3D World magazine 117 is now on sale. I wrote the feature, “Ten Animated Shorts to See Before You Die”, in which I interviewed 10 animation industry luminaries about the films they feel are important. I found it interesting how many of these films were traditional, non-3D, non-CG films.

Over the past three weeks, I have been writing a feature article for 3D World magazine. It is a compilation of interviews with various animation industry professionals, regarding one excellent animated short each. I was hoping to uncover issues with them like what they felt was notable about the film, why they personally were passionate about the film, and what exactly they felt 3D artists could learn from the film (this is 3D World after all…). I enjoyed trading emails with these pros.

One of them brought up a particularly interesting point. Regarding my questions discussing one of the traditionally animated films, he said, “I don’t wish to be rude, but I don’t really care what 3D artists can learn from this film.”

The 3D artist in me bristled at that comment, because I thought it part of a Real Art vs Commercial Art snobbiness I come across from time to time. I agree with Hugh McLeod that the argument over whether something is commercial or artistic is a complete waste of time. And I do caution those Artsier Than Thou goons who would throw stones at me that although I  am a life-long commercial artist and longtime 3D artist, I am also a one-time 2D cel animator, newspaper and magazine illustrator, and current comic book artist, not some mediocre polygon monkey without traditional skills. The phrase “book by its cover” comes to mind. Other phrases also come to mind, but one doesn’t say them when one is hoping to get a decent interview from animation industry luminaries.

Anyway, after his initial I-don’t-wish-to-be-rude response, I didn’t think I would hear back from him; I and my silly question had been dismissed. Yet, he surprised me by almost immediately sending me back a perfectly reasonable response about the film, and what was valuable about it. I don’t want to spoil the article here, so I’ll just say his comments had to do with the fact that the edges hadn’t been knocked off the film.

And then I understood where he was coming from a lot better. Knocking the edges off of art is what 3D software excels at, and it’s what many mediocre 3D artists inadvertently excel at too, for that matter. The 3D artists I admire are the ones who work very hard to avoid sterility, who work very hard to get and keep character in their work. The films that I respond to have those things in common, regardless of media. And so I think the interviewee and I actually wound up in agreement that there was plenty 3D artists could learn from the film in question, and from his comments. His interview was my favorite and the most illuminating. And the things he said needed to be said, and should be said more, especially in the pages of our CG magazines.

Look for that feature article in next month’s 3D World. Watch this space…