Tumgik
#vfx filmmaking
arenaanimation2 · 8 months
Text
Unleash Your Creative Vision with Arena Animation: The Best VFX Filmmaking Training Institute in Kolkata
In the fast-paced world of filmmaking, visual effects (VFX) play a pivotal role in creating stunning cinematic experiences that captivate audiences worldwide. Aspiring filmmakers seeking to master the art of VFX need not look any further than Arena Animation, the best VFX Filmmaking training institute in Kolkata. With a legacy of over two decades, Arena Animation has carved a niche for itself as a pioneer in the animation and VFX industry, setting high standards of education and industry-relevant training.
Cutting-Edge Infrastructure:
At Arena Animation Kolkata, students have access to state-of-the-art infrastructure equipped with cutting-edge technology and industry-standard software. The institute provides a stimulating learning environment where budding filmmakers can unleash their creativity and develop the technical skills required for VFX filmmaking. From digital compositing to motion graphics, Arena Animation Kolkata ensures that students have the tools and resources to bring their cinematic visions to life.
Tumblr media
Experienced Faculty:
The faculty at Arena Animation Kolkata comprises experienced professionals and industry experts who bring their extensive knowledge to the classroom. Their expertise and passion for VFX filmmaking are evident in the way they guide and mentor students throughout their educational journey. With personalized attention and hands-on guidance, students receive top-notch training and valuable insights that prepare them to tackle the challenges of the VFX industry.
Comprehensive Courses:
Arena Animation Kolkata offers comprehensive VFX filmmaking courses that cover various aspects of visual effects, digital compositing, motion graphics, and post-production techniques. Whether you are a beginner exploring the world of VFX or a seasoned filmmaker aiming to enhance your skills, Arena Animation has a course tailored to meet your needs. The curriculum is regularly updated to stay in sync with the latest industry trends and technological advancements.
Practical Training and Real-World Projects:
Practical training is a cornerstone of Arena Animation Kolkata's VFX filmmaking courses. Students engage in hands-on projects, applying their knowledge and honing their skills. This practical approach ensures that they are well-prepared to handle real-world VFX challenges. Additionally, the institute organizes workshops, seminars, and guest lectures by industry experts, providing students with invaluable insights and exposure to the latest trends in VFX filmmaking.
Placement Assistance:
Arena Animation Kolkata goes the extra mile to ensure its students' success in the industry. The institute has strong industry connections and offers placement assistance, helping students secure internships and job placements in renowned production houses, animation studios, and VFX companies. This industry exposure and networking opportunities open doors to promising career paths in the VFX filmmaking industry.
Conclusion:
With its cutting-edge infrastructure, experienced faculty, comprehensive courses, practical training, and placement assistance, Arena Animation Kolkata stands as the best VFX Filmmaking training institute in Kolkata. It empowers aspiring filmmakers to unleash their creative vision, master the art of VFX, and create cinematic experiences that leave a lasting impact on audiences worldwide. Join Arena Animation Kolkata to embark on an exciting journey and become a proficient VFX filmmaker in the dynamic world of cinema.
0 notes
kevinbparry · 1 year
Text
How I broke myself in half.
19K notes · View notes
thirstyvampyr · 20 days
Text
when i see someone with an established career i really gotta stop going "this could have been me" because no, bitch. you're not an expert in any field, all you do is day dream about shit you'll never have while not appreciating what you do have
9 notes · View notes
wcwit · 4 months
Text
youtube
youtube
"NO CGI" is really just INVISIBLE CGI Parts 1&2 (of 4) | The Movie Rabbit Hole
9 notes · View notes
finnicksannie · 1 month
Text
If you feel like posting something anti-CGI/VFX on here, either watch this video series or Venmo me a million dollars (so I can distribute it to every out of work VFX worker I know, which is pretty much everyone I’ve ever worked with).
Otherwise, if you don’t feel like informing yourself about the state of the industry right now, please be quiet. You are actively making things worse.
2 notes · View notes
iagainstitute · 3 months
Text
Best 3D Animation And Games Development In Indore - Iaga Institute
IAGA is the best 3D Animation and games development In Indore. We provide you with the best education services for you. Your education should prepare you for the future. We teach students a future-focused curriculum that keeps pace with industry upgrades. 3D animation and games are vast and always evolving, making it challenging to pinpoint the "best" without specific criteria. Offering top-tier 3D animation and game development services requires a blend of creativity, technical expertise, and innovation. We provide job assistance to ensure Students get jobs per their skill set and interests. Discover your passion for Animation,VFX and Game development at IAGA, where creativity and innovation converge. Our institute is dedicated to providing a dynamic learning environment led by industry professionals who are experts in the field. With IAGA, you'll get assured job guidance which will support the student's financial stability and diverse programs in IAGA catering to courses such as Animation,VFX and Game art and other various interests, and a focus on portfolio development, we ensure you graduate with the skills and confidence needed for success in the animation industry. Benefit from our industry connections, collaborative learning environment, and real-world projects that enhance your practical experience. At IAGA, we nurture your artistic potential, helping you build a strong foundation and empowering you to unleash your creativity in the exciting realm of Animation,VFX and Game designing. Join us and embark on a journey where your imagination knows no boundaries. For more information, visit our website.
2 notes · View notes
scyllaya · 1 year
Video
youtube
The Visual Effects Crisis
15 notes · View notes
jamesthekiwibird · 8 months
Text
Compositors only want one thing and its fkn disgusting..
Tumblr media
3 notes · View notes
spaceintruderdetector · 6 months
Text
youtube
How to film MINIATURES | Top 10 filmmaking tips
2 notes · View notes
chromascoping · 2 years
Text
VFX vs. CGI
“I hate CGI!!!” yells the grumpy movie-goer. They may not know the proper terminology, but they are actually pointing towards the poorly “green-screened” person in a particular scene. Unfortunately, following modern and general industry definition, keying out green-screen elements is not CGI. It is a very small thing but knowing the difference between VFX and CGI is a key factor in understanding who actually possesses at least some knowledge when complaining about it, which can make all the difference in conversations.
 I personally find it very tiring to hear people speak on topics they know nothing about, and here is no exception. Nothing is free of critique, including visual effects, but the blatant hatred towards this film department that many movie-goers hold does not help towards larger issues like VFX artist job stability, monetary valuing, and general respect within their own industry. The last thing needed is the combined voices of millions of unknowledgeable people dictating one’s job stability, especially when they call every possible thing that was not immediately filmed “CGI”.
 So what are the definitions? CGI is computer-generated imagery, and generally regards elements that were created and rendered in a 3D engine. Digital 2D animation does also fall under the CGI umbrella, yet our focus for now will stay on the most common definition for films, 3D rendering done within the computer. Visual Effects is the larger umbrella that CGI sits within and encompasses a larger range of techniques, from motion tracking, to rotoscoping, keying, matte painting, and the overall compositing that combines all these elements into one. These techniques can sound confusing when in today’s context they are done in the computer (“If VFX is done digitally then is it not computer-generated?”), but that is an odd argument that can begin to delve into calling everything, even colour grading, CGI. It is important to un-confuse and separate the terms in this way for matter of ease, historical context and them being distinctly different concepts.
CGI can exist without VFX. VFX can exist without CGI. Both intertwine and remain very close but are separate. The difference to note is that VFX greatly predates computers, and that CGI must obviously always take place within a computer. Digital VFX techniques of today are not called CGI because they do not historically need a computer to be done. 1857 brought the world’s first visual effects image with Oscar Rejlander combining different sections of multiple film negatives into a single image. Numerous other “optical” visual effects would continue in the following decades as techniques like matte painting, keying and stitching became known, editing and altering the film itself without the use of computer technology.
 The only CGI shot in the original Star Wars: A New Hope involved the Death Star wireframe animation the rebels watched when discussing their battle plans, created by the University of Illinois as the best showcase of what computers could output at the time. The rest of the VFX in A New Hope involved optically keying those famous ship miniatures, beautiful matte paintings placed in front of the camera (originally painted on large sheets of glass, only viewable from one angle), and creating a completely new motion-control camera system that would need to be built again from the ground up by the time Empire Strikes Back began production, questionably functional only because of how new the technology was.
 So, in short, VFX is an age-old process that has CGI prominently under its umbrella but not required. The optical effects and techniques listed have not gone away, they have just been updated for the digital realm, a more stable and workable environment. VFX is here to stay, same as how it has been embedded in film since the birth of cinema. We can only hope that further discussions and arguments about it come from individuals who can understand the definition of two terms, at least as a starting ground.
65 notes · View notes
dougielombax · 7 months
Text
I fucking LOVE matte paintings!
Tumblr media
YES!
Look at that!
Astounding!
3 notes · View notes
kevinbparry · 1 year
Text
Collection of me turning into random objects
23K notes · View notes
pablolf · 9 months
Video
youtube
Why CG Sucks (Except It Doesn't)
2 notes · View notes
evilwickedme · 2 years
Note
What are your film degree opinions on the post about why films are different now?
omg yes thank you for asking there's nothing I love more than talking about Things
I want to be very clear in that this post does have valid points to make. The difference between film and digital is palpable, both in the practical (color grading, the types of blacks and shadows you can capture, etc) and in the psychological (grain being added to digital footage to make it seem more "real"). Practical effects and VFX are not the same and computer generated effects tend to age much more poorly than practical ones. Also, not to be very "Tragic, the worst person you know just made a great point" but the midbudget film is dying, and most of what we get nowadays is either very low budget indie films or overly produced extremely high budget Hollywood blockbusters that are extremely formulaic for the most part. A lot of films are sequels or remakes. The rise of TV - specifically, although not clarified in the original post, the rise of Quality TV(tm) as a genre in the eighties - has impacted the way we view films. Save the Cat was an influential book that created a very specific type of screenwriting that has impacted all of film. It's just...
Well, the post sort of implies that any of this is new. And it really isn't. History repeats itself, and specifically when it comes to film, history has been repeating itself for the entirety of film history.
Let's go claim by claim.
Film v. digital. This is just my personal opinion, but I just don't think this matters much. Certain directors still insist on using actual film, but that film still goes through immense amounts of digital post production. The difference in our mindset regarding this is only palpable/relevant in two contexts: 1. VHS tapes. This video essay by HBomb and Shannon Strucci covers the effect VHS has on us pretty effectively, in my opinion. 2. Late 90s/early 2000s digital cameras, that were simply such low quality that you could not do the same things with them, which created what, in my opinion, is actually a fantastic era of unique filmmaking we simply don't have anymore.
The interesting thing here is that digital filmmaking is yet another step in what has always been happening - filmmaking becoming more and more accessible to the average person. It used to be impossible to shoot movies at all without a full fledged studio. (This is also why the natural lighting claim is BS - studios have been used to film pretty much everything in Hollywood forever, and it is only rarely or in very specific artistic movements that natural lighting was regularly used.) Film cameras were big and loud and for a long time (see Singing in the Rain) you had to have them in a separate room to even film with sound. Eventually the portable film camera was invented - this is in the sixties, more or less - and suddenly entire artistic movements were invented, because they could be. If you can carry a camera around with you, you are capable of making art that was simply impossible to make before, and as those cameras got cheaper and cheaper over the decades, more and more people got access to filmmaking. But film still has a steep learning curve, and it is not at all as accessible as the simple digital camera. And nowadays, many of us have HD cameras capable of high quality filmmaking just sitting in our phones. Digital cameras, although originally pretty terrible for many types of art because they were just... well, bad, are now the most reliable way to make moving pictures as art, because you can do anything with them. They are slightly less capable of capturing certain types of shadows, and honestly, that's not even a relevant concern for many of the professional cameras anymore anyway. Which brings us to...
Effects. After effects - including photoshop and color grading - are as old as film itself. Yes, we've gotten better at them. Yes, practical effects do still age better and don't usually have to be "fixed in post". But the use of digital VFX itself is not an evil. If anything, I think it's a good thing. An iconic story is that the reason Jaws is so scary is that the shark simply stopped working when it came to contact with the water, making it so they had to use very few shots of it, building tension. That's a success story. But how many times have practical effects made life so much worse, so much more dangerous? Everyone on the original Who set hated K-9 cause it malfunctioned constantly. If you can just add a digital explosion, you don't have to risk a forest fire. Do you understand my point? There are positive and negative aspects to both choices. And color grading is fucking critical to making movies watchable, as is audio editing. I cannot express this enough. Do not underestimate the importance of this kind of thing. Good editing makes a film, bad editing breaks it.
I have nothing to say against the death of the midbudget film. It sucks and I hate it.
I have nothing to say against the editing thing, either. Trends come and go when it comes to pacing in the editing room.
But the formulaic nature of Hollywood filmmaking? ... Have any of y'all done any research into Hollywood history? Hollywood has been making sequels and remakes and using the three act structure and five act structure and various other theories for its entire history. One of the first films we have a record of is an adaptation of a moral story that used to be told in slideshows. The original A Star Is Born was made in 1937, and there was a remake in the 50s and the 70s before the remake in 2018. While the term would be used until Jaws in the 70s, movies such as Birth of a Nation (racist propaganda that it is) and Gone with the Wind were absolutely blockbusters by today's standards - adjusted for inflation, Gone with the Wind is literally still the most financially successful movie of all time. Experimental filmmaking has existed alongside blockbusters and formulaic movies, and arguably - very arguably - the Hollywood formula actually predates much of what we think of "artistic film".
Finally, the rise of Quality TV(tm) and tv movies in the eighties was absolutely influential when it comes to how we watch movies but like... so was the television set entering 90% of American households by the late fifties. Films have been getting bigger and (literally!) wider and more colorful and more technologically advanced every single time TV has caught up with it. This is just how film has differentiated itself from television - it's bigger, more bombastic, or - in the other direction - somehow even smaller, more intimate, artistic. TV is called the idiot box (which is such BS btw), but movies were being called trash first, and had to prove themselves an art and not a business way before the TV came along and made life harder for them.
In short, there's very few things that are actually, objectively wrong with the original post. It just implies a variety of things that, in context, are just what film intrinsically is. And while I think we're entering the era of television in general, and I like it that way, there is still value in film as it is. Some of y'all just have nostalgia goggles on and no historical context for why these things happen the way they do. And the second one is not your fault - again, I just got my fucking degree in this shit. But the first one... maybe it's time for you to take those damn goggles off.
29 notes · View notes
pabloestamor · 1 year
Photo
Tumblr media
Ink splatter 💦🩸 #fx #indiefilmmaker #indieart #filmmaker #inkdrip #dripart #art #inkart #drip #vfx #blood #horror #gore https://www.instagram.com/p/Cq8mvmRPDqS/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
6 notes · View notes
comicweek · 2 years
Text
I’m a VFX Artist, and I’m Tired of Getting ‘Pixel-F–ked’ by Marvel
To get work, the houses bid on a project; they are all trying to come in right under one another’s bids. With Marvel, the bids will typically come in quite a bit under, and Marvel is happy with that relationship, because it saves it money. But what ends up happening is that all Marvel projects tend to be understaffed. Where I would usually have a team of ten VFX artists on a non-Marvel movie, on one Marvel movie, I got two including myself. So every person is doing more work than they need to.
The other thing with Marvel is it’s famous for asking for lots of changes throughout the process. So you’re already overworked, but then Marvel’s asking for regular changes way in excess of what any other client does. And some of those changes are really major. Maybe a month or two before a movie comes out, Marvel will have us change the entire third act. It has really tight turnaround times. So yeah, it’s just not a great situation all around. One visual-effects house could not finish the number of shots and reshoots Marvel was asking for in time, so Marvel had to give my studio the work. Ever since, that house has effectively been blacklisted from getting Marvel work.
Part of the problem comes from the MCU itself — just the sheer number of movies it has. It sets dates, and it’s very inflexible on those dates; yet it’s quite willing to do reshoots and big changes very close to the dates without shifting them up or down. This is not a new dynamic.
....
The main problem is most of Marvel’s directors aren’t familiar with working with visual effects. A lot of them have just done little indies at the Sundance Film Festival and have never worked with VFX. They don’t know how to visualize something that’s not there yet, that’s not on set with them. So Marvel often starts asking for what we call “final renders.” As we’re working through a movie, we’ll send work-in-progress images that are not pretty but show where we’re at. Marvel often asks for them to be delivered at a much higher quality very early on, and that takes a lot of time. Marvel does that because its directors don’t know how to look at the rough images early on and make judgment calls. But that is the way the industry has to work. You can’t show something super pretty when the basics are still being fleshed out.
The other issue is, when we’re in postproduction, we don’t have a director of photography involved. So we’re coming up with the shots a lot of the time. It causes a lot of incongruity. A good example of what happens in these scenarios is the battle scene at the end of Black Panther. The physics are completely off. Suddenly, the characters are jumping around, doing all these crazy moves like action figures in space. Suddenly, the camera is doing these motions that haven’t happened in the rest of the movie. It all looks a bit cartoony. It has broken the visual language of the film.
Things need to change on two ends of the spectrum. Marvel needs to train its directors on working with visual effects and have a better vision out of the gate. The studio needs to hold its directors’ feet to the fire more to commit to what they want. The other thing is unionization. There is a growing movement to do that, because it would help make sure that the VFX houses can’t take bids without having to consider what the impacts would be. Because a lot of the time, it’s like, you get to work on a Marvel show, and you’ll work on that for cheaper just because it’s cool
Full Article @ Vulture
4 notes · View notes