An afternoon strolling through the late Walt's place (the pastel above is by Disney vet Mel Shaw)...
"Meet the Robinsons" is refilling the pipeline after a pause for story modifications, and the crew is now off shortened workdays with way more shots to work on... (last week, you'll remember, the troops downstairs were anticpating generous overtime...)
"American Dog" is still heavily in story, and modellers and others have been told not to expect a heavy schedule before new story screenings unspool in the Fall...
"Lunch box lectures," which have been a staple at Disney Feature Animation for years, are now video-taped and offered on-line internally at WDFA. Employees who couldn't get to presentations can access them from their computers. (Recent lectures include a four-part series from Eric Goldberg on Disney animation, and a panel on a hand-drawn feature from the early nineties.)
At Disney Toons, word is that the division will phase out its hand-drawn sequels of old classics and concentrate on CGI originals, with new stories and characters. The humber of releases per year will be reduced (at least for now), and some Toons departments will be eliminated. Administrative staff will be reduced and streamlined.
Lastly, a reporter called from some web magazine (the name of which escapes me) to ask if it was true that "morale is down" at WDFA because of recent announcements that the administration at Feature Animation was staying the same.
I told the reporter I could neither confirm nor deny, since I knew nothing about it. But, I said, it sounded untrue to me.
So Monday I asked around on the second floor. Doesn't seem to be true. (The web reporter said he got his info second-hand from "former employees" who talk to current employees.) In fact, one employee said: "I got in trouble under the the last regime when I asked a rigger in the hallway how a rig I needed was coming. Next thing I know, I get dragged on the carpet for not going through 'proper channels' to ask the question. Under David Stainton, management wanted you to go through them for everything. Now, this new team WANTS you to share information. It's a lot less top down than it used to be. And we've had way more meetings with Ed Catmull and John Lasseter than we ever had with Stainton, and they answer questions for an hour. There was only a few meetings with Stainton. And you never got much information about anything."
This isn't scientific at all, but based on what I'm hearing, I'd sort of say people feel better with these new guys than they ever did with the old commandantes. Based on what I'm hearing, the web reporter got himself some skewed info.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
At the House of Mouse
An afternoon strolling through the late Walt's place (the pastel above is by Disney vet Mel Shaw)...
"Meet the Robinsons" is refilling the pipeline after a pause for story modifications, and the crew is now off shortened workdays with way more shots to work on... (last week, you'll remember, the troops downstairs were anticpating generous overtime...)
"American Dog" is still heavily in story, and modellers and others have been told not to expect a heavy schedule before new story screenings unspool in the Fall...
"Lunch box lectures," which have been a staple at Disney Feature Animation for years, are now video-taped and offered on-line internally at WDFA. Employees who couldn't get to presentations can access them from their computers. (Recent lectures include a four-part series from Eric Goldberg on Disney animation, and a panel on a hand-drawn feature from the early nineties.)
At Disney Toons, word is that the division will phase out its hand-drawn sequels of old classics and concentrate on CGI originals, with new stories and characters. The humber of releases per year will be reduced (at least for now), and some Toons departments will be eliminated. Administrative staff will be reduced and streamlined.
Lastly, a reporter called from some web magazine (the name of which escapes me) to ask if it was true that "morale is down" at WDFA because of recent announcements that the administration at Feature Animation was staying the same.
I told the reporter I could neither confirm nor deny, since I knew nothing about it. But, I said, it sounded untrue to me.
So Monday I asked around on the second floor. Doesn't seem to be true. (The web reporter said he got his info second-hand from "former employees" who talk to current employees.) In fact, one employee said: "I got in trouble under the the last regime when I asked a rigger in the hallway how a rig I needed was coming. Next thing I know, I get dragged on the carpet for not going through 'proper channels' to ask the question. Under David Stainton, management wanted you to go through them for everything. Now, this new team WANTS you to share information. It's a lot less top down than it used to be. And we've had way more meetings with Ed Catmull and John Lasseter than we ever had with Stainton, and they answer questions for an hour. There was only a few meetings with Stainton. And you never got much information about anything."
This isn't scientific at all, but based on what I'm hearing, I'd sort of say people feel better with these new guys than they ever did with the old commandantes. Based on what I'm hearing, the web reporter got himself some skewed info.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
So glad Satan's gone. Ooops, Stainton...
GOOOD RIDANCE!!
The name said it all... "Stain" ton
Can't believe Andrew 'The Terminator' Millstein still at Disney. Already has closed down three studios that I know of. TSL, The Florida Studio, and Circle Seven...not that it was his fault, but...
I read somewhere that Steve Martin's character in LT:BIA was based on David Stainton. Is this true?
I know it's a minor point in the above post, but the idea of putting the Lunchbox lectures online is brilliant, and is the kind of thing that separates a good studio from a great studio.
David, actually I think that character was based on Tom Schumacher.
Regarding the rigging request, I experienced something similar at another studio. Going through proper channels and following protocols, a task would take about a month to get done...talking directly to the rigger, the task would get done in a couple of hours!!.
The reason that "proper channels" exist is that it's easy for TDs' time to get chewed up with sideline requests from animators that aren't in keeping with the production plan and schedule laid out by their department heads. "Invisible" work chews up the budget and stress the crew. Take that "two hour" hallway request and multiply it by 50 animators. :-)
Animated feature films are massive, complex undertakings. Individuals who place their personal priorities first and foremost often do so at the expense of the general well-being of the show or in contrast to the preferences of their director. "Proper channels" exist not for the sake of "control", but to ensure that resources and time are applied as efficiently as possible across the entire production, for the duration of the show.
Anon, I know exactly what you're talking about, but I also know that a production that operates only through "proper channels" is going to have it's own problems.
I remember on "Over the Hedge," I had a shot that required coordination with a couple of other departments. The requests and all info and feedback flowed through department heads and appropriate production people. And, after multiple meetings, tons of emails, and multiple official work requests, the issue remained unresolved (with lots of wasted work that didn't address the issue). Months went by, and probably a dozen people wasted hours and hours, to no avail. Finally I bypassed the heirachy and talked directly to my two peers in the other departments -- the problem was solved in literally 15 minutes.
Proper channels often operate like the telephone game, with information getting garbled at each stage of communication. My experience is that there are usually a couple of people in any department that abuse the priviledge of going directly to people in other departments. But to handle those few people, a straight jacket it put on everyone else. Yes, controls need to exist to make sure people get their assigned work done, and that priorities are addressed. I absolutely understand that, and agree with the necessity. But my experience is that productions that are able to allow some reasonable give and take between departments tend to be smoother and more cost efficient.
> But my experience is that productions that
> are able to allow some reasonable give and
> take between departments tend to be smoother
> and more cost efficient.
True. But if going through proper channels resulted in the ineffective roundabout you describe, then it sounds like you had incompetent department heads and producers. :-)
I see plenty of folks who wear the hat, but who don't have a CLUE what they're doing... or who have the job confused with something else.
Post a Comment