Hi,
We're about to start layout on a 45 minutes full-cg show.
A few of us here are debating the idea of doing the majority of the
layout-previz and animation in a "master" scene. Such master scene
would include basically all the cameras and animation for an entire
sequence.
There are several motives behind this approach:
- To enforce continuity between cuts. The idea is to be able to
playback the scene and have all the action take place more or less in
one go. So we make sure, for example, that the character's hand that
was at a given position on the cut out is not breaking the continuity
at the next cut in.
- I have good reasons to think we won't have good old-style
storyboards, or complete ones. It seems the plan is to have the layout
artists do full-fledged storyboards in 3D, in order to reduce
continuity problems but also to make sure things are always at the
right scale in the FOV.
Now, I can see an interest in doing this for the layout/previz stage,
but I have a hard time figuring how advantageous such an approch to
animation can really be.
Continuity is a strong argument in favor of this workflow, but.....
- Accounting for "cheats" introduces some hazards. For instance, it's
not uncommon, to fit a specific shot, to move props or even characters
from their "standard" location to another location, simply because the
director likes it better that way. So it means that the animator might
have to animate the position of props, stage elements and even full
character rigs. As a result, some objects may just jump from one place
to another.
- It is my understanding that shots that have requirements too complex
to fit in the master scene would become separate scenes. So again I
foresee a nightmare of trying to keep track of what part of what
master scene has been done separately. Worse, what if we want to make
modifications to the master scene, and then pipe these changes down to
the specliazed scenes? I mean it certainly is possible, but then it
need to be extremely tightly tracked, right? Lastly, from my
experience, what everyone thought to be an exception or a special case
actually happened to be quite a common scenario. I'm probably
paranoid, but getting bit by an inadequate workflow is the last thing
I want.
- That would also mean having animators (or else) "slicing" the
animation and export it for the "special" version, and possibly
migrating the "special" version back in the master scene. This is
entirely possible by using the Mixer as a "montage table". But again,
I see big red signs that say "PROBLEMS AHEAD", mostly because of human
errors.
- Our characters have syflex simulations. Obviously if characters are
jumping, bad things will happen. So we'll need to have some "rollout"
frames between cuts for the simulation to get back in a stable state
(unless the character is moving violently, of course). I guess this
problem also applies to motion blur and various time-movement
dependent effects.
- Then if we have to move objects around in the same shot, and we have
to put delays between "action" time, then I see the whole thing
becoming a nightmare in terms of management. It means someone will
have to keep a very, very tight look at frame ranges and make sure
this info is propagated.
Given all the previous points, where is the advantage of doing
"master" scenes? I'd be interested in people who have tried this, if
they have some thoughts to share.
Thanks
Bernard
