VES Board Members Van Ling and Colin Campbell comment on Variety Article

VES Board Members Van Ling and Colin Campbell comment on David Cohen's Variety Article about "Deadly dull vfx undermining the biz" Visual Effects.

 

ALL THE VISUAL EFFECTS IN THE WORLD...

 It has become apparent that there is a trend in the industry to view visual effects work as a technical commodity in the creative industry, rather than as the artistic process it really is. This view --often perpetuated by media reports citing the "exorbitant" costs of and over-reliance on VFX-- has had a significant negative impact upon how visual effects artists and facilities are treated, both in respect and in value. Some have even suggested laying the slump in box office receipts at the feet of "lackluster effects that are not drawing the crowds", which can directly lead to the idea that if expensive visual effects are not worth the price, then the artists who create them are not worth the cost either. Statements such as these are erroneous and do a great disservice to all of the contributors to the creation of motion pictures. A number of us who are members of the Board in the Visual Effects Society feel it is important to counter this notion by pointing out the obvious: both filmmakers and filmgoers know that all the visual effects in the world can't cover up poor storytelling. Studios and filmmakers need to rethink how they're using visual effects; they can't count on big innovations in visual effects alone to carry films.

We are now capable of producing any image storytellers can imagine. The pure amount of visual effects consumed by audiences on a weekly basis is enormous. Commercials, television, and film as well as video games are full of both the spectacular and the subtle in terms of visual effects and image manipulation, all made possible by both advances in creative techniques and technological efficiencies. But audiences already assume that anything and everything are possible. Similar designs and techniques have been overused to the point of audience fatigue. Nothing is magical if every thing is magical.

But to say that visual effects are no longer wowing audiences like they used to and are thus undermining the business is to reduce the VFX art form to being just a novelty, just another transient trend in keeping viewers' attention. Such a viewpoint is erroneous and insulting to all parties: to visual effects practitioners who put their amazing creative talents into realizing a filmmaker's vision; to screenwriters, for whose work visual effects should be considered a creative tool and partner rather than a crutch; and to audiences who understand that compelling storytelling is a collaboration of sight, sound, character, and emotion. Visual effects are not just a novelty, where it's about pushing the envelope and upping the ante; it's about having worthwhile content in the envelope to begin with, and betting on the skills of talented filmmakers in all departments to realize that content. Used wisely, visual effects are a creative force-multiplier that allows the storyteller to help bring their vision to its full potential.

As VFX professionals and as proud members of the Visual Effects Society, we wish to challenge filmmakers to focus on creating compelling stories, but more importantly, we would like to encourage all of Hollywood --as well as all content creators who want to use the power of visual effects-- to let us help them make their projects better by using our creativity, and to see us as valuable collaborators instead of just technicians hired to push through the work. We wish to point out that visual effects have made tremendous strides both technically and creatively over the decades in service of their visions, and that while we're still innovating and improving, the biggest improvements will come from combining our imaginations and abilities with great narratives and engaging characters. A good story well told will inspire visual effects artists to not only meet a filmmaker's wildest expectations, but to exceed them.

Visual effects practitioners are among the most passionate and creative talents in the industry, because we often start from nothing more than a few words and an imagination, from which we create characters, worlds and images that have to perform in concert with the wonderful work of our peers in editing, production design, cinematography and other production arts. Visual effects artists and facilities have already been doing their part in bringing the magic to the business. We can now bring virtually anything to life that can be imagined, and the "pipeline innovations" that may seem pedestrian behind the scenes allow us to do it better, faster, and more cost-effectively... which in turn makes it possible for visual effects to be one of the most powerful tools in any filmmaker's palette, whether the project is a small indie or a studio blockbuster.

Visual effects are not a trend, a fad or just a necessary technical cost or process devoid of creative artists as its practitioners. We are made up of valuable, knowledgeable and professional artists, supervisors, producers, and technicians who work together with every department on a project from development through post, who only want filmmakers to bring us great stories, engaging characters, and strong visions, so that we, in collaboration with cinematographers, production designers, editors and all of our fellow members of the creative team, can help realize them.

To our fellow members: whether you agree or disagree with these sentiments, please let the VES know your thoughts. Together, we need to find ways to change perceptions and be seen as the experienced professionals we are and the valuable collaborators we can be.

To comment on this please click on 'Add New Comment' below
 

Comments

Wonderful essay on exactly

Anonymous's picture
Wonderful essay on exactly what is least appreciated these days. That digital artists are just that - artists!.The ones with lots of vision, drive, talent - they make good images. Commoditization of the process is often what causes bad effects. Inexperienced artists, the "just hit the button on the computer" attitude, etc., result in bad-looking films. Ironic that the very artists who battle against such trends are blamed for the falling quality.

Somewhat Inevitable

Causticks's picture
There's a certain amount of inevitability to the current situation, driven by the large number of VFX shots on a major film. I have a small VFX shop in Los Angeles (and have talked about this with both David and Van), which I've consciously kept mostly small, and kept away from larger shows precisely because there's very little in it creatively for us. All the creative work in bigger shows is done at the production level, and especially smaller shops are generally expected to simply produce the plan. Well, I got into VFX back when three guys with a downshooter, an optical printer, and a dusty stage in an industrial park was a viable VFX shop. And because it uses both sides of our brains, and certainly not for the money. Once upon a time we were given a problem to solve, and spent a lot of time solving it. But here's a fact: our clients make business using shows, not the other way around. We may THINK we're in a nice little cottage industry of creatives who everyone loves, but that VFX producer who keeps purring in your ear about how he or she's looking out for your interests will screw you in a heartbeat to make their performance bonus, and then dig your grave at the studio to make you shut up about it. Anyway, I would respectfully suggest that (A.) the drop in production over the last few years without a commensurate drop in available production capacity has turned VFX from a seller's to a buyer's market. I'd go further and say that the incentives rat race has ratcheted up the amount of available capacity in the face of falling demand - the rise of virtual facilities structured to chase incentive programs around the world is the latest rather sickening development, (B.) if you want pricing power, do great creative and sell it, and (C.) I have no problem with structural incentives; if you want to send a bunch of work to India, well, then you also have to be willing to deal personally with a crew of Indians, and all their eccentricities, if you want anything to get done. Which BTW can be an extraordinary experience. (D.) OTOH, direct production incentives are what DOES create the culture of dependency that Republicans rail on about, and are sometimes ethically very questionable. How long would production stay in Vancouver with dollar parity if you took away all government support tomorrow? Not very long, I'd guess. IMHO the way that incentives should be structured is as training and tax breaks for talent and companies wanting to enter the business, with NO money going directly to producers. But considering who supports who, I hold out NO hope for any reform or government support.

VES logo

Follow the VES on TwitterView the VES profile on LinkedIn© 2010 Visual Effects Society. All rights reserved.