Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carey

  1. It's my fifth. I'm a big boy now! I put it on the youtubes. This one might be stupider than the other ones. You can be the judge. Love, Carey
  2. Hi Dan, nice job! That's a good selection of work for your first year in. A few things to consider: 1) The less you broadcast that this is student work, the more people will assume you can do good work for them professionally. So go in and change your fake title sequence text from "not based on a true story" to something plausible. And "made by daniel..." could be something plausible like "Produced by Ulrich Gardst"? It's already made-up bullshit, so make it bullshit that doesn't scream "HEY, LOOK, THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT" 2) Along those same lines, the on-foot chase scene you've shot looks ok, but it also screams "HEY, LOOK WHAT MY FRIENDS AND I SHOT ON MY 5D" hahaha. Everybody does it, but again, you don't want to broadcast that you're not working at a professional level, so if you have the option of cutting away from that footage sooner, do so. Obviously if you just don't have other work to show yet, that's not an option. That's also not to say that it would be inappropriate or bad form to show it, just that you always want to optimize your presentation for its purpose. 3) I don't know why your intro animation has a dark grey background, but your logo "fades" up from black. I'm not sure if that's intentional or not, but it seems like a mistake. If it's unintentional, fix it. If it's intentional, rethink it so it doesn't seem like a mistake. You're doing well so far. Hope that helps!
  3. Of course you would, hahaha! Lookit this sexy bitch wavin' his skillz around like a stripper. My pockets ain't deep enough for your high style life. All I really want is video streaming with a paywall. Gumroad seems to be able to pull that off, although it might not look great. I doubt there's a perfect non-custom solution, but I also doubt I want to front the kind of cash I imagine it takes for a custom build. Thank you so much for the suggests!
  4. So I've been doing these AMAAAAAZING design primer videos but I'm kinda juggling them with doing work that actually pays, and I think I'm gonna try to put a really big one together with project files and all that hot mess, like a mini class, but for retarded cheap like $20, like happy hour beers cheap. Vimeo seems like an ok way to do it, but you gotta keep paying them for a pro account and then they take 10% on top, and I'd still need a way to give access to project files. Anyone have suggestions of other quality ways to do this?
  5. C4D mograph solution it is! Additional question, though, and even more of a brain fart: If you've got a cloned grid of objects, is there an effector setup that would allow them to "blink" into existence semi-randomly, like a bunch of fluorescent bulbs all trying to turn on? Embarassingly, i can't seem to wrap my head around this simple problem. It's been a while since I C4Ded.
  6. Look at you lovely people, with your readymade solutions. Tried the shape layer repeaters, the hextex, and mylenium's ballsy custom rig. Pretty great. But indeed, it's probably going to have to be a C4D mograph solution, I fear.
  7. I hate to add another "how do you..." kind of question here, but I'm stumped and I know one of you smart asses is gonna be like "you're an idiot, why don't you...?" Is there a way to procedurally duplicate or tile hexagonal shapes in AE such that they make a honeycomb pattern where all edges abutt each other? Specifically, is there a method that still allows for some animation amongst the shapes, like how you might use a reference layer to affect position/rotation/opacity when using Card Dance? I can easily draw the honeycomb pattern, but then it's not very animateable.
  8. At a certain point, if it's still sitting on your desk, the actual size of the monitor is so big that you find your eyes and head ping-ponging from one side of it to the other just to follow your mouse. And the distortion at the edges, just due to your extreme viewing angle, isn't helpful either. So there's sort of a useful limit to desktop monitor real estate unless you have the deepest desk in existence. The second monitor setup is still a neck-swiveling solution, but if you have all of your important stuff directly in front, and accessories/palettes off to the side, it's pretty decent. I think the situation where a 40"+ monitor is helpful is when you're mirroring on-screen content for an audience, like in an edit or flame bay. 4k and 5k monitors are availalble now, and at sizes that are still pretty useful. They're not dirt cheap, but if precision matters to you, and it should, that's probably going to work out better than a huge bargain basement screen.
  9. I really like the quality of the imagery. What sort of techniques are you using for the datamoshing? I think you'd get a lot more mileage out of the images you're creating if you considered more what each image means in the context of those surrounding it. You know, creating a progression... a narrative, however loose. What you have now is really a sequence of random images of war and some stuff about worship in one section. But they don't really seem to mean much together. And the glitch is so evenly applied to everything, that everything tastes the same. And of course that's fine, it certainly works as background visual accompaniment for your live shows, but once it's played as a standalone short film or music video, presented as something to be seen start to finish, the viewer is going to require a little more out of the experience.
  10. It's the same everywhere. Or at least anywhere that a client can benefit from hiring someone with more skill. If it's worth it to them, they'll pay it. That said, there's kind of an average ceiling for most positions, where clients (especially studios, who hire lots of people for similar positions) stop seeing added value for higher rates. But that's a pretty mushy ceiling. The highest rates seem to be in staff positions for really fucking good designers in high demand. The kind of people who clearly elevate a studio. You know for sure you can raise your rate with a client when you're not afraid to lose them. Otherwise, it's kind of a gut feeling and a gamble.
  11. No. We talk about and treat businesses like they're singular people, with personalities and integrities and varying interests. But businesses are social structures, organized to create value in various ways. Sometimes they're valuable to a small select few, and sometimes to a huge number of people. Sometimes they steal value from one to give to another. Sometimes they take one resource to make another. Given that their purpose is to create more value, many times these tradeoffs get out of hand and result in bad externalities. Adobe isn't really a company that inherently generates externalities (it doesn't gain much by polluting or killing or overusing resources). Its value is generated mostly by labor, and the value it generates is mostly in helping other people generate more value (tools for making stuff). But it's still subject to its drive to shift more value (money) to its owners and shareholders, and in attempting to do so sometimes it's gonna try some shit that doesn't benefit everyone. The creative cloud solution has all kinds of benefits and drawbacks, but the benefits outweigh the drawbacks for adobe. As a customer, for me it's the other way around, and I'm unwilling to drink that Kool-aid, but that doesn't make it a bad company. It's just self-interested and short-sighted, as almost all companies are, and it's extremely difficult under current corporate law for a corporation to be anything but. On the whole, Adobe has created a shit-ton of value for everyone without doing much damage. Photoshop is part of the cultural lexicon now, and no animal testing even had to be done.
  12. Wow, there's some really cool imagery up front. I watched it through a few times. Feels like you're teasing out some kind of oblique narrative that we'll be treated to. But that kind of fades somewhat from 1:00 to 2:00 and we never return to it, in favor of the drifting fractals. If you think about it like there's an A story and a B story, where A is the analog and B is the fractal stuff, we kind of go A A A A A A A AB AB AB AB B B B B B B B B B B and the effect is of switching gears for no particular reason. The A story never really goes anywhere, and kind of slides into the B story, which isn't a story so much as it's just camera passes over fractals. So it sorta feels like you forgot where you were headed. If that fractal stuff was a bridge to finding out what was going on in the analog/kinect stuff, like if you went A A A A AB AB AB B B B B B AB AB A, that might provide the kind of narrative satisfaction that a viewer's gonna be able to take away from the experience. Cuz there's definitely something valuable in the imagery, it just doesn't seem to be packaged coherently yet.
  13. There's always the possibility that someone got a job they shouldn't have, and it turned out underwhelming. Or maybe it was a bad client and the process was unnecessarily micromanaged with bad taste. But more than likely, yes, the budget didn't support a higher quality production. I mean, honestly, how big of an audience do you think this track has? It's not really in the moneymaking range that might make a significant marketing investment a good gamble. It ain't no Taylor Swift single. And the sales falloff from Taylor Swift to this is basically logarithmic. As I understand it, in the music biz these days, there's millionaires and there's kids eating packaged ramen, and there's not a whole lot who successfully fall in between. These guys may be known, but they're like the c-list celebrities of the music world. Ain't much of the lion's share left for them.
  14. It might be a worthwhile challenge to try to make something compelling without voiceover! Y'know, constrain it to a minute, or whatever, and convey whatever it is that you think is interesting, but do it in a purely visual way.
  15. Aww man, thank you for that file. It doesn't seem to have come across right though, cuz it's just an extrusion where the face is separated from the sides, and it's not deformed to the surface of the sphere. Maybe my setup is deficient. Surprisingly, projecting a spline onto the sphere and THEN extruding it works at first glance, but you get a whole mess of geometry from the extrusion that has little kinks and stuff. I guess it makes "bad geometry".
  16. Say you've got a logo extruded slightly, and you want it to lay flush against a portion of a sphere. Y'know, so the backside of the logo touches the sphere and the whole thing curves to meet that sphere. I'm trying to figure out how to do that, but all I can find so far is how to project a spline on to a surface. This seems simple. Is it not?
  17. Yeah, I gathered as much, and that's where these kinds of questions may help you make something really satisfying. That's really all a good question is for, anyway, to help you get at answers you weren't thinking about. If you really want to practice "motion graphics", then you have to assume you're making this for an audience other than yourself, because you need to be communicating something (otherwise it falls into the greater and more nebulous category of "art"). And if that's true, and the point is to communicate something, then you want it to be something enlightening, and compelling, or your audience isn't going to care. Because the medium is imagery and text in motion, that's what you're working with to make something compelling, so you have to figure out how to get it done with just imagery, text, motion. Knowing that, and asking these questions about what you're accomplishing with that imagery, text, and motion, kind of helps focus your thinking so that you hopefully head toward something interesting for your audience, as opposed to just "messing around".
  18. So what you have so far implies a video piece presenting some inspirational quotes in homage to the people being quoted. Something that might help clarify your thinking about what you want/need it to do is to ask why you think this needs to be video instead of print. What's going to happen in this thing that couldn't happen in print, which makes watching it more valuable than seeing it on a page. Is there a visual narrative? And is the imagery compelling enough to complement, support, or enhance the experience of reading/understanding the text? This question challenges both the concept and the execution. You might find yourself answering it by evolving the concept, or by executing the existing concept in some way that makes the text more meaningful. Maybe it's in the animation of the elements, or the juxtaposition of images and text.
  19. What you have implies that you're basically designing a see-n-say. So, are you going to have this narrated? Or, as aromakat is guessing, is it text that's meant to be read? Basically, the issue is: what's the point of the sequence, and what are you communicating? So the question becomes more about what's necessary in each frame. Do we need to read the text to get it? Do we need the images to get it? What is each providing, how do they complement each other, and is there a reason for them to be in motion, or is this really an animated print piece?
  20. Well, motion graphics is kind of a catch-all term. It's really the application of design principles to filmmaking techniques, so it can use animation, live action, vfx, you name it, but the goal is always some kind of visual communication. It's a pretty broad definition, and it gets kind of blurry at the edges. But that contains all the jobs and specialties you might think it would. You could say you're a motion graphics artist and mainly do illustrative typography for pitches with production houses. Or you might be a guy who does abstract stop-motion stuff with design studios. Or you might be an expert in 3d particle systems. Or you might do all of those things, and more. Realistically, a large bulk of people are somewhere on the spectrum between designer and animator and probably do a lot of work in After Effects and Cinema4d. So, if you look at staff positions at motion-graphics-oriented studios, you'll see there are probably people who specialize in concepting and design, and people who specialize in production and animation techniques, and people who have their fingers in both pies. And the skillsets of each of these people overlap a lot, but they all tend to have their own interests and niches too. For example, I have a graphic design background with some pretty solid animation skills and ok compositing skills in after effects, and can do a bit of basic modelling and texturing in 3d, with some illustration and typography skills, and I tend to market myself as the guy a studio wants when they need to put a pitch together to sell a job, because I kind of enjoy that more. I communicate that by sending potential clients still frames of my pitch work, as opposed to a reel or a collection of finished spots. I know a lot of people who have almost the same skillset, but market themselves by presenting only a reel, which suggests they're really good working at the production end with a team. And what's in that reel suggests how they're most valuable. You're just starting out, and trying to get a grip on what it is that you enjoy, so the content of your reel is unsurprisingly experimental and not client-driven. But as you continue to make work for yourself, or as you complete client work, you can be more selective about what you include in that reel, and how you craft it to hone that message about who you are, what you do, and where your value lies. It's kind of cheesy for me to drop this link here, but I'm sure there's something helpful in it for you: http://mograph.net/board/index.php?showtopic=28897
  21. Hey Philippe! You know, for half a year of experience, it's better than you think. The question that's probably most pertinent at this point is: what do you need this reel to do for you?
  22. Hey man, exciting! So what's new? What should we be lookin for?
  23. You're super welcome, but are you sure you talking about a documentary and not just being super high? lulz I don't know if this will turn into a river, let alone a flood. Joe posting that feature on motionographer definitely let a bunch of people know, but that was kind of a one-time thing, I'd imagine. It's pretty interesting to watch the way that the word spreads virally, and how it needs to keep hitting sizeable communities or the whole thing peters out.
  24. Man, I'd love to put one out a week, but I can barely get one out in a month. They are a BITCH so far. I thought this one was gonna be super fast and then nooooooooope. I keep underestimating how much work there is just to put out a half hour episode that looks like it was made in Powerpoint. That's really the take-away here.
  25. Last month I put up a video about compositional strategies, and then decided to make this one about putting those strategies to use. I hope it's more good, or less good. Or super good. Or not good at all, ever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE3ftltJRbA
  • Create New...