Sad state of the Visual Effects Industry

Sad state of the Visual Effects Industry


For anyone considering visual effects as a career and for those already working in the industry-  please check out this great article by Jeff Heusser  at fxGuide:
VFX in Los Angeles – 100 hour weeks & homeless

Puts things in perspective.

This is what our industry has come to. We who make the magic from nothing and we who generate the major profits for the studios. The studios have commoditized us and shipped jobs around the world to save pennies. Those who are experienced, talented and skilled are putting in long hours and are being forced to move to other locations around the world, away from their family and homes.

Those just starting out are being fleeced by anyone and everyone selling them on this fictional dream of fame, fortune and creative riches.

For profit schools are multiplying at an incredible rate and being funded by money machines such as Goldman Sachs to sell dreams to people, young and old. The problem is those dreams don't exist. These schools are churning out thousands of graduates to an industry without jobs. The only selection process at these types of schools is can you pay or can you sign this student loan from the government.  Your aptitude and your potential talent is never evaluated. Guidance counselors never reveal the reality of the industry you're getting into or your odds. In most cases these diploma mill types of schools teach very little of value and even those that do now have cranked out so many others it doesn't matter. It's hard to stand out and even when you do it's hard to get a job. When you do get a job you will likely be working long hours and then have to move to find your next project.

All of these students are eager to go into tens of thousands of debt. They are eager to work for free or close to free. They are eager to be exploited, to lower their value and the value of everyone else in the future, to the detriment of their real future.

The student loan bubble is the next big bubble to burst with over $1 trillion in student loans here in the US.

Many coming to this website are searching for the salary of visual effects supervisors and other positions, eager to learn about making a fortune without pausing on some of the more sobering information.

Those just considering visual effects industry as a career, save yourself. Go into something with a future. Visual effects are being used  more than they ever have (every film from hollywood uses vfx and most independents) and the technical and creative challenges are increasing but the business aspects and control of the industry have turned the love of what we do into a mess. It certainly pains me to write this as someone who has been doing this a long time. Visual effects companies are collapsing while others fiddle.

Many in the industry, even those with experience, are bailing as quickly as they can. And with a visual effects only skill set, there's very few places you can work. There are few other industries that can take people who do animation, lighting, rendering, modeling, compositing, etc. Make sure if you do go to school you gain a broader base of knowledge than just visual effects. 

There are plenty of visual effects companies around the world that have no problems exploiting recent graduates who have already been exploited and fleeced from the schools they attended. Overtime is the norm. Companies encourage it, especially since it hides the sins of poor management, and it is now such a mantra for workers that they accept it as the norm themselves.

The visual effects companies who take on many of these new graduates do so at the expense of other, more experienced workers. And why do they do it? False economics. They think that hiring people at a lower wage is how they can save money. The truth is the experienced worker is more productive, the more likely to solve the problems, and the one who can make sure the project gets done in the compressed time schedule. New people should be brought in as needed and mentored so they have a future. In an industry where experienced people are being dumped for the cheaper, inexperienced people - what do people starting a career in this industry think will be happening to them once they become experienced? It's an endless cycle.

With so many visual effects graduates eager to be exploited and companies willing to exploit them, the visual effects industry is dissolving from the bottom while pressure and other problems are dissolving the top. The end result will be an empty hull.

Now there are thousands and thousands of film school graduates every year as well. Likely many times the number of visual effects graduates. Why isn't the rest of the film industry having these same problems? Well the studios are smart enough not to hire too many inexperienced people. They know the value of experience. And everyone else working in live action filmmaking is covered by a union. This provides the studios with the experienced people they need and also protect the crews from being exploited. Visual effects is the only group not covered by a union and thus is able to be easily exploited.

Related posts

Visual Effects Career

Visual Effects Schools

Price of a VFX education

Update 6-14-2013
Even if you work in a subsidized area you might not be paid 

See any article on the right column under the State of the Industry

Updated 6-11-2013
I'll repeat some of the links here from the schools post since not everyone follows the links and I've added many more since there seems to be some confusion regarding this issue.

Harkin, Colleagues Say For-Profit Colleges Squander Billions and Destroy Dreams
Art Institute graduate spent 70K on degree, can't find video game job, takes up stripping instead.

New links:
Yes another video and article about another visual effects student being lied to at Art Institute in Tampa.

110 for-profit colleges accused of lying, defrauding taxpayers - video and article

Read more:

For-profit colleges investigation - Great video
For-Profit Colleges Are A Spectacularly Bad Investment


What I Just Told the Obama Administration About For-Profit Colleges
NY Times list of articles on for-profit schools

Some of those NY Times articles:
Student Debt and the Crushing of the American Dream
Misleading Advice for Student Borrowers
Closer Scrutiny of For-Profit Schools


For-profit colleges wrong solution to higher education problem

See vfxsoldier for more student stories.


Update 6-14-2013
Even if you work in a subsidized area you might not be paid 

-----------------------

Today is also another Townhall Meeting that applies to all involved in visual effects around the world.

This is a streaming event that is being held in New York today but is being streamed globally with speakers from around the world.

Starts at 6pm New York time. 3pm Los Angeles time.

More info:

VFXTownHall Streaming location.

More info

VFXTownHall Who

VFXTownHall info 

Response

There have been some good comments regarding some of my posts.

As Steve Molin commented: “I think the heart of your post is that the relationships between artist, VFX company and studio are fundamentally flawed. I don't think we'll have a healthy industry until we find better ways to work together.”

And that’s exactly it. We can try to patch here or there but what we really need to do is revamp the basic structure and balance.

The VFX industry is like a tire that has gotten out of alignment and is getting more out of balance all the time. Toward the end of the optical era and the beginning of the digital age most projects ran reasonably smoothly, at least at ILM. There was still the sprint at the very end but it wasn’t super crazy. ILM was powerful enough to let the studios know how much time was involved.

With film you had to make sure you finished your shot in time to make the lab run. Once you made the lab run at 7pm or 8pm that was it. That was the end of the day for most vfx artists. Working after that cut off time was only worth it if there was a late lab run, which was only arranged in the final sprint. The next morning you’d see the dailies and would reshoot. Even if it was a small change you’d still have to wait until the next morning unless you sent the film as a daylight run (more expense). When digital came in, the render took the place of the lab run. Sometimes it took longer time to render than to process the film. You’d get your render prepped for 7pm or so and the CG supe would allocate procs in the render farm. And you still have dailies in the mornings. However now it was possible to actually see composites and other things during the day so turn around time for some tasks was much less. As computers became faster the internal deadlines became more flexible.

Certainly in the early days of digital the studios would at least discuss how much time would be required to do the vfx for a large film. The studios would use that information to determine the release date. As more projects were being done digitally the studios realized how much flexibility was available. Both studios and directors started pushing the limits not just creatively but technically and time wise. And we, the eager and hard working vfx artists, jumped to meet those goals. While we were wiping our brows afterwards, amazed at what we had accomplished, the studios and directors now used this as the new standard. Directors on their next show would say, “You guys say you need clean plates and markers. But remember that last film where we had one shot that we didn’t do any of that and you still made it work? Well that’s what we’ll do for all these shots. That was much faster and easier to shoot”. The studios were now saying “You did the last project in 6 months and we made changes two weeks before the release and you still did it. This time you’ll have 4 months and we’ll be making changes 1 week from release.” Some of them like to brag about this type of thing.

From the studio standpoint they want to get a film out as quickly as possible. They take out loans to make the film so their interest payments accumulate the longer it takes to make the film. They also know there is overhead at any vfx company so the longer the project is in post-production, the more that costs them. What they don’t reliably calculate is the compressed time schedules mean there will be large amounts of overtime that is likely a bigger loss than the gains from the short schedule. The studios also have specific target release dates they like and yet they at times may drag their feet waiting to make a decision to greenlight the picture. Now with this new reduced schedule (1 year? 9 months?) to make the film they review the project schedule with the director, producer and 1st asst director. And of course the shooting time will remain the same as it always does. X number of shoot days. So where do they make up for all the lost time? In the post–production phase. Their goal is to complete it in less time than the last show. Multiple vfx companies working a lot of overtime is now normal in their thinking. It’s now standard practice. With the various tax breaks and globalization the typical vfx company doesn’t have a lot of leverage. The studio has the money and may have several projects looming. The vfx company needs to keep some type of cash flow going if they are to remain open. Since there are now a number of worldwide companies for vfx, most of which are willing to charge less just to keep afloat, it’s a downward spiral. The squeeze on the vfx company in turn causes a squeeze on the artists.

The ironic thing is the studio, who originally pleaded poverty when bids were coming in, is more than willing to throw money at the problem to make it finish on time. It bears repeating they would have gotten better quality shots for less money if a reasonable schedule had been used. But the studios sometimes tend to take away a different lesson. “VFX are expensive and we should do anything we can to find the lowest price company that will do it good enough on the next one. And let’s reduce the post time even more. That overhead was killing us.”

With all the extras shots being tossed into the vfx mix along the way of the production, the number of changes and even more processes such as 3D post work, there comes a time when it will be impossible to shove any more into that time. At some point there will be a major project that misses it’s theatrical release date due to vfx not having enough time. And that will not be pretty.

The flexibility of the digital process also causes some directors and studios to delay making decisions as long as possible. “We’re shooting it this way. I’m sure you guys will figure out how to make it work later. “ And we do. You try to setup target dates that decisions have to be made by working the schedule backwards. We need the design for this model approved by date x so we have the time to build it and render it. We need the turnovers for sequence y to be locked and delivered by date x for us to complete the sequence. But unless these dates are built into a contract and have consequences they may likely be ignored.

As discussed in the Special Effects Service posting there is now a disconnect with regard to the studios and the vfx artists. The vfx company is a black box they push stuff in and out it comes when demanded. There’s very little connection to the actual people doing the work. This can hurt both the creative process and the budget process. The current incentives the studios typically have in place for producers and asst directors can be problematic. Their main target is to complete the shooting on schedule, even if it means pushing more work on the vfx list. This can cost the studio more money but there is a disconnect between the production process and the entire budget of the film.

Solutions?
I don’t have any solutions but I do know the studios and the vfx companies are going to have to start taking this seriously and to start looking further than the current film. With the amount of money being spent in vfx, the amount of money being made by vfx films and the sheer volume of vfx in many films, it’s madness not to review the situation.

If the studios go to a vfx company they may find it’s gone out of business. There’s little incentive to develop talent and techniques if there’s no money in it. If the studios focus all of their efforts on places where tax incentives allow them to get work cheap, what will they do when those incentives go away? What will the vfx companies that are located there do? All companies have to realize they’re in the same field and whatever happens elsewhere is likely to happen to their location at some point in the future. Your country may be the least expensive today but as we’ve seen things can change rapidly in a global economy. What happens if you’re not the lowest priced country or company? Are the studios going to jump from place to place trying save a dollar? Does the quality of work and working relationships enter in to these equations?

The studios should start taking a look at their schedules and the decision process. Preplanning and some discipline would result in better work for less money. The same can be said of the vfx companies.


Question responses

Q: I'm of the camp that creating a vfx union would just drive the nail in the coffin of the US vfx market, or at least that within the circle of union influence, namely, Los Angeles.

A: I think it’s a myth that a union will cause all expenses at a vfx company to go up. Most vfx artists in the US, at least at the larger shops, are reasonably paid. And likewise many are already receiving some type of benefits. It’s not like everyone is being paid minimum wage and want several times that amount. I think what most people want is for there to be a little more balance in terms of hours and other issues. Part of what might come into play is limits on crazy over time or at least paying people higher wages in overtime. Many vfx companies have managers at different levels. Most of those in management came up through the ranks, which is good since they understand the process. The bad news is some of those people get moved into positions that are beyond their real skill set. Leading people, managing people, dealing with business decisions, etc is not easy and not everyone can do it. A vfx company may always be doing crisis management. This project is running over schedule or budget so we’re going to steal people from this other project. This usually causes a ripple to each following project and the problem doesn’t stop until there’s a dry spell. Management may under-staff to keep costs down but with the low number of artist means they have to work them very long hours to make up for the fact they don’t have enough people to begin with. And this is where one of the many false economies comes into play for the companies. In trying to save money it can easily cost them much more. A higher cost to work people overtime would compel them and the studios to rethink that approach.

Q: I'm not even sure how that would work internationally, or interstate, as many states are 'right to work' states.


A: That’s why we’re discussing this and that’s why we should think out of the box. That’s why I made my suggestions regarding universal rates.

Q: It would be nice to have some form of group that at least made sure companies complied with safe and respectable working conditions, but not be involved in setting rates.

A; That was the first suggestion on my list. A Code of Standards, Seal of Approval, whatever it may be called. Wasn’t there a standard put in place for companies that outsourced shoes and clothing to other countries? We’re not at that level (hopefully) but that’s the idea.

Q: We only have to look as far as the auto industry to see how that ultimately pans out. 


A; The auto industry created their own problems by not making the cars people wanted or needed. They also made too wide of selection of vehicles. Once again, it will be up to the vfx companies to rethink where they are and where they’re going and to work with their customer, the studios, to make sure they’re in sync.

Q: Very interesting stuff, although in my opinion kind of depicts unions in a too idyllic light.

A; I would agree. I’m sure I’ve painted the union as being too good. However I get the impression most people have a lack of knowledge about unions. In an ideal world the company you work for would take the well being of their employees into consideration and try to establish a balance of profit with a balance of the people who work for them. In that case unions would not be needed. The problems are that many companies are so focused on profits for their shareholders or management is so removed from their employees that decisions are made because they seemed right on paper. As a result they pull in one direction. The unions typically pull in the other direction to try to establish some type of balance. For those who aren’t unions you should realize one of the reasons why you’re likely paid the wages you are is because the unions made some headway decades ago. Believe me, any company would love to pay everyone minimum wage. In the film industry studios could charge people to work for them (and they might if it were legal)

The union is another group of management that you may not agree with. Look at the WGA. Not all of their members agreed to what management there was doing. With a union you still have to put in so many hours every 6 months in order to qualify for health care. =The camera union has restrictions on who can operate the camera and they may require an operator to be employed even if the DP will do most of the operating.


Q: The only serious observation with the article is the recommendation at the end for Michael Moore. The guys is the most unreliable "documentary" film maker I've seen, totally subjective and set from the start to prove his agenda. I don't think someone can make an *informed* opinion by watching a Michael Moore film.

A: I would be the first to say none of Michael Moore’s films are non-biased. And he does as well. But it does provide some glimmer in several areas that are documented by others. It certainly seems strange to have a college educated jet pilot flying hundreds of people full time and still having to apply for food stamps to make ends meet. And I think that’s part of the issue is the imbalance valuation of people.

Visual effects service - The Big Picture

(Note: I’m on the board of the VES but all posting to this blog are mine own and do not represent the VES) (As always, I could be wrong about anything)

If we’re re-examining the current VFX situation we need to take a step back and look at the whole process.

I think most of us think of visual effects as a service. But is it?

History
Years ago the studios had their own visual effects department with people on staff and basic optical and animation equipment. When the studios closed those departments, labs and small optical companies took their place. I can remember looking over lab and vfx company price lists in the mid-70’s. A dissolve was so much per foot. A matte was so much per foot with minimum cost of X dollars. Some of the places had small insert stages they would rent for so much per day. If you needed something special they could give you a quote but the majority of the work was on a time and materials basis.

For larger vfx projects the productions themselves would set up a full department somewhere. This was the case with 2001, Logan’s Run, Close Encounters, Star Wars and other films. The production would lease a building and set it up from scratch with the people needed to run and operate it. For Close Encounters we were in an industrial building in Marina del Rey. They had to custom make the matte painting stands and other equipment as need be. They purchased or leased optical printers and an animation camera. Everyone working there was paid by the production. This is in fact how productions usually run. They become their own company that has a group of people that round up or build whatever is required for the film. In live action this would be the construction of the sets, special rigs, etc. Once those shows were done the one off facility they setup would usually be closed down and the crew laid off. In the case of ILM, since George Lucas had such success with Star Wars and thought he might like to do more things for himself and his friends he re-created it in Northern California. Apogee was formed by John Dykstra and others using the original ILM building and some of the same gear(?) used on Star Wars. Many of the Close Encounters people went to Universal Hartland where Universal setup up a facility to handle Buck Rogers and Battlestar Galactica.

When we formed Dream Quest most of the initial projects we did on a time and materials basis, especially if it was large. If someone wanted us to shoot motion control we charged for the stages and the crew for so much per week. This saved us in a number of cases where the director or the vfx supervisor they had hired made changes or threw out work because of a change.

Today if you’re working on a commercial the cost of a telecine is so much per hour and so much for tape, etc. The work on the Flame system or equivalent is on a per hour basis. They may provide a rough estimate but it’s always up to the client how much time is used. If the agency wants to tweak something all day that’s fine. They get billed for it and the video house doesn’t have to worry about making a budget.

Fixed Bids
Somewhere along the way the studios wanted a fixed bid on vfx work for feature films. Estimates were no longer good enough and the vfx companies would now have to stick to the budget. This changes a number of dynamics. In the eyes of some studios and directors the vfx people were no longer working directly for the production, they were working for the vfx company. The vfx crew became another step further from the film crew. Outsiders. Now there’s always the ping-pong of trying to please the director but not going over budget. Filing change orders and having discussions with the studios regarding the costs now became standard process. At times the vfx company can be pushed into a corner. The vfx supervisor was now that guy from the vfx company. The name of the vfx company became the main selling point. The vfx supervisor, not so much. If the client doesn’t like the first proposed company supe then another one at the company will be swapped out on a whim. The crew having to work overtime was now the vfx company’s problem. We still had crazy hours at times in the ‘old days’. On Star Trek: The Motion Picture I worked several weeks straight, 12 hrs a day, 7 days a week. (and a few 24hr days) But the studio knew it and actually visited the facility. Today, they’re now removed from those details.

So are there any other areas of film production that are completely farmed out to a 3rd party company besides VFX? All the other main leads tend to be hired directly. DP, Production Designer, Wardrobe, etc. Even though most Special Effects people have companies I believe most are hired as a team of people or at least paid on a time basis. Sound mixing or the DI? I assume these are on a time and material basis as well. The previs team is frequently brought in to work in the same office down the hall from the director. They typically bill by the man days or hours. Most of the set construction I see is done by a team of people working for production with special projects (cars, etc) farmed out.

When I think of a service I think of a dentist, a car shop where they work on your car or a plumber that comes to your house. In these cases they do work but don’t tend to produce anything. The costs are based on time and materials.

Custom manufacturing?
Should vfx be considered as custom manufacturing? We actually create something when we finish our work, whether it’s from scratch or a montage of material provided. That’s what the studios want, not the actual service part.

Here is where things get crazier. Each shot is unique like a snowflake. It’s own little world of issues, handwork and tweaks. You try like anything to make shots as consistent as possible and to be able to run them through the exact same process but it’s never full automated. For all the talk about computers in our business it’s still a very labor-intensive process. The number of people and the time required to do a shot from start to finish would astound most outsiders.

If you go to most manufactures and request custom work you will be required to make specific requirements in writing. (I.e. you want cabinet style 32 but in this specific color of blue. You want a custom cake that says Happy Birthday. It will be yellow cake with vanilla ice cream and chocolate frosting.) And that is what you will get. They seldom show you the work in progress or have your input at every single stage. The other thing is a custom manufacture will tell you when it will be done. They dictate the schedule. In the film business it’s the opposite of all of this. The studio specifies when the delivery will be. It’s almost always less than the time that would have been arrived at by a normal scheduling process for the facility.

On a VFX project you start with the script, which provides a wide-open interpretation of what the final visuals will look like. In pre-production the director hopefully approves concept art, does storyboards and ideally previs. While most previs lays a good foundation the number of nuances and changes required for the final shots can be enormous. The director usually wants something never seen before that will require a lot of R&D. Not just custom but a totally unknown look or process that needs to be invented. Just how much time and money will that take? The vfx companies have to provide a bid for all of this before the film is even shot. During shooting things will change. During post-production things will continue to change.

This is a creative process so there will be changes but think of it this way: The vfx company is making a 1000 custom oil paintings that technically have to be delivered on a hard date for a fixed price (at least initially). This process could costs in the 10’s of millions of dollars, make up half of the film budget and fill up half of the screen time. There are some rough thumbnails but not enough information to simply deliver the finished paintings. The director is involved at every step of the process for every single painting. In some cases, for every brush stroke. Some directors only want to see the final pieces. In these cases you can end up with ‘no, now that I see it I don’t’ want apples in the painting, I want pears’. So much for the time and effort to create the initial painting. If a director changes one painting that may change two dozen that are almost finished. Remember, the due date will not move, regardless of the changes. And of course shots are not paintings but moving images so time and motion presents another infinite number of possibilities.

How many other areas does the director really work in this much minutia? Normally when they’re working with Directors of Photography, Production Designers, etc they discuss and try to get in sync regarding the general look and style they want. The director may be asked about the color of the pillows on a set but at some point they pass on the taking care of the details to their key creatives. The director is unlikely to ask to change the 3rd brick from the right on the set or ask the DP to reduce a specific light by ½ stop. And yet at times it can be that way when working with visual effects.

With visual effects the director has unlimited control. Every pixel of every frame can be changed. If production has an on set stunt or action the director shoots what takes they feel are appropriate and will select one. The fact that the stuntman’s hand is raised a little doesn’t cause problems. The best take will be selected and production moves on. With the advent of digital visual effects that’s not the end of the story. What would have been fine previously in any movie is now something to be scrutinized and analyzed by the director, editor and studio. Now it may be an added shot for the vfx crew to fix that hand position. And while they’re working on the shot can they change that thing back there and that other thing over there? A shot with a jet may get a request to roll the jet another 3 degrees. Will the audience notice 3 degrees? Will it make it a better shot? Obviously if production paid and shot a real jet they would be unlikely to schedule another shoot day simply to get the jet to roll 3 degrees more.

On the set the director knows it will take a certain amount of time to make a change so they always have to balance that because time is their gold standard. They have so many days to shoot the show and have only 2 days scheduled for this set and need to shoot 20 setups a day. With vfx that time balance is thrown out the window. Most of the work is done after filming. The amount of time and effort to make the change is all hidden. It’s happening elsewhere by unseen people. It’s no longer the director or producers responsibility to complete this phase of production on time; it’s up to the vfx company. To add to this difficulty is the fact that the live action shoot can and does go over schedule. Problems during shooting may now require additional, unplanned work to be done by the vfx company. But the vfx company cannot go over schedule. They are the end of the road so every delay during shooting, every added fix, shot or change needs to happen by the deadline. That’s the finals date that was set before the vfx company even started bidding on the show. Not only does the vfx company have to do all the work they initially agreed to do in that time, they have to absorb most production issues that have accumulated and rippled down the pipeline since the pre-production began. Add into that mix the requirement by the studio to make last minute changes, possibly based on test screenings, possibly based on an idea of an executive.

Are there other non-film businesses setup like vfx companies in terms of the requirements and client involvement? That would be useful to look at and learn from. Unfortunately I can’t really think of anything on the scale or dealing with the same types of issues. Many construction projects are of course custom and involve a lot of money and people. However they have blueprints that have been signed off on. They have colors that were selected to paint the walls and the client has approved the carpet and the tiles. Sure there will be some changes but the majority of the work is usually very well specified. Any major changes will involve a change of completion date or will require client to pay a large fees to have it accelerated.

Summary
Visual effects is a very labor-intensive business. The labor is made up of dedicated and highly skilled and trained people. There’s the requirement to complete hundreds of works of unique, never before seen, art (shots), based on rudimentary starting points, that are constantly being scrutinized and changed. And this all has to be done for as much adherence to a fixed bid as possible and above all has to be finished on the deadline, - no ifs, ands or buts.

I do want to go on record that I support all the directors I work for and that I’m all for anything that can make a film better. All vfx artists want the best possible film. What I hope this posting will illustrate is just how complex this issue is. We have art, technology and commerce all colliding. The vfx companies are put in a tough situation and the vfx artists are put in a tough situation to try to balance this all out. The end result is any process or structure that will help balance this issue to create the best creative and to make it reasonable for the vfx artists will be a welcome relief.

Related posts:
Pass me a nail
Risk and subsidies
Oh, the mess we're in!