Whos responsible for motion capture performances?

the answers Andy Serkis, right?

Seriously though, if anyone is synonymous with this relatively young effects method, its him.

These seemingly harmless remarks prompted outrage amongst the VFX industry.

So where does the balance lie?

Ad content continues below

We need to trace the history of motion capture back.

IfJurassic Parks partly digital T-Rex and Raptors count, weve had digital characters as early as 1993.

The next stage was then for characters that could deliver emotive performances, with human actors.

To be fair to Serkis, his feelings may be in reaction to a long-perceived stigma against such acting.

But Gollum himself was redesigned to better reflect the actors facial structure and expressions.

More and more, Serkis dedication to the role led people to greater accommodate his contributions.

The original actor is absolutely an invaluable reference.

As Serkis mentioned, the technology has been developed to closer follow his performance.

Itd be easy to think animators jobs were made easier by this development.

Simply, the more traditional keyframe animation, where a digital element is created from scratch, remains crucial.

There were some scenes where we used no Andy reference at all.

More intricate stuff such as facial and finger movement all had to be keyframed.

But its a performance which still needs interpreting by people other than the actors and director.

For instance, how exactly do Benedict Cumberbatchs human face and movement translate toThe Hobbits firedrake dragon Smaug?

And it works excellently.

The dispute is another example of how sole authorship in film is a very slippery concept.

What about the studio pressures that forced them to insert an action scene?

How is this any different from the cast and crew working to create this character?

Serkis would perhaps argue that the character is increasingly his, as motion capture technology continues to improve.

So the balance of authorship is supposedly shifting.

Andy Serkis has played many CG characters, and you marvel at them.

You go, Wow, thats a great character.'

How many people, by contrast, actually know of Joe Letteri, Weta Digitals most senior figure?

Intentional or not, the artists contributions are being marginalised.

And not just in this case.

And I wanted to point out that we arent technicians.

Visual effects is not just a commodity thats being done by people pushing buttons.

If anything,Life Of Pishows that were artists and not just technicians.

And they are artists.

Its an interesting debate, where the credit for such praised characters truly lies.

After all, digital effects continue to have a less-than-stellar reputation among may cinephiles.

We have a situation where both parties work is obscured to some degree.

This article comes fromDen of Geek UK.