Are we filmmakers?

[EddieLeon]

I just read an excellent article about Neoscape and how they approach their animations and storyboards.

 

http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/AEC/Visualization-with-Attitude/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/486290

 

I share similar thoughts on how we should approach animation. I just find it very curious how they refer to Nils as a "Filmmaker". Granted, Neoscape creates great animations that are film-like. But, I think the label of filmmaker puts them in a different industry. Is it too boring and un-sexy to call ourselves "Design Visualizers"? As it is, I have a hard time explaining to layman what I am and do. Lately, I just say I'm a "Specialized Architect"

[BrianKitts]

If you do animations on the scale the neoscape does with a director professional camera equipment/operators, a hired cast, etc.... then yes you are a filmmaker. I don't consider myself one, but architectural animations can definitely benefit from approaching them with filmmakers mindset.

 

I think of a film as being a higher level or production then what the majority of us do in our day to day architectrual animations. In my mind a film tells a story, whereas sometimes we just do animations as a display of design. A good architectural animation should tell a story, and many of them do, but many of us fall short on that one. Nils on the other hand..... the label of filmmaker is a spot on.

[upshot]

As time has passed I have come to appreciate and study the art of filmmaking as well as blur the line... There is a ton to be learned from framing, timing and minimum effort/maximum visual impact. I'm constantly using film and stage techniques as a point of reference in my presentations.

 

It's interesting that you point this out because I've always been attracted to both worlds and mark my words the next generation will be skilled in temporal production.. I just found this on youtube the other day and it spoke to me like a sign of things to come... We just won a major contract using a similar technique to present at the interview (albeit a little less 'funky' ;-)

 

On a side note here is my 'experimental' filmmaking (I'm a timelapse nut)...

[EddieLeon]

If you do animations on the scale the neoscape does with a director professional camera equipment/operators, a hired cast, etc.... then yes you are a filmmaker. I don't consider myself one, but architectural animations can definitely benefit from approaching them with filmmakers mindset.

 

I think of a film as being a higher level or production then what the majority of us do in our day to day architectrual animations. In my mind a film tells a story, whereas sometimes we just do animations as a display of design. A good architectural animation should tell a story, and many of them do, but many of us fall short on that one. Nils on the other hand..... the label of filmmaker is a spot on.

 

???...I own a piano, but I am not a pianist. I don't think the equipment we use determines what we are. In fact, the same equipment and crew can be used to film TV commercials. Does that make Ad Agencies filmmakers also?

 

I think film-making is about story telling. Neoscape adds a storyline to their animations. This along with dramatic camera paths and editing elevates their work to film-like qualities. But, at the end of the day they are selling real estate. These are not stories that we would pay to see or watch more than once.

 

I think the label of filmmaker only fits if the real intention is to do more than just architectural animations. Joseph Kosinski did it and now he is directing the sequel for Tron. He is now a filmmaker.

 

Ultimately, we all strive to make our work the best that it can be. In our field Neoscape and a few other studios are really pushing the envelope. How do we define the ones that are at the top of the game? What labels do we use? We are not in the film business. There are a whole different set of standards for film that don't fully apply to AEC. If we force too much cinematics and big budgets on our clients they will reject them because they only really want to sell buildings and not movies.

 

Should our goal be to fit within the demands of our market or do we push up and away into another one? Should the creative directors and animators in our studios strive then to be filmmakers and move to Hollywood?

[EddieLeon]

On a side note here is my 'experimental' filmmaking (I'm a timelapse nut)...

 

Jay, I agree it's helpful to study the techniques of filmmaking. By the way, your timelapse is awesome! How do you you keep the camera so steady when it rotates? I guess you must have special mounting equipment with a precise motor.

[upshot]

Jay, I agree it's helpful to study the techniques of filmmaking. By the way, your timelapse is awesome! How do you you keep the camera so steady when it rotates? I guess you must have special mounting equipment with a precise motor.

 

Right, the label 'filmmaker' is probably not accurate... The 'new world' cgarchitect is probably more akin to 'director of photography'. Getting the right angle, lighting, dynamic movement, and influencing the pace of the final cut.

 

The static image has always been (and probably will remain) the mainstay of architectural rendering but, again I think the new wave of talent is going to be pushing motion and dynamic presentation to the forefront.

 

Thanks! it's my fun little hobby that keeps the 'everyday world' around me inspiring. I use a telescope mount to get the movement. If your curious,

.

[BrianKitts]

???...I own a piano, but I am not a pianist. I don't think the equipment we use determines what we are. In fact, the same equipment and crew can be used to film TV commercials. Does that make Ad Agencies filmmakers also?

 

well put, but I didn't say it was because they own the equipment, I'm speaking to the level of production that they go to beyond what is common for a typical architectural animation.

 

Some of their pieces are more than a TV commercial, its a storyline with a plot intended to invoke feeling in the viewer, that to me can be considered a film. We are all entitled to our own opinions, this may be just like the unanswerable debate of what is art......what makes it a film?, in my opinion I think the title is deserved.

[Nils Norgren]

I just find it very curious how they refer to Nils as a "Filmmaker".

 

There are many things I have been called, at least "Filmmaker" can be said in mixed company I did give an Autodesk master class last summer at Siggraph called "The Architectural Film" so I guess I am guilty of perpetuating the term. I don't think it much matters, in all actuality our work is real estate marketing collateral, but that hardly rolls off the tongue. The name for the industry(albeit larger than just architecture) that Autodesk coined is "Design Visualization" which I don't think is a perfect match.

 

It is a valid discussion to talk about the merits of terms and labels, we always called a model in a photograph a "Photo Simulation" back in the early 90' at Parsons Brinkerhoff. Now that is more often called a "Photo Montage", which is also confusing.

 

It is an interesting point, language is intended to clarify a situation but it seems to much more often used to obscure it. My answer to many of those debates "is it art or not", or "what is the difference between art and craft" to all of those debaters I say "good question".

 

-Nils

[EddieLeon]

We are all entitled to our own opinions, this may be just like the unanswerable debate of what is art......what makes it a film?, in my opinion I think the title is deserved.

 

We are all clearly entitled to our opinions. And it is my opinion that when an industry leader (Nils Norgren) labels himself a filmmaker it sets a precedent for all of us. This might be perfectly fine and the discussion might be completely trivial. I just feel that it is worth noting and discussing. Maybe there is a better label that we can come up with (or not). "Filmmaker" definitely gives you an instant cool and sexy aura. Arch Visualizer does not.

 

Anyways, I'm sure I will soon have a hearty discussion with Nils about it

I'll keep you posted.

[EddieLeon]

It is a valid discussion to talk about the merits of terms and labels, we always called a model in a photograph a "Photo Simulation" back in the early 90' at Parsons Brinkerhoff. Now that is more often called a "Photo Montage", which is also confusing.

 

It is an interesting point, language is intended to clarify a situation but it seems to much more often used to obscure it. My answer to many of those debates "is it art or not", or "what is the difference between art and craft" to all of those debaters I say "good question".

 

Good point! Another example is aerial video compositing. It's also called helicopter tracking. What do you call it? Also, what about job titles? Are project managers and account executives the same thing? We get architects applying for PM positions and their pay scale and qualifications are completely off.

 

I believe we need to have more clarity in our industry. I have no idea how we can do this. But, it seems to me that we (and our clients) will benefit in the end.

[EddieLeon]

Thanks! it's my fun little hobby that keeps the 'everyday world' around me inspiring. I use a telescope mount to get the movement. If your curious,

.

 

That is too cool!! Thanks for sharing. Maybe I can hurry up and be the first to put this technique into one of our animations

[upshot]

That is too cool!! Thanks for sharing. Maybe I can hurry up and be the first to put this technique into one of our animations

 

Funny you should say that because I've been thinking about trying to match a location timelapse pan to a rendered pan... If anything, clouds and the horizon makes a sweet background! I've done that ;-) but getting a full frame foreground and all matched up is tough enough with a still!

[EddieLeon]

Funny you should say that because I've been thinking about trying to match a location timelapse pan to a rendered pan... If anything, clouds and the horizon makes a sweet background! I've done that ;-) but getting a full frame foreground and all matched up is tough enough with a still!

 

Lol...we are on the same page. I imagine doing a city scene with people and cars whizzing by. Animated clouds would be sweet too, especially if you can get an animated reflection onto the 3d building.

 

Tracking should be easy if you use BouJou or Syntheyes.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

Arch Visualizer does not.

 

In the same manner you are arguing against the term film maker, i am going to argue against the term Arch Visualizer. It comes across as you are putting down the industry, granted it is tough to convey feeling and thought via web posts. You need to be at the very minimum a decent digital artist who can create production pieces that are intriguing, enticing, and make the viewer think beyond what they may have already imagined in their mind.

[EddieLeon]

i am going to argue against the term Arch Visualizer. It comes across as you are putting down the industry,

 

I agree feelings don't come across well in posts, so I am going to try to clarify my position. Hopefully, I won't offend anyone.

 

First, I didn't make an argument for the term "Arch Visualizer". I used it as an example of a common term that is used and how it doesn't give the same romantic impression as "filmmaker". The position I actually took was, "Maybe there is a better label that we can come up with (or not)."

 

Second, in no way did I imply to put down the industry. My argument is the complete opposite. It is that we need to strengthen and "build up" our industry into it's own uniqueness and not let it be confused with common labels from Hollywood or Advertising. We should try to be as clear as possible about who we are and what we do. And at the same time we should do it in a way that is unique and marketable. There are many industries in the US and around the world that join together to strengthen each other's image and broaden their markets. Got Milk? Is a perfect example. Cotton and Beef have done the same. No...Where's the Beef? was not part of the official campaign.

 

Does anyone get my point here? Do you all realize that we are the bastard children of the AEC industry? We are the last ones to get the baton in the design process and the first ones to be blamed if something goes wrong. Do you also realize how powerful we have become? Do you realize that some developers prefer to skip the designers and go straight into 3d because it saves them time and money? Do you realize how much of a crutch we are to some designers? Some practically give us napkin sketches and expect us to figure it all out.

 

I believe that if we got together as an industry and set the groundwork for work process, terminology, contracts, yada yada yada...we would have greater respect, public awareness, and get greater compensation.

 

Obviously, a lot of artists are going to read this thread and ask themselves "what the heck is Eddie smoking?" Actually, I don't know what it is but I think it's good stuff

[EddieLeon]

It is an interesting point, language is intended to clarify a situation but it seems to much more often used to obscure it. My answer to many of those debates "is it art or not", or "what is the difference between art and craft" to all of those debaters I say "good question".

 

Nils,

Come on man! Don't get political on me and side step this. Ian challenged you on a sports bet. I'll challenge you to take a more clear position on proper terminology in our industry. Are you calling yourself a filmmaker for marketing purposes? Or, are you going to school Joseph Kosinski one day?

[Nils Norgren]

Nils,

Come on man! Don't get political on me and side step this. Ian challenged you on a sports bet. I'll challenge you to take a more clear position on proper terminology in our industry. Are you calling yourself a filmmaker for marketing purposes? Or, are you going to school Joseph Kosinski one day?

 

Here is how I see it, there are titles, we have "Creative Director", "Art Director", "Senior Digital Artist", "Editor", "Compositor", "Project Coordinator", "Graphic Designer" you get the picture. Then there is how we refer to ourselves as a whole, "Architectural Visualization", "Real Estate Marketing", "A Digital Media Company" "Creative services". It often depends on the context. We do things like Graphic design, branding, Interactive services, Presentations, Marketing center design, Movies, (We have two categories, lifestyle and brand essence), and straight up renderings.

 

On our movies, some have very little cg, we shoot timelapse (love the ones by Jay, BTW) we shoot b-roll, on location interviews, Hele footage. Some of our CG shots are created entirely in compositing, with moving footage of water shot on video, comped in with a few stitched hi res photos, with a moving sky behind the whole shot. This is not typical Architectural Rendering, but that is what we do.

 

I recently went on vacation out of the country, on the little slip they make you fill out when you land, there is one line for occupation, to keep things simple I put "Animator", this is a huge stretch but I don't want to explain anything to some customs agent, so for all intensive purposes that is my occupation (according to customs agents).

 

I am sure that everyone on this board has a tough time describing their occupation, Currently on my card I have only "Founding Partner".

 

I am curious, when someone asks you Eddie, to describe what Spine3d is (knowing they are outside the industry) how do you do it? Can you make an elevator pitch in 2 to 3 sentences that captures the essence of the company and industry.

 

It is frustrating when the industry is so esoteric, When I show them a few movies and some renderings then the point is much easier. Without collateral it can be challenging.

 

As for film making I don't plan on following in Joe K's footsteps, but the guys here who run the editing rooms are called "Editors" so from that standpoint, I don't think it is a stretch to call some of what we do "Filmmaking".

 

We could change it to "Quicktime Making" but it hardly sounds as cool.

 

-Nils

[EddieLeon]

I am curious, when someone asks you Eddie, to describe what Spine3d is (knowing they are outside the industry) how do you do it? Can you make an elevator pitch in 2 to 3 sentences that captures the essence of the company and industry.

 

It is frustrating when the industry is so esoteric, When I show them a few movies and some renderings then the point is much easier. Without collateral it can be challenging.

 

Thanks Nils! You have brought up some excellent points. Essentially, we are creative chameleons that need to change our stripes depending on who we are speaking with and the type of project we are working on. Architecture, Advertising, and Entertainment are very different worlds that we often migrate between. Could we or should we not create our own?

 

My elevator pitch lately is that we are “specialized architects & artists” that assist designers & developers in visualizing their projects. The images and videos that we create are then used to promote their buildings for either design approvals or sales purposes. There is a great need for our services because most people cannot fully understand the 2d plans that the designers first create.

 

The reason why I describe myself as “architect” is two-fold. I have an M.Arch degree and people generally understand what an architect does. Also, it is a respected profession and it’s sexier than something like “cg artist” or “arch visualizer” (no, I’m not putting the industry down). I guess it’s similar to saying filmmaker. People get it. By the way, have you noticed how most people have no idea what “CG” means?

 

Regarding title, my business card says “President/CEO”. I find it to be an odd description because I don’t really know what my main function is sometimes. I do a little of everything. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to be too involved with all our projects. So I really can’t say I’m an animator, filmmaker, or 3d artist. I guess I am now just a business owner or an entrepreneur. Either way, I have a strong interest in the health and direction of our industry. Case in point, does Autodesk really listen to us before they make changes to Max?

 

I share your frustration in our esoteric industry. I am hoping that somehow we can all work together to introduce some clarity and structure. I kinda leave it to Jeff to pave the way and help provide a platform for us to do this. He has already done an amazing job pulling us together with CGArchitect. There is much more that needs to be done and I am here to help.

 

Eddie

[ikinman]

It's entirely context. I can talk about what I do and come up with 'titles' among this crowd or among my clients and no one is going to question it: I'm a 'renderer.' But my (and everyone else's) problem has always been what to tell people not involved in or with our field. My wife and I joke about what words I'm going to use to describe what I do, when we're heading off to a party or some event where we're going to meet new people. Lately I've been playing with 'commercial artist' or 'graphic designer.'

 

When pressed further I usually say that I'm one of the guys that does all the 'pretty pictures of the new buildings you see in the real estate section of the Sunday Paper.' It's not elegant, but I've said that phrase so often now I can do it in my sleep, and the good thing is that everyone understands what I do after I say it.

 

Perhaps we should have a charity contest for whoever comes up with the best way to describe all that we do to someone in a bar.

[upshot]

This 'label' discussion is so apropos to me personally because I'm:

-an architect by training (primarily a designer in my firm)

-a 'renderer' (architectural visualizations)

-a graphic artist (co-ordinating print material - indesign stuff)

-a web designer (html, java monkey)

-a 'time based producer' (I own a 200 title educational documentary collection and produce some of them on the side as well as my timelapse footage - not to mention my experimental HDR stuff for corporate clients and... time based architectural presentations at the firm)

-a photographer (shooting most of my firms' promotional material)

 

I don't know what the hell I am... Rest assured, anyone who is serious about expanding their skill set inside of the general envelope of 'computer/graphics/architect' will eventually have a hard time finding an appropriate job description label... I many times refer to my self as a 'presentation sniper' (as silly as that may sound): someone who can create the object, understand the message/audience and precision deliver the appropriate force.... bang.

[Hidden_Pixel]

In my opinion we should not try and establish a steadfast title for what we do. To me it would be a disservice to pigeon hole us when we wear many different hats. We are part architects, interior designers, artists and the list goes on. Eddie you mention that most people don't have an idea what "CG" means, I don't think this is the case. Hollywood as pushed those two letters into the consciousness of many people with their effects ridden films. At the moment I reluctantly call myself a digital artist, it seems to cover a myriad of things. By being too specific you narrow down peoples perceptions. On a side note the title of Architect is far from sexy. At least to me the title digital artist stimulates interest.

 

Also I forgot to ask Eddie you said "I believe that if we got together as an industry and set the groundwork for work process, terminology, contracts, yada yada yada...we would have greater respect, public awareness, and get greater compensation." Is this greater compensation for us as artists or for the profits of your business?. I ask this as I think there are more important issues that affect us artists in terms of compensation. For example rendering companies who outsource all of there work to artists outside the U.S. to maximize profits.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

On a side note the title of Architect is far from sexy.

 

The title of Architect when viewed by the general public is one of the sexiest tiles you can have out of any profession. It is viewed on the same level as Doctor, Filmmaker, etc… In general if someone finds out you work for an architectural firm, the first thing they ask is if you are an architect. If you say no, you can see their interest instantly lowered a couple of notches. Architecture is considered one of the few professions, and to the general public, an architect is a person with the grand view and control of entire projects that define the structures we use. In the profession we know that an architect is typically a person who manages and oversees a project, handles legal issues, and appropriately delegate things from design to drafting. The general public is not aware that a building is designed by a designer or architectural designer, they simply hear the word architect, and have a vision of a artistic, intelligent, commanding, motivated individual that is respected and should be held on a pedestal.

[Hidden_Pixel]

Sorry I don't want the topic to veer into the dangerous territory of whether the title of Architect is sexy or not. My point is that if I meet someone for the first time and they ask what I do. If I mention the word architect they zone in on that word because it is familiar to them. If you mention digital artist it usually stimulates more interest and conversation into your profession. Peoples perceptions of the word architect are very engrained which I feel misleads them in quantifying our job. Also where I am originally from Architects are not viewed on the same level as a doctor, far from it. Maybe in the U.S this is the case.

[Ernest Burden III]

when an industry leader (Nils Norgren) labels himself a filmmaker it sets a precedent for all of us.

 

That article was aimed at the AEC industry, so it makes sense that they would play up the uniqueness of what Nils does (through Neoscape) in the larger architectural business. I don't think it means he's 'putting on airs' on the one hand, or silly to think arch-vis could be art on the other. When you earn your living producing moving pictures, you are a film-maker. But it's a broad term--what kind, people will ask.

 

When asked what I do, I often start with a simple 'I'm an illustrator', hoping that will be enough. Rarely is it, and I'm asked if I do children's books. No (yes, actually, if I can free up some time to complete those books I've been working on bit by bit for years). Then I may try to just put it as 'architectural'. 'Oh, you're an architect'? No. It's then that I say what Ian says about doing the pictures they see in the real-estate section of the paper. The trick is to just start there.

 

Every now-and-then I start the sideways explanation of what I do and someone will interrupt with 'oh, you're a renderer'. Some people know what a renderer is.

 

Would a better, universally-accepted term for what we are/do improve things for us? It might. It could help clients know when they need us, help us get jobs with production studios and design firms and be properly paid for them. Or not, I don't know.

[Hidden_Pixel]

A universal term for what we do could be a hindrance if it doesn't have a broad scope that covers the numerous disciplines we cover. Would a client know from a title such as Architectural Illustrator that you create visuals of an architectural nature, yes. Would they know that your are not a traditional illustrator, no. Would they work out from your title that you also provide a plethora of other services, definitely not.

 

Or job is truly unique in the regard that we have to wear many different hats. A career which comes close is VFX. Now if someone says they are VFX artist, that can cover many different types of disciplines such as roto, compositing, lighting etc. I just don't know if we could work out a blanket title which could represent an industry such as ours.