2d Vs 3d calarts vs ringling

Hello.

I would have to say CAL ARTS is the topschool for animation- period.

Most the animators who worked on the INCREDIBLES were 2D animators who learned 3D at the studios.

The move is on toward studios simplifing the interface for animators. Learn the 2D skills first - along with some excellent art training at CAL ARTS- then you can always layer on the 3D packages.

Thanks.

The days of training traditional animators in 3D is quickly becoming a thing of past. If you have years of traditional experience a company might take the risk ... when you ask the big companies how often they do that most say it's been a while.

Most the animators who worked on the INCREDIBLES were 2D animators who learned 3D at the studios.

I take it the years of experience clause came into effect on that one :)

Hi Lindsey

Hope this will help you in one way or another.

From Pixar website: Pixar

In choosing an animation related school, look for one that focuses on traditional skills, drawing, painting, sculpture, cinematography. Ask the school how they will help you build an effective portfolio of your work: not merely a collection of your assignments, but a well developed presentation of your unique point of view, and your technical skills. Also ask the school how well integrated their theatre and film departments are with their 2D and 3D art departments.

Learn enough about computer graphics to know how they work in general. Look for a school that has not substituted electronic arts for traditional (or vice versa). Ask them about how they balance the two. Avoid just learning packages of software. Today’s packages will be replaced several times during your school career, and many studios use proprietary software that you cannot learn in school anyway. Learn enough to know you can learn it, but concentrate on the more expressive traditional skills.

I'm 4th year animation student at Sheridan College. The debate as to whether or not solid 3D can only be achieved via a strong 2D foundation is certainly an interesting one.

The reality: Studios such as Pixar often hire 2D animators who are then trained as 3D animators. Why? Well, to be frank, in most cases, 2D animators have acquired an extra sensitive eye for performance. Now, this is not to say that a 3D student with little to no 2D experience could not achieve this, but, often in cases this is unlikely.

Computer animation has it's limitations. I mean, you COULD achieve the same quality of movement seen in, say, a WB cartoon, but given that the characters are rigs of anchored bones and weights, the same qualities of movement and distortion could not be achieved in 3D without amazingly impractical amounts of time. In fact, to truly achieve the same quality of animation in 3D as 2D, there would be no rigging, only a model. And each and every vertice would need to be manipulated to produce the same equivalent squash and stretch. This is why 2D animators succeed in the 3D market. Because, unlike many 3D animators, they better understand the limitations of the rig. And with this heightened sense of how good the performance COULD be, they tend to push limits of the character more so than a 3D animator. In order to maximise the quality of animation, you must know beyond your means. But, once again, I'm not speaking for all 3D animators.

So, why all the denial? Why the persistant defiance towards the traditional? It takes time to learn, and we live in a fast, fast world.

Even if you're not the most gifted traditional artist, it is crucial to learn as much as possible about it, and while it's easy to dismiss the idea with claims like, "That's one man's opinion," then consider the word "experience." This word means something. It's the idea that before you can do calculus, you need to know how to divide and multiply, and before you can divide and multiply, you should understand adding and subtracting, and before that learning to count. A programmer without his math may be able to make a crude program, but when it comes to the specifics, his lack of focus on the basics will present itself. The same applies to animation. Any one can make a drawing move. Anyone can set keys. Unfortunately, not everyone can sit down for hours trying to perfect the way a characters index finger moves.

All I can stress is that it is ignorant to ignore the fact that animation is simple to understand theoretically, but damned hard to do. So, for all you 3D guys, pick up your pencils. Animation is a visual art, and the computer is just your calculator.

All I can stress is that it is ignorant to ignore the fact that animation is simple to understand theoretically, but damned hard to do. So, for all you 3D guys, pick up your pencils. Animation is a visual art, and the computer is just your calculator.

I agree 100% with the first sentence; the rest is total nonsense. Like any animator the computer animator thumbnails out ideas and poses using the precious pencil, it's just the end result is ends up on a computer. One could say that makes them twice and talented.

ed

That's pretty interesting. I just read about a state school that has traditional classes all of the last three years, with increasing levels of cumulative advanced instruction...and the school I'm going into has one total. I don't wanna get caught with my pants down, though, thinking I can be a 2D masterpiece of an animator, and use my smarts to learn the 3D software, and find out Whoops, it needs to be approached as its own thing and not just a translation and have my work lose something as a result.

Ed, you had mentioned before extra credit versions of the traditional classes are available on a limited-seating basis. Am I remembering that correctly?

Throwing in what's in my head, and this isn't the total picture...I've never -not- heard of CalArts and their alumni list is varied and extensive for some time now. I've only heard of the Ringling school in the past few years, and their alum list for animation is impressive and seems as old as their offering of the program itself. Like was said before it depends on what you'd like to do, what you WANT to do. I am learning 3D to get a job in the field, but I'm a 2Der at heart, so I am banking on a revival, or a 2D Pixar studio, etc...Television...whatever I can get my hands on. If most schools train you either way your feet get wet enough to create great work on your own and get jobs on either side of the fence.

I guess that depends on how you define talent. I wasn't dumping on 3D. When I say, "Pick up your pencils." I just mean doing it more, and realizing the freedoms of expression only traditional can show you. Of course it's give and take. 3D does have it's perks. Anyway, do what you want.

Ed, you had mentioned before extra credit versions of the traditional classes are available on a limited-seating basis. Am I remembering that correctly?

I could have said that and if I did I was mistaken or there was an optional third semester and now there's not or finally I might have dreamt it. There are two semesters of traditional in our program. Starting next year a student will have their first semester in the spring semester of Freshman year and the second in the fall of the Sophomore year.

ed

The "talent" remark was me just having fun. Both 2D and 3D definitely have their perks it's just a matter of what floats your boat. But what's with those stop motion people are they crazy or what?

ed

hah, yeah. figuring out the timing would have to be the craziest thing with stop motion. like anything, all talent and practice.

There we go. It was the optional third one... was...

Seems to me if you want to be an animator, you need

1. practice

2. education

3. connections

Almost any school can give you the practice. Take a look at both schools and ask yourself will you be getting enough hands-on practice at traditional and non-traditional techniques. In fact, you don't need school for the practice. You can definitely do that on your own.

Then look at the courses, the education you will receive. ALmost everyone has to do some "on the job" training, formal or otherwise. Hardly anyone is hired by any company having everything that company wants. They will train you, but they will not have as much patience as your teachers or school. Be prepared to continue learning and work your tail off. So when you're taking classes as yourself which school has the courses you really want to take. Which school offers the most choices? If you decide midstream to change your approach to animation, can you stay in that school or must you leave to find a school with what you need. Look at the range of courses in each school.

Now for the tough part. You can practice yourself. You can teach yourself. But you can't get the connections you need without some help. Talk to some of the schools students who've graduated. Did going to the school help them find a job? Who graduated from the school and where are they working? Look at places where you think you'd like to work, and then see if the people they hire tend to come from a certain school or a certain type of school. Say you want to work at Disney or Pixar. What schools do they hire from?

Lastly, I think the most important thing is to practice. Lots of different kinds of practice. Practice lots of different methods and techniques. Develop a style. Develop your preferences for media. Experiment with lots of different variations.

Above all, draw!

The days of training traditional animators in 3D is quickly becoming a thing of past. If you have years of traditional experience a company might take the risk but when you ask the big companies how often they do that most say it's been a while.

Also take a look at the traditional work that is being done these days and ask yourself if that is the type of work you want to be doing in the future.

At Ringling you will have some experience in traditional (two semesters) plus plenty of other opportunities to draw in the concept and character development classes.

It's a tough choice, think about the big picture and good luck.

ed

If you are just worried that you might not get good 3D training don't be. Last year I know nothing about 3d animation. Nothing. Last May I started teaching myself how to use Maya. 9 months and 6 300+ pages books later, I am doing my third short film. My previous two films have both won awards at state competitions and those films got me into the MFA programs at Calarts experimental animation and School of the Art Institute of Chicago and I don't think those two are schools that will take anything from off the street.
Both are good schools but don't let technology be the deciding factor. I think I know the Maya software package pretty well by now although I am learning new things everyday - on the otherhand, it took my whole life to learn how to draw precisely and accurately and even longer for my aethestic intuitions to take form. I would advise that you worry about developing those things because those things really benefits from good instructors. Technology you can probably learn faster yourself with some books and CGtalk.com.

My point is that the tech won't hold you back too much if you have a good head about things already

My point of view is that you should to do what do you like. My passion is 2d animation and I will try to do it.

How many time takes to complete the course in CalArts?