Kathleen Quaife Memorial Service December 5, 2022

draft

 

There was a memorial service for Kathleen Quaife (-Hodge) on December 5, 2022 at noon.  Stereotypically, I got a late start and other hilarity ensued combined with everyone leaving immediately afterwards.  But the upside is that an insider tipped me off to the correct location and I arrived to have several hours to myself in the fabulous exhibit dedicated to Kathleen's work as an artist.  This exhibit was created by her co-workers at the California State University Channel Islands where she had taught for several years.

 

Kathleen was one of my favorite people from my time in Los Angeles in the 1980s and 1990s and I was happy to reconnect with her for a day two years ago at the opening of a ceramics studio here in Santa Barbara.  

 

Kathleen was like having a glowing ball of positive energy around. Again, why are the best people taken from us while the annoying and amoral swine continue to live among us?  Where is the justice in that?

The physical plant of CSUCI is astonishing and was the location of a notable hospital far, far away from anything else five miles outside Camarillo.  The buildings are classic and the place is huge.

How to Contact Glassner & Blinn

draft

To my astonishment, both Andrew Glassner and Jim Blinn are easy to contact, as they maintain web sites with a contact form.

https://www.glassner.com/

http://www.jimblinn.com/contact/

My Jeffrey Katzenberg Memo Part 1 (Do Good Work and You Will Be Rewarded)

draft

Once upon a time, Jeffrey Katzenberg wrote a 28 page memo describing how he thought the industry was changing and by implication his mistakes of the recent past (or so it was reported at the time). I am not Jeffrey Katzenberg and this will not be a 28 page memo. It will however be a series of posts from time to time in which I describe some mistakes made that have gotten me where I am today. Many of these mistakes are intertwined, and have assumptions that may seem odd based on what we know today.  Some of these posts will also describe decisions I made later that I believe accurately describe reality (e.g. where the industry is going) but which may or may not be a mistake given that there are no alternatives.

The people who were involved with computer animation early felt (or some of us felt) that we had something to prove. People who mattered did not believe that computer animation would work or be worth anything. We are talking about the early 1980s here. If you do not understand that, then stop reading, because you will not be able to understand anything else I say.

So a bunch of us decided that we would prove that it did work and would do great things. There were a variety of nests of such people, several of them in LA, some in N. California, some in NY, some in Europe, etc. All of these people made sacrifices to be in this field, or at least most of them did.

I felt that I had a chance to have an impact early on and I decided to take that chance. I knew that unlike what later became Pixar, that we did not have the cash or the management to do this really well, but I figured that people would give us slack because of our good will and the situation. I figured that people would say, well if they could do this with $1.50, just think what they could do if they had real resources. It was also the case that none of this would have been possible if people (companies) had not supported us. In my case, this meant little consulting projects and genuine access to expensive hardware and other resources. At the time I knew that we could not rely on this for the future, but the hope was that we would do good work, deliver marketing value for our benefactors, and then hopefully things would become self financing.

To repeat, the fundamental assumption was that people would recognize our work, give us credit for it, and allow us to move to the next level when real projects and real capital became available. Well, it turns out that this is not what happened. We proved that things worked, but moving forward people did not give us credit for out work, many of us were not hired, we were no longer given the access to equipment or consulting (e.g. cash flow) that we had before.

So now, when people say, why not just do new work, my response is that when you are completely impoverished that is not a possibility. When you have no access to resources, you have to buy everything, and when you have no money that is not going to happen. Furthermore, every door slammed in my face 20 years ago.  Why that is, or was, is a long story and it is not very pleasant but it comes down to money. Some famous Greek once said, there is no person so brilliant that extreme poverty will not silence them. You were supposed to hire us, but you didnt.

Too bad, my mistake, I guess.

But this is not the entire story.  Some of us were not hired for reasons that are, in my opinion, problematic, but reasons nevertheless.  We will go over what some of these reasons are in a later post. Its not all "bad people failing to recognize our genius", there are other factors at work.

Neverthless, now when someone says “you must do a demo to prove that you can do this work” I laugh, bitterly. Been there, did that, didn't work. I would rather make a new mistake, rather than repeat an old one.

____________________________________________


It turns out that this memo from Jeffrey was not a reflection on past mistakes, although that is how it was presented in the industry press that I read.  It was instead something else, as is completely obvious from reading it, which you may do here:

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2011/11/some-thoughts-on-our-business.html

The Standard Disclaimer

At various times when I write about topics far outside my recognized areas of expertise, such as the decline of the American Republic, I will make reference to this post, the idea being that it is a "standard disclaimer". Your mileage may differ.  CAVEAT EMPTOR.  That sort of thing.

One of the purposes of this blog is to express my opinion on a variety of topics, many of which are outside my formal areas of expertise. I recommend that you see these comments as the sincere, if sarcastic, statements either of belief, or disbelief, or anger, or dismay, and consider it warmup for a standup comedy routine that will probably never exist. Standup comedy, it would seem, is one profession where a layperson can express their rage about events in the world far beyond their ability to control or influence and far outside their recognized area of formal expertise.

Readers may notice that I fail to adhere to the rules of Standard Marketing and Self-Promotion in early twenty-first century America. I am somewhat self-deprecating on occasion. What I say about myself, my self-deprecating sense of humor, is certain to be used against me by some friends and acquaintances. It is a nasty world we live in.

I am a college educated (BS and some graduate work) American from the South, a third-generation agnostic Reform Jewish Democrat from Virginia, who has a (some will think) inflated opinion of himself. I have some credibility in the areas of visualization, synthetic imagery, computer animation both real time and otherwise, digital production, photography (computational or analog), simulation, visual effects, the history of computing and the Internet, and certain aspects about the history and circumstances of the Southern United States. I worked at the RAND Corporation when I was too young to know any better. I started using computers when I was very young long before that was common. I also come from that period when people did not have formal training in their field because very often the field was still being invented.

I had something to do with the invention of computer animation and its applications in the motion picture industry.  I have a technical achievement award from the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences. There will be some primary source material scattered in these pages for those who are interested in the history of computer animation and the history of Los Angeles in the 1970s and 1980s.

This is my standard disclaimer, or one of them. I hope you find whatever I write here to be entertaining, humorous, whatever.

Thank you.

Hero of the Revolution Chris Wedge and his Adventure in Hollywood

In Hollywood, it is said, people are something that they are not. This is a joke that tries to make fun of the phenomenon that people are working in one area but say that they aspire to be working in another. There are many examples of this in real life, and that is one of the reasons that the joke exists. There are actors, writers, producers, etc, who want to direct. There are many waiters and real estate agents who want to act or write. There are many successful writers who are not satisfied with that and want to also be paid to write, direct and produce their own movies.

On the other hand, the fact is that a small percentage of people do get to achieve their dream. People who come to Los Angeles and work in food service or in computer animation, but actually are able to get acting roles in television and film. People who went to film school and become successful film editors. People who write screenplays for years and work at odd jobs who do become successful, working writers in television or film. Or who work mostly in advertising or trailers and make a good living and who are happy to do so. It certainly beats slinging burgers.

And why not? People are ambitious, people are also talented, and many people are not able to find a situation where they can demonstrate that talent. You must be dedicated, tireless, indefatiguable or you are guaranteed not to succeed. This is why we see so many successful people who are outliers when it comes to ambition, only the very ambitious have a chance.

The danger, the classical danger, of course is to know, or not know, when to stop. If Icarus had not flown so high, but stayed at a moderate altitude, then his flight would have been a complete success. When do you stop trying to recreate yourself, and just try to do as well as you can with what you have? If a writer, to write more great screenplays or novels. If an actor, to be a better actor. If an director of animated films, to direct more animated films.

One of the local heroes of the canon and revolution of 3D animation is Chris Wedge, who with his colleagues at Blue Sky in upstate New York, defied the odds and has become a recognzied and accomplished director of 3D animated feature films. Among other films, he has directed the Ice Age films, and he has also been a successful voice actor of many of his characters. But that is not enough, and he wants to direct live action films.

Chris Wedge Publicity Photo from his IMDB Page

The good news is that his first live action film, Monster Trucks (2017), is coming out soon. The bad news is that the studio that financed it has so little faith in it that it is taking a write-off on the film before it even comes out, something that is very unusual, and demonstrates to what extent the studio does not believe in the movie.

I am very proud of Chris for what he has accomplished and hope that this latest adventure will work out for him.

Monster Trucks (2017) on IMDB

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3095734/

Chris Wedge on IMDB

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0917188/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

Kinky Sex and the Dream of a Regional Film Community in SF Fulfilled

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Jim Shaw at the New Museum

        This world is mine, in time. You best of all of us, Gabriel, should understand ambition.

                                                                              Lucifer/Satan from Constantine (2005)

I am happy to report that an alumnus of degraf/Wahrman (dWi), Jim Shaw, is having a retrospective of his work exhibited at the New Museum in New York (see link below).

I have not one, not two, but at least five friends from the early days of computer animation who are recognized as successful contemporary fine artists to varying degrees. But all of the others are involved in the digital arts in one way or another.  Jim is the only one I know who has achieved his success through what we might call "old media", you know, painting and drawing, with no computers involved.

Of course there were many “artists” who helped found computer animation in the 1970s and 1980s and “art” is one of those culturally laden terms that mean different things to different communities.  Hollywood is particularly fond of giving its own meaning to the term "artist" as is discussed in this post:   What is Meant When it is Said Hollywood Needs Artists    Other types of artists in this world might include production designers, fashion designers, commercial art directors, graphic designers, visual effects supervisors, and so forth.

But we are not talking about that kind of artist, as difficult and competitive as some of those fields are. What we are talking about here is the varsity squad, an artist of the sense of museums, collectors, galleries in NY and London and notices in certain elite magazines.  This is what we might call the :"real" world of fine art.

What you may not be aware of is that this is the dream of so many artists, or at least of people who went to art school, and it is far from easy to achieve. Of 100 talented people who attend art school, how many become recognized artists? Of the people who attend film school, how many become noted directors of film?

But the really disturbing thing is not just that my friend, Jim Shaw, is successful at pretty much exactly what he wanted to achieve back when I knew him in 1980, the really disturbing thing is that he is to have a retrospective one person show.  Retrospective?  I just exchanged email with Jim and he is as always creating new pieces right and left.  Perhaps I am giving too much emphasis  to one meaning of the term "retrospective".

There is much more I could say about Jim Shaw, but I will just mention a few of them here. First, he never secretly aspired to be a commercial art director, or a visual effects supervisor, or anything else but what he did. Second, as long as I have known him, from when I believe he was an assistant art director at Robert Abel & Associates, he was producing his own work every day. Publishing his own books of his artwork. Putting on a Thrift Store Art exhibition. Third, and finally, we hired him at deGraf/Wahrman as an art director for various reasons, but the most important one to me was that it would help him make a living while he was building his career as a fine artist.

I haven't talked to him for about 20 years but I recently exchanged email with him courtesy of John Nelson (I had had trouble tracking Jim down).   Not only is he doing well, but he has a life, apparently, and has been married for over 20 years.  Amazing.

Information about his show in New York is at

http://www.newmuseum.org/exhibitions/view/jim-shaw-the-end-is-here

His public statement from the Thrift Store Art exhibit is here:

http://globalwahrman.blogspot.com/2013/01/statement-from-thrift-store-art.html

Communication & Anecdotes About Early Computer Animation

Dear Friends,

Some of you have noticed that it is hard to reach me on the phone.  That is correct it is, and it will continue to be so for a while.

One of the fun manifestations of being abused by the medical community is the difficulty in getting the medication necessary to process stress, where stress may include such things as going to the grocery store or starting thermonuclear war.

Therefore in order to prevent you from experiencing thermonuclear war, I constrict most communication to such things as email and text messages, with no guarantee for a prompt response to either.   Its for your own good, trust me.

Now on other news, we are collecting anecdotes on how you first did computer animation.  I had to walk through the snow for five miles each day, for example. Someone else had to type up vector lists on punched cards.  Still a third took a course in programming a plotter in Fortran from Nelson Max in 1975.  Please send me your stories.

You suffered and now you should get some recognition for your suffering.

Sincerely,
MW

Pat Cole, Kathy White, Nancy Bernstein, Brian Jennings: In Memoriam

All of the above were each in their own way involved in the early days of computer animation, Pat Cole was earlier than any of the others. Nancy was involved in NY, the rest mostly in Los Angeles, and in Pat's case also SF.

Pat Cole first came to my attention when she worked at JPL for Dr. Jim Blinn and Bob Holtzmann. She was also responsible for some very important early parties in Los Angeles, where I met many people. I know that she struggled with some sort of very long term illness for many years before she passed away.

Kathy White had been a technical director at Robert Abel & Associates after I was no longer there and then was one of the early technical directors at Rhythm & Hues. I barely knew the woman, but she was friends of friends and seemed like a very nice person. She was also depressed and her passing was unexpected to many.

Nancy Bernstein was an early producer at R/Greenberg & Associates and then came out west to work at Digital Domain. She died after a long illness.

Brian Jennings was a computer animator who worked at Kroyer, at deGraf/Wahrman and many other places. He moved to India and seemed to love the place. His passing was a surprise and a shock.

Lynda Weinman and the Early Days of Computer Animation

For those of you interested in trivia from the early days of computer animation, I have a somewhat interesting story.

When we were founding degraf/wahrman, a variety of people helped us out. One of them was (and still is) a truly delightful and wonderful woman who helped us in dozens and dozens of ways including, among other things, helping us set up our office, helping us set up our finances, and spearheading and completely owning the early use of the Mac for previsualization, in this case for Star Trek V and Ralph Winter, which got everyone a lot of publicity. She was/is also an animator, a friend of many people in animation, and I have no doubt that she was in part responsible for the good vibes surrounding our startup.

She was also from the earliest days a complete believer in the idea that computers such as the Mac could transform peoples lives for the better and enable their creativity. Her idealism motivated everything she did to a remarkable extent. After Star Trek V she had bigger fish to fry and probably most of the people who later worked at dWi did not even realize she had worked there. But she went off and among other things started doing conferences about Flash, and then started an internet company to help people learn to use their computers.

Apparently, a few weeks ago, she sold that company, Lynda.com, to Linkedin for 1.5 billion. It is hard to believe that someone who is so idealistic and so well-meaning would do well in such a practical way, but Lynda Weinman is really that amazing. Anyway, I wanted to publicly congratulate Lynda and thank her again for her help long ago and far away.

The Debevoise Brothers Win the Finals

draft

Allen Debevoise (aka "devo") and one or more of his brothers sold one of their companies for $200M.  I have known Allen since 1980 or so at Robert Abel & Associates and have watched (at a distance) his entrepreneurial activities since 1991 or so.   I still have the drink ticket from Consumacio in Barcelona where we were being hosted as part of Ars Futura when the first Iraq war started in 1991.

I do not know the details and I will update this post when I do.  But Allen has been tireless, inventive, and with a tremendous positive energy through thick and thin, and company after company. Possibly even a genius. Certainly an inspiration.  And without doubt one of several people I know whose success is based in no small part on their own hard work over a very long period of time, in spite of adversity, and as a reward for merit.

As difficult as it may be to believe that merit and hard work gets you anywhere, nevertheless it seems to be so in his case.

Jeff Kleiser and Coco Conn at the Hotel Figueroa

At a SIGGRAPH long ago, Jeff and Coco discuss something very important.   Between Jeff and Coco we have the two most important social/party organizers of the LA computer animation community in the 1980s.

Jeff is of course partner in the Kleiser/Walczak Construction Company and Coco was the force behind SIGKIDS at SIGGRAPH for many years.

The Ancient Past of Early Computer Animation (draft)

This is all just going to be rewritten.

A friend of mine, Terrance Masson, hosted an event at SIGGRAPH 2014 to tell some of the stories behind the early work in computer animation.   I was invited because it is thought that I know quite a few of these stories, and I do.  But instead I wrote up some notes as to why it is very difficult for people to look at the early work in computer animation and make much sense of it or know why these projects are important, if indeed they are.

Although I am going to try and explain some of the factors behind these projects.  But it may still be very hard to understand.   

I may say that I walked through the snow five miles each day to go to school and you may believe me.  I may say that if we wanted to do computer animation we had to build our own computer and you may believe me.  I may tell you that the electronics for a 512x512 frame buffer (graphics display) without the monitor might cost you about $30K.   Or that a major production studio had about 1/2 gigabyte of disk total.

It is extremely difficult to look into the past and really understand what people were thinking and why they did what they did.  If you are going to understand history, even the history of people still living, then you are going to have to realize how recent certain things really are, how much smaller the community was, how much less money was involved, and how much of this was essentially an outsider activity.

The projects I am referring to were created and premiered, generally at SIGGRAPH, between the years 1995 - 1993 or so.   By 1995 at the latest, it was a completely different world.

So here are some things to consider when viewing an early computer animation project (in no particular order):

1. The further back you go in time, the more likely it is that they wrote their own software or someone on the team was writing software.   What!  Write one's own software!?  How technical!  Yes, thats right, to do computer animation you had to know what a computer was.

2. As far as we know, no one in authority thought this was really going to work. No mainstream entertainment organization believed that they were going to be making movies with computer, that 3D animation would take over from 2D to a large degree, that visual effects would use synthetic imagery, etc.

3. With the exception of Lucas and possibly Disney, so far as I know none of the major studios paid for any of this technology until it was all proven to work and make them money.

4. Some people were being paid to do the projects you know about, some were not.  Those who were paid were often expected to do a real job as well, or in some cases their management permitted people to work on the project you are looking at rather than their real job.

5. Computers were unbelievably slower and more expensive.  A 12 bit 512x512 frame buffer (e.g. color display) cost about $30K in 1976 dollars.  Note that is 12 bits, e.g. 4 bits each R, G and B.

6. Some of the best motion graphics was done between 1976 and 1978.

7. All of the projects that we are talking about here were labors of love.

8. Attending the "film" show was an intellectual activity, as my friend Andy Kopra has pointed out.  It was the ideas being demonstrated that made the project important.  If you did not know what those ideas were then you would not be able to understand the piece.  So for example, imho, "Luxo, Jr" by Pixar was about demonstrating that a character could be brought to life in classic Disney character animation terms using 3D graphics.  The film was about proving that such a thing was possible, and only secondarily about a lamp playing ball with another lamp.

9. Although there were people who were interested in the commercial applications to the entertainment industry, there were also many people who were interested in abstract filmmaking, electronic and video synthesis and other, completely non-commercial uses in the visual arts.

... to be continued

Rashomon (1950) on IMDB

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042876/

Judson Rosebush on the Hudson

Judson Rosebush is a pioneer of computer animation who was partner in one of the earliest computer animation production companies, Digital Effects in New York City.   In this picture, shot available light, he is navigating his boat on the Hudson river and we are passing close to the Intrepid aircraft carrier.

At one point, about a decade ago, Judson ran an office out of Carnegie hall that was doing dozens of interactive media CD-ROMs for various publishers.   I was very impressed as well with Judson's research into the history of the Manhattan project in Manhattan as well as visiting the site of the Trinity test.  He is the only person I know who has in his possession a piece of Trinitite.

I need to track him down and see how he is doing.

The Mystery of Tom Bombadil and Symbolics

When Craig Reynolds sent me a link to Tom Bombadil's Facebook Page I did not at first realize why he asked about this person.

Tom Bombadil is of course an enigmatic character from Tolkien's Lord of the Rings series who is the only one in all middle earth who is not affected by the One Ring and seems to be indifferent to the power of Sauron in some way.

Then I looked more closely at this Tom Bombadil and saw the Symbolics 3600 component boards. The 3600 was one of the original Lisp Machines that came from the MIT AI Lab and was commercialized by two different companies, Symbolics, Inc and LMI, Inc.

Look closely at the top of the picture

Only a member of the inner elite would have access to one of these or understand its significance.

Therefore we can ask, who is Tom Bombadil?

So I sent an email to Tom and asked him about himself and what was up.   He replied immediately from Germany.

Its nice to know that we had a positive impact on someone.   Those were back in those naive and idealistic days when we thought that inventing computing and computer animation was going to help the world, not merely provide more opportunities to steal and support corrupt governments.

Tom Bombadil on Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bombadil

Pepper's Ghost and the Spirit Lodge at Expo 86

Once upon a time, a long time ago, I saw one of the best live / theatrical performances I have ever seen, which is the subject of this post. Like all great live performances, part of the impact that it has on you is that you are seeing something that will never be seen again. No matter how rehearsed, no matter how often they give the exact same performance, what you are seeing is live and those moments can never be recreated.

And what I saw was really well done. It was a story about the freedom of the people and of the tribe and about the love of a man for his family. The setting of the play is a native american lodge of some sort, at night, around a campfire.  Our narrator tells you the story his grandfather told him once, long ago.   We of course are not around a fire in native america, we are seeing this as part of a World's Fair and as part of the General Motors pavilion but, magically, it all still works.

I admit, it is hard to believe that what I saw was or could be as good as I remember it.  But as I have researched this post on the sometimes useful but always annoying Internet, I have come across other people who have a similar opinion about what they saw there in that pavilion.

Perhaps if one saw such events from time to time, then perhaps one could believe in the power of narrative, live theatre and the other theatrical arts to enrich our lives and maybe even improve the world.

But of course that is terribly naive and we know better today.

But in 1986 I was much younger and idealistic and made a last minute decision to attend the World's Fair (1) in Vancouver, Canada, Expo 86 (2), in the final week it was open. It was an impromptu trip and it was so long ago that I barely remember any of the practical details. I think a friend had rented a house so I had a couch to sleep on. I don't remember if I drove or flew to Canada, but somehow I remember having a car so maybe I flew and rented, it doesn't matter. But there I was at Expo 86 in its final week as they were basically wrapping up the park after a successful six month run.

If you have never been to a World's Fair before, as I had not,  it is a combination of theme park and international foreign affairs public relations and trade relations exposition. The park is filled with pavilions from various countries that want you to know about their history and what an attractive place it is to visit, to make investments in, or even perhaps to emigrate to. They will have a beautiful building that somehow represents their country, it is usually very open and large, so that you can walk in and get a passion fruit drink and watch films about diamond mining in S. Africa, or who knows what.

A world exposition is an opportunity for designers, architects, businesses and governments to show off how creative and positive they can be.  When things come together, these Fairs can have an impact for years or decades after their run.   In a few cases, such as Paris 1900,  they are recognized as important culturally for as long as a century or more.  So they spend a fair amount of money, which varies depending on how the world economy is doing and produce a result which serves many purposes, from the level of world government and business down to the individual and his or her family.

Expo 86 was "special format" heaven. Special format is the term we used to use in the world of theme parks to describe unusual film format and projection situations. The Hobbit at 48 fps is a modern example of what we used to call special format. At Expo 86 we had real Imax, stereo Imax, Showscan, Stereo Showscan, and on and on. These are all obsolete but esteemed film formats and terms-of-art from the days before digital projection. (5)

But everyone said that the "must see" pavilion was the General Motors exhibit, which had the odd name of "Spirit Lodge".

Spirit Lodge was very difficult to get in to see.  Apparently the theatre was quite small and could only handle a few people per show and maybe 4 shows an hour, so the show itself was short.   There were no reservations as I recall so you just had to get there early and wait in line.   So I did and thus was able to see Spirit Lodge in its first release and in its proper place.

You were in a small room that I think maybe held about 80 people arranged in a semi-circle around the stage. The stage was at the level of the lowest row of the audience, you shared the same space. Like good close-up magic, part of the appeal of what is about to happen comes from the fact you are so close and not more than a few feet away. There is only one performer, a single older man. No robots, no apparatus that you can see.   Just a small camp fire in the center of a dirt floor.   There were a few props around the stage to set the scene and to provide objects for dramatic shadows during the show.  There was nothing to keep you from walking the few feet from your chair to the center of the stage if that is what you wanted to do.

The lights go down and a man comes out. He is dressed in what I remember as a traditional native american outfit from someplace cold (e.g. like Canada).  He was there that night, he told us,  to tell us a story that his grandfather told him many years ago here in this lodge. It is clear from the context that he is addressing us as if we were his grandchildren.  He talked about his love for his grandfather who has been dead for many years now and he told the story of a magic canoe and how it took the men of the tribe wherever they wanted to go. The meaning of freedom, he said, was the freedom of the people to travel. Without the freedom to travel, whether in a magical canoe or otherwise, then there was no real freedom.

And as he spoke to you, live, right there, magically a few feet away, what appeared to be flames and smoke came out of the stage floor and hovered in the air. As he warmed his hands by this magical and impossible fire, images started to appear in the smoke to illustrate his story of his grandfather and the magic canoe from long ago that let the people go where they wanted. The images appeared to be there, live, in three dimensions, not projected in any way, but real.  He moved his hands above the fire and commanded his memories to appear and they did. They came and went in a dreamlike fashion. But it was right in front of you and a few feet away and it looked completely natural.

What I was seeing, of course, without realizing it, was Pepper's Ghost (3), that famous 17th century stage illusion which uses glass and half silvered mirrors to project a stage somewhere out of sight to the stage in front of the audience.   Using the magic of mirrors gives the perfect illusion of depth and substance like we only approximate with stereopsis. Somewhere in the back, or above me, was another stage that had some combination of film projection, perhaps projection on solid objects, perhaps projection on other transparent screens, and so forth.   Mirrors and glass were used to transmit the image to the center of that little stage with you not more than a few feet away from it.

How they managed to do this in a way that worked for all the different perspectives in the audience that day, and every day of its performance, is a mystery to me. Pepper's ghost is very tricky to execute and yet we had a lot of people sitting around the campfire. But it was perfect.

I have never seen Pepper's Ghost look so good.

I am not sure what this picture is, but it may be concept art associated with Spirit Lodge.

And of course, the context at the time, remember, is 1986 and the world is still divided by the Cold War and the Iron Curtain. And there are many nations where people are not allowed to travel outside their country for fear that they would defect to the West. So, Spirit Lodge, at this international exposition in the pavilion of General Motors was about the freedom to travel, in other words it was a subversive message, tastefully done. Very nice, and unusually well done for a company like General Motors, it seemed to me.  (4)  

It played for the length of the Exposition and, as is the nature of such things, disappeared.

I know that years later a version of Spirit Lodge opened at  Knott's Berry Farm. It may still be there for all I know. But I have never seen it there, and don't intend to, because I know it would only diminish it for me. Part of what made Spirit Lodge what it was, was when and where it was. In Vancouver, much closer to the reality of native america than Knott's could ever be. And it was performed then, during the Cold War, when the concept of transportation as a manifestation of freedom could have the subversive meaning that it had that day.

For more on Spirit Lodge see http://bobbea.com/expo-86/gm.html.

_____________________________________________________

Notes:

1. A world's fair or exhibition is an event that only happens a few times any generation and is controlled by an international body. In the history of America the 1938 and 1964 World's Fairs are particularly significant. Some believe that the 1964 Fair was the high point of our civilization in its purest most idealistic form. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Fair

2. Expo '86 was held in Vancouver, Canada between May 2 and October 13, 1986.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_86

3. Pepper's Ghost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper's_ghost

4. Apparently General Motors is known for doing very nice pavilions at World's Fairs, although I do not know the details of this.  So this was not out of character at all and probably a good investment in their global identity.

5. Deleted paragraphs:

Expo 86 had fireworks every night. But in the final week, they did not just have a fireworks show, no, they had a fireworks show designed to use up their extra fireworks so it would all be gone when the last show was over. And they had a lot of fireworks. I mean hours of fireworks. All overwhelming and filling the sky. It went on and on and on. Fireworks need to be experienced and is not something you can store up and remember, unfortunately. But I have the memory of thinking that I will never see a fireworks show like this again.

There were dozens and dozens of pavilions representing countries from all over the world, and a very entertaining center "walkway" of the history of transportation that was many lifesize sculptures for kids to play on representing transportation through the ages, from horse drawn cart through jet airplane and submarines and space craft.

Always Look on the Bright Side of Subsidies

Part 3 of a series.

When Brian was nailed to the cross in the 1st century Roman province of Judea, a thief is alleged to have told him to cheer up, and remember to "always look on the bright side of life".

With that thought in mind, lets review some of the effects, or affects as it may be, of international subsidies and tax exemptions on the industry of visual effects and try to find our silver lining. Sure, the American industry has been crushed and there is massive unemployment in this country and misery. But its not all bad. Here are a few ideas I have come up with and submit for your consideration why this might have some "socially positive" aspects.

1. The tax exemptions and subsidies may result in better films.

It is possible that many of these movies that are made under this system are better because of these subsidies and tax exemptions. Often movies want more visual effects than they can afford. With subsidies, which result in a lower price for the effects, it is possible that producers choose to spend the same amount of money as before but get more work for their money. In the rare case where visual effects actually contribute to the quality of the film instead of being merely stupid, this could result in a better film. To the extent that you believe that the cinema has a role to play in our culture and civilization, then certainly having better films is good for all of us.

2. The tax exemptions and subsidies may result in more films.

The same argument as above but elaborated to include that some films which may not be completely financed and would not ordinarily be made, but under this system do get made either because the discount given to effects encourages the investors to believe that the film is less of a risk, or maybe just lowers the cost of the effects element sufficiently to make the entire budget achievable. In any case, under this scenario, we would get some films that otherwise we would not see at all under the free market, and if the films are good, then we all, theoretically, benefit.

3.Through adversity, character and moral fiber is enhanced.

How lucky are the poor for they will inherit the kingdom of heaven!   Of course they will be dead by then, as I understand the way this works, but still its something to look forward to.  They will have an opportunity before that to learn new skills and work in new industries!  This is America so anything could happen.  They could learn to clean out old sewage lines while their wife and children work in under-regulated garment production, showing great initiative by working 12 hours a day 7 days a week for less than minimum wage.  You know, like minority groups in this country have to do.  Their children could drop out of school and help support their parents by programming stupid web pages for the Internet.  Anything could happen because this is America and both initiative and hard work are ALWAYS rewarded, I hear.

4. Relentlessly competitive, they live by the sword and die by the sword

The companies that went under were not always the nicest companies, made up of decent human beings, or anything like that.  These are/were fairly vicious competitors in a field that shows or showed no mercy.  So they got outmaneuvered and destroyed by structural elements beyond their control, but some of that is their responsibility for failing to deal with the political issues.  We should not weep bitter tears for them.  These companies were for the most part not centers of idealism, good will or progressive anything.     Most of them were snake pits of politics to say the least.    

5. The government subsidies may lead to a more stable industry.

Everyone knows that visual effects companies are (or were) flaky.  The studios would brag about how they put their subcontractors out of business.  So why not just use companies that are supported by other people's tax dollars or supported by large corporations?   These companies are likely to be more reliable and they will complain less than the whiny locals.

6. Failure to organize was a strategic mistake and you lost.

The failure of the digital artists to organize and stand up for their rights,  to get the government to pay attention to them the way their British, N. Zealand and Canadian comrades were able to, led inevitably to the doom of the American worker in this industry. See what "not making waves" gets you. To this day the American worker, the so-called "digital artist", still have not organized.  Of course, at this point getting organized probably would not help, but it couldn't hurt.  Compromised, confused,  and unwilling to do the right thing, so now they suffer what the "free market", quote end quote, under Mercantilism (I mean Globalization, excuse me, I must have forgotten), buys them: a one way trip to the unemployment line. (1)

7. Why not emigrate ?

Why not apply for a junior position in England? Sell your house, leave your kids, or uproot them from school, live in a shared, shitty apartment in London.  After spending 20 years of your life working your way up in the field, you are now unemployed and unemployable in an industry that arguably you helped invent.   Why not apply?  What do you have to lose?  You might get the job. Maybe. Probably not, though.

So what is the problem here? Maybe no problem at all. The "free market" (wink wink) just has winners and losers and overall maybe the industry is stronger and the films are better. After all, the government of those three countries are pouring big money into it, putting their wallets where their mouth is so to speak. So if the US of A fails to respond and it screws the little guy, who cares? The big film companies still make money, more money than ever in fact, and if it is at the expense of the worker or of the people who invented the field, well in America that is just too bad.

In Hearts of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, our narrator says to himself, "He wanted no more than justice. No more than justice!"

Grow up, you're in Hollywood now, and this is what we call justice in this town.

_______________________________________________

The previous posts in this series are at

Part one: Vast Government Subsidies are as American as Apple Pie
Part two: Recent Events in International Finance and Visual Effects

The Roman Province of Judea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_(Roman_province)

Always Look on the Bright Side of Life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJUhlRoBL8M

________________________________________________

Notes:

1. A corollary to this is the failure of "magical thinking".  I have had 20 year professionals in the field tell me with a straight face that studios were going to start giving points of their films to visual effects studios "just because".   Thats just crazy, completely disconnected from reality.  Thats my point, the so called digital artists here, who along with the local production companies are now unemployed, are guilty of the worst kind of magical thinking.

Revised 1/12/2014

Vast Government Subsidies Are as American as Apple Pie

[Do not forget that the VFX Bake Off will be Jan 9 at the usual place and the usual time].

There has been a lot of discussion recently about various government subsidies and tax incentives to filmmakers who do certain kinds of production or post-production work in that country. The country that offers such benefits is in effect co-financing a film with their tax dollars, and in return, sees employment and other benefits brought to a very prestigious industry in their country that might not otherwise be able to compete internationally.

As always, in matters of this type, subsidies are not the sole cause of the situation. None of this would really happen if the industries in the subsidized countries did not demonstrate skill in the areas involved. In many cases, such as the case of the UK and London, there is a long-standing community there that is highly esteemed. Nevertheless, that industry is greatly nurtured and supported by their government's actions on their behalf.

Furthermore, let us not be naive.  This did not just happen.  The local industries have been working with their respective governments to get these advantages.  And can we perhaps suspect that producers and studios have also used their persuasive ways to encourage these governments to shower their beneficence upon them?  Yes, of course they have.  That's their job.  (2)

In the last month or so, three major events have occurred that will likely determine the fate of the motion picture visual effects industries in various nations for the better part of the upcoming decade. All three events are structural and examples of how governments manipulate trade and industry in their perceived national interest.  This is something we, the USA, does whenever it is convenient for us to do so, a topic I will expound upon in an upcoming post.  (1)

The net result over the medium term is that the American effects industry will continue to be destroyed, and that work will pass to three other nations which will develop the technology, employ the people, receive the money, the awards and the careers that come with it.

The issues involved in this matter are far too complicated to put in a single blog post at this time. The best I can do, with my other responsibilities, is to break it into about 5 posts on various topics in this larger subject. The topics will include (a) what has just happened that will set the stage for the next decade, (b) what the effect the actions will have on the domestic visual effects industry, (c) some of the history of international trade and preferential subsidies and other means and (d) the argument will be made that change will only be possible by organizing and working within the political system that exists in this country.

Failure to organize and express our interests politically, which is the current state of things, will result in the destruction of the American industry. Actually that destruction is nearly complete as it is, so the best that could be affected is perhaps a renaissance of those industries.

Without political action, there is not a prayer of success.

Next: Three recent events

___________________________________________________________

1. But if you want a taste of it, see to what extent our government is involved in the creation and current success of the aerospace industry.  This is not subtle.

2. Their job, generally speaking, is to make money by making entertainment product.  They make money a number of ways, but one way is to lower the costs of any given production.  If someone wants to give money, why not?

Late Breaking News: BOIDS tests from 1986 Found

Just as I walk out the door to NYC, I read some old email, and find that Tom McMahon has resurrected the long missing Boids tests from Stanley and Stella.

Boids are what we called the early behavioral animation tests by Craig Reynolds.  It was to showcase that technology that we did the film Stanley and Stella.   This is all shot off the screen of a very low res Symbolics window.

I thought these were lost forever.

When I get back from NY, I will add some more pictures.

The test video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96LIKfKcoxk#t=170

Why I Did Not Attend the Keynote Speech at SIGGRAPH 2013

When I declined to attend the SIGGRAPH 2013 Keynote Speech, a friend was surprised and concerned. The Keynote speech was a collection of talks by successful directors of computer animation as organized by the Academy (of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences). He simply could not understand why I would not want to listen to the publicity machine grind out more material about those chosen by the powerful to be successful, but I will try to explain.

The reason was not because I fundamentally believe that a Keynote speech by a healthy organization is going to be by someone in the field who helped to create it, and who has something to say about how the field is doing, where it has been and where it might be headed. SIGGRAPH has gone away from that years ago, in fact the last talk of that type that I recall was Ed Catmull, president of PIXAR, and even he might have been selected for the wrong reasons.

But I understand why we do not have a keynote speech of that more serious type, and instead usually have someone else who has nothing to do with the field.  The reason is that SIGGRAPH uses the Keynote speech as a way of advertising the conference to the people who might not attend otherwise. Its also a way to generate publicity for the conference, seeing as how our media could not care less about a computer science conference, but give them Hollywood and they jump to. So they choose people who have media appeal to give a "Keynote" speech that isn't.

But that is ok with me because I think that they do need to attract people and there are other ways to get the effect of a Keynote speech. In fact, I think that the Awards speeches which was initiated this year come very close to what I am looking for.

I did not attend because of something else entirely, something ineffable. Something about my past. Something about being in computer animation in Los Angeles in the 1980s.

Voice echoes and camera defocuses to indicate a flashback.

In the 1980s, I chose to destroy my life by working to help invent computer animation. (1) Being an intellectual out of water (any intellectual in Los Angeles is out of water) I attended no less than 20 or so courses at UCLA, the American Film Institute, and attended many lectures at the Academy. Had I not been a complete idiot, I would have enrolled in a degree program and gotten my terminal degree in some field, that would have done me some good. But instead, I decided to learn about the glamourous and rewarding motion picture industry from a series of continuing education classes taught by working professionals. Not less than 300 individual lectures by my reckoning.

And I had a wonderful time. I attended Robert McKee's story structure course when it was ten 4-hour lectures (and not the weekend thing it became). I attended classes with Lynda Obst, Debra Hill, Lauren Shuler, John Dykstra, Bruce Berman, the VP of Finance of Warner Bros, John Badham, Richard Donner, Joel Schumacher, George Roy Hill. Directors, writers, producers, and even a few "movie stars" (Jody Foster, Women in Film, etc).

Writers on writing. Producers on producing. Directors on directing. And I learned a lot, I think. But after a while one has a diminishing return from such things. Hearing Martha Coolidge speak at WIF is entertaining but it does not pay the bills. Hearing Douglas Trumbull talk about doing all the effects on 2001 is enlightening until you realize that he did not do all the effects on 2001. He just managed to figure out how to get the credit for the work (2)

Then, as with anything, knowledge and experience begins to show you the dark side of these innocent events.

So what do we have with these seven so-called "directors of computer animation".

First, very few of these people are directors in the way that term is used in the rest of the motion picture industry. They are at best managers of part of the production process whose creative content (e.g. script, design) has been created by a studio system that may have nothing to do with the director, who in general is partnered with another person to spearhead and organize the production process.

Second, the people chosen to be directors are chosen for a variety of reasons, of which talent and accomplishment are only two, and probably not the most important ones. The people doing the choosing are people who do not have a clue about computer animation, for the most part.

Third, how many of the people up there sacrificed anything to help bring computer animation into existence? None, I reckon. Why in fact, one of them is a stop motion animator who hates computer animation and was dragged into it kicking and screaming.   To glorify such a person at SIGGRAPH is at best ironic but probably worse.

Fourth, isn't it rude to have a presentation celebrating and glorifying people who had nothing to do with inventing a field at this conference while so many of the inventors of the field are unemployed and impoverished for doing so, are walking around outside?

I think it is rude.

There are two other reasons why I did not attend.  First, I do not have enough time at SIGGRAPH as it is to do the work I need to do there and thus consider it a waste of time to listen to talks I could just as easily hear at some other time or venue.   There was nothing about those particular talks that was unique to SIGGRAPH.    Second, I know, from vast personal experience, that while talks of this type might be entertaining, they do not lead to anything.  Ever.

So that is why I did not attend.

_____________________________________________

1. In order to do so, I had to turn down opportunities that almost certainly would have made me independently wealthy. Those opportunities are gone, they were part of that time. And being involved in computer animation did not result in being able to make a living. Therefore, since I did not come from a wealthy family and since being wealthy or being able to generate wealth is a sine qua non of our society,  I had destroyed my life by making this choice.

2. He was so egregious at this that Stanley Kubrick took out an ad in the trades reminding everyone that the credits for visual effects for 2001 had five names, the first being Stanley Kubrick.  I think the ad ran about 1982 but I am not sure.