This the character i am doing my animation on. i choose him because the sketch is short, funny, and he is about the simplist character i could have choosen from the creature comforts series. below are some of my 'early' models of Fluffy. The images show my progression. the first images are totally rubbish, but towards the end it starts to look a bit like fluffy...
This is basically a brief look at what my scene may look like. I have been experimenting with lighting but mainly there hasnt been much difference in the way it looks from this. one thing that is a peoblem is rendering time. as you can see there is reflection in the wood which slowed the rendering time ALOT.... also the lamps base isnt really that nice, maybe i'l hide this in the final scene.
This is an interesting look on the Simpson's in 3D. It is based on the intro of every Simpson’s episode, but it has been produced in 3D. I don't know what it is about it but it isn't the same as the Simpson’s we all know and love. Is it because the modeling and animation isn't brilliant. Or is it because we are so used to how the original Simpson's looks, that we aren't used to it being in 3D.
If the Simpson's actually looked like this, I don't think it would be watched an 1 8th as much as it is.
One interesting thought about the idea of people not liking 3D, is the fact that the characters become too complicated. It has been said that the reason for people liking simple characters is because the viewers can relate to them a lot easier, which makes you enjoy the show more. If you think about it, all of the characters in the Simpson's don't have many different characteristics.
Homer; Fat, bald, drinks a lot of beer, loves his food. (like millions of people his age across the globe).
Marge; Big hair that she loves, basically a house wife. (again a stereotypical mother)
Bart; naughty boy (most boys are naughty at some point)
Lisa; plays saxophone, bit of a geek (probably how many boys see their sisters)
Maggie; typical baby, sucks a dummy allllll day.
Maybe when the producers of the Simpson's made Homer and Bart into 3D, this maybe more acceptable? They know the characters inside out and exactly what they should look like. Well lets see...
I am writing to enquire for information about the drawing format chosen to broadcast The Simpsons.
I am currently studying my second year of Multimedia Design at Huddersfield University, England. I have been asked to study a topic of my choice from the brief, ‘RE’. I have chosen re-create. Part of my study is to find out why such accomplished animators such as Nick Park and yourselves use a particular medium.
I am fascinated to why The Simpsons is still produced in 2D. I am a big fan of The Simpsons but wonder if it would be better if it was 3D and whether it would be easier to produce? Please could you aid my study by informing me why is it that you choose this 2D format over broadcasting in 3D?
Futurama
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to enquire for information about the drawing format chosen to broadcast Futurama.
I am currently studying my second year of Multimedia Design at Huddersfield University, England. I have been asked to study a topic of my choice from the brief, ‘RE’. I have chosen re-create. Part of my study is to find out why such accomplished animators such as Nick Park and yourselves use a particular medium.
I have recently learned that Futurama is produced in 3D, yet it is broadcast to appear as if 2D. I am fascinated why 3D models are produced, but are never used. Please could you aid my study by informing me why is it that you choose this 2D format over broadcasting in 3D?
One of the very first things that inspired me to do this project is the fact that Futurama is produced in 3D but is actually made to look 2D. I want to find out why they go to such lengths to produce it in 3D then show it in 2D. Would it not be more aesthetically pleasing in 3D?? As I have said previously in my blog, I want to ask them why by writing a letter and that I cant really think of any programs in this genre that are 3D!! Why is that?? Surly there must be some.
The process of making a Simpsons episode is quite daunting. This is an insight into the work that goes into making each episode.
Lisa: The writers should be ashamed of themselves. Bart: Cartoons have writers?
Yep, that's right. A team of about 15 writers decide on plots and throw around ideas for jokes and gags, then one or two writers are sent away to write a full script for the episode. This script is then given a read through by the voice artists, before making any final alterations. The main voice artists are Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Nancy Cartwright, Yeardley Smith, Hank Azaria, Harry Shearer plus any special guests (See the cast list and guest stars list for more info). The episode is recorded onto a voice track and sent to the animating team.
The animators draw out story boards and rough sketches for how the episode will look, followed by a set of black and white drawings for the whole episode, called frames. These are then shot under a camera, pieced together and combined with he voice track to give the writers and director a rough overview of the episode. They can also make any last minute changes needed.
The drawings are sent to Korea to be drawn neatly and inked (colored in), where labor is cheaper. These are again shot under a camera and linked to the voice track.
Finally comes the music. Alf Clausen and his orchestra add music to give emotion and feeling to the episode. Everything is combined together and the writers & producers can get a look (and a laugh at the final product before airing.
This whole process take about nine months. "It's like having a baby," says executive producer Mike Scully. "Only it's a cartoon baby." The producers sometimes find it aggravating that it takes so long. A episode for a sitcom is usually written over two or three days, recorded the next day, and then aired a week later. However, on the set of The Simpsons, an episode is written in two days, recorded on the third day, then the final product is viewed six months later.
Nevertheless, everyone who works on The Simpsons agrees that "it's the best job in show business."
Creature Comforts worlds A lot of the charm of creature comforts comes not only from the characters themselves but also from the amazing worlds they inhabit. Nothing Is cluttered or confusing and everything is carefully designed to direct attention straight to their plasticine stars.
Creature Comforts have a lot more sets and props than ever before and they all have to be hand made. That’s where kitty clay comes into it – the art director. Kitty and her team have to make sure that all the props get made and the characters are just the right size for the sets. It’s up to them to make sure that everything comes together in the creature comforts world.
One of the biggest challenges that kitty faced was trying to make a house for the dog fleas. This set was huge and showed all of the pores that the hairs came out of, along with the flea’s eggs. First of all the team had to sculpt the skin surface and then dress it up and paint it. Each hair had to be hand painted and sprayed and then covered in a protective gloss. It took 4 people 2 weeks.
The man responsible for making the whole production come together smoothly is Gareth Owen the production manager. Unlike many people working on Creature Comforts, Gareth has to worry about the entire team. It’s up to Gareth to co-ordinate every aspect from making sure the sets are ready for a particular scene to be shot, to making sure they don’t spend to much money and go wayyyy over budget.
The Editing Process In television the editing is almost the last thing that happens. But creature comforts are different. For a start the editing is done at the same time as filming – or even before it!! This is because the episodes have been constructed in audio form before any decisions have been made about how the creatures will look so the voices have to be edited together, along with the initial images of the characters.
Dan Lincoln is one of the people who edit the interviews they collect. The first thing that he does is listen to the chosen voices – all 137 of them – whilst looking at the transcript showing which bits Golly wants to use. Then Dan picks out the lines from the audio material and puts them into a rough edit. He has to get about 1 ½ hours of audio down to just 8 minutes.
Once an episode has been roughly assembled the editors sit down with Golly and put the dialogue along side the original sketches of the characters. Together they make a simple film called an animatic. This allows them to see if the voices go well or not with the characters they have in mind. This means they can tell if its going to work as a character before they start animating.
It’s only when the animators start producing their 4 seconds of animated characters per day that the voices can be put to lips. Dan hen takes the dialogue that us being used and fits the moving lips to it. During this process the characters really begin to take shape and our creatures start to come to life.
Problems with Plasticine To the untrained eye, plasticine is plasticine. But the professionals there are a thousand different varieties. Some are hard, some are soft and some are crumbly. Some are even sticky, but every animator likes there plasticine slightly different. You can’t overcomplicate things because too many different colours blended together and too many different varieties can create a mess.
The Animation Process Miki Cash is one of the model animators. He starts with lav, where he and Golly act out the lines. When that is done, the set is put in his cubical where he will be animating and the puppet is put into shot to see how it will look. But before jay can start animating there are a few things he likes to do, such as adjusting the face a bit and getting to know the model.
The animators use between 10 and 20 different mouths for different expressions which they just slot into place and sculpt around to make the join imperceptible. A different mouth is needed for each phonetic sound. For instance, ‘ahh’ is very different to ‘mmm’.
The animators try to film between 3 and 5 seconds of material a day and each shot tends to last 20 seconds. That means it takes 4 days just to create a 15 second shot. Compared to other Aardman productions, creature comforts have quite a quick turnaround. Unlike chicken run which took a week to create a 4 second sequence.
Although creature comforts have a consistent style for all the animals, we all agree that each animator has his/her distinctive approach. We can pick out who has done what because we all have certain mannerisms that we use, for example a store of eye or mouth movements. After a while the characters even take characteristics from their animators.
The Acting Process The animators on creature comforts don’t get a script. All they get is a transcript of the dialogue and then they have to make their own decision about how it’s said. They have to take into consideration, emotions, when to have blinks and twitches and all of the characteristics that make the animations resemble real characters. This creates more diverse animations, rather than scripting. This is where live action video tests (lav) come into it.
In order to help the animators a technique known as live action briefing is used. It provides the animators with a video that they can work from which shows there real movements and emotions and how their animated characters should behave. The animators act out their lines so they know how their characters should react.
Lighting and Films The new series of creature comforts is totally filmed digitally and no film is used what so ever. The directors of photography make the best of their digital look rather than pretending that their shooting on film. The reason film isn’t used is because it would have been too expensive and difficult. Digital filming is starting to take over from film. There is even an introduction of cinemas having digital projectors. This could mark the end of film.
Once the sketches of the characters have been drawn they are sent to the set builders and to Andy who is the director of photography. The set designers and Andy work closely together and decisions are made about what lens to use – depending on the dimensions of the set. For example a wide angle lens would be used to fit more of the scene in shot.
Andy also has to ensure that he and the animators work together and communicate well. If they don’t this could mean hours of wasted time. The animators might fiddle with the brightness of the monitors to be able to see the models better. If Andy doesn’t know, then his lights are all wrong and the scene will come out dark and murky.
Designing the Characters No matter how funny the voices are, they are no good unless they are transformed into visual characters. If not then they just gather dust. This is where sketching a visual interpretation of an animal comes into play. Without sketches the people who model the characters wouldn’t have anything to work from. Sylvia Bennion is one of their in house artists that put together ideas and starts bringing the creatures to life.
The team of 7 meddlers is 7 strong with Kate Anderson at its head. When she first joined aardman she found it hard not to make the characters too perfect. After all they are meant to be realistic and being too precise could mean that this is lost. Over time her and her team have got used to what creature comforts should look like.
Like with every team effort everyone has to work out how their own style fits in with the joint one. Each creature takes between one and three weeks to make and they all start off the same – as a nondescript lump with protruding wires for the arms and legs. Then plasticine comes into play with each model custom made for the animator.
The models aren’t complete when they leave the model makers hands. There is one crucial stage the models must go through before they can be animated – there mouths have to be made, all of them. The modellers just make a neutral mouth based on an ‘A’ shape and then a mould is made so that lots of different mouths can be made from that mould.
Creating the Characters It takes along time to get from someone being interviewed in the street or park to their words coming out of the mouth of an animal or alien. There are lots of different things that effect what voice gets paired with what animal. Sometimes a voice just sounds like an animal and other times the character develops over time.
A character who came to life when the people at aardman heard the voice was fluffy the hamster. The voice seemed lonely but with a very dry sense of humour. The result was a hamster that is somebody’s pet that has been outgrown so he sits in his cage making up philosophy about life, the universe and everything.
Fans of the first series will be glad to hear that some of the voices are back but this time around their older and they’ve become different characters.
It isn’t just important how the characters look; it’s also about how they are presented. Should they be sitting or standing?? Should they be looking up at us or down??
Creature Comforts, the interesting facts you didn’t know…
Recording the Voices
The things the animals say in creature comforts is unscripted and unrehearsed. This is part of their brilliance. The interviewees don’t even know which animal they are going to be until the show is broadcast.
Even though the people being recorded know it’s for creature comfort voices, the most important thing is that they sound like real people. There has to be honesty and a sense of real life in what they say. The creatures are animals who don’t think that they are animals so if somebody guesses which animal there voice is going to be used for, it could all go wrong.
After interviewing literally hundreds of people they have begun to learn what there looking for so they tend to target people who they think will be funny when a character is put to them. Then they blend their ideas with the people they interview and the result is magic.
Unlike any other animations, the characters are created to fit the chosen voices, not the other way round. The animators, artists and Golly (the director) listen to the recordings and create a mental image of what the character should look like to fit with the voice.
A large part of the fun is contrasting what the characters say with the look of the creature that’s actually mouthing the words. A good example of this is the cat and dog. They are best friends, however the dog hates cats and the cat hates dogs.
Above :- Nick Park, with Wallce(left) & Gromit(right)
Nick Park is the creator of such television productions as, Wallace & Gromit and Creature Comforts. He has also taken plastacene animations to cinema with, Wallace & Gromit ‘The Curse of the Were-Rabbit’ and ‘Chicken Run’. He is unbelievably successful and has won many awards for his outstanding animations. His well stocked trophy cabinet consists of a British Animation award from 2004 and a Bafta award in 2006, to name a few.
Above :- Wallace and Gromit film, The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. See 'http://www.wandg.com for more deatails about the film. You could even watch the trailer.
Plot Synopsis :- It's 'vege-mania' in Wallace and Gromit's neighborhood, and our two enterprising chums are cashing in with their humane pest-control outfit, "Anti-Pesto." With only days to go before the annual Giant Vegetable Competition, business is booming, but Wallace & Gromit are finding out that running a "humane" pest control outfit has its drawbacks as their West Wallaby Street home fills to the brim with captive rabbits. Suddenly, a huge, mysterious, veg-ravaging "beast" begins attacking the town's sacred vegetable plots at night, and the competition hostess, Lady Tottington, commissions Anti-Pesto to catch it and save the day. Lying in wait, however, is Lady Tottington's snobby suitor, Victor Quartermaine, who'd rather shoot the beast and secure the position of local hero-not to mention Lady Tottingon's hand in marriage. With the fate of the competition in the balance, Lady Tottington is eventually forced to allow Victor to hunt down the vegetable chomping marauder. Little does she know that Victor's real intent could have dire consequences for her ...and our two heroes.
Above :- The film 'Chicken Run'.
Chicken Run is a comedy escape drama with a touch of passion set on a sinister Yorkshire chicken farm in 1950's England. The film follows the turbulent romance between two farmyard chickens, Rocky and Ginger, who yearn for freedom and plan a daring 'prisoner of war' style escape.
I haven’t blogged now for a few days as I still didn’t have an idea of what i wanted to do with this particular project. I took a visual of most of the Re- words I was interested in and tried not to think of any ideas. This may seem backwards but I did this as sometimes if I am constantly thinking of an idea then none will come to me. Sure enough my idea came when I was least expecting it! I had been really interesting the word Re-Create as I thought this could be fun and create some really interesting outcomes.
Basically the idea came to me as I was sat in my girlfriend’s house watching creature comforts, a Nick Park production. It consists of many plastacene animals in funny situations, talking about random but funny topics. Nick Park is Famous for creating the hugely successful line of Wallace and Gromit animations and Chicken Run to name a few. He has won many awards for his animations as they are funny and fantastic aesthetically and fun for all the family.
A Few weeks previous to watching creature comforts, I had been shown a behind the scenes DVD of Futurama and to my astonishment I found out that it is actually modelled in 3D and made to look 2D. I couldn’t quite believe why they would go to so much trouble to model all the characters and sets in 3D then make it 2D. I didn’t think much of it after that, other than telling all my mates that it was 3D and they couldn’t believe it either. By pure chance ITV Midland had technical difficulties and couldn’t show one of their programs so that’s how I came to watch creature comforts. This then started me on thinking why people would bother spending hours and hours making plastacene models and animating them frame by frame. Surly it would be a lot easier to do it in 3D and it would look better too?
I then started to think about all of the 3D television programs of this funny nature that I knew of or watched. I couldn’t think of one! I think the only one I know of is the new Captain Scarlet for children, but I’m not even sure about that. So this leaves me with the question of why there aren’t many or any television programs shown in 3D?? From the Simpson’s to Futurama, from Family Guy to Creature Comforts and from Chicken run to American Dad.
To find out some of the answers for my project I plan to write a letter to the creators of the Simpson’s and to nick park himself. I know the chances of receiving a letter back is slim to none, but I think it is defiantly worth a try, after all you never know. I don’t know exactly what I will ask, but it will be along the lines of why haven’t they moved with the times and why they think people love their particular format of animation.
Added to this I want to ask the viewers of these particular programs and more, if they like the format and if it was 3D, how would this change the show to them. Along with this I will also research certain areas around the different formats of animation.
I don’t just want to find out all of this and have a research based project, I also want to try and Re-Create a scene from Creature comforts but in 3D. I will model a particular scene as close to the plastacene animation as possible, even using the original sound track. I want to see if the 3D version is as fun to watch?? And maybe my own view would change if television programs where all in 3D.
This the character i am doing my animation on. i choose him because the sketch is short, funny, and he is about the simplist character i could have choosen from the creature comforts series. below are some of my 'early' models of Fluffy. The images show my progression. the first images are totally rubbish, but towards the end it starts to look a bit like fluffy...
This is basically a brief look at what my scene may look like. I have been experimenting with lighting but mainly there hasnt been much difference in the way it looks from this. one thing that is a peoblem is rendering time. as you can see there is reflection in the wood which slowed the rendering time ALOT.... also the lamps base isnt really that nice, maybe i'l hide this in the final scene.
A lot of the charm of creature comforts comes not only from the characters themselves but also from the amazing worlds they inhabit. Nothing Is cluttered or confusing and everything is carefully designed to direct attention straight to their plasticine stars.
In television the editing is almost the last thing that happens. But creature comforts are different. For a start the editing is done at the same time as filming – or even before it!! This is because the episodes have been constructed in audio form before any decisions have been made about how the creatures will look so the voices have to be edited together, along with the initial images of the characters.
The animators on creature comforts don’t get a script. All they get is a transcript of the dialogue and then they have to make their own decision about how it’s said. They have to take into consideration, emotions, when to have blinks and twitches and all of the characteristics that make the animations resemble real characters. This creates more diverse animations, rather than scripting. This is where live action video tests (lav) come into it.
