Visual Effects in the Jungle Book

The new live action version of the jungle book has come out recently. While reviews are mixed and I am not sure if the film itself is worth seeing, but it is absolutely full of complicated visual effects. This video shows some of the work and compositing that went into this film. So much of this film from the characters to the backgrounds are computer generated. It looks pretty cool and is definitely something that I would like to be able to do in the future.

Opening Title of Deadpool

Through advanced CGI and visual effects, the opening title sequence of Deadpool was one that was extremely memorable. It was a jab at basically every superhero movie that gave an insight as to what the film's total atmosphere would be like. A great opening title sequence, like Deadpool's is key to making the film entertaining to its' viewers. There were a lot of logistics and intense thought put into this opening sequence that made the distinct 3-D visual effects and placed them into an atmosphere that was able to be manipulated into looking like a frozen fight scene for a lengthy amount of time. There were various levels of preproduction that went into making this opening title one to be competed with.

Check out the creation of it:

Deadpool Visual Effects

Deadpool is not only a box office success, that was thought to be an extremely risky movie from Fox,  smashing all records and having more domestic gross then other big box office films like Iron Man and Captain America: The Winter Soldier. I was lucky enough to have worked for Lauren Schuler Donner at The Donners' Company this past Fall and go to hear about a lot of the behind the scenes aspects of the film when it came to budget and story development. Lauren had discussed with me about how since the film had a much lower budget than bigger Fox/Marvel films she had produced ,like all the X-Men films, they had to use their resources. Visual Effects was one of those major aspects. In the industry it can be easier to say have a car chase all visually animated than get a stunt team to make it reality. The lead visual effects company that was responsible for Deadpool's effects released a breakdown video, and Lauren was not wrong Deadpool was animated quite a bit, even in places I thought for sure was real. Luckily Deadpool's costume/design can be more easily animated then say Wolverine or Magneto.

The Box Trolls

A movie that I believe has utilized a lot of interesting animation technology recently was "The Box Trolls." In 2015, I believe it paved a way for animators to be more creative and utilize different types of animation throughout movies. One thing that it used was CG- generated stop motion that combined visual effects with the originality of stop motion animation as well. This caused them to create more complex scenes that were more intriguing to watch. In addition, they also used 3D printing to create their models for characters. This was innovative and something that is sure to be seen in future animation movies to come. I certainly enjoyed the animation and thought it was different and something cool to watch, and I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a a new animation to watch.

Mockingjay part 1

Here's a cool video I found about the making of Mockingjay part 1.

Visual-effects supervisor Charles Gibson, whose previous work includes the Pirates of the Caribbean series, says the 950 effects shots in Mockingjay Part 1 required a different approach given the way director Francis Lawrence wanted to tell the story.
“The films are played through the point of view of our main character, Katniss, and Francis wants a very real, accessible, naturalistic approach to everything,” says Gibson. “So for us in visual effects, it was finding a way to introduce more of a science fiction element in a real context.”
Realism was important, with the action in Mockingjay Part 1 veering far from the futuristic facade of the Capitol and the Hunger Games in the previous films. “The world of the games was always sort of this thing off to the side, where the rules were not really that clearly known and you could do anything you wanted,” he says. “Here, it is the real world, so all the effects had to be extensions of our real world and played as naturalistically as everything else.”
Environment work formed the bulk of the effects work for Mockingjay Part 1.   “The first film is more of a science-fiction film and more of a political film, and the second film is more of a war film. It has more action in it and more scope and more that plays outside, above ground," says Gibson.

Oblivion: Sky Tower Practical Effects

Oblivion is one of those Love it/Hate it type of movies, meaning that there are things that you can really like/love about the movie, and then there are things that arent so great. To get it out of the way, the not so great thing was the story, as it came off as weak and confusing to me.

However the redeeming factor of this movie (in my opinion at least) is the visuals. Everything looked so practical and realistic, even the CG and visual effects were very photo real compared to other Hollywood movies out there.

When I watched this BTS featurette about how they accomplished the Sky Tower in the movie, I was amazed at how practical they made it. They really wanted the actors to feel like they were really in that moment, rather than trying to interact with it via Green Screen set. They accomplished this look by capturing footage of the sky and clouds that they filmed at the top of a really high volcano. And then they took that footage and front projected it onto High Res Screens on the set.

This truly was a cool and very practical thing to do. It looks more real, the light from the footage helps illuminate more light into the set, and best of all, it would save VFX artists the headache of having to deal with green screen spill in the set, because that green would bounce around everywhere I imagine, and would be a nightmare to have to key out and make as real and clean as possible.

To see the Oblivion Sky Tower Featurette, check the video out here:

  

Animating Pirates of the Caribbean

This weekend I decided to watch Pirates of the Caribbean in honour of Pirates Week back home. I was very interested in the visual effects and how they created everything. I have always wondered how they animated Davey Jones and his crew. 

The movements of a computer-generated character such as Davy would traditionally be recorded by an actor in a motion capture suit as he darts around a meticulously controlled studio environment. The filmmakers would shoot plates without the actor in the frame, and then the CGI beastie would be inserted into that blank space in post-production. 

These videos were very informative and interesting to watch. Enjoy!

Gravity BTS

Gravity is definitely one of the most Visually stunning films ever made. It's one of those movies where you feel like you are actually there in the moment and it just seems so real.

And yet 95% of the movie was CG. Almost everything you see was generated in post production using advance 3D software. The only things that were practically shot in production were the actors. But everything else from Space suits to ships to satellites and more were CG elements.

This behind the scenes look at Gravity explains the process of what it was like to make this movie, knowing that majority of it was going to be CG.

Lightsabers: The First Effect I Learned in AE

I've used After Effects since 2009, right before I started high school. I got into After Effects because I wanted to learn how to make my own Star Wars fan films, particularly involving the infamous lightsabers. I was inspired by a fellow VFX artist that I found through YouTube named Ryan Wieber. I first saw his famous youtube lightsaber fights titled: Ryan vs. Dorkman. Then I watched his tutorial from WAY back in the day (like early 2000s) on how to make lightsaber glows in Photoshop and After Effects. It inspired me to want to get after effects and start making my own effects for my movies. 

So I got an EDU discounted copy of AE CS4, and started making effects for my own videos. It did take some time for me to get use to the technique (let alone the program). I think I watched the saber tutorial at least a dozen times before I was able to memorize it by heart. And then I think it took about a year for me to understand the program in its most basic format. 

Here are some samples of my earliest saber effects in AE:

And then as the years went by I kept practicing with AE, and slowly but surely, I got the hang of making a good lightsaber. 

Here are some more samples from a few years after the previous ones:

But obviously, I couldnt just limit myself to lightsabers. I had to expand my skills to other effects. So then I started to watch tutorials from Andrew Kramer and Ryan Connolly of VideoCopilot and Film Riot. And I learned how to make all kinds of different effects.

Such as:

This particular post is not meant in anyway to show off anything or be a portfolio. I just wanted to share what my journey to learning After Effects was like, and what I did to learn the program. It took me a very long time to understand the program the way I know it now, and I'm still always learning new things about After Effects that I never really thought about in my earlier days. I'm in no ways a true master like Andrew Kramer is. I also really want to practice making effects and graphics in other advanced programs beyond just After Effects, like Maya (which we are learning in class currently), 3DS Max, Fusion, Nuke, and more.

I hope this post was inspiring in some way to those who might still be a little bit intimidated by AE. But dont worry, if you take some time and practice enough with it, make stuff that you think is cool (like I did with lightsabers), you'll get the hang of it in no time!

CG is (Not) Ruining Movies

I recently saw this video by the fine folks at RocketJump Film School (or Freddie Wong as some YouTubers might know him by) about using CG elements in films. A lot of people have said (and still do) that CG in live action movies just looks bad, and how it is better to shoot things practically (as in for real, captured in camera). But is this true?

In some aspects, yes CG doesn't always look great; it may look too animated or glossy and doesn't blend well. But that doesn't mean it's bad altogether. As Freddie points out in this video, the main reason we probably see bad CG and VFX is because the movies themselves are just bad altogether. But there are several movies that use VFX very effectively and people dont even realize it being CG elements. Things like adding cars to streets in a chase scene for example, majority of the cars in the scene are not real cars. They are CG cars that were rendered and utilized correctly in order to add to the story.

I think that the main point that Freddie is trying to make is that CG is simply a tool, a tool that is used to help enhance the story that a filmmaker is trying to tell. If that story is not good, then many other elements will start to look bad as well. The effects will call attention to themselves because the audience is not engaged enough in the story.

So in the end, what matters the most is having a wonderful story to tell to an audience, once you know you have a great story, use the tools you have at your disposal effectively; use the right mix of practical and visual effects in order to help tell your story and make it more engaging and more believable for your audience.

Matte Paintings, Photo-Realistic FX

We talked about how we are soon going to start to learn about using photos of birds, and animate and composite them in our scene to make them look life its actual video of birds actually moving rather than still images. And also add smoke or any kind of atmosphere to the composition to help blend all of the layers together so that it adds a little extra something to sell the effect.

This made me think of this particular tutorial about Matte paintings. Matte paintings are images that are used to add an element to a scene that otherwise doesn't exist. These are commonly used to extend a set or add things into the background of a scene to help make the world of the story more dynamic.

In this tutorial from Corridor Digital, Niko shows us how to make a mountain appear that doesnt actually exist, using simple photos, some 3D tracking, and adding some atmosphere to help make the mountain look like it actually was there in real life.

This also basically explains how compositing is very important in the animation/visual effects/CG process, as it uses multiple elements/layers and blends them together to make one impressive final result.

Cinderella

Over this weekend, I went and saw Disney's new live adaption of the classic tale of Cinderella. I wasn't expecting a lot going in, and I ended up leaving the theatre extremely surprised and very pleased. The story was adapted fairly well, but the thing that struck me most was the production design and the visual effects. The attention to detail was remarkable, and managed to make the film pop more than practically any film I've seen before. I was so impressed, in fact, that after I left the theatre I looked up the previous work of the production designer, Dante Ferretti. Here's a great article about his attention to detail in the film from Hollywood Reporter.

Hollywood Reporter Article

Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

I recently noticed on Netflix that the ABC show Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was available on Instant Watch so I figured I'd give it a go and jumped in. Aside from some funny Joss Whedon dialogue and cool comic book story lines, what really impressed me with this show were the visual effects. Having been a lover of Science Fiction movies and TV shows my whole life, I've gotten used to campy special effects and have learned to ignore how low-budget it looks (here's looking at you every movie SyFy channel has ever produced). In the case of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. the visual aesthetics really do justice to the super-powers and weird alien technologies they are demonstrating. After looking more in depth about the show when I decided to write this blog post about it, I was pleased to learn that the show was nominated for an Oustanding Visual Effects Emmy. Similarly, I was pretty pumped to find a Youtube show that dedicates an episodes focus to different behind the scenes aspects of the show and luckily they rightfully reserved an episode for the Visual Effects department and here that video is.

PEACE OUT
           &
HAVE A HAPPY
THANKSGIVING

Game of Thrones Green Screen

One of the shows that has won a bunch of recent Emmys for Visual Effects is of course Game Of Thrones. With such a vast, virtual, and magical world it's very important to have believable graphics.

Most of the structures in the show are computer generated, even though they shoot in exotic locations like New Zealand. The video below is a highlight real of some before & after effects consistently found in the show.

One of the things that amazed me was their ability to duplicate extras in the show. Many times they took a small platoon of soldiers and turned them into an army of thousands. It is so amazing how they can do this and create such a realistic army. I also loved the use of green screen curtains to eliminate certain pieces of unwanted terrain that were in the way of the shot. I had never thought about using green screen to get rid of things before.

Rodeo, the company in charge of the visual effects does a fantastic job of creating fantastical and amazing skylines, with crazy mountains, lights, and castles. It truly is a visually stunning show.

Did Michael Bay actually do something right?

The Transformers trilogy is absolutely awful. Like most of Michael Bay's 'films' they are one-dimensional action flicks trying to disguise themselves as something more meaningful. Sorry Bay, but you're not fooling anyone. There's not a single Bay film that I have found cinematically pleasing, nor have I ever found a reason to commend the director, except for one exception.

While I do not necessarily agree with Bay's style of filming or directing, there is at least one thing he's done right all these years (besides managing to perfectly resemble Michael Bolton): hiring an excellent team of visual effects specialists. More specifically, I'm talking about the Transformers movies. While I find them to be terribly painful to watch, there is certainly something to admire about the films. The visual effects behind the absurdly complicated alien robots is simply breathtaking.

To start off, Destroyer, an enormously impressive creation found in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, took 72 hours to render...per frame! Pretty crazy, huh? Let's be honest, though. Anyone can make something that takes weeks to render. That's not the impressive part. The impressive part is that the single Transformer was put together by 6-8 individually created, incredibly detailed vehicles. Imagine how long that would take you to create. Now, imagine how long that would take you to create a second time once your director told you it wasn't good enough. I can only assume you'd be pretty upset with that news. Essentially, the animators were instructed to go back and make the machines twice as detailed as it already was, and THEN to reconstruct the final robot with all 6-8 individual pieces.

Another kudos for Bay goes to his ability to bring in practical visual effects. On the set of Transformers 2, Bay was able to bring in a sizable number of military vehicles (tanks, bombers, F16s, you name it) to fly over set, drop flares, and just add some level of believability to his otherwise ludicrous film. Bay is also a fan of on-set explosions. They're dangerous, yes, but they make for one hell of an effect. It also saves quite a bit of postproduction time and effort. Speaking for anyone who's ever worked postproduction on a film, we all greatly appreciate it.

Bringing it back to postproduction visual effects, the aircraft carrier scene of Transformers 2 is also quite an impressive feat. I never really gave it much thought, but much more than most people would ever expect went into this scene. The team shot actual burning miniatures and debris with blue screens that were later composited into the completed animations. The people on the carriers were a mix of animations and people who were shot tumbling and falling. The aircraft were created by the animators as well. Basically, thousands of pieces were created for this scene simply to be destroyed over the course of a minute. It's like being a kid again after taking hours to build a LEGO model just to have your younger brother completely and utterly demolish it.

Animation is a crazy field to go into. It's often the defining point between a film's success and it's downfall. In Michael Bay's case, it's really the only thing he was able to do correctly.

Are heroes born or created?

After seeing Captain America: The Winter Soldier this past weekend, I remembered a question that I had about the first Capt. America movie that I never got answered. If you've seen the film, you've seen the amazing transformation Chris Evans' character, Steve Rogers, goes through in order to become the patriotic hero we all know and love.

It's pretty absurd to even think about, let alone to try to figure out how they did it. They must have used two different actors. That's what I originally thought, at least. I figured there weren't any visual effects at all. It made perfect sense to me for them to use two actors with very different physical builds and similar faces and then to have Chris Evans ADR (automated dialogue replacement) the scenes with his own voice.

Well, it turns out that I was partially correct in the two actors assumption. Partially. There were two main techniques the crew used to shrink Cap. down to his original, scrawny size. The first one of the two (the one I was closest to guessing) indeed required the use of a double. Leander Deeny played Evans' double before Steve Rogers goes through the physical transformation that allows him to become the super soldier that stands for all that is American. What they did to cover for the fact that the two actors clearly don't have identical faces, was to place green dots all over Deeny's face to use as motion trackers. Using these motion trackers, animators were able to take Evans' face and place it on Deeny's body. This was achieved by having Deeny act out each and every shot pretty much exactly the same as Evans. Then came the hard part.

That was the easier of the two techniques. The other one (and certainly the more time consuming one) required an entire physical makeover. Basically, the visual effects specialists would take the shots with Evans and literally reshape the majority of his body, making him smaller and thinner. This includes everything from thinning out his neck to completely reshaping his jaw line. The reason for sometimes using this technique over the other one is...well, I'm not quite sure. Apparently the motion tracking was simply less effective in certain circumstances. I don't know what those circumstances must have been, but I'll leave that up to the professionals. For a more detailed explanation of the entire process, take a look at this behind-the-scenes video:



Glad that another mystery in my life has been solved. Onto the next one!

Ahoy there, matey!

Sick of posts regarding VFX breakdowns from MPC? Well, too bad. Get over yourself. You have no say in this matter. I'll write about these breakdowns until the day I die (or at least until the end of the semester). These videos are simply so fascinating. They show simple folk like you and I just how much work goes into the films we know and love.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides VFX Breakdown from MPC on Vimeo.

This week's breakdown comes to you from MPC (Moving Picture Company)--the same as usual--highlighting some of the greatest visual effects accomplishments found in Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. I can confidently say the fourth Pirates installment is by far the worst film of the series, but it's impossible to overlook the spectacular visual effects.

Before

After

What's so fascinating about this particular breakdown is just how much of the highlights was news to me. I know that's not much of a surprise, but isn't that the true indicator of a job well-done? Not knowing something was actually added in postproduction means it was truly done with skill and precision. I was confident the majority of the effects displayed in the video were shot on-scene. Sure, I know Johnny Depp couldn't have possibly jumped from a couple hundred-foot high cliff into a rock-infested river and survived (probably), but the plants he walks past are fake?! You've got to be joking.

Apparently Barbossa's peg leg is fake, too. I guess everything I've ever known to be true is just a lie. It's an unfortunate discovery, but I'll just have to learn to live with the sad, sad truth. It's strange, really. One of Barbossa's biggest defining traits is his wooden leg, and it turns out it's been animated the entire time. It just goes to show how much of an impact animation has on individual characters as well as the entire layout of a film.

Gary Brozenich led the MPC team on Pirates of the Caribbean VFX supervisor. Having spearheaded other projects such as The Lone Ranger and Wrath of the Titans, he certainly was a good pick for the job. I'm sure he'll have other great work for us all very soon.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it: MPC is doing some amazing work and they need to be recognized as a leading visual effects company. Now, I shall leave you all with this compilation of unbelievably cute puppies.

Winter is Coming

Following in my friend Sam's footsteps, I too shall be writing about one of my favorite shows and how exactly visual effects have made the show possible. Game of Thrones, a particularly violent show with enormous sets and countless extras, it has always seemed to baffle me how exactly a show of this style would possibly be shot. Well, it turns out that quite a bit of this medieval drama isn't actually shot on camera, but is added in postproduction.

Game of Thrones - SSVFX Breakdowns from Ed Bruce on Vimeo.

Tez (Terance) Palmer, the senior special effects technician on the show, is one of the driving forces behind the show having become the great success it is. Having been a special effects technician on X-Men: First Class (it wasn't the greatest film, but the VFX were pretty dope), I have a high level of respect for this man. This is most definitely a larger project for him to take on, but he has done a spectacular job with it so far.

What fascinates me is just how much of this wonderful show is done using animation. From making a couple dozen soldiers into an army to turning a boy climbing a few feet off the ground into a 100-foot drop, the animation in the show is endless. In order to make it appear as a man is getting beheaded, the actor wore a chroma green mask to blend his actual head in with the background. It's so simple and yet I would never think to do it.

As far as I know, every time a spear, arrow, or sword impales an actor, animation is what makes the death come to life. Clearly, you can't kill an actor for a television show (as far as I know). Maybe there's a loophole in their contracts or something. Assuming there isn't, however, every weapon causing every death is not actually shot on camera. It's all added in postproduction. I was honestly never quite sure how something like that would be shot. The reason for that is, it probably can't be. I just never thought that so much time would be spent on something like that (there are quite a few deaths in Game of Thrones for those of you who have never watched).

There are so many reasons to watch Game of Thrones. Swords. Spears. Blood. Death. Animation.

How much of what we watch is real?

Through many hours of YouTube scouring and fact searching, I can confidently state one thing: so much less of what we think is real in movies actually is. My mind has been sufficiently blown by the countless examples of where visual effects have replaced what I truly though had been shot on-set. Usually, one can tell what can be realistically recorded on a camera and what is produced by a computer. Well, as it turns out, that's not entirely true.

Take The Avengers for example. Now, clearly very much of the film is computer-generated. It's obvious. Unless there was actually an alien invasion that recently happened in New York City that I wasn't aware of, I think it's safe to say that the large majority of this invasion was created through the use of visual effects. What I had no idea, though, was the fact that pretty much the entire city itself was also created after the original shooting of the film. Seriously, take a look:

It's unbelievable to think that some of the only real-life things in that entire video are a couple actors in front of tiny green screens. You'd think at least some of the city landscapes would be shot on-scene, but nope! Not at all!

The Lone Ranger is another prime example of this sort of visual effects use. Now, personally speaking, I feel like the large-scale use of effects is much more noticeable in this film, even though the animators did an excellent job with it. I'm really not quite sure how to explain why I feel this way, but there's just a feeling you get when you watch the film. Here's a highlight reel of The Lone Ranger:

I had another video that was a much better example, but it decided that it didn't want to be posted. Anyway, you can see in this video that, in many scenes, the only real things are the actors themselves. Sets seem to be becoming obsolete when they can be replaced by green screens and special effects.

Here's the link to the actual video I want you to watch.

NOW you can see how ridiculous The Lone Ranger is when it comes to special effects. While the effects aren't necessarily the most realistic-looking you've ever seen, you've gotta hand it to the animators. Led by VFX Supervisor, Gary Brozenich, the visual effects company MPC created over 550 individual shots for the film. These include anything from CGI canyons and forests to horses and scorpions.

It's crazy just how much of a film can be attributed to the countless animators who you've never heard of and exactly how much of what you're seeing on screen was actually shot on-set.

Safety Not Guarenteed

Over the past few days I watched a film called "Safety Not Guarenteed." If you haven't seen this film and are planning to do so, I suggest you STOP READING NOW. Only because I am about to ruin the ending for you.

The film is about grocery store clerk Kenneth Calloway (Mark Duplass) who posts a mysterious article in a Washington based newspaper that states he is looking for a partner to travel back in time with him. The post, which was based off a real-life article, can be seen at the bottom of my post. After the article is posted, Darius Britt, played by Aubrey Plaza, decides to investigate the man and his article with her team of journalists. She becomes infatuated with him, (something her journalist friends convince her not to do) and teaters on the idea that he may actually be able to travel back in time. As a viewer, we are almost convinced that their will be no point in the film where we actually see any time traveling. We think that Kenneth is actually crazy, and his previous claims about wanting to go back to prevent the death of his girlfriend are all some reflection on his apparent mental instability.

The film is so realistic, and such a dramedy, that the chances of any spectacular special effects and animations being used seem little to none. It comes off as a slight more quirky "Funny People," type of film, until the end. I will post the last scene, so you can take a look at just how well these animated special effects of the time traveling machine are. I'll also post a link below to the team who did most of the special effects, called "DIVE."

http://www.divevisual.com/