and politics.
There’s certainly something nice about focusing on a specific aspect and doing a great job compared to being pulled in multiple directions. A supervisor seldom get much hands on effects time and getting work becomes more daunting since there are a limited number of visual effects supervisors employed compared to technical directors or others in the visual effects crew.

If you’ve only worked in one area of visual effects then you’re likely to try to solve every visual effects shot with those techniques. I’ve seen people who only had physical model experience trying to create an effect with a physical model that would have been easier, faster and more importantly, better done with an animation camera. I’ve seen other people try to write elaborate software programs for something that could have been filmed and composited in a fraction of the time.

These days most people employed in visual effects are assigned to a specific area of work. I was fortunate enough on my first film, Close Encounters, to work in most of the departments (Motion control, model photography, animation camera, matte camera, R&D and model shop)

It’s up to you try to try to keep moving up in your area and to expand outward. Talk to your employer and see if you can help out in other areas or take training in other areas if they offer it. Some VFX companies like to have people who can accomplish a number of different tasks. Animation and technical directoring, matchmoving and writing shaders, etc.

Try to get on to a set to see how things work. Most people working behind the computer screen have no idea of the issues involved in the shooting process (‘and why didn’t they shoot that other element on the set’). It can be helpful for a technical director to work as a match mover or data collector as an example.

If you’ve only work with computer graphics try to get some experience with miniatures and visa versa.

You’ll have to make your own opportunities. Continue to educate yourself on your own. When you think you have a true understanding and feel you have enough experience then see if you can work on a small project (short film, few shots on a local commercial or independent film). Jumping into the deep end of a visual effects heavy film is not for the faint of heart nor for those with limited skill sets.

Good luck.

Update - The VES Handbook has now been released which covers quite a range of what a VFX supervisor needs to know.

Tip - Make sure you have real experience in a number of VFX productions before considering becoming a VFX supervisor. There are quite a few things that can't be taught in classes or in books. VFX Supervision takes real experience.

Wages:  If you're looking for how much a vfx supervisor makes (that seems to be a high hit factor coming to this page) then you're looking for the wrong thing. If it's money you're after become a Wall Street Banker or a CEO. These require less skill and learning and provide much better hours.

If you still want to know how much a vfx supe makes then it starts at $0 (check craigslist) and goes up from there to a level similar to a DP. A supervisor is typically on some type of flat so when the crazy hours are happening for weeks/months, their wage remains the same and can frequently be less than the people who work under them but are paid overtime. And because there are a limited number of Supervisors on projects you may spend months out of work compared to say a compositor, where they may need dozens of compositors who are paid overtime. If you want to be a good or great vfx supervisor you're doing it for the love and passion of vfx.

Related Post:
Visual Effects Positions