The 5 Miserable VFX Jobs That Make Movies Possible
So I am a visual effects (VFX) artist, putting fake things into movies with computers (often referred to as CG effects). You think you know me? You don't know me! You know that CG makes things like Gollum and dinosaurs and pretty much everything in Avatar, but most of the CG you've seen in your life, you didn't know was CG at all.

Just a collection of 1s and 0s.
For instance, did you know that there was only one real helicopter in Black Hawk Down? Or that most movie sports stadiums are filmed completely empty, or that no buildings were harmed in the filming of the Bourne trilogy? If not, then we know we did it right. If you ever find yourself saying, "That's a pretty cool CG effect there!", that means we fucked it up.
Everyone assumes VFX happen in an office that looks something like Mythbusters except with excited artistic types gathering around computers, talking about what kind of dinosaurs they want to make today. And for the top ranking people, the ones who get to talk on the DVD special features, it might be.
But several steps down the ladder from those guys, you have an army of peons whose job descriptions seem to have been created as part of some cruel psychological experiment. If you dream of a career making super heroes fly, these jobs are where you'll start, and you may never leave.
So, as you watch some $200 million VFX-filled blockbuster this summer that has CG in basically every frame, remember to say a prayer for the...

Basically It's:
Rotoscoping is a fancy word for "tracing." Specifically, tediously tracing around hairs on an actor's head, over and over and over until you long for the sweet release of insanity.
If you've ever tried to, say, use Photoshop to put some celebrity's head onto a naked fat man, you know just how fun it is to painstakingly trim out the background around a guy's head with your mouse. Roto is basically that, all day long.

Rotoscope artists look at film frame by frame, 24 frames in each second of film, carefully tracing around individual hairs or hoodie cords so that someone else can have the satisfaction of putting the actor or object behind or in front of explosions or dinosaurs or Jar Jar Binks. For the rest of their lives, roto artists are thus instinctively drawn to people who wear tight clothing and have short slicked-back hair, so there's a pro tip if you're looking to date one.

Roto artists' attempts to speak up for their community are often mistaken for PETA protests.
Why would someone want to trace Brad Pitt's head for ten hours a day? Well, it's a stepping stone to the cooler jobs (like Compositor, the guy who gets the satisfaction of actually pasting different elements together into a frame that actually looks like something). Roto is an initiation stage, like a fraternity pledge or a knight's squire, only if most pledges and squires never got promoted.
The second reason you'd want to do roto is if you live in India. A lot of this grunt work gets outsourced these days, because it looks pretty good if your only alternative is to have your eyes put out by a red hot poker and sing for your money, which is what I gathered about Indian career options from Slumdog Millionaire.

Don't even get me started on the gang problem.

Basically It's:
Doing whatever has to be done that no one else wants to do.
The duties of Production Assistants (also known as runners, or gofers, or peons, or self-moving ottomans) can range from relatively respectable tasks, like getting coffee, to slightly demeaning tasks, like holding coats for visiting Hollywood execs or being set on fire so the FX artists can have a reference for their fire effects.

Occasionally they fight for their boss's amusement.
When I was new to the field, the concept of working with PA's was pretty unnerving to me because they were basically like servants, waiting on you hand and foot. Over the years, though, I've gotten used to gently resting my feet on an obliging PA's back as I leaned back to think about a rendering problem or calling several PAs to form a bridge across a puddle on a particularly rainy day.

Producer and PAs, c. 14th century
Why would someone willingly submit to this treatment? Well, it's the Hollywood dazzle. When someone has the chance to be in a movie or participate in any task slightly related to a movie, the judgment centers of their brain go dead. Being a PA is like buying a lottery ticket to the Hollywood production big time. The chances of winning are laughable, but at least you have a ticket.
And even more tempting, a PA applicant often doesn't have to demonstrate any actual skills. They truly are looking for enthusiastic go-getters that will learn on the job and don't have a leg to stand on in salary negotiations. It also helps to look good, because, you know, Hollywood.

Hollywood.
Unfortunately, to get a promotion, PAs do have to demonstrate some kind of skill, even if it's just being "well-organized" or finding very good delis to get catered sandwiches from. There is a production ladder they can work their way up, each step as unlikely as the first, truly a churning whirlpool of cutthroat competition. Along the way they will gain more responsibilities, like managing schedules, communicating artists' needs between departments, and filling out a lot of forms.

Or picking up a producer's "medicine."
If they manage to make it all the way up, they might become a producer, in charge of budget and schedule, with a pretty firm grip on the balls of all the artists on their project. It's basically like a pawn crossing the chessboard to become a queen. And then some country actually declares the chess piece to be their actual queen.

Basically It's:
Drawing dots on individual frames that need CG, so the computers don't get confused. Over and over.
Matchmove is a lot like roto as far as prestige--that is, zero to negative.

The average hobo commands twice the respect of a matchmove artist.
Little known industry secret - most cubicles for real animators are actually built out of extra matchmove and roto artists. So what could matchmove artists do that could be as mind-numbing as roto?
Well, when the film makers shoot a scene with a camera, the camera is usually moving, even if just slightly. Your CG effect, on the other hand, will want to hold perfectly still if you don't tell it otherwise, so you need to match its motion with the real scene or else your Gollum or aircraft carrier landing on the White House will appear to jiggle haphazardly through the frame.
To fix this, some poor bastard has to put a little dot on the corner of the central building's tower in this frame...

...and then in the next frame, put a dot on that same tower to tell the computer that it's the same corner. He usually has to pick out several landmarks to put dots on, at which point he will turn it over to the computer, which will scream back that it doesn't have enough dots and make him do more.

Computers, like people, are put at ease by the freckles on Morgan Freeman's face.








But what are the alternatives?
ReplyYou may try to get into a management position where you get to exploit people instead of being exploited. (And that does not just apply to VFX but also any other field where the only target is profit maximization, without any regard for the peons)
Study and become an academic. And have an even harder time earning money if you want to do something beneficial to mankind. Or develop weapons and boner pills and rake in the dough.
Or you can choose to become an "actual" peon - farm/factory workers, brick layers and so on. Depending on the country and company better job security but wages roughly as s****y AND a chance of damaging your body permanently in even worse ways than working on a computer.
What it really boils down to: Exploit or be exploited.
There may be some careers/fields that are an exception to this rule. But I very much doubt that there are any that stay that way for more than a few years (I actually heard that digital artist used to be a nice career... about 20 years ago...). Capitalism will always get you.
"There are a lot of VFX shops out there, and if one of them pleads for some kind of plausibly realistic deadlines or budget, the Hollywood film studio can easily find someone else who can work their peons harder and longer and for less pay. And if the peons don't like it, the VFX exec can just reach out the window blindly and grab a replacement."
ReplyThis sums up the architecture industry as well.
Read more: The 5 Miserable VFX Jobs That Make Movies Possible |
God thats depressing... thanks for ruining my day -_- maybe I'll just stay where I'm at as opposed to making that big Hollywood leap..
ReplyWelcome back to the rest of us. Can we take your jacket?
Nice article, very insightful. I do wonder why I should thank the peons, they get payed don't they?
ReplyAccording to that last part of the article, apparently they don't always get paid.
wow, a christina article I actually liked!
ReplySounds like the VFX employees would kill to be as high up the food chain as peons. Getting physically peed on for the camera would be more dignified and higher paying.
Replynot all peons get paid alot, some of us do it just for the joy of it.
Now wait, does it take *one* Hollywood supercomputer an hour per frame, or does it take EVERY COMPUTER IN THAT STUDIO AT ONCE an hour per frame? There was a documentary about Pixar that said it takes their render farm on average TWENTY-FOUR FREAKING HOURS per frame (but it's worth it for the level of photorealism), and they also left the "24 hours for one server or for the whole farm?" thing vague...
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesI have no idea; but what was the documentary called? It sounds interesting.
That would really depend on what sort of computing power each machine possesses, and how much processing is required for the task at hand. Asking how many computers per frame is sort of like asking how many cars does it take to pull a ship - are the cars Geos or super-duty trucks? Is the ship a dingy or an aircraft carrier?
It would, I imagine, boil down to a question of the total processing power you have available, and the total amount required.
For most things one computer == one frame. Some sophisticated systems can spread the computations across multiple computers (known as "distributed processing" if you are a huge nerd like me and care), but generally you just dump more processors on a single computer and spread the computations across them (much easier to manage, and let's face it--we are very lazy in the VFX industry even as we are pushed to work 100+ hours/week).
...THOSE ARE PUERTO RICANS. For fuck's sake.
Replymexicans.
I really appreciated this article other than the fact that half of it is written in the first person. After a while I felt like I was being lectured.
ReplyWhat I find strange is that many VFX studios seem like they don't care if they stay in business, the movie studios don't want to pay them anyway, and the workers don't like the jobs. The directors don't like the results, the audience just finds the most impressive CGI distracting and they fail to notice most shots.
ReplyAll this, and it still seems like visual effects don't take any less time and don't cost any less to produce than they did ten years ago.
I read this article before I decided on my FYP, and I still picked Matchmoving and Compositing. I currently long for the sweet embrace of death.
ReplyYeah. It takes an extreme amount of work, time, and quality to put these visual effects together in movies. And yes, most of times, it's better to not use them for the sake of the budget and production schedule.
ReplyWow I had no idea...I'm really impressed that there's this much work going on...now I understand why some producers and directors feel that it's just easier to NOT shoot everything in CGI as much as possible! (ie that other cracked article about scenes that weren't shot in CGI)
ReplyIn #2, I'm pretty sure your "negative reinforcement" is actually "positive punishment".
ReplyNegative reinforcement makes people do more of something in order to avoid a bad consequence. Actually, the line is pretty blurry.
I read Render Wrangler as Reindeer Wrangler. Whoops.
ReplyThat's the worst job at Santa's workshop.
It's an interesting topic, but I was a little disappointed that only 3 of this list of 5 are actually specifically VFX jobs. Surely there's more boring roles to fill than rotoscoping, point matching and render farming?
ReplyWhat could possibly be more boring?
Seriously. One of those is described as watching different paints dry and people complaining that one paint isn't drying quickly enough.
You forgot to talk about 3D roto in your matchmoving section - which some people might think sounds more interesting than tracking points seeing as though it's essentially animating (not really animating).
Reply3D roto, especially on a f**king horse, is currently the bane of my life
im a match mover. and i don't use after effects. after effects isn't match move software, sure it can make 2d tracks, but who cares. the compositor can do that faster than it would take me to open after effects. 3d match moving is a whole different story. SynthEyes or PFtrack.
ReplyThere's a Plug-In for After Effects that makes it worthwhile. But baseline AE? I wouldn't eve do a 2D match with that.
holy s**t this was interesting i was wondering how they did all these things - but i always imagined they must have some magic computer program or something because surely that level of mundane work is just too unreasonable - turns out theres more work than i imagined and its more mundane than i can possibly imagine
ReplyI totally thought it was done by Omniscient Supercomputer too- but now that I know these jobs exist, I'm totally gonna be on the lookout for opportunities. Roto and matchpointing both sound exactly my type of thing.
Just as a general response to the occasional "be glad you have a job". VFX jobs in films rarely last for long. You get hired for a specific project and then assume you'll be out of work in 6 months to a year. It's in essence an entire industry full of freelancers. Unless you work for television. Less exacting standards, but much greater job security. Blame Hollywood.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesThat's what he said...
She, you mean...
there are no girls on the internet.