The Minds Of Three Dimensions

If you have read my other blog posts then you probably have a clear idea of why I love and am interested in animation. I am definitely not the only soul with this interest. It has taken the creativity and ingenuity of many others with a similar passion to develop this new field. What is the driving force that has brought these people to the world of computer animation? Why has the film industry evolved from the world of traditional special effects with puppets, robots, miniatures, real explosives, and large physical sets to the world of computer graphics to produce these same effects? Should computer graphics be considered art and it’s practitioner’s artists? In todays blog I intend to examine some of these questions to find out what’s driving the minds behind computer graphics.

The discovery of perspective in the 1400’s was revolutionary. It revealed that a three dimensional environment could be accurately recreated using a set of rules. With these rules, many artists began experimenting with perspective and were each able to obtain similar results. Recreating three dimensions on a computer was inevitable; we just needed to program the computer to use these same rules, which led to the development of simple wireframe 3D models.[i] Today these early 3D models might be considered super simple, but they opened a portal to a whole new dimension of creativity!

The president of the most prestigious animation company, Pixar, is also the one of the biggest pioneers of the field. Edwin Catmull’s experimental research and remarkable developments in the new media of computer graphics gave birth to the field of 3D computer animation. He first gravitated to the field because he had a great interest in creating true curved surfaces on a 3D model. [ii] His research in to this subject led to the development of what are now called “SubdivisionSurfaces” which are used in every major 3D animation package for creating smooth organic creatures and surfaces. To push himself in to new boundaries, he worked towards the goal of emulating reality. His ultimate goal was not to create photorealism, but by pushing towards realism, it helped drive him and his team forward to create new big breakthroughs in 3D technology. Thanks to Moore’s Law and developments of computer technology it is now possible to create 3D images that perfectly emulate reality. However, the goal of most 3D artists is not to recreate reality, but to express their imagination and breathe life in to characters that do not really exist. “You can create your own universe. You can visualize your wildest imagination in a photorealistic way if you like to and you can bring it to life by animating it. ” - Mark Gmehling[iii]

When it comes to creating new universes, George Lucas is one of the first names that comes to mind. In the original Star Wars Trilogy, Lucas teleported his viewers in to a new universe, complete with fascinating aliens, planets, epic spaceships and new technology. At the time Lucas had pushed the limits of what could be done using special effects, but he had bigger worlds and ideas in his mind that simply could not be done using traditional special effects. For his new Star Wars Prequels, Lucas went all out, using 3D computer animation for anything and everything: sets, spaceships, explosions, and even characters were generated with computer graphics. While the new films may not have reached the same level of greatness as the original films, they were the first films to fully integrate 3D environments and characters with real live action actors. Other films like Jurasic Park had previously blended 3D imagery with the real world, but Star Wars: The Phantom Menace was the first to use 3D graphics not just for special effects but also for 3D sets. The true beauty of using 3D graphics in this film became most apparent in the editing stage; Lucas was able to easily alter and recreate scenes at the computer without ever having to reshoot anything.[iv]

An entire army of robots could only be done with 3D

Many may wonder what the importance of using computer generated sets as opposed to real ones is. One of the most costly aspects of creating massive worlds in a film is the cost to build the sets. In the infant years of cinema, gigantic sets were actually painstakingly built, but these were problematic as they take up a lot of space and are very costly. To keep budgets reasonable, new techniques needed to be developed. A popular technique was to only build small sections of an environment and add in the rest with a painting on glass which was placed in front of camera. This technique is known as matte painting. This technique has worked quite well, but as technologies evolve, so do the audience, and the audience wants to see moving worlds. With the 2D matte painting, all the camera angles must remain fixed and static. 3D computer animation breaks through this barrier, allowing total freedom of camera movement. In addition a small set is no longer required, saving producers money. You might not have realized it, but most of the town in The Truman Show was done entirely in 3D. Using 3D for this film allowed the director to get the perfect town which would otherwise have to be built, quite a costly endeavor. [v]

CGI Town From The Truman Show

Although computers offer numerous advantages over traditional mediums for producing art they are often discredited. Some people consider computer art cheating, but “Computers don’t generate art. Artists generate art.”[vi] states CG Artist Ron Miller. A common misconception is that computers do all the work, but artists are needed to create objects and worlds in 3D and to animate and bring them to life. Without an original copy of a 3D sculpture or digital art piece, computer art cannot be marketed in the same way that a traditional painting or sculpture could. Artist David Mattingly actually sees this lack of an original to be a major benefit to computer art, “…almost no one will ever see your original, while thousands of people will see the printed piece. Worrying about the original is so last century.”[vii] Last century art scholars may not consider computer art to be art but as new generations are born in to a world filled with computer art it will be difficult to refute the artistic merit and talent required to create computer graphics. There are many different reasons that people have been drawn to the world of computer animation, but one thing is constant: computer graphics provide the artist with total creative freedom without the constraints of reality.



[i] Paquette, Andrew. "Introduction." In Computer Graphics for Artists: An Introduction, 1st ed., 10 - 122. Springer, 2008.
[ii] Hanrahan, Pat , and Edwin Catmull. "A Conversation with Ed Catmull." ACM, November 1, 2010.
[iii] Slee, Sarah. "Mark Gmehling interview." 3D Artist, March 27, 2011.
[iv] Rickitt, Richard. "Animation." In Special Effects: The History And Technique, 1st ed., 187. Billboard Books, 2000.
[v] Rickitt, Richard. "Matte Painting." In Special Effects: The History And Technique, 1st ed., 206 - 207. Billboard Books, 2000.
[vi] Frank, Jane , and Ron Miller. "What Would Bonestell Have Done?." In Paint or pixel the digital divide in illustration art, 1st ed., 81. New York : Nonstop Press, 2007.
[vii] Frank, Jane , and David Mattingly. "Everything I Know About Being A Digital Artist." In Paint or pixel the digital divide in illustration art, 1st ed., 73. New York : Nonstop Press, 2007.