Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carey

  1. This short thing about smoothing out sped-up video has a kind of neat effect. The artifacting is sort of interesting in extreme cases.
  2. And then, in a time of need, it appeared!
  3. It's not a hard position to take, to come out swinging at the "me too" buzzword idiots for whatever they're doing lately. Yeah, they jump on whatever train seems to have a desirable destination, seemingly hijack it and shout about it unintelligibly before jumping on another. Sure, you're a brand storyteller. Sure, you're a UX consultant. Sure you're a craft microbrewer. Sure you're a DJ. If you say so. And it's nothing new. Those sort of identity leeches are always going to be riding one wave or another. But who gives a shit? What's tired is getting fired up over the latest instance of it. Or using the latest instance of it to fire up anyone who's easily threatened by an "invasion" of their precious in-group. The problem is that he's further conflating an argument about who gets to call themselves what, which is intentionally elitist, and a purposeful jab to get people riled. I'm a real storyteller, not like you. You make animated films, I make REAL films. So go back to your cartoons, hack. I'm a real designer. Not like you. I can spot the difference between Arial and Helvetica. You can't call yourself a designer, bro. I'm a true original Belieber, not like you. You're one of the fakes who just likes the popular songs. You can't like him anymore. I'm a true Aryan, and committed to the cause. Not like you, you fucking half-breed. We're gonna beat the piss out of you now. It's all feeble-minded, exclusionary bullshit, and as destro said pretty simply, it's basically self-promotion for everyone involved.
  4. I guess I should say I don't know jack about the PC world anymore, so I can't compare at all. And I don't think there's been a 15" mbpro update since late 2013 anyway, which might mean they'll refresh them around september, if that means anything. Pretty easy to get them new online with no tax or shipping.
  5. As any laptop, Macbook Pro probably isn't the c4d renderbeast you'd be used to, but it is clearly the best purchase I've ever made. The whole retina display is kind of wasted because hardly anything seems to utilize it, but the guts of this thing are ridiculous for something you can throw in a backpack. I do everything on it, without limitation. Then again, I'm not popping off 4k vray renders, but I imagine if you were, you'd be render farming it. Mine is getting on 2 years old and I have no thoughts of upgrading.
  6. Well, Sagmeister has long been a deliberate pot-stirrer, which is why he's known, and this marks no change. This is for FITC, the theme of which this year is apparently "crafted stories: branded storytelling", so the rant is almost cartoonishly antagonistic of him. And of course there's some truth in there, or it wouldn't be antagonistic. There ARE a lot of inflated titles, and randomly-applied buzzwords, and puffed-up people, but that goes without saying. He is, however, making an embittered assertion that equates to "only some people get to be called artists." And of course that's self-important crap in itself, but that's how he gets you riled up. No, of course there's no committee that decides who qualifies as an artist/storyteller, and no, Sagmeister is not on it. He's on the committee of his own self-exposure, and he does a pretty good job of it.
  7. I'd have to learn color theory first. I mostly wing it. Probably gonna have to figure it out eventually, though, and then all your dreams may come truuuuuue! If someone wants to teach me, I'll make an extra extra dumb video about it. I've got a face made for radio.
  8. It's good to hear that these are beneficial in some way, and that some people are liking them. Literally, TENS of people are liking them! How so? You mean like in production? Or in storyboarding?
  9. Awesome! Yeah, there are several different ways to break this stuff down, none of which are definitive, and this is really just part of one of those ways. But it's a helpful part, and I realized a refresher would probably be helpful both for people who haven't been exposed to it, and for people who learned it a long time ago and do it by feel now. I tend to get lazy and stop thinking about these things consciously, which leads me to get stuck figuring out why something looks bland, and as soon as I look at that thing in the context of the fundamentals, it usually becomes really clear. I'm working on another one this week as a way to explore this stuff a little more, so let me know if there's something I didn't go over very well in this one. I'm still learning how to make pop tarts. It seems easy, but it ain't. I might have a learning disabillity.
  10. Hi. I made another thing. It's about building compositions. It's extra stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPRAH7AKMWw
  11. I don't think that the raison d'ĂȘtre being a showcase of the modeling stuff was just complicating. I think it was the crux of the problem. The problem from which most other problems flowed. I actually think if you had started with a viewer-centric goal, a story goal, you're totally capable of having made something really resonant. And I don't think you did this as a vanity project. I'm not saying YOU'RE the hot self-interested girl, hahaha. I'm saying that, as a viewer, the experience is of watching something admiring itself. And that that's a direct result of what you really set out to do, which is to let us admire the stuff you made. It's not vain. It's proud, but not vain. And proud is totally fine, but it isn't really something the viewer can appreciate. Like when a kid learns to dive into a pool head first and they're really proud and they want you to watch. It's great for the kid, it's just not that fun for the watcher cuz there's not much in it for them. Now if that kid put on a compelling show about an aquatic race in the deepest part of the sea and it incorporated diving as a necessary element... y'know, that'd be more for the viewer. The slow buildup is great. Mystery is great. But it has to work at inviting the viewer to stay curious and then it has to pay off. If you've seen A Christmas Story, there's that mystery code the kid is trying to figure out and he goes to some length to decode it and solve the mystery. And when he decodes it, and knows his efforts must surely have earned him some kind of great knowledge, he's rewarded with "Drink more Ovaltine." It was an ad. How utterly deflating. He felt pretty cheated. Taken for a ride at his own expense, so someone else could put their name out there. Not that there's a sense of utter deflation when your short culminates in self-promotion, but I think there's kind of that feeling of having been lightly cheated out of what seemed like something more important. I think your tactics of slow reveal and mystery played well to your goal, but again, your goal was problematic. You're right about those phone/device animations and the resultant cam moves. They're product demos, so they're usually coming from the "I'm a gadget, watch me do this thing" perspective, which you know is boring, so you compensate by making the camera do something just for visual effect. So it totally makes sense that, having gone into this one as a "watch me do this thing" project, you might feel like you need to compensate by putting some extra whizzy moves in there. You basically have all of the skills you'd need to make something resonant and fascinating. It seems like it's really about reorienting how you use that skillset. What you're using it for. I mean, this is really lovely stuff you've made, you just haven't used it to make something for the benefit of an audience. And I think learning to do that, putting story and viewer first, will make your work really special.
  12. We can certainly talk about pacing, narrative, etc. but firstly, there's some really beautiful imagery here! Super nice stuff. You've really put some love into the details. So, on the modeling end, you've nailed what you set out to. I think it's really apparent that the modeling was the goal here, though, because the whole production seems to just sort of say "look at this neat bit, and this one... and this thing here, look at this." Right? And, y'know, I DO want to look at this neat bit and that neat bit, but if I'm taking the time to watch something, to go on the journey that's promised by any narrative, however simple, I'm going to feel a little let down if all it ended up being was self-admiration. Cuz then it smacks lightly of pretension. So there's a bit of a problem from the outset with this kind of project, because it's not really made to provide the audience with anything. It's mostly self-serving. As a viewer, it's kind of like (bad analogy alert:) being with a really hot girl who doesn't care about you. She's lovely to look at, and loves the attention, but you get nothing out of it. It's not fulfilling. And I think for your piece to be meaningful or fulfilling as an experience for your audience, you'd have to have come at it with a slightly different goal in mind. Pacing, editing, and narrative are the things you're questioning, and rightly so, I think. But again, I think the decisions you've made about each of these things, and at each point, stems from the overall perspective of "I made this cool stuff and I want to show people, so I'll show the stuff doing things and it'll turn out that what it was doing was building my logo." Because every camera movement, cut, or action, is essentially to showcase some modeling or the animation you've applied to it, not necessarily to convey something intriguing to the audience. So like, when you're moving your camera around the door, watching pins unlock, the slow and repetitive cuts focused on that detail kind of feel like self-fascination. Like, you don't have to show multiple close-up shots of that action for an audience to get it. And the camera shouldn't have to have a Michael Bay dolly effect to add visual interest if what's happening is already interesting. But you're showing them multiple close-ups because this is a showcase, and you're making the camera restless either by accident or because you realize it'd be boring otherwise. But honestly, it's still boring, because it's a showcase. This sort of thinking really does impact the narrative on every level, because it informs all of your decisions about what to show, how you show it, for how long, and so forth. Getting into the mindset of "what is the story that the audience will find really intriguing, and how do I best tell that story" will give you a different goal for all of these decisions and you'll make much different choices about what the camera is looking at or doing, and where the cuts need to be. And the result will be that all of your beautiful imagery will be vastly more interesting to your audience. I think you're fully capable of doing all of this already, and it'll come to you when you think of the audience and the story first.
  13. You bet. And "motion graphics" isn't necessarily commercial, but it is necessarily design-driven, and maybe that's not your particular area of interest. But even if you're into doing music videos or whatever, you're still making things for an audience, which involves communicating things to them, however abstractly that may be. So it's crucial to develop those skills so that you can showcase them for potential clients.
  14. Hey Blake. So, it's important to note that motion graphics is kind of a nebulous field, with lots of skillsets involved, but the overriding principle of motion graphics is that it's filmic imagemaking that always attempts to achieve some GOAL. It's implicit in the idea that motion graphics is a kind of extension of design, where there is always meant to be a problem to be solved, a message to be conveyed, or in other words, some kind of goal to be achieved. And that's significant because that's how we tend to differentiate between design and fine art. Fine art may have a goal, but it doesn't need to. Essentially, the goals tackled by "doing" motion graphics are communication goals. Maybe this is obvious, maybe not. But I say it because your reel isn't strongly demonstrating communicative work, so it's going to appear to a lot of potential employers to be non-applicable to their search for a creator of motion graphics. It's going to look like you're a fine arts guy who uses computers. That doesn't necessarily mean you have to go make a bunch of things that look like commercials, or kiosk graphics, or network logos or whatever, but it does probably mean that you'll need to make some things that have more purpose-driven narrative. And honestly, maybe the best way to make that work IS to make some fake commercials, or do a title sequence for a show or film you're interested in, or make something that clearly illustrates a concept, or that takes a preexisting property or product and presents it in a new light. Whatever gets you started, really. And then you can cut that stuff into a reel which also itself is a piece of work displaying your storytelling and imagemaking talents.
  15. It's a weird niche to fill. They try to be editorial about selecting the work they present, and then try to add value with editorial commentary. It just seems like it all rarely proves that valuable unless there's commentary or an interview that really provide insight, and that's exceptionally difficult to churn out. So it ends up with kind of spotty content. There's basically no community involvement because it's hard to comment and presumably much harder to get work posted. The net effect being that it functions like a magazine, in the era of the internet. I was hoping that maybe mographwiki could somehow fill the void. Because its content is crowdsourced, a simple voting/liking structure like behance (or a million other sites) might allow cream to float to the top. So the community makes the content and then buoys the usefulness of it by sorting it. By soft editing. I just don't think there's another way to do it unless there's dedicated staff with awesome taste and brilliant insights to share constantly. Oops I'm getting on a plane now.
  16. Ah, that was quick. I was assuming it would be down for a while for testing or something.
  17. Maybe it's entirely temporary, but I saw that they're doing some kind of update. I know they had kind of slowed down for a long time, posted a "how can we be better" type of questionnaire a few months ago, and now the site is intentionally unavailable. Just curious if anyone here has been a part of a reimagining or a format change or whatever seems to be going on.
  18. Carey

    Motion Reel 2014

    Hey Albert, you've got some good work in here! A first reel is usually a little bit awkward, if only because there's hardly ever enough work to fill a whole presentation. It's kind of like puberty. Some stuff looks great, but everyone ends up paying attention to what's sticking out instead. Personally, I like the audio you've picked because it has a good energy and it's memorable, which does you a lot of favors. To make good use of that, however, you most likely need to be cutting your work to match that energy. But you're not doing that, probably because you don't have enough suitable material to pack in that densely. So the effect is that the audio is racing like an unstoppable party train while your imagery is frequently kind of sitting there not doing a whole lot, by comparison. And by that comparison, your work ends up feeling inadequate. The "lack of material" problem will naturally fix itself as you grow your portfolio, but you're looking to make a reel now. So you can adopt one of a few strategies, moving forward. The first is to pick audio that's more suited to the pace of your current editing tendencies, although I think you've made a good audio choice and I doubt that this is a compromise you need to make. The second is to experiment with editing tactics that will bring the visuals in line with the energy of the audio. Let them complement each other. Like, if you're gonna have punk rock vocals, you probably need punk rock movement. At 0:16 you're starting to pull this off pretty well for a couple of seconds, but the visuals and audio really need to play together through the whole piece. I think you could really take this reel from something a producer rams through to something that people really enjoy watching for its own sake.
  19. My thinking is that mograph is an audio/visual medium, and that initially I want to address the art and craft of it, which means these should be videos. It seems more valuable to provide lots of visual examples and to show things instead of trying to tell them. Design podcasts are typically about technology or industry news, career talk and stuff about the experience of the artist, and tutorials are usually specific tips and tricks, and all of that stuff is pretty well covered already. So I don't really know what to call these things I'm making... they're sort of primers at this point, and I don't have a solid model for how best to craft them, but I don't want them to become either tutorials or lectures. So if there's something specific that worked for you, or didn't, or that seemed particularly helpful or not helpful, I'm all ears. Literally, I'm made of ears. It's gross. OMG, that guy's putting out almost a video a day! Clearly it's a lot easier to say stupid stuff while playing video games, record it and publish it, but wow. Took me about 3 uninterrupted weeks to make mine.
  20. Thanks for watching. I'm going to try to keep making them, if they're helpful. I have another that's almost done, but I really need to figure out where there's an audience for this stuff cuz it's kind of not the traditional tutorial thing. If anyone can think of other forums or places to drop a link, please let me know! I think we were pitching against several other studios, and I don't think they went with this one. This was like 8 or 9 months ago and was for the upcoming nascar season, so whatever they decided to make has already been airing for quite a while, or is off air. So far the videos have been too long/large to upload to a Vimeo Basic account, or I would. Also, it seems like there's a better discovery process on youtube. People watching related things have a better chance of happening upon these videos, and since I have no idea where the audience is for this stuff, that's a bonus. Vimeo's sexier, but kind of less suitable.
  21. Hey, so I made this video about doing storyboards. I'm better at making storyboards than I am at making videos, I think, but hopefully there's something enlightening in here nonetheless. Not sure this belongs in the showcase section, and it's not a tutorial, but I'd love to hear what you think, if anything. I'd like to get better at making these. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Cg5aCvbhWw
  22. Hahaha, I want the title to be truncated to "Shit Showreels", and I like that you've driven yourself crazy enough watching shitty reels to have made this. Is self-torture the best inspiration? And yeah, you're right. Cel animation. So hot right now. Cel animation.
  23. That's so exciting to see. I think there's a huge potential benefit from reintroducing this working relationship back into the industry. Treating design as a professional service, with the client's role and the designer's roles clearly delineated so that everyone's expertise is used most efficiently. The client best understands business/marketing goals, and the designer best understands how to communicate to audiences to achieve those goals. It was pretty interesting to read the polarized reactions in that "one concept" thread from a few weeks ago. I hope this basic idea starts filtering through the industry, in some form. For everyone's sake, really. Congrats, Joe!
  24. I don't think anyone feels like it's out of reach, because it's clearly cheaper in the short term. The argument is one of preference. A preference not to be a renter. It seems like most people are much more satisfied with owning than renting, because it confers control and stability. It means, in very real terms, "We've made a transaction and I'm not beholden to you in any way, nor do you have any influence on how I conduct my business henceforth." It means independence from outside interference, which is a benefit on several levels. Renting is a similar relationship to being a debtor. The owner of the commodity you're renting can choose to stop renting to you at any time, leaving you with nothing, or can change the cost of your rent, or modify or retract the commodity or do essentially anything they want because they own that commodity. Sometimes there's just no better way to get access to the commodities you need, but it's far from the ideal way to run a business when your livelihood depends on it. Zook's analogy speaks to that point pretty well. At some point, Adobe may reduce CC's backwards compatibility, either because it's cheaper not to maintain it, or because it allows them to move forward in a specific development direction, or because it will intentionally leave some non-adopters to contend with being an inconvenience to their clients, which may mean more of them move to a subscription model. The subscription model is driven primarily by business decisions for profit motives, so the rationale suggests that things of this nature will happen. Changes to the deal will happen in baby steps. Just enough that we'll swallow it, while maintaining consistent profit growth for Adobe, as a publicly traded company is obligated to do. Maybe a little price bump. Maybe fewer resources allocated to development. It sounds cynical, but it's really just kind of how it works when you have a soft monopoly. Doesn't mean their product isn't good. Doesn't mean there's an evil master plan to enslave us. But I personally don't want to be tied to it, for these reasons and more.
  • Create New...