Date of the podcast: 2022 / 04 / 06
Podcast link : Agora / A Conversation With Leif Jeffers (login required)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoMp66NfsE4
Show notes:
Coming: In the meantime, check out the paragraphs in bold.
Transcript: Beware, the capture was done at 1.25% speed to the timecode might not match the original podcast.
Brent George 0:06
Welcome to the conversation everybody. We have yet another amazing guest on today someone Surprise, surprise, who is working with both David and Jacob. Seems that there is no industry there. There. There there. Kevin Bacon like tendrils in the industry. But we have Leif Jeffers here today who's currently work for Disney. But he's got quite a long track record of working for several big studios. So very, very interested to get into his headspace as to like what that journeys been like, and, and maybe touch on some fun anecdotes. While we're at it. Let's bring in David, and then we'll of course do the live interaction.
David Hubert 0:35
Isn't that we've seen each other not long ago.
Brent George 0:38
Friday? Yeah, yeah. It's it was very, very previous it was I think Friday, actually, yeah, when I'm present Friday was done with a nice set of exes.
David Hubert 0:44
Yeah, that was pretty cool. So now, as we mentioned last week, okay, let's explore other expertise and animation. So you feel that we're right back into our home base. It's just a little bit before we go into another division again. So yeah, it'll be a fun one.
Brent George 0:56
Yeah, make sense? Sounds like there's been a bunch of overlap there. Like it sounds like a lot of the people who work in that general area have not everybody but there's a number of people that have migrated from a lot of that sort of thing almost touched on all the different studios because they kind of bounce around and sometimes just because they're interested the project sometimes it just because, you know, for just they get recruited like it's funny because some people just need to be really, really like sink. Like they've only worked at Pixar. They never jumped around. And there's a whole other group of people have worked everywhere. So to sort of see the difference between certain people.
David Hubert 1:19
Yeah, especially in Sydney like LA for instance. As soon as you have a you know, a pretty strong show reel, and you already have a few years of experience and other big studios. It seems that the door or easily opens to the other studios or it's not rare that you're a little animators, I will spend like a couple of years , each one of those. And Leiff is definitely an example of that. So it'll be interesting to discuss his different experiences.
Brent George 1:36
Yeah, okay. Let's bring him in. We can kind of get this conversation on the road. Mr. Leif Jeffers, how are you sir?
Leif Jeffers 1:40
Hey guys, how is it going? Not too bad. How are you? Good. Thanks for
David Hubert 1:44
Thanks for Thanks for Thanks for accepting your invitation. One of the things Leiff that actually even if we know each other from back in the days and we had a hard time to believe that it's been 10 years ago already that we worked with at Dreamworks or something that I never knew is the little bit of the background story of how did you get in animation in the in the first place? How would you like in the very beginning? Yeah, the very beginning because for the moment that they were like a child like, Oh, my God, I'm going to work at Disney and others are just like happy accident that just happens. Because your journey to get to you to, in animation.
Leif Jeffers 2:13
sir, yeah, my journey was just growing up. I always loved those like movie magic behind the movies, like the effects shows that they would have on TV. And I always knew I wanted to be in film in some kind of get vaccine cool. Kind between that indirectly in or there's anything that follows me away from childhood, like I remember elementary school going and getting, there's very early 3d film set of music called beyond the mind die, I don't really get saw that was kind of like The Lawnmower Man style of 3d, like way back in the day now like, three class and have them watch it in art classes. And so I got into it. And then later, after high school, I decided to go to art school. And at the time, I asked the school where I'm going to like what I wanted to do directing and visual effects or 3d, and they're like, Well, you gotta pick one, because they're totally different tracks, and you won't have time to do both. So I settled into doing visual effects, 3d, still hadn't walked into animation. And it was only a couple of years into school, I went to the Academy of Art University in San Francisco. And at the time, I don't know they still have it, they had these Pixar classes, which are just portfolio review entry classes, taught by Pixar animators, and it was going into those that really kind of, I guess, ignited the flame for animation specifically, and just kind of deep dive from there. And then from there, you know, just living at the computer for a few years ago, I don't think I've ever really moved away from theater since then. But just going there straight to blue sky.
David Hubert 3:21
And for you. And for you animation was was it an expertise that you that you knew that this is what you wanted to do it or it was more like CG in general. And then it just happened that animation was the the first opportunity that you got,
Leif Jeffers 3:32
necessarily the first opportunity, it was definitely CG VFX. In general, I was really into it, but not really knowing the specific discipline. But I didn't know enough about it to know the different disciplines. And then it was a combination of seeing the animation stuff that we've done at the student at the school at that time, it was having an unexpected opportunity to go see an early screening of Finding Nemo at Pixar and walking around that studio while I was in school and geeking out about all that stuff that those two things kind of combined to kind of make me kind of pick that path. And like being able to embody a character seemed like a fun, fun way, spend your time.
David Hubert 3:59
I think there's many people right now in the industry that would have memories of oh, you know, just special effects in general, like making entertainment, whatever that implies, which eventually led to animation. So it's funny because we often have this idea that most successful animator had a clear plan of action that they executed. But the truth is often like Well, I'm kind of interested in this and this and this and then eventually it kind of leads to an opportunity that brings enemies.
Leif Jeffers 4:23
And I will say that like I you know, I always drew since I was little that's kind of my hobby and pastime. And so that was what led me towards art school for sure. And you know, I mean, I think what most of us have our age, you know, Jurassic Park was a big inspiration and just really geeking out about that Terminator two scene that he went 1000 You know, at the end, like how in the world did he do that?
David Hubert 4:42
Yeah, that was the same thing for me all the way. Even before that was all of the like the prosthetic or the very physical elements that would make you know a special effect. But yeah, the Terminator, Terminator, Jurassic Park towards everyone are all big influence from from the 90s of most of us that ended up in the industry that
Leif Jeffers 4:58
yeah, that's for sure.
Brent George 4:59
Kind of weird to think that that was kind of the beginning. And it feels so long ago and it also feels so not not so long ago at the same time, like I went back and watched the original Toy Story and, and reminded him quickly reminded me that like, wow, like that was really at the very, very beginning, you take a look at the rigs and just the animation and like some of the character designs, you compare it to what they're actually producing now and it's just like, it's it doesn't it's not even it doesn't make any sense. But it's, there's such a huge gap, that sort of literally it and Sophie was such a relatively few number of years, it sort of just grew enormously hoping that the capability of these these productions. Yeah, I
Leif Jeffers 5:24
mean, I don't I mean, some people might speak more accurately to this man, for sure. Even on this first one that even have IK legs. So like you know, exactly, you know,
Brent George 5:31
the whole counter I mean, the FK legs is something a lot of fun.
David Hubert 5:35
Yeah, I would say before having watched a little bit of it not long ago, I would say probably the two first like towards everyone in Bug's Life didn't age that that well, but I mean, back in the day, they were literally like almost any meeting in Excel sheets of entering values and where this is going to go. So let's talk about the sorcery too. And then Monsters Inc. and Ford, it's still aged pretty well, even if it's, like 20 years ago, almost those movie were released last week, because
Brent George 5:55
I lost perspective like you cuz I remember the time thinking, oh, man, this is for sure the future of entertainment. And but I look at it now. And I'm like, wow, like I just we're so spoiled. It just it's so hard to kind of remain remain that sort of keep that into perspective is very difficult, because we're because of the crazy, crazy advancements, it's nuts.
Leif Jeffers 6:08
I mean, even today, I think there's very few films that are visually timeless in 3d, because it's still moving at such a breakneck pace.
David Hubert 6:15
Yeah, I agree. So moving to so leave your first job as animator was at Blue Sky. Right? So you worked at Blue Sky everywhere a little bit to to get at DreamWorks. And then you went to Riot games and then Disney, right? Am I missing one or that's needed for a studio, I'm curious to maybe go in critical knowledge, chronological order and have a little bit of your different experience as those different studio because I know that every studio that I worked at were kind of very different in the sense, you know, both the production where they were to kind of budget that we had the culture and all of it. So just had a little bit of an overview of your own experience in each one of those. Those those studios.
Leif Jeffers 6:52
Okay. Well, I mean, I think the biggest difference between the studios that I found is its culture and style. That's kind of the big things. And I think other than that, it's all pretty much the same stuff with a different name. But like culture, culture at a studio, for me with different parts that I think is a studio culture, part of it, I think, is where I was at, in my journey, or like, you know, I started, I think I was around 20 to 23, when I started at Blue Sky. So then I did with the other connected the other people that have similar age. So that was the time where we all hang out together, we all go out together. Like, we're all one big family. And so that was a really fun time, with a lot of hard work and long hours, but still a lot of fun. And then it's just keeping that thread when I went over to DreamWorks. And, you know, I was still younger, but like the crowd generally was older. at DreamWorks, a lot more people were at a different stage of their life. They were in having families, and they've got their own group of friends. And you know, some people been there 1030 years and people, maybe five years, there's a range, but you have to find your pocket, where is it at Blue Sky at that time, I could go like, Hey, you guys wanna go see a movie, and like two thirds of the department would go to the movie. And at Dreamworks you go, Hey, guys, I'm gonna see a movie. And I'd say like, maybe one or two, everybody else is like not going to life, I gotta go do my life. And then culturally at Riot, you know, that was my first time going into the game world. And there's just a very different beast. And I don't have any other point of reference as far as how other game companies are. But it's it got a much more tech company mindset of like, you know, disruptive industry. And at a much younger, I'd say, talent pool. So then for the person with a feeling like, suddenly, on the other side, we're like, I gotta like, now I gotta look at it. Oh, you guys are your movie. And it didn't eat felt like a nice mix of the two. You know, there's different age groups all kind of doing their own thing and getting together and very collaborative and fun environment. And if we're going back in time, again, to the styleside, the big difference on those I felt just for me, and I'm sure David might have different experience at Dreamworks variants during market if indicative my personal take away from it was that I was at Blue Sky during Ice Age 2 and Horton Hears a who and Ice Age 3 of it. And that was about really pushed, animation really pushed style, you know, the Bible at the studio at the time was "Cats Don't Dance". And so it was really about like, how can we really have these motions that are appealing and interesting, the transitions are appealing and interesting. It's like the global shape changes of the characters, and how can we play that against each other, a little bit more of a frenetic energy across the whole shots. And it was it was very much living into a Looney Tunes type of style. And just how far can we push it in 3d? Because when I was in school, the teachers were saying, No, you can't do that stuff in 3d. And then I ended up at Blue Sky where we are totally trying to do that stuff. Doesn't have a brain having to learn. And then I went to DreamWorks. And for me, you know, there was a lot of movies going on at DreamWorks. So I didn't necessarily work on all of them. But I got put on to the dragons, movies and movies like that. And so that became much more a study of naturalistic and acting driven choices, more than style driven choices, I guess, is what I say. And it again, depends on the show, I think if you were on, I don't know, like Monsters vs. Aliens, or penguins or Madagascar, it's much more of a style, but I was always on those dragons, Rise of the Guardians, or Puss in Boot those type of ones that are much more grounded. And so they're focusing more primarily on performance above all else, and like, you know, you'd be iterating on your performance sometimes even if necessary at the cost to polish a little bit. It's like performance was number one on those films and then Riot was its own separate beast that we can talk about because of the different styles in upstart within the company. And then Disney I feel like stylistically it is at least my impression as well. Yes, naturalistic performances are important. I feel like they leaned heavily into 2d graphic appeal, polishing appeal seem to be the thing where we'll iterate the most on it's like, okay, yes, that facial expression is what it needs to be But how would you actually draw it? Would you even have this bottom teeth, would you go a little more three quarter? You know, how would you cheat in a drawing? And how can we achieve that same thing in 3d? And, you know, very clean arcs and clean spacing? Yeah, I mean at DreamWorks, I when I was playing, I was more like intentional imperfection. So let's always having smooth art. Sometimes you want other imperfections to have that believability at the moment? And so Disney is so far it's been much more we want clean arc, clean spacing.
David Hubert 10:21
And was it a big gap for you going from Blue Sky to Dreamworks? Because I agree, especially on How to train your Dragon, and you're on the Rise of the Guardians as well. Right. And this one was definitely a we have reference, we want to say we stick to the reference, but we go get all the little naturalistic details realistic details. As as you mentioned, Blue Sky was all about, you know, entertainment appeal like these do move, go, go go. So it was very successful, it was just more like, oh, well, let's go and practice something different for a couple years.
Leif Jeffers 10:49
But it's funny because like, you know, Dreamworks for me was a lot of Toothless animation. So well, that's it's actually referenced, there had to be some filter going through it to get to the to the character. And so I think there was no matter what I think, just going back to your initial thing, I think, even at Blue Sky, I think my natural tendencies are towards naturalism. I think that just based off of the way I was taught, and where I put my emphasis when I was learning, and so it was a growth time for me to be able to push into the more cartoony zany stuff. So going into the Dreamworks style was kind of felt a little bit more within my default zone. And then then it was much more about going like, okay, animated quadrupeds, blue sky, but now I got to do it, realistically, I'm gonna need to fly. And so I've got to start learning flight mechanics. So a lot of my time, in the beginning was watching a lot of like, birds videos on using motion gallery, or like one of those getty images or something to like, really understand the way things move, or how the tail influences the direction changes. And that kinda stuff was, I felt like on the first Dragon, that's where a lot of my energy was. And then you're talking like Guardians, I was mainly on Bunny, the bunny character. So again, I had to be a little bit of filtering through so I can see like on Jack and be like, Okay, can I reference me? What am I gonna grab? You know?
David Hubert 11:50
Yeah, yeah. You mentioned some some of the resorts that were with, you know, fly cycle of birth and all that for, for Dragon? Is this part of the process, something that you actually enjoyed? Or for you, it was more like, Okay, well, let's do it more the homework first. So we're able to do it, because therefore some that it's like, this exploration phase is like the most fun part. And for others that just like, Oh, can I can I just make now?
Leif Jeffers 12:11
Yeah, I mean, I think for me, it's all about, in order for me to feel like I can do my job, effectively, I have to have that knowledge base underneath it. Because otherwise, I'm gonna be bogged down in the mechanics and not be thinking about the performance. And so for me, that learning period is really engaging and entertaining for me, because I'm learning new information. And one of the things I always liked about animation was that you kind of had to know a little bit of all disciplines to be able to do it, you know, all art forms, like, like, you can't just be like, Alright, go make somebody dance. It's like when I gotta go figure out how to dance or like, what is the right kind of dance? And how does the body move and why. And so, because otherwise, at least I found for me, if I don't do that, then I'm not allowing myself to get to the essence of the acting of the performance. We don't have to worry about the display go here or here, like, how does it work mechanically. So I think, especially definitely my career, it's like, really about understanding that if it's quadruplets, then okay, what kinda quadratically I gotta figure out, how does their rhythm naturally work? You know, if like, if it's a mammoth, for, for Ice Age, it's like, oh, there's a period of time when all the feet are on the ground traveling together, there's not always, you know, on the back end could be like a fever traveling on both sides, on one side together, you know, whereas other animals might always have a foot up in the air. You know, we're like birds, like, so much of their movement are coming from the slight angle changes on the wings, but then the tail is there also to help, you know, and we're gonna use those to detract from it.
David Hubert 13:19
Yeah, we had a, we were running some strings that we answer a few questions, and one that we had recently, it was about the how do we use a reference in general, because we've seen, especially when you're teaching or you're looking at your real using some reference that it literally like Chris was copy that he copied exactly what it is, and others, you don't even understand what how is this reference have been influencing this animation? Because there's no. So how is it for you? Maybe how did it evolve? Over time, the use of reference?
Leif Jeffers 13:45
Yeah, and I'll start off by saying, like, I think some of those were, they're really diverged from the reference. Some of them are stylistically they just version, some of them probably got noted away from their reference. Also, you know, to do the iterations with supervisors and directors, for me reference with the, with our shooting reference in college, for sure, and use it. And I think my general relationship with references stayed broadly the same, where it's like, I will shoot reference until I find something I'm happy with. And then I will put it up, you know, starting out, there was no bringing it into my so it was just a quick time next to that I would timeout with a stopwatch and write down notes. But now you can have it in Maya. But basically, I would grab the main key poses from that reference, translate that into the 3d as a general first pass, then I would go back over those poses and be like, How can I push these poses a more feeling version or more readable version, sitting with them, whatever the style is of the show you're working on. So if it's right for the Guardians, you might be favoring naturalistic behavior over readability, sometimes you might make the poses a little less readable and a silhouette because that's not the driver is that performance within versus like a Blue Sky thing where it's like, okay, I need to or do anything I need to push the graphic appeal and make it readable from the silhouette and also not having overlapping things that are missing muddying up the image. So I could have passed that on as main goes. Then, depending on the show and what the needs of the shot are. I will start breaking down what the motion is between those and I usually kind of approach it a little bit from a layered standpoint and the way that I'm observing it, meaning that like, I'll look at the root of the character, you know, there hips and be like, how are they mechanically moving what they're doing to the hips? What do I want to grab them to put into my shop, and then I'll work my way up the chain of the body because it's just them in the head until I have a decent blocking that I'm feeling good about. After that point, usually the reference turns off. And then from that point to the end of the shot, I'm just kind of seeing it as what it is on the screen, and how can I push it? How can I push and pull it with the performance of that not actually reading that I overcomplicate things, only the strict stuff out, you know, that kind of thing. And that's it might process generally through my whole career, the only thing that's changed is when at Blue Sky, I did more thumbnailing. And as I've progressed in my career, I do less thumbnailing. And I think part of that I just found that I just get frustrated with the time I'm spending doing the thumbnails, like I could already be posing it up in the computer, and then I would have the version I could push and pull from there and just start there. That works for most shows, I feel like if you're going into a very graphic show, and definitely not a reference heavy show, then you know, then I'll bring the thumbnailing back because it's a necessity start thinking things in like rhythms and shape languages more than mechanics. And then they'll start there. But yeah, I usually always start with references. And I'll say, when I started out my career, it would be like sitting in a reference room for 45 minutes to an hour doing the same line over again, and a pick and choosing little bit for each one and cutting them together. And I think as I started my career, and I honestly taking an improv class, I guess brought it for me was just having confidence in your choices. And knowing that, basically any idea you do ultimately work once you put it through the whole machinery under your process. And so now my reference to the time is like maybe five to 10 minutes and other people work. And then I'll pick the one and then you know, just not live or die by my reference, like a starting point, you know.
David Hubert 16:23
Just wanted to ask you think it's because you've got way better at it or because you're you don't suffer from analysis paralysis anymore, when you're going and looking at those different options.
Leif Jeffers 16:30
I think it's analysis paralysis, I think honestly, it was it was the like improv class, like, somebody said, Oh, go take improv. And I personally didn't enjoy improv, a little bit more introverted on the spot, and groups is not really not really my thing. So what I took away from it that I really liked was like, all these people are just making the choice in the moment, and then they've got to make it work, they have to live or die by that choice. And there's no really going back. And then when I just put a reason I prefer shooting reference. Again, after taking a class, I started just trusting in my choices more and being like, cool, this will work. You know, and I had this understanding for myself for a long time was that throw away your first idea is really your second idea. These are gonna be your generic ideas, and then keep going keep mining until you find the thing. And for me, whatever reason, there was a light bulb at some point, they were like, yes, be mindful of what's cliche. But also don't necessarily throw away that initial idea. Because what may seem obvious to you may be original to everybody else, you know, because you all bring your own personality, your own style to things. And so just because it seems like, oh, that's the obvious cliche thing, take step back and look like is it really a cliche, cliche thing? Or is it just the way I do things? And would that be a unique thing? And sometimes it works. Other times are like, no, no, I shouldn't be doing this, like 10 times in my shot for whatever it is. But
Brent George 17:28
I really like this idea of, because I've I've often brought up improv classes being something that more animators should definitely try. And I think it's, it's funny, because that particular reason ever came up in my brain, but it makes so much sense when you say it, this idea of, of people that are doing things in front of a camera, like the actual actor, they need to live in the moment, right, so they need to commit to, to their choices, kind of right going in there instead of getting hung up. And it's trying to self direct themselves too much in their brains. And I see a lot of new animators they really struggle with that they end up putting, you know, shooting some reference, and then just being paralyzed with indecision, because of, they just, they just, they feel like they don't know how to pick one and just own it and move forward. You know, they just, they're always worried that Oh, but that maybe that's not the best choice. And there's so many good choices here. But like you said, it's like there's a good chance that almost all of those ideas can work as long as you then support it and give it the right amount of love. Right. I'm wondering in your mind, like, what is your your what is your mental process? Was it look like when you're validating those choices?
Leif Jeffers 18:11
Sorry, yeah, I mean, I think I think it's like a, honestly, I think that's the thing that took time, you know, like building your, your taste, I guess, your acting taste. And so it's sort of like there's like, just like, it's gut instinct on like, when like, this feels right, this doesn't feel right to the moment. And I guess, filters that I could run it through without really realizing it is like, is it supporting the subtext at the moment more than the surface level, because I think that's an important thing. It's making sure that and I think a lot of my time in reference is spent really trying to isolate out, me thinking about it as I'm doing it. Because I think a lot of us in animation particulary, you have a certain number of shots that you need to do, there's pose you start with, a pose you need to end with, you need to grab this cup, at some point in the shot, you know, that certain landmarks you need to hit. So at least for me, when I'm starting to shoot reference, I'm kind of more in my brain, than the choreography of like, I need to go here, I need to figure I need to start like this camera here and to be looking there. And then my time is really just trying to turn that off, and be like, okay, cool. Who cares if the shot is supposed to be looking like this, and I'm asking it like this, I can translate it in my head, I can rotate it in my head to go like, I can get what I need from it. So instead, like turn that part of your brain off. Shoot the reference that just feels true to the moment. And then really, for me, I tried to figure how to reverse engineer if I really was off based on that first pose. And that can be reverse engineering and computer that can do reverse engineering by going like cool, I'll just, I'll just start with my pose and get to that certain point of animation that maybe that'll help me bridge the gap for myself mentally. But beyond that, it's just when I'm walking back, my reference is trying to go like, Alright, I'm looking at my eyes. Am I thinking about what I'm doing? Or am I just doing it just kind of, it's kind of the thing, like, I feel myself, am I reciting a line? Or am I doing it so somebody's like, get out of that a little bit, get stuck in the rhythm of it is like, Alright, fine. I'll turn the audio file off now. And now we'll just memorize the line and just say, whatever rhythm that works for me hoping that it's gonna be some of the rhythm of what was there. But I'm not stuck in this loop of it playing over and over again. The other thing that I'm mindful of is trying to catch myself when I've just gotten done an echo chamber at the same pose over and over again, like, you know, I'll be like a minute or two of filming stuff I can look into, like, every time am I doing the same gesture? And that's the only thing I'm doing this is one gesture. Then I got to make a conscious choice of going like can you try some other gestures? It's like anything to try something. So those are kind of the things for me that I'm looking out at Hi At a high level,
Brent George 20:00
I like the word the use of the word truth. I've just come up a lot with actors. I think there's a lot of overlap there, as you're usually is between what an animators process and an actress process. And I think finding the truth in the moment I think is, especially if you're working on every performance oriented or performance sort of prioritize scene, like you were mentioning tends to be the thing that you see a lot of what it was, it was it was mostly DreamWorks, he said, was more performance, right. They were prioritizing that.
Leif Jeffers 20:19
I said they prioritize it the most at any place at work. I will say Disney definitely has a priority on it.
But I feel like as you're iterating, with your supervisors, and more on the polish, and less on the choices, right, so there's a bit of a change. You made me think of something with reference, that is another thing that I had to get out of the habit of which was, when you're starting out, I can tell you when I was starting out, I was trying to act as a cartoon. So like, if I'm grabbing a cup, I wouldn't just read the cup. It
Brent George 20:47
was like a puppeteer, you're putting your body. Yeah, exactly.
Leif Jeffers 20:49
So instead of doing that, like turning that part off, and be like, just do it right, and figure out how to exaggerate your character. Yeah, as an artist afterwards, you're gonna be more than the truth of the moment. And I think that's so valuable.
Brent George 20:58
Well, that segways perfectly. My next question, which is, you mentioned a couple, you've used the word filter a number of times, which I think is really interesting, when you think about filter, I mean, it comes from that particular author, there's lots of filters. But when I think of filters, in this kind of context, I'm talking about filters up front of a lens, right? Something that modifies in some way, something that would be normally reading from the camera. And that's a really, really interesting and very, very straightforward way to think about animation, especially when you when you complete what you just said, if you start with the truth of the moment of performance, and then add filters in front of that, you're actually kind of making your life a lot easier, rather than trying to get it all right in front of the camera. Let's get the truth. But make sure that the course makes sense. And the truth, of course, on the checklist would have I'm sure you have your own checklist, like what makes something truthful, like you said a couple things like subtext. And all these other very important qualities I think you probably measuring in real time automatically. And then if and then if afterwards, you can then apply filters, but I'm wondering, in your mind, what does that what does that look like? What does what does the filtering process look like? If say, for instance, working in blue sky, and the pushing the boundary a little bit on sort of like that kind of Warner Brothers esque looking at timing, like, what is your what is your process usually look like? As soon as we say you're working on a project like that, in your trial, you've already got a good performance, you found a really good one. Now you want to layer up all these other things? What kind of things go through mind at that point? I'm wondering?
Leif Jeffers 21:53
Yeah, I mean, I think at that point, it becomes about design, it is design of motion, it is design of poses, you know, so it's like, okay, I have the truth of what the acting needs to be. And then eventually, it's a more serious acting moment, but it's only if it was in a cartoony style, then you're like, Okay, stylistically The show has strong shape changes, strong line of actions, very pushed expression. Okay, so now I started going through like, okay, my shoplifting, I've got an expression, when I'm bored, I'm just this is my board, face, whatever it is, and then like, Okay, I need to push that forward. Okay. Well, like, if I was to draw this, if I was to be a caricature artist, I would they exaggerate things within my expression to make it bored really work for them. Like, they'd have to look at eyebrows that whatever that things are going, you know. And so for me, it's like going like that filters, like, what is the style filter of the show, the now let me go through my performance and go like, just for myself, like, I know that this is me trying to be bored. This is me being happy. This is me being excited, whatever, cool, this is how it came out like that the unique asymmetry of whatever happened when I did it, how can I push that to support the style support the rhythms, you know, definitely, like 2d Drawing principles come out of like, you know, your line of actions, your straight vs curves, simplicity vs complexity, readability, you know, silhouette, like those type of things, you start playing through each of those checklists are going like, okay, line of action? Is this a strong line of action? What if I pushed it more and so sometimes, for me, that'll be just like, I have my pose, my golden poses, and then I go to the very next frame, that's a detail starting step a lot of time. And I'll just be like, How can I push that pose of try, push another maximum, have requested a post, try it, okay, then I compare a frame through the three, four pose and be like, which is actually the most appealing, which is pushed too far. I'm gonna find what I want, I just replace the main pose with that, and then continue down to the next thing. I think that's generally how I do things. Because like, you know, very often in animation, you're not even animating a human, it might be a anthropomorphize animal, you know, or something like that. You're like, cool, I made this sneer face. But now I've got a character with a snout. How do I translate that feeling onto this snouted character, you know, so I think naturally, we all do it to some extent, you know, there's just no other way around it. And so I think it's just layering those on. And I think it's just, you know, I think a lot of my animation style has evolved to be, step, pose to pose and then transition to spline and to like, you know, moving on from there. But I think the beginning, I was taught more of a layered animation style, where you like, you just start at the root, make that right, everything's good as you move up the chain, make that right in the head. And so my splining process still kind of lives in that world. So I think my mind still kind of works in a layering way too. So if you see a lot of my shots, there's a progression and quality, I assume, there's my feet. As it progresses, I gotta go with some animators like they're supposed to, they hit in blocking or their final poses, and they just get more poses in between them, and then the shot is done. But that's not me, man. It's always an evolution to the end. So it's like, it'll look a little bit more rudimentary and just refined, refined, refined, it's I think that's the thing layered approach in my mindset works into how I filter things onto a freestyle, it'd be like a checklist of things, you know, it's, it's something of action is pushed expressions. Did I do that? Okay, can I do it more? Okay. All right, move on to the next thing. And then just cycling through it again, again, getting feedback from other people where they go, Yeah, that's too pushed or , it doesn't feel like the style of the show. And you like learn and then you dial in a little bit better on the next shot, you know, as you're starting out?
David Hubert 24:30
I'm curious, do you show your reference to the director or you keep it for yourself and you present in blocking instead?
Leif Jeffers 24:36
I often don't show my reference to the directors, unless it's something that's going to be too time consuming to block out. And we're not I don't have extreme confidence in the idea. And it would be a multi day thing to block out. But a two minute conversation. If I just had a reference, then I'll share the reference. Like, I have no issue with only reference. Like I'm not embarrassed by it. I know. It's part of the process. It's just, I'd rather be more representative of what they're actually going to see if the things evolve away from the reference.
Brent George 24:58
I wanted to say something really quick as I wanted to call it because I thought was really interesting. I feel like I've used this before myself. So I'm glad we have parallel thinking here. But caricatures. I think that a lot animators can learn a lot from caricature artists because they're kind of doing the same thing that animators need to do when they're trying to stylize animation. Like you were kind of describing it like a characterization. Like, okay, good. So these are my moments, these are my poses, how can I make that pose more that pose? How do we make that anticipation read even more clearly make it bigger. And basically, like character artists do the same thing. They're looking at features on the face, making noses smaller, making those bigger eyes closer together, or further apart. These are all just exaggerations of truth that lives sort of right in front of them. And I just I really wanted to call it up as I think it's a really good way to describe stylization filtering, and, and sort of how to apply it.
Leif Jeffers 25:33
You know, it's funny, you remind me of a advice I got early in my career from an animator Blue Sky has stuck with me and because like they're pushed dial, so your natural inclination is to push your poses and you exaggerate, you exaggerate your motion, you exaggerate your poses, and they brought up the point to go like, look at it, reframe the way you're looking at this instead of exaggerating motion, exaggerate emotion, focus on the internal and let that bubble out into the surface. So like, if somebody the sample they gave is kind of like if somebody said, like, sad and whatever they've ever done in their life, how would that make them feel? Are they just like sinking and melting into themselves will show them like pose that don't just pose like a bigger frown and bigger brows? Like posing the internal emotion doesn't exaggerate that interesting. And so I think, I think that was a big help for me. And understanding what exaggeration could mean beyond just a bigger version of the same pose,
Brent George 26:11
sometimes can be smaller, right? Exaggeration doesn't have to be bigger, it sometimes can be taking something that small and make it even smaller, right? Exaggeration goes both ways, theoretically. All the time. Yes,
Leif Jeffers 26:20
it's exaggerated, whatever the emotion is, or whatever the character you're trying to get across, which, sometimes that's less is more,
Brent George 26:25
sometimes.
David Hubert 26:27
So you've mentioned that, you know, it was definitely more push. So how do you get from an idea or a even a reference performance and you push it visually to something that's going to be super dynamic, DreamWorks was a little bit more decided of let's go get the essence of the performance and sometimes a little facial subtlety and all that. Is there something at Disney that you can recognize that you that you have to work on more? Or some advice that you got there or anything at that time at Disney that made you evolve in a slightly different direction as an animator?
Leif Jeffers 26:55
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think the graphic appeal is a big one. Because I mean, like, well, yes, I've been doing it, theoretically, my whole career, there's a different emphasis on it at Disney, you know, there's a huge emphasis on line breaks and shapes, like the way you think of it as a drawing, like where there's angle changes, you know, in different places, and maintaining those and not losing those and letting the architecture of the architecture of the face lives in poses, learning where the 3d cheats are, where like in 2d, even if I'm talking to you full frontal, the drawing might be a little bit three quarter, you know, this is more appealing to have that three quarter, you know, having those like, like, you know, there's usually like a swoop in here and then out, like having a subtle linebreaks be mindful of those. I think stylistically on a broader time, especially from coming from Dreamworks, where it was all about nuance and intentional imperfections, and all kind of things, figuring out, you know, how can I simplify, without losing the essence of what it is, you know, and it's like, you know, more graphic posing, or more graphic shape language, but not as pushed as what this guy was doing. It lives more in a truth naturalism, but it's a much more how would you draw this is just across the board. So, you know, having some background in drawing, but I wouldn't call myself the most incredible 2d draftsman ever and great to work with some very incredible ones over the years. You know, it's a fun learning experience, you know, and so, I'm really enjoying that at the moment of like, How can I push that appeal at all doesn't appeal, appeal and like, using a definition of appeal being the way things relate to each other, you know, within within a face within a body pose, and just putting those ideas? Definitely the growth has been for me, and where the fun has been really the last few shows,
David Hubert 28:15
I think that really had this nice sense. The it feels that Tangled was a, you know, a turning point, where you really feel that you know, the Glen Keane that is redrawing under so many of those poses, and you can feel, I mean, both was already a step in the right direction, but Tangled was just like, Okay, now, the appeal is just screaming all over the screen all of a sudden, and it feels like you know, since then they've never looked back. And some movies might have different style a little bit. But this idea of visually appealing in the posing and in the expression and the performance all that just stayed for forever.
Leif Jeffers 28:43
Yeah, I feel like I feel like the 2d is just ingrained into the DNA of the studio, you know. And so I think anyway, we've got some of the old 2d Disney legends still there. And there's lots of like, newer artists who have 2d backgrounds also. So there's just a love of 2d. And even, it's not just the actual act of 2d, but just the approach to 2d. So like, even, you know, if I was going to draw something, and I was going to have inbetweens in it, like what is the realistic amount of inbetweens, you would have if you were drawing with a pencil versus if you were drawing it, or if you're using a computer to have infinite amount of easein, and that you could do this quarter pixel with, you know, like, is that where you want to spend your frames, you know, certain thinking about things more graphically as if you were drawing it, which I, you know, I know there were people at DreamWorks, who did that, you know, there's people who come from 2d to even call their poses drawing, you know, and I just had never one of those people. So it's like, it's been my evolution as an artist, I guess. Yeah. Go 100
Brent George 29:26
I'm just gonna, it was gonna change topics. I'll be able to follow up question they should go Go for it, right.
David Hubert 29:31
Yeah, no, for me, it's just this I was wondering because during this time with Tangled, and you're back today there's been a change of leadership back then that you had the you know, John Lasseter and Ed Catmull that have arrived and kind of helped to restructure a little bit the the animation studio there is there since you've been at Disney was there any stories or anything discussed about this transition? Because Disney did a couple of like, okay movies and then very rapidly after Tangled it was just like hit after hit after hit. So is there something in that transition that kind of spoke about?
Leif Jeffers 29:56
Yeah, unfortunately, I don't have a lot of knowledge on that time. Like when I came was actually When the transition of Lasseter leaving, and, and Jennifer Lee coming in, so I don't really have a lot of history I do. I mean, I heard secondhand. So take with a grain of salt that just, you know a lot was riding on Tangled being successful for the studio? Like if not then, you know, studio may not be what it is today, you know. So it's like, I know there's a lot of pressure on that film. And I think they definitely for about a year had a lot of a big education on appeal from Glen Keane in particular, like doing drawovers for some most of the people's shots. I feel like the impression I get as an outsider looking in within the department, I feel like that's where a lot of the growth happened for a lot of the team that's still here from that day. But beyond that, I don't I can't really speak to it. I just don't know. Brett, good.
Brent George 30:33
I wanted to pivot a little bit because we're the time is vanishing, as it usually does on these these calls. So Riot, let's talk about Riot for a second. Just because I'm have a personal interest in this is why I wanted to talk about it. Okay, so you left to work on what I heard. So I'll get to the reason why in a second. But there was a dream team that was being formed over there for a while. And I believe this I saw some of the work that came out of the dream team because they were doing some cinematic like work for their League of Legends property that had come out and it hit them hit the friggin the, the internet and like literally broke the internet, cuz it was just unbelievably good. The work that was happening there. And I assume you probably joined to be part of that team, I guess. Right? You were there for how long? Three years? Three and a half years? Right. But it's so at some point, though, that team was disbanded for a variety of I'm sure, complicated reasons. But I mean, what was that? What like, I mean, I would imagine he would have had some pretty amazing people on that team with you. Because I heard legendary stories of the recruiting process, and how they were able to put together some like really, really, really lead animators to to drive that whole department. Like what was that time like for those that short three years?
Leif Jeffers 31:26
I mean, it was, it was a mixture of amazing, fun and incredible frustration. Yeah, it's kind of like a startup in a way within the company. So you gotta imagine it's a video game company with a mindset of more of a tech company, branching out into narrative storytelling. And so, you know, they brought a lot of us in to develop stories, they had a story they wanted to start with when they build out their pipeline and team. And you know, it's a lot of pipeline that has to be built out for building from the ground up of like, trying to have like highend 3d stuff, you know, and so there was learnings that needed to happen on both sides. And the frustrations usually stem from communication issues of terminology, you know, because like, for example, like in the film, world, art director means the main artist with a huge artist background that oversees the whole art of the film. Riot, for example, an art director may not be an artist at all, that's the main manager of a team of artists. So it's like a different thing. So there's a whole, like terminology, education, you'd have an info side, and a process education I needed to happen if they were gonna move from doing approaching things like the games, how you approach things like a film. And with that there was tensions and difficulties around just the philosophy of the company is that there is no leader, everybody's equal. And the idea is equal to any other idea. You know, that's just the approach and film at its nature is not that, you know, you need to have a driving vehicle, and it needs to be. And so there was there was struggles in time figuring out how do we know these two approaches, you know, because we couldn't abandon fully what Riot is if we're in Riot, but then there's the if we're gonna be doing film. So that was, that was the challenge, but there's a lot of fun artistic stuff, and a lot of cool opportunities that were, you know, we had, like, you know, I was able to write and develop and direct some stuff in development, which was very fun. You know, it was about it was a bit of give and take over the years. And ultimately, you know, like, you're saying that the team got disbanded, but not because of anything that the team itself was doing. What was what was that about it? You know, ultimately, it was a leadership change at the head of the CEO, the CEOs changed and then a philosophy change of how they wanted to be producing content and changing somebody an internal driven versus where they had to support a pipeline to something more external. And so that was the shift. And unfortunately, that means that teams started to disbanded or routed to other departments.
Brent George 33:12
Right? I saw David making a lot of very sympathetic deep nods. Because he directed, he directed things over and it was for a while, and it is culturally very difficult for your right videogame companies are just like, because of the nature of how you make games, they have a completely different sort of concept and perspective on how to organize a team and much more of a flat kind of string it gets it's hard, like anybody can have an opinion on it, because it kind of needs to be that way for the game to run properly. But yeah, it's so it's like trying to move mountains to get people to understand, like, why we should like I mean, I the number of times, I often find myself, like trying to argue like, No, you should not use JIRA, for instance, to track shots in a cutscene sequence. That is just not a great idea. We should do something a bit more standard, you know, and David, God bless him because he had really a relationship with the, with the studio director there was able to be like, no, no, no, like, if you want me to do this, we need to do it in a certain way. But there still needs to be compromises. Right? David? Like I mean, there's no way around that because again, copy is getting up you can't like you said change riot and meet somebody exactly a video game. I mean, if a film company when it's just clearly not what it is.
David Hubert 34:00
Yeah. Like you mentioned leaf, it's it's exactly it feels like game is almost closer to you know, tech development in general, you're basically building a software, it's just entertainment, it's a game, that if you're working at triple A production, it's a lot of people and feel like a marathon because everyone is running in parallel. This story is being built as your character design is built, as the programmers are developing the the and all of it is progressing together as in film. I mean, you start with this and this and then it's a relay race and everyone has its place. And don't change the story once your sequence is fine, final enlightening. I mean, you can do it if you have unlimited money and and time, but it's not the proper way to do it. So there's definitely a clash in the mentality. And yes, it's possible to to kind of find your way but don't assume that by default, it'll be easy will not be
Leif Jeffers 34:42
yeah, like I don't know if you guys saw like on my website, but there's like, a bit of a story real from something that I was developing at Riot and just a couple minutes of like a storyboard that we were doing because I just wanted to make sure it's going in a good direction before we just move forward. And if you look at it, it's all very polished drawings, like way more than we would ever do normally on a film, but at had its purpose, it's there to pitch to people who aren't as familiar with the process and don't want to get distracted by bad drawings, you know? So there's like there's those, those approaches you need to shift a little bit because of who you're interacting with.
David Hubert 35:09
Yeah, I agree with that the the level of polishing of many of these storyboards that we needed to be approved by the creative director in game were far superior in polishing than many of the storyboards that we had at DreamWorks with for instance, which was basically, where's the character? What is the framing? And you know, what is the shelf and moving on? So yeah, definitely different. Different expectations, different industry?
Leif Jeffers 35:26
For sure. Yeah, it's interesting, because they don't, I don't know, nevermind, I don't even remember.
Brent George 35:35
Having been like working with a bunch of a number of video game companies. It's funny because they're, they all they all have the same kind of challenge. But it's interesting to see some companies stand out and become clearly somehow they found a recipe that allows them to function like a software company making an interactive experience, but still find a way of putting narrative first I can take a look at, like, Naughty Dog. And it's, you know, they seem to be continually putting out products. And I mean, their narrative stuff is not even just touching it. It's like, woven directly into the game experience in a way that some some studios really try but just can't manage. I'm really wondering what it takes, like, it is phenomenal, because I mean, you because all three of us have been on the inside of knowing how how much needs just like how many people need to get it to in order to build a pipeline, and even just a structure to be able to, like accomplish some of these things. And, and it doesn't always work out for something for some studios. But the it's very clearly possible because you got
Leif Jeffers 36:16
with Naughty Dog, right that like Neil Druckmann, like the lack of of creators, like at the top of the studio. So you've got somebody who can write a profound script that when the first like, I think Writers Guild Award for an anime game, leading the studio, so you got somebody to understand story, because I think at the end of the day, at least my strength is and it all boils down to, can you tell a good story, and it's very easy to go? Yeah, stories easy,
Brent George 36:34
I'll just write a thing has a beginning, middle and end and then actually do it good is a whole totally different thing, you know? Yeah. And it's it comes down priority to write because you can, you can say that you want to be able to make a story or make a good story in the game. But are you going to prioritize it? Are your technical directors are they going to get the memo that that's a priority as well, because what I find a lot of American companies is that they unless someone like you said at the top is like, here's a vision, this what we need to do, this is what we're gonna be able to do in order to make that happen. And I need everyone to get on board that plan as opposed to just sort of saying it, and then assuming never understand what that means for them in their department individually. Because mostly people just been shipping possibly games that like that, that wasn't a priority. And so they're gonna make, you know, it's amazing how often some of these things become difficult just because people are operating based on their reflex. And they're sort of what they've done in the past. And so sometimes it requires profound change in their the way that they do things in order to make that kind of thing a priority.
David Hubert 37:16
Yes, I think it's more than you need to make it a priority. But it's, it's not that there's a lot of execution in Oh, are you organized, because as much as you can decide at the end, the story is important. The characters are important enough that at the end of the day, you're making a game, he needs to be fun. If discipline, if the game just doesn't work, okay, well, we just have six months, we need to remove that. And guess what the story has to adapt to the fact that all this hour of gameplay doesn't exist anymore. So are you going to solve all of the risks and still make sense of and this is, this is why it's super challenging story, because the game is constantly evolving to make the best game with the time you have. And yes, even if salary is super important means that it's still in the top five, it will still need to to be adjusted to whatever the game is becoming overtime.
Brent George 37:54
Yep, yeah, like if they just even changed the level of the the order of the levels, because it makes a better flow for the gameplay and to onboard the player. Now suddenly, I can have a pretty profound impact on the story, probably because that's the the setting for that whole act of the story. It's if anyone who's working games you probably what I'm talking about, but it's it can be very challenging. It's like changing, like trying to make a movie make a movie, but it's like everyday, the script changes in very, very, very big ways. Yeah, so I assume so that that change of philosophy, right, like probably, I would assume gave birth to essentially Arcane because they did partner to an external studio. And, and we see the results of that which clearly, even though an amazing team got disbanded, it's it's clearly working out for them. Because everyone's minds,
Leif Jeffers 38:25
I think it's a little bit more complicated than, than that one's gonna lead to the other, they were happening at the same time, right? Chris unlink, who was leading our team was developing that slowly with his little group, while the other team was being built internally. I think it was a time where they didn't know what was gonna be happening, they're gonna be internal or external. And, you know, Christian partnered with Fortiche, that we've used before for a couple of music videos, and if anything develops, definitely picking up steam, and then they would do this whole process of like, you know, iterating on story and the kind of thing so it was, it was always going on while this other thing was going on. And the one thing I will give Riot huge credit for is that they will be the first to say they don't know how to do a certain thing. And they will push against things because they like their like tech company mindset of going like how can we disrupt an industry, but so far, they seem like a dog with a bone and that they don't give up on the thing. They'll just keep trying it until it finally clicks with something. So I mean, I maybe Alexei or Christine with either people talking about Arcane, but like, I imagine they iterated on that story for a long time until they felt like it was worth taking to the next level. They were willing to commit the resources and the time to have that hard learning. And it seems that paid off in a hurricane seems very clearly yes,
David Hubert 39:21
yes. Yeah. Yeah, so So we're definitely going to keep some time for the the q&a. Before we do. I wanted to just have one one set for it and come back to Disney and maybe go a little bit in the last two years. Because obviously what you worked on in Canada when you you mentioned that it was right at the period where you know, okay, let's, let's work from home and all that. And it was also at the time that you know, your daughter was a four year old so maybe a two How was it because that's something I've discussed often with guests the adaptation of, of how to just go with everything that happened in the last few years. So how was it for you this transition from overnight you are working from home and you have a daughter at home as well, how did you deal with that that situation?
Leif Jeffers 40:03
I mean, deal was interesting. I would say it was a mixture of total stress and pain and, and some great things. I mean, I think it gave me two years with my daughter every day that I wouldn't have had otherwise. And very grateful that because even the daycares for the first year and a half were closed. So she was at home, as I said, my wife actually works. And so we're sitting next to each other, didn't need drinks, looking taking turns watching her today, and then making up time at night to try to get to our base hours. So I think for me, you know, we started working from home at the beginning of animation on Raya, and we've been at home ever since today. And it was tough, it was a tough transition. I mean, it really meant we're normally just for a couple of months at the end of production, you would work overtime, it meant for two years, I've been in a state of overtime, just because not working hours, but just having to stay up really late at night to make up my hours to get to basic hours. So, you know, oddly enough, like I have a lot of strong memories of the film have made but Ryan and Tonto in particular are a little bit more of a blur, just dealing with a lot of like my four year olds every year, you know, started out at two at the beginning Institute for you know, like, you can't play by herself. So like, we have to be like taking her and so it's like, okay, now I've watched her for four hours, and I gotta make up for hours somewhere, I gotta get this meeting, there's all this kind of like a bit of a marathon to this moment. So it's all kind of blended together, you know. And then because we're at home offices here, you know, ended up that way his living room, literally, you don't really leave like a 20 foot space in a day if if we're going to walk it off. So it's like it's been an interesting, couple of years. Glad gladly will be happy when things get back to a state of normal. But also, I was very sad when my daughter started going back to daycare, because that time was time we made. Like I said, it's bittersweet in some ways, but also tiring.
David Hubert 41:30
You know, if Disney is going to provide a kind of a hybrid approach, or when it's time to go back, everyone's going to go back in office.
Leif Jeffers 41:37
Yeah, I don't I don't know if they've locked in for sure on what they're doing. I think they're gonna try some different things out. It's going to be what feels right for the team. Because obviously, some people love working from home and other people hate it. I don't know what we're gonna do. Ultimately, I think that's across the industry. I don't know what we're gonna do.
Brent George 41:51
Yeah, I can really relate to that whole bittersweetness. I mean, like all of us parents that are that have been working in this, this industry at home. I think it's it's been a challenge in so many different ways. But I do agree that like, you know, looking back on that what I've had in any other way, I mean, the dad, those are the gifts, I would imagine what life would have been like normally, with my daughter, she's six now by the way, he was banished to Kanto. I've probably seen it at least 50 times now. Luckily, it's a good movie. So I don't mind. But like it's a nice, it's a nice, nice. It's like little things can line up. And as a parent, you can totally get into the film. And yeah, she she, she was she was young, like like your children. And so like she growing up, she literally grew up to this pandemic. But yeah, looking back and thinking like, man, what would have been like to not have got the chance to be that close to her and to learn who she really is. Because normally as a parent who was busy production, if you drop them off at daycare, you pick them up and you're too burnt out. They're too burned out. And you have weekends, that's all you get. And it was interesting to spend time during the week. But yeah, I just would have been nice if, if you didn't also have to produce a film or a game during that same amount of time it would be
Leif Jeffers 42:43
Yeah. And I will say Disney in particular was very understanding what they were okay, if you flex your time, because it's better if like, Oh, I'm a little bit late on my show, because if they're flexible, they're understanding everybody's going through this together. And I think across the industry, I feel likely, you know, we'll all have a deeper connection with each other as artists on teams went through a thing together. It's really the trenches, bonding that happens there early on with my computer, a zoom window, but something
Brent George 43:06
that's right, you just unfortunately, all social interaction from this point forward will need to be on a two dimensional screen for you otherwise, you don't have connected to the person. Yeah, exactly. David, you want a transition into questions? Yeah. Okay. All right. Looks like Scott pin some stuff. You're gonna go in there and take a look. Okay, we got we have a question from I can never say your your handle. I'm really sorry. But I'll just say I'll just answer your question. You have you blocked spline a lot in the beginning. So I think this is going back to earlier. Earlier on we were talking about your process. And remember when this question rolled in, to get continued to context, but have you seen the blocks blind a lot in the beginning? Yeah. Go for it, go for it, we got to play the game of let's pretend we know what this means and go
Leif Jeffers 43:45
running. Talking about blocking and spline versus step for me, depends very much on the shot that I'm animating. So if it is a shot kind of framed like this camera view right now, it'd be like shoulders up, close up. Not a lot of movement, this type of stuff. I'll likely block it in splined. And I'll have my key poses and I will playblast it out on the keys, but I will be blocking out in spline because I 'll be like 80% there if they happen to like what I did. But like if it's like a full body mechanic running like I get a shot in Encanto, where Louisa is holding Mirabelle running through geysers, bolting it on, right? If it's like full body like that, then like no, I'm gonna start out steps because I need to figure out the choreography of the shots, the mechanic of the shot I don't want to tackle it all at once. I want to iterate through things to get to that final idea. And so for me, that's been the thing that I've done. As far as like in the beginning of when I was animating I always started with a more step process.
Brent George 44:28
I interpreted I interpret the same way you didn't quite answer the question the first time around where it was like, like were in the process is Did you are you are you a step kind of person versus Are you and I'll just really quickly reiterate the decision making process it sounds like if the shots really complex and has a lot of a lot of choreography involved then you'll simplify and you step but if it's a little more straightforward, then you'll go right and go right away in spline. Is it what you said?
Leif Jeffers 44:47
Yeah, usually. Yeah, I mean, so I mean, like I'm trying to get more into just splining than in blocking because there is a huge time saver, for sure. Because you don't have to transition. You know if you've got basically ready to be and you can still playblast it out on just your keyframes or on twos or fours and it'll hide some of your issues you might be having in the inbetweens. But I mean, I think if I'm having to do something that's complex mechanics, complex choreography, it's an easier way for my brain to solve it going pose to pose on it, something that's less mechanic heavy, then it's very easy for me to just let it be splined, you know, get there. And it would be like, if somebody's walking and talking, but the legs aren't visible on the screen, like waist up walking, talking, I might do that spline because I may want the rhythm of the body to support it, you know, early on, figure that out. It's one of those legs, they're coming into it delays in feet, and they're gonna be doing something more complex that I will usually always start with steps.
Brent George 45:31
It's funny, it's sort of like using filter all over again. But instead of using it to like modify things, it's a way to limit the information. Because I do the same thing when I use step often to try to remove distractions, so that I can focus on something like a smaller sort of sliver of the shot, because it can be very overwhelming. When you're new to animation, you work on a really complicated shot to think of like I find when you have too much information, your brain really has hard time processing it. But if you'd be like, Look, all I care about is the staging, the overall timing. And basically, you know, those those first initial poses, if I can at least give myself confidence that I have that then I can move on to the next step, which is where I start worrying about splines. And the way to move because a lot of animators they start getting distracted and go down these rabbit holes. So early on in the process and the steps can theoretically filter out the the sort of the temptation to start getting distracted by little things and always focus on what's important early on. Yeah, definitely. Yep, yep. Okay, I got a question from Qatar. He's usually asking questions. Let me I'm gonna be read. I'll read it first, then I'll bring it up. Because I can't do both. It doesn't let me do it. Oh, crap. Hold on. Let me do it. No, it's not I'm sorry. One sec. All right. I'll read it first, when you're getting supervised on a shot? This is a good question. Cuz I've also struggled with in the past, what did you do when you have a certain way of working, but your supervisor expects you to present your milestones in a different way. Maybe I like working layer but my sup will only knows, sorry, can only visualize it, the shot is good or not, if it's in step, in pose to pose, so this synergy we discussed early on be like before even get the job, for instance, because this kind of thing that you that you should be worried about as an animator.
Leif Jeffers 46:40
I mean, in my experience, there's a bit of you have to adapt to the style of the studio, somewhat, depending on Studio, you know, but like, it doesn't mean that like, you have to like change who you are at your core, you know, but you have to get your ideas readable for blocking, let's say you have to get them readable, to where the idea is clearly coming across to your leadership and the director, everybody. So however you get there at the process of that first milestone, I think, do whatever you want, but you need to present something that's going to clearly indicate the idea you're trying to kind of pitch because you're basically pitching, I think it should be this as a performance. And they're gonna be looking at it in isolation without knowing a deep conversation of what you're gonna do on top of it, they need to be in that moment, oh, yeah, I can kind of squint my eyes and see where you're going with this. And I want I want you to go down this path, or no, this doesn't meld with the general flow of the sequence, or the style or the story companies that come across, like, that's the purpose of your initial blocking, it's like getting the quickest, readable version of your idea out there. So you can have a discussion about it. You know, so I think at a deeper level, though, we're not just talking like at its core, like a layered approach or something, I think something that comes with time on a show or time with the studio is that they'll start to learn how you work and what your end result looks like. Like, it's like, oh, he hears you always present something that's super polished and nice. So the thing that isn't the Polish at the beginning, I don't have to worry about the Polish, that polish will get there. So I don't have to note about that right now. And I think that's something that just comes with getting to know each other, and it's less about a conversation, he's having the beginning of my experience, and we're just gonna happen to time. So in the beginning, you will make it more notes on your polish earlier. But then as they go, like they sort of build a bit of a Rolodex of your shots in their brain, they go Oh, no, don't have to worry about that part with him. The other thing, it'll get there,
David Hubert 48:01
yeah, I would have to do that. But in my experience, it's never that much your lien or your lead or your supervisor, or even the head of animation has a way of presenting, but it's more how the director is reacting to what he's seeing. So in VFX, are notorious kept coming from movie, they have a harder time to squint and just see a first, you know, rough looking and see. So you'll have to push a little bit more. There's some directors that they really like to see your reference and chat about it. And there's other that it will be distracting for them there. So it's more like the directors who at the end of the day, they want the one that will approve the the shot, how what is the way you need to find out what is the way to present this, because as we've said, your goal with the blocking is how do I communicate my performance, the easiest way, you might have a way but many different directors have different way of reacting to a webinar and others who just kind of steer a little bit in one direction or another depending on who's the director of the show, but that's usually the director, it's rarely your leader or supervisor that will, you know, try to force a specific workflow for for you.
Brent George 48:51
I've seen before where there is a bit of a force, just because they really they they think it comes down to trust again, is like what people are saying how they are at the end of the day, just trying to sort of be able to see where that shots gonna go and allow them to exercise, they're part of the job, which is to make sure that they're pre filtering and prequalify these things, these things so that they know it's gonna fit well into the film or whatever you're working on. But I mean, I think the big key takeaway here is, is to be flexible, because you're gonna find yourself in situations where, regardless of whether your supervisor really needs you to work a certain way, it might just make some more sense for production. So you want like I said, David, as David said, get to get to that as quick as possible, because what you don't wanna do is waste weeks on some sort of prototype of a shot and then sell it and then they're like, yeah, actually, it would have been great if they were going from left to right, or like they are crawling into the shot not running to the shot to read the manual, like you should have been take a closer look at the at the storyboard maybe at that point. So it's about making sure that you're in sync with production more than anything else, you're gonna have to be flexible in how you approach that probably. Here's an abstract question isn't very difficult to answer. Hey, I got a question, which is, how difficult is it these days? I'm gonna paraphrase a little bit to get into a place like Disney like it was a competition like these days and studios like Disney
Leif Jeffers 49:47
will be pretty tough on it's hard. I don't know. It's like, it really depends. It's similar to all the studios, I guess, you know, it's like there's two factors that come into play or maybe three. One is, is their available spots. nominee. Two is what is the quality of your work? And three, what is the quality of the work of your competition of other people that are applying at a time, you know, and so I think all you can do is to the best work you can and keep an eye out for when the studios are looking for people and apply. I mean, I think it to set yourself up for success, you should do your best to make the work on your reels of the same quality or better than the movies, you, at the studio you are applying to, you know, obviously, there's limitations in rigs, or lighting or whatever. But the core performance, the core animation have to be the quality bar, because your competition may be an animator from another studio that's applying with their demo reel from kind of movies that they've done. Or maybe you know, who knows. But like, all you can do is control what you do. And so I would just make sure your stuff lived up to that level as best you can. And knowing that there are within the department, Junior mid senior level artists, you know, but still, you got to be in that ballpark, if you want to play the game basically,
Brent George 50:44
do you feel like so when you look at junior level positions coming into study, like Disney these days is there kind of like a bar in your mind, like a certain number of like demand people get, like how many people on average, you feel like get hired right out of school, for instance, you have even an idea.
Leif Jeffers 50:56
I don't even have an idea, honestly, a few. I think we're often having notifications of people coming from other studios, but it does happen. There's also no place like Disney will have an apprentice program that will do or a training program type thing where they're like, they'll bring in more student level people that I see there will like help hold their hand and guide them and get them up to speed a
bit more. You know, it's an internship almost.
Yeah. But it's, it's with the hope that they can continue on this internship, like a fix,
Brent George 51:20
right? Is there is there like, is it to apply for a program like this? Is it? Is it like a completely of a process? Like if you can people go to the website and like, try to apply to this sort of apprenticeship program? Or is it just through the main recruiting channel, and they just sort of like as they get ingested into the recruiting sort of machinery? The recruiters are like, Oh, hey, this person may be not there yet. But he has a show promise. Maybe they're a good person who kind of sort of offered them an apprenticeship, but opportunities like this, or is it a separate application process? Yeah,
Leif Jeffers 51:42
I can't I can't really speak with authority on it. Probably. I believe it's something where they actually announced that like, we're looking for applicants for this
Brent George 51:48
training program. So they should keep an ear out for that, basically. Yeah. If someone's so interesting, so inclined. Okay, cool. Here's a fun one. So out of all the years of experience, do you have any anecdotes as far as shots that stand out in your mind as being quote unquote, interesting or favorite?
Leif Jeffers 52:07
Yeah. Trying to remember, remember all the shots I've done, there's one problem. You know, that's a really tough one for me to answer a particular shot. That's been my favorite. I will say, my favorite character that I've animated has been Toothless. Just because I did it for a four to five, five and six years. I don't know him for a while and he was a lot of fun to me. Like we started off with him like, he was gonna be a very naturalistic monster dragon creature. And then there was just one meeting for Chris Sanders through in one drawing of him sitting up with a beard kangaroo creature thing, and then I was like, oh, no, he's a character. Okay. Yeah, we went to the picnic. It was a fun journey because on the first film, his rig like where his default hypose ended up being very white. I was like, the only max value that the lids could go. So we started at a max place which is really kind of interesting challenge like, particularly sad. That's a really hard one for me to say. I mean, like I'm content on my favorite thought maybe it was the running through the geyser shot.
Brent George 52:53
How about how about is that a favorite? What if it was like Do you have a story about a shot that really sticks out? You might like something that was was a particularly big disaster or what a really big victory because you thought it started really bad but you got to the end zone anyways, any stories like this?
Leif Jeffers 53:05
That's tough for me. I mean, I mean, I think every shot feels like at some point it's a disaster and then it makes it so if there's one thing I can say about myself is that I get humbled on a regular basis even today. I'm like, is it easy of course up here no problem we're not going out in two days like a week later. Why did I make the vaccine choice that like a no contact Serena? Yeah, I don't know. I can't really fun challenging stuff I did on season two was also within the ocean and the dark sea and like fighting the like, running away from the like water horse, the NOC and like it like it's coming up underwater with towards her. And she's like, I'm gonna swim over to like the little ice rafting days to climb up on it and not throw it up into the air. And then he lands and waves crashing over her. She's trying to get her bearings. Those are fun, because it's probably the most collaborative, I've had to be with effects and layout as I'm working on it. Because literally the surface I'm animating and isn't effects elements, you know, and then if like they would like, they would do assemble the entire ocean in that region. And then the camera get placed near you. But then like, Okay, this wave isn't working. Now, we needed to do a different part, we can make it work with a different way, but already existing than layout has needs to get involved. And so that was a big back and forth. That was a really fun challenge. And yeah, I like that whole ocean moment in the movie in general, just cool lighting.
Brent George 54:10
That scene is so epic. I remember watching it with my daughter for the first time. And I'm just like, what the effects and sequence two are just crazy. They knock it out of art, for sure. There's one thing I've really noticed with films these days is it just seems like the entire VFX departments have completely evolved to a whole other level. Like I'm just watching these things these days going, What are you talking about? Like it's just unbelievable, like the fluids and the hair and the cloth sim, it's just
David Hubert 54:29
all of it all everything that is long and complicated and expensive. All of it. Yeah, like
Leif Jeffers 54:35
I don't like the video that worked for like, they always have like some type of movie browser manager thing to see the stuff being worked on by the fire department. And like one of my go twos is always to go look at the effects department because there's so much cool stuff to be done.
Brent George 54:47
And there's this force multipliers too Right? Like you take a good shot and then you suddenly put like a really good cloth seam on it and you put like the the hair suddenly moves around and that's it believable secondary, it can take a shot and make an already awesome shot go so far the next stratosphere it's just unbelievable, unbelievable. Unbeliev We'll be funded to see your own shot, get some. And also
Leif Jeffers 55:02
it helps. It helps you inform your choices more because you start realizing oh yeah, maybe I can hit that pose a little harder and have a drink too much, because the cloth is going to overlap with the hair training lab and the secondary motions, give it what it needs to do anymore. It's gonna muddy it up.
Brent George 55:12
Exactly, exactly. Okay, we got another question here from sushi cat. Let's see. So how, okay, Google Play, gets very excited when people are conversation on radio. So we've all heard stories of the quotas of these big studios, they tend to be around three, five seconds. So I'm just I guess this particular person, chatty, we're looking for some specifics on is that still the case? What wha t is what does it look like these days on a feature film, when it comes to how long it takes to make a shot? So how long does it average shot take to complete say how long on average, it takes us to complete a 10 second shot on a feature film.
Leif Jeffers 55:42
I mean, that has to be a big average, because 10 seconds of somebody's talking in this frame versus 10 seconds. Yeah, totally. And then spending their money in climbing are two different things. But I mean, I will say the quota that most studios I've worked for anything seems to be around 80ish frames a week. It's kind of it kind of the average, it goes up and down, but then on complexity, and we're talking 24 frames per second, I assume, correct? Yes. Yeah. So I mean, that's kind of the average on those things. So I mean, I would say this would probably depend on complexity, a 10 second shot might take me, between two to four weeks, depending on what's happening, or how many rounds of notes are happening, how many characters are in the shot, but studio averages, you know, like, when I was at DreamWorks, with about 80 frames a week, I think it's increased, since I've left, Blue Sky, I think was somewhere around between 80 and 100 frames a week? I don't I don't remember exactly. I feel like Disney is a little bit closer to the 80 frames a week, they're a little bit less focused on schedules and deadlines, and more about quality, harder to gauge that exactly. The rumors I hear at Pixar from around 60ish frames a week, you know, so it's like, a rumor. But like, so I mean, I would say, you know, and I think I think a good average is between 60 and 110/120 frames. So around, that would be the range for a feature, feature studio.
Brent George 56:47
And like I said, it really depends on average, because like you give some shots or like close ups didn't and the other shots did have like six characters in it. And they're all singing and holding hands. And dancing in a circle basically, is completely different shots. So that only works if you're being given a healthy dose of you know about balance of those complex shots with the simple shots, right? Because some people might get shots, they're always complicated. So they're not expected to deliver as many frames maybe because they're dealing with a lot of extra stuff.
Leif Jeffers 57:05
And it's communication. It's a constant communication of going like this, like, you know, when you get past a shot, your supervisor, head of animation, however the show runs it does their best guess what the complexity is and how long it's gonna take to get the conversation from there. It's like, how did your initial blocking idea go? Director hate it? Okay, cool. Let's have a conversation. Can we have the reblock that might be this long? You know, we're like, Okay, the splinning is taking longer than we thought this is just a constant communication, in my experience, Nobody's holding you holding it against you, like production generally is there to support and just make sure the schedule works out in the end. So that might mean like, okay, alright, cool. It's taking longer, that's fine. These things happen. It's art. It's not like a thing. So maybe these other two shots, we were thinking to get to him, we'll get to the other person who just pretend to have been diminished earlier. And it all just kind of comes out in the wash. And there's not like targets. Really? Yeah. Yeah, I don't think it's, you know, as long as they know you're trying your hardest and do good work. Ultimately, it's generally worked out, okay. Now, certain studios put schedule above others, never creative. And then you just need to be mindful of what are the indicators of success at your company and make sure you're hitting those because if you're just ridiculously slow, and the work is good, but that studio prioritizes speed, that doesn't work out for you.
Brent George 58:01
That's good point. television productions are notorious for be a little bit more scheduled, like schedule oriented. And it's not because they don't want to like enjoy the quality it is that it's like they're on during the writing. And either they're, they're running a tighter ship. Basically, they don't they have to ship more and more frequently, as opposed to having like, you know, whatever I could a year and a half, sometimes two years of production, to be able to put something or something out, you have a lot less wiggle room in a scenario like that. So they have no choice. But to be a little bit more, you know, on top of the schedule, basically, we're talking the time vanished, as it always does. It's just the way it goes on the show. It's we we feel like we've created some sort of weird wormhole, or some sort of like time space. continuum continuum breach. Every time David and I are anywhere we're like, we blink in the time is gone. So I wanted to just thank you for hanging out today. It was awesome.
David Hubert 58:37
It was great. Super fun. Yeah.
Brent George 58:41
Yeah, yeah. Well, that's that's kind of why we brought you so that's awesome. And so thank you chat for all the great questions as well. And, you know, we wish you the best of the rest of your day, David and leaf and chat. Have a really good one and talk to you guys soon. Cheers. Bye. Thanks. Thanks, right
Comments
Post a Comment