It seems like being transparent from the beginning rewards itself towards the end. In VFX, at least in the digital age, versions and increments just comes naturally. I'd love to be in a SCRUM team at least once to try it out.
Cheers, Elias 21 mar 2014 kl. 16:44 skrev Howard Jones <mrhowardjo...@yahoo.com>: > I like this SCRUMming idea. Something I've always insisted on (though not > always had my way). > Nice to know there's a name for it and doesn't involve shoving your head > between other people's arses (google 'arse' if you're american ;) > > What a lot of this seems to come down to is good communication (As well as > decent leads/supevisors that aren't taking shots the wrong way). > Open not closed doors. > > That's overly simple but ... > > On 21 Mar 2014, at 13:19, Fredrik Pihl <fre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Ouch! ;) >> Steve... and artists of course.. But what I think the kids are getting at, >> is the barrier between physical and virtual. They live a large part of their >> sparetime in front of their screens being windows into virtual worlds with >> which they feel no connection. So when they are told that "Ey boy.. this is >> all props, sets, stunts, rubber, opticals etc.. " they get emotionally >> connected - Oh..its real stuff... Weird isn't it? >> >> >>> One of the biggest time and money wasters, in my opinion, is the fact that >>> directors aren't accessible to the people whos work needs to be directed >> Yes indeed Frank! And: >> >>> don't bother putting a competent (!) post production manager in place. If >>> post production was managed like a shoot (where everything costs money >>> every minute you are on set), things would be radically different; director >>> feedback would be weighted against the financial repercussions, and >>> concessions would be made to achieve "good enough" every single day >> >> These are some of the heavy points that were addressed in our setup making a >> HUGE impact on throughput. >> - Demanding the directors presence on a daily basis.. sometimes even sitting >> beside the leads setting looks. Things got approved and ticked off in SG by >> the VFXproduction coordinator. >> - The VFXproducer (me) answered directly to the production company and by >> that could say no to the director -"no.. we cannot do it like that, it's too >> demanding on our resources.. but we can do this...and keep the storyvalue of >> the gag". The director also had an very experienced "VFXcreative_director" >> helping him with arriving at the right decisions. >> >> Two other tricks to make things more manageable were; >> >> - Approval of shots was always done in context of the edit, and in blocks - >> -no looping shots. The smallest approvable unit were "slates" ie, a >> conversation scene could be 35 cuts/shots but they were edited from perhaps >> 4-5 slates. That made it psychologically easier for the director to review 5 >> slates instead of 35 shots. Even the compers worked in "slates" as the >> smallest unit (we wrote some software to handle this). >> This might sound like a foolish numbers-game, but it made huge difference.. >> a lot of it was psychological .. like: -"shit.. today I have to complete 35 >> shots" vs "oh.. today I have to complete 5 slates"... BUT the whole pipeline >> was designed to lessen the sheer number of "decision points" .. I believe I >> calculated somewhere around 12000 instances of approval counting all assets, >> shots, moods, etc - that we got down to a couple of thousand decisions >> instead. >> >> - Compositing was done in SCRUMS (google it) to get rid of the >> shot-tracking-problem and artists "shot-angst", so the first version of a >> film was comped in 10 days.. all 1100 shots. >> It looked like crap but all the artists were familiar with their shots now. >> After SCRUM no 2 still no slates were approved (of course - still looked >> crap hehe) but now the director was getting e very good feeling on were he >> wanted to concentrate on moods and story elements. After SCRUM 3 a large >> number of shots, mainly CU and mid shots were tech-approved for mattes and >> roto.. and we have just used 30 work days so far..........etc etc.... >> This way of working was first regarded as utter nonsens at first.. but when >> the dirctor and producer could sit down and watch a film in its entirety and >> in a somewhat ok viewable state, after only a little more than a month.... >> they got the idea of it. >> Also the artist felt very awkward about ScRuMming in the beginning, but >> quickly adjusted to it and began to enjoy it. :) >> >> >> //fredd >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Frank Rueter|OHUfx <fr...@ohufx.com> wrote: >>> Totally agree. Just because we are more flexible in post has created a >>> culture of creative micro management that is equivalent to man handling >>> actors on set rather than letting them act >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/21/14, 12:25 PM, matt estela wrote: >>>> >>>> On 21 March 2014 10:09, Elias Ericsson Rydberg >>>> <elias.ericsson.rydb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> In all kinds of productions there seems to be a heavy reliance on the >>>>> director. That's the standard I guess. Should not we, the vfx-artists, be >>>>> the authority of our own domain? >>>> >>>> I do wonder if non cg fx heavy films of the past were as reliant on >>>> director approval as they are today. Using raiders as the example again, >>>> was Spielberg really approving every rock, every mine cart that was >>>> created for the mine chase sequence, sending shots back 10, 50, 100 times >>>> for revisions? Or as I suspect, was there the simple reality of 'we need >>>> to make these things, that takes time, you really can't change much once >>>> we start shooting miniatures.'? The ability for digital to change anything >>>> and everything is both the best and worst thing that happened to post >>>> production. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Nuke-users mailing list >>>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >>> -- >>> vfx compositing | workflow customisation and consulting >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> >> >> >> -- >> ______________________________________________________ >> Fredrik Pihl - visual effects supervisor - visual effects producer >> UNITED IMAGE CREATORS AB >> rönnvägen 11, se-14144 huddinge, sweden >> +46-721 86 58 40 >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended only for the >> above-mentioned recipient(s). Its content is confidential. If you have >> received this e-mail by error, please notify us immediately and delete >> it without making a copy, nor disclosing its content, nor taking any >> action based thereon. Thank you. ツ >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list Nuke-users@support.thefoundry.co.uk, http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
