Disney's Frogumentary

[Elodie]

Hehehe

[slowtiger]

Paul: that's the most detailed description I ever found of that machine!

It should be noted that Disney's Xerox-to-Cel was the very first of its kind, adapted for animation around 1960 by the legendary Ub Iwerks. So it's no wonder the machine was big and clumsy - it must have been a prototype. It's just amazing that it still was used and in working condition a decade later - but that also shows that at Disney's human labour was cheaper than investing into a new machine.

Out of curiousity: does anybody know of any screenshots from the GUI of Disney's CAPS system? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_A ... ion_System claims (at the end) that Princess and Frog was done using ToonBoom Harmony ...) I never saw any picture of that system, it would be so interesting to see and compare it to recent software.

[Elodie]

Paul: that's the most detailed description I ever found of that machine!

Yes, that's true. I thought it was like the current xerox / photocopier we use in offices... I didn't know it was such a monster !

[D.T. Nethery]

A very interesting video. Thanks for sharing it

Does someone know this guy, in order to send him a Demo version of TVP ?

I know Marshall Toomey from way back to 1986 .

Here's the thing about Disney : Over the past 4 years I have sent multiple emails, links , articles about TVP to many of my friends/former co-workers at Disney , extolling the advantages of TVP , but the company has heavily invested in ToonBoom Harmony for their production pipeline. I doubt that will change , even if most of the artists could be convinced to use TVP (my experience is that once a traditional animation artist tries TVP they are sold on it ! They love it. The problem is compared to ToonBoom or Flash most animation people in North America do not know about TVP).

The intention at Disney was for The Princess & the Frog to be drawn all paperless , using Cintiqs, but many of the artists rebelled against that idea because they found the ToonBoom Harmony software awkward to draw with. (but to be fair , some liked it. For example, veteran animator Dale Baer , who started at Disney in 1973 on Robin Hood and trained directly under legendary Disney animators like John Lounsbery, Frank Thomas, Ollie Johnston , and Eric Larson, was very enthusiastic about switching to a paperless system) But in the end it was decided that the animation and clean-up would be done traditionally on paper , then scanned into ToonBoom for coloring , much as the traditional animation at Disney from the late 80's to the early 2000's had been drawn on paper, but then scanned and digitally colored in CAPS. However, I believe there is still the goal of getting to a completely paperless production system at Disney.
Interestingly, all the Effects Animation in The Princess & the Frog was animated paperlessly using Cintiq tablets, drawn directly into ToonBoom.

When I first heard that Disney was reconstructing their traditional animation pipeline (to replace the out-dated CAPS system) for a test run with a paperless system on the Goofy short "How to Hook Up Your Home Theater" I mentioned TVP to several of the people involved with building this new paperless pipeline. Unfortunately this was during the time period when the "Bauhaus situation" was still ongoing , so the legal status of TVP was still in doubt . I think they had already set their mind to use ToonBoom Harmony, but the "Bauhaus situation" closed off any discussion of them using TVP. No one told me that directly, but that is what I surmised from some off-hand comments . Ultimately "How to Hook Up Your Home Theater" was about 50% paperless (using Toonboom Harmony) and 50% traditional pencil on paper (scanned into Toonboom for coloring) . On screen there is no difference. It is impossible to spot which scenes were done with traditional pencil on paper and which were done on a Cintiq in Toonboom. The feedback I heard was that the artists found that the clean-up process was MUCH slower using ToonBoom . Clean-up drawings which would take half-an-hour on paper were taking an hour to do using the Cintiq because the line quality and control in ToonBoom was not as sensitive as drawing on paper. So in this case the paperless system actually slowed down the process. Not good. And some of the artists just hated using it (not to blame them: they have spent 20 , 25, sometimes 30 years refining their traditional animation skills with pencil and paper , why should they change now ? ) .

However, I think if we could get Disney artists enthused about TVP it could still make inroads . By all means if it is possible send Marshall a copy of TVP .
(I could supply you with a list of names of other people to target .) I am still doubtful if at this point the Disney Studio as a whole would switch over from ToonBoom since they are heavily invested in Toonboom , but it couldn't hurt to get more people at Disney exposed to TVP.

[Paul Fierlinger]

Paul: that's the most detailed description I ever found of that machine!

.

Well, I was inside it. In the dark room there was a big hole in the carpet from one of the people having to stand in that spot and keep turning around and around to go through all the cycles of processing the cassette (which I believe they called trays.) In the last room, the cleaning one, there were three middle aged ladies. They asked each other, with a naughty smile, if they should show the visitors THEIR art and after they all agreed they pulled it out. It was a little stack of cels with an ECU of a hand from the Hound and the Fox, and apparently these were rejects, because the ladies had drawn into the palm of each hand an ECU of a penis. As you can see, I was all the way in the belly of the beast.

[D.T. Nethery]

I think he complains about the hardware, the tablet and stylus, not about the software they use.

And I'm right with him, the pencil line on paper is still unsurpassed in delicacy and exactness.

And I agree with that too. Pencil on paper is much more precise for drawing.

But of the available paperless systems I think TVP most closely simulates working on paper.

[D.T. Nethery]

Paul: that's the most detailed description I ever found of that machine!

It should be noted that Disney's Xerox-to-Cel was the very first of its kind, adapted for animation around 1960 by the legendary Ub Iwerks. So it's no wonder the machine was big and clumsy - it must have been a prototype. It's just amazing that it still was used and in working condition a decade later - but that also shows that at Disney's human labour was cheaper than investing into a new machine.

Out of curiousity: does anybody know of any screenshots from the GUI of Disney's CAPS system? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_A ... ion_System claims (at the end) that Princess and Frog was done using ToonBoom Harmony ...) I never saw any picture of that system, it would be so interesting to see and compare it to recent software.

I will look around to see if I have any photos of the CAPS workstations (the old blue Silicon Graphics workstations) and screen shot of the GUI.

There may be some shots of CAPS in these movies:

The Magic of Disney Animation - Florida Studio Backstage Tour


This is from the orientation tape that was made in the summer of 1990 to give the Animation Tour hosts and hostess an overview of the animation process and background information about the Disney Florida studio. 1990 was right at the transition point when traditional cel painting was being phased-out and the CAPS system was being installed , so you may see mostly traditional ink and paint, with one or two quick shots of the (then) new CAPS system. (I haven't watched these in a while, so I don't remember everything that is shown) .

Actually I did just fast forward through this part : Part 6 - Ink & Paint and I see that it does show a demonstration of the Disney Xerox system , starting around the 1:20 mark and continuing to around 2:59 . If you want to see the Xerox system that Paul was describing from his 1979 visit to Disney you can see it in that clip from 1:20 - 2:59 . The one we had at the Florida studio was somewhat newer and streamlined than the old Xerox machines at Disney Burbank in the 70's (which were probably the same machines in operation since 1960 on "101 Dalmatians") , but as you can see in the clip the thing still took up two whole rooms and was quite an involved process.

[Paul Fierlinger]

But why do you think pencil on paper is more precise than stylus on tablet (or even directly on top of the drawing, when using with the Cintique? I don't understand the reasoning for your claim and presume that you have each worked both ways at length.

My experience with the Wacom stylus is that it is, if anything, more precise than pencil on paper because I don't have the bulk of my hand obstructing the view of my entire drawing. I can enlarge the project window's view if I want to really squeeze yet another in-between between two very tight lines, it is easier to erase a slight mistake and redraw a more precise fit, I can tilt the project window with the tip of a finger with the ease of flicking off a spec of dirt, compared to breaking my finger when sticking it into that hole in the heavy animator's disk, I can flip with the ease of a scrub through many frames at a time or even just by touching a button ... surely you get the point.

Now you explain to me how a pencil on paper is more precise and easier. Just listening to the crackle of those metallic paper sheets gives me the willies and on top of that you can't flip more than three at a time and you wouldn't even want to because you can't see through more than three without going blurry eyed.

[D.T. Nethery]

This other part of the "Frog-umentary" features animator Eric Goldberg .

Interestingly , here is what Eric said about paperless animation in an interview a couple of years ago:

Q: How do you feel about the future of hand-drawn techniques as animation shifts to paperless production using Cintiq tablets in place of traditional animation discs and drawing in programs like TVP Animation, which has the ability to simulate the texture of pencil and watercolors, or ToonBoom Harmony? Are these types of software getting close enough to the look and feel of traditional techniques or do you think pencil on paper still has the advantage for full, classical character animation?


Eric Goldberg: I actually don’t have a problem with the notion of paperless animation, and I’ve been comfortable on a Wacom Cintiq since 2002 on Looney Tunes: Back in Action, where I used it for pose drawings, and subsequently comping them over the live-action takes for creative approvals. I use it a lot in storyboarding and design work, and almost all of the animation tests on the CD, as well as the book’s many illustrations, were drawn that way, even if their origin was as a paper sketch in the original notes. If the program is sophisticated enough to accommodate the subtleties of good classical animation drawing, then I can make use of it.

However – nothing replicates the one-on-one, tactile physicality of rolling, flipping, and drawing on paper, and I’ll always consider it the premiere way.

I'm not sure if Eric has ever played around with TVP. I know he tried out Mirage at one point , but obviously there have been a lot of improvements to the software since that time .

[Paul Fierlinger]

However – nothing replicates the one-on-one, tactile physicality of rolling, flipping, and drawing on paper, and I’ll always consider it the premiere way.

A slave of habit.

[Sewie]

...
Clean-up drawings which would take half-an-hour on paper were taking an hour to do using the Cintiq because the line quality and control in ToonBoom was not as sensitive as drawing on paper....

I think ToonBoom uses a drawing engine that is a lot like the one in Flash. I've drawn a lot in Flash and can see why it would be very hard to do tight cleanups with it; Flash slightly changes the line after you've placed it. And it can drive you crazy if you really need to control those lines!

TVP doesn't have that issue at all in my experience.

[D.T. Nethery]

However – nothing replicates the one-on-one, tactile physicality of rolling, flipping, and drawing on paper, and I’ll always consider it the premiere way.

A slave of habit.

I would say rather a Master of his craft (and his tools) . No slave .

Eric is one of the guys who has done both , easily moving back and forth between a Cintiq tablet and the traditional animation disc.
That he prefers one set of tools over the set of tools you prefer doesn't mean he's a "slave". I have friends who are full time Background painters for animation studios
as their day job , using Photoshop or Corel Painter , but they still prefer to haul out their trusty brushes, oil paints, and canvas when they paint their own artwork for pleasure.

You've gone paperless and never looked back. It's been great for you. Some people don't feel the same. So what ?


Honestly, Paul, you're preaching to the converted in my case. You don't have to sell me on the advantages of paperless and specifically on using TVP. I've been as much of an "evangelist" for TVP as anyone here. I love drawing with TVP. But do I think it has the exact same sensitivity as a pencil on a good piece of animation bond paper ? No. Especially not for doing the type of precise clean-up work needed for the Disney style. Your style permits a much looser line .

The resistance to paperless isn't coming from guys like Eric Goldberg who said: "I actually don’t have a problem with the notion of paperless animation... If the program is sophisticated enough to accommodate the subtleties of good classical animation drawing, then I can make use of it. ".

As I said before, I think some of the resistance to going paperless at Disney is from artists who have been stuck trying to utilize the less sensitive drawing tools in ToonBoom . I think if they tried TVP they might change their mind about going paperless. TVP is the closest thing to traditional pencil on paper animation in my experience. There are other advantages to going paperless , beyond the actual drawing process, and to me those other advantages make up the difference. I like being able to easily resize or transform my work. I like not having eraser crumbs all over my desk and clothing or graphite smears on my hand . I like that I can erase a line several times on a clean-up drawing and doing so does not chew up the surface of the paper, etc. But I'm not going to pretend that I think the Wacom stylus is as sensitive as a good pencil on good quality paper. It doesn't feel the same to me. That's not good or bad, just a fact. I can live with it. I expect the next generation of Cintiqs to get better. I can wait.

[Paul Fierlinger]

Eric is one of the guys who has done both , easily moving back and forth between a Cintiq tablet and the traditional animation disc.
That he prefers one set of tools over the set of tools you prefer doesn't mean he's a "slave".

Sure it does. He prefers the old way because he's already used to it and feels more comfortable working that way. In my view it is hard to deny that working paperlessly has many advantages over the old ways but it takes getting used to. The old way is a slower, less efficient way, but he still prefers it to the new. This has nothing to do with my preferences since I am not making comparisons between him and myself, just between two techniques.
EDIT: and now that you have expanded on your argument while I was answering, I must add that you are the one comparing me to Eric. Honestly, I don't care how he works.

[D.T. Nethery]

The old way is a slower, less efficient way

Not always. Believe me the production management at Disney really wanted "The Princess & the Frog" to go paperless . They were pushing hard for it . If it were only for the artists whining about learning a new skill set they would have pushed it anyway , artists be damned. The reason they did not do it paperless is because the nearly year-long period of testing gave empirical , closely-tracked production data that showed the scenes which were done paperless moved through the pipeline slower. If they could have made their movie cheaper using paperless production they would have done it. Those who couldn't or wouldn't adapt would have been shoved out of the way. But it was not faster or more efficient. The line control for the type of precise drawing needed for the Disney style of character animation wasn't easy enough to replicate with the Cintiq tablets drawing in Toonboom. Too many wobbly lines that needed to be adjusted vector point by vector point. Very time consuming and not at all intuitive for people who are used to drawing freehand.

That doesn't meant it won't change in the future as both the hardware and the software is tweaked to be more artist friendly. (and again, if they had tried the paperless tests using TVP things may have turned out differently, but for a variety of reasons they went with ToonBoom , and the drawing tools in Toonboom are not as good as the drawing tools in TVP)

[Paul Fierlinger]

I've never tried ToonBoom but can see from your description how it wouldn't fit the Disney style needs. I also agree with you that there will come a day when this too will change. But what must change along the way is the company's own pipeline. I have to wonder if the old pipe line of one artist starting with the roughs, passing his drawings to the next one who improves them (or not) and on to the next one who improves (or ruins) the second one's drawings, is the best way to go anymore.

It's pretty sad to hear the guy who has the last touch extol upon his position of having the last word; 'It's my lines that are up there for everyone to see!' Especially in the light of what TVP can do for animators to help them quickly advance from rough to finished line with far less effort than goes into the old traditional pipeline.