tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post6404614289763218510..comments2024-03-26T22:42:06.412-07:00Comments on TAG Blog: The Joys of TestingSteve Huletthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05537689111433326847noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-17790034178383662182008-06-04T14:30:00.000-07:002008-06-04T14:30:00.000-07:00It's been over a month, but I wanted to revisit th...It's been over a month, but I wanted to revisit this topic to say that Wes loved my storyboard test for Goode Family. Hopefully it goes somewhere. I'll take this time to address the above post...<BR/><BR/><I>Like, a number of the brethren out there, I am sitting here with the King of the Hill test for what's actually not the show, one's testing for. Which's a whole other matter, since there's a pilot of Goode Family, let's save that for another time. Well, like other board tests, where's the storyboard sample. I can't remember the<BR/>last time I received a board sample<BR/>for a test.</I><BR/><BR/>I saw one panel but I did think it was a bad move not to at least include some samples. I ended up Google searching them, and finding some storyboards. I decided to take the safe route and board them as they looked on the show, proportion-wise. Details mostly omitted, except for close-up shots. When you have to draw the characters smaller, it's tougher to display their acting.<BR/><BR/><I>Why don't they include construction sheets on drawing the characters. They exist, there's tons of them, phone book size model packs, once you end up on the show. Granted wouldn't a few of them help. Like a few headshots and some expressions, poses. But, more important as every visual storyteller knows.</I><BR/><BR/>I was surprised by this too. I took a test for Fox a while back and they had expressions, hands, and mouths out the asshole. No assholes though. For construction I lightboxed the character turn-arounds and built construction on top of them until I found a comfortable set-up. Then, I went to Hulu and just watched a bunch of King of the Hill episodes. I missed many episodes from this season anyway, thanks to never knowing when the hell it was on. While watching I would pause and copy down some expressions, mouths, hand gestures, and so forth.<BR/><BR/><I>No scene works in a vacuum. Where's this scene in relationship to rest the story? They know how the scene fits or why won't they tell us, what's the big secret here? Will we be graded as mindreaders as well?</I><BR/><BR/>You got an audio CD, right? Even without the rest of the story, just by hearing their voices you can recognize their emotions if you've seen the show. It's possible to board the scene stand-alone, and I think Wes Archer and the others realize that the board artist won't know the rest of the story.<BR/><BR/><I>My biggest concern, just getting into character. It's very different<BR/>watching the exploits of Hank Hill and the gang vs. playing Hank Hill.<BR/>And make no mistake, that's what one trying to get on-board to do. Coming from a different cultural<BR/>experience, I would like the show<BR/>creator's thoughts on the matter. Does it hurt to draft a paragraph on the characters, who's skins you must get into? But, that's not there either. So, can the game be, they expect follow-up on your part<BR/>to dig out these answers. Doesn't sound like, " hit the ground philosophy " to me.</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not aware of your cultural background, but it would be interesting to know. I think they were just looking for the basics in boarding, since they'll have a layout team to fix it and because this is a brand new show. Good staging, acting, solid proportions and proportions between characters, good perspective, and drawing consistency will most likely earn a pass.<BR/><BR/>The point to this post was if one ever get a test based on an established show like King of the Hill or say The Simpsons or Family Guy, and for whatever reason they don't include extraneous construction sheets and expressions, I'd recommend test takers go watch episodes and research the expressions themselves. It's very likely that the majority of test takers won't take that step and will try to wing it, and those who took time and researched the show will have a big advantage.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-32840933102347519112008-04-28T01:59:00.000-07:002008-04-28T01:59:00.000-07:00Someone mentioned the audition analogy. There is ...Someone mentioned the audition analogy. There is a certain point where if the actor is called back for multiple auditions, that they get paid for their time. Tests are fine, if there is even a small point of compensation. <BR/><BR/>It only seems fair. After all, if they like you enough from your portfolio to take the test, they should put their money where their mouth is. Call it some kind of test wage. (but the tests cannot be something that shows up in a production) after all, Someone is giving their time to take the test. And time, as the saying goes, is money.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-1079541806162381152008-04-23T10:42:00.000-07:002008-04-23T10:42:00.000-07:00Holy CA-RAP!!!Yeah, there's soooooo much feature w...Holy CA-RAP!!!<BR/><BR/>Yeah, there's soooooo much feature work going on now, that all the tv animation artists will be hired on with open arms and no tests RIGHT NOW!<BR/><BR/>I'm busting a gut from laughing so hard at the naivete...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-74726449923585802902008-04-20T16:29:00.000-07:002008-04-20T16:29:00.000-07:00Sounds like a'newbie'....don't worry, you'll get y...Sounds like a'newbie'....don't worry, you'll get your chance to be bitter too...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-37353618690248585662008-04-20T15:21:00.000-07:002008-04-20T15:21:00.000-07:00Answer: EMPLOYMENT!....Duh!Really? That's it? Th...<I>Answer: EMPLOYMENT!....Duh!</I><BR/><BR/>Really? That's it? Then...<BR/>I repeat--glad I work in features!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-72182767466983442372008-04-20T15:04:00.000-07:002008-04-20T15:04:00.000-07:00Answer: EMPLOYMENT!....Duh!Answer: EMPLOYMENT!....Duh!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-47844723438023410982008-04-20T14:22:00.000-07:002008-04-20T14:22:00.000-07:00The conclusion I have drawn from this long list of...The conclusion I have drawn from this long list of comments, and from every other thread of comments dealing with TV storyboarding is that...<BR/><BR/>...wait for it...<BR/><BR/><BR/>...wait for it...<BR/><BR/><BR/>...it SUCKS to work in TV animation!!!<BR/><BR/>So don't! <BR/><BR/>Thank god I work in features. Seriously. I don't say that as some sort of elitism, just a general observation that feature environments seem to be far more pleasant and less stressful than TV. <BR/><BR/>It's just my observation that those working in TV are incredibly bitter, and deservedly so! The conditions they describe do indeed sound horrendous, and would sap the soul out of anybody within a short amount of time. <BR/><BR/>How could anyone preserve a sense of pride or fun about their work, if they're constantly batting up against these issues, working on shows that are designed to look like utter garbage, for TV producers that just don't care about quality, with schedules that force you to work unpaid overtime, searching for new work every nine months or less, having to do 40-hour unpaid tests to re-prove yourselves, all for shows that are ultimately animated overseas and look terrible?<BR/><BR/>I ask this in all seriousness, because this is all the impression I get from all these endless threads--<BR/>why would ANYONE desire to work in TV animation? Someone please explain, or correct me if I'm somehow way offbase.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-89299891709418055602008-04-20T10:45:00.000-07:002008-04-20T10:45:00.000-07:00"this is pretty much what I've been arguing for ....."this is pretty much what I've been arguing for ... oh ... eight or ten years."<BR/><BR/>Try twenty years ago, when Jim Brooks paraded an army of sit-com writers into the promised land of animation and showered them with WGA residuals and a line of Emmy's from here to eternity.<BR/><BR/>Admittedly, Klasky-Csupo was a pretty heinous place as far a labor is concerned, but the WGA coming into the fold was a setback for artists having influence over their careers in television animation.<BR/><BR/>Why is it that 99.999% of the time these kinds of complaints come from prime time animated shows covered by the WGA, who has had such success working in animation that they felt that ALL of animation needed to benefit from their scribes? And judging from the number of artists who seem to be looking for work, why is it a surprise that these ‘animation’ production houses have taken advantage of the writer work stoppage to re-tool departments and reinforce their policies? The Animation Writers Caucus clearly states the divisions in the pipeline - writers, actors, THEN animators, in that order. And all separate, but supposedly created equal. Not likely, and not by a long shot. That is exactly the atmosphere that breeds these thirty page tests. It’s you, the artist, who pays the bills for this pipeline. <BR/><BR/>As an artist in this town, you cannot sit back and expect to simply remain a pit-stop for production that speeds its way overseas and back. That freeway was long ago cemented in by H&B, and judging from the state of the global economy, it is only going to get worse. Working for more artist-friendly productions is your best insurance against falling victim to this continuous riptide of primetime animation production. And to know the masses have to suffer from yet ANOTHER one of the Simpson's rip-offs?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-78932819661476846042008-04-20T00:57:00.000-07:002008-04-20T00:57:00.000-07:00With all that's been said so far. We know that the...With all that's been said so far. We know that the test thing not going to drop off the edge of the industry world. Therefore, I want to bring up the general question of do ability and thus fairness. Where's the real support material to do the test properly in the first place. If you're an experience visual storyteller, you know there's things you must have to accomplish you storytelling. And if you're new to the style and approach of a show, where's material to help you understand. <BR/>Like, a number of the brethren out there, I am sitting here with the<BR/>King of the Hill test for what's actually not the show, one's testing for. Which's a whole other matter, since there's a pilot of Goode Family, let's save that for another time. Well, like other board tests, where's the storyboard sample. I can't remember the<BR/>last time I received a board sample<BR/>for a test. Why don't they include construction sheets on drawing the characters. They exist, there's tons of them, phone book size model packs, once you end up on the show. Granted wouldn't a few of them help. Like a few headshots and some expressions, poses. But, more important as every visual storyteller knows. No scene works in a vacuum. Where's<BR/>this scene in relationship to rest the story? They know how the scene fits or why won't they tell us, what's the big secret here? Will we be graded as mindreaders as well? <BR/>My biggest concern, just getting into character. It's very different<BR/>watching the exploits of Hank Hill and the gang vs. playing Hank Hill.<BR/>And make no mistake, that's what one trying to get on-board to do. Coming from a different cultural<BR/>experience, I would like the show<BR/>creator's thoughts on the matter. Does it hurt to draft a paragraph on the characters, who's skins you must get into? But, that's not there either. So, can the game be, they expect follow-up on your part<BR/>to dig out these answers. Doesn't sound like, " hit the ground philosophy " to me. <BR/>So, I say let's look at the evidence. And thus what conclusions<BR/>do we draw. And how can the studio s and the creative managers justify the statement of fairness. And I can say from personal experience. They don't like it when you can point out there's a mistake in the test itself, let alone vagueness. The storyboard tests have their own unique issues. Since they're stuck with these things, how do you make them honest?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-7310948203706709622008-04-19T22:38:00.000-07:002008-04-19T22:38:00.000-07:00"Studios cling to long tests, I think, because sta..."Studios cling to long tests, I think, because staff producers and directors like them."<BR/><BR/>Not those with experience. My rule of thumb is that a test is virtually usless since it's unpaid for and the tester will not give it his all. More importantly if the person has the time to take a long test you probably don't want to hire him/her anyway. No one else does.<BR/><BR/>If you hire someone you're unsure about then put them on a tryout and if it doesn't work eat it and fix it yourself - you're the GD director! Then don't give him anymore work. If you can't fix it yourself or you somehow keep managing to hire unqualified people then maybe you're the one who should be repleaced.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-19799208303777672902008-04-19T17:16:00.000-07:002008-04-19T17:16:00.000-07:00If someone is or is not capable, it should be imme...<B>If someone is or is not capable, it should be immediately apparent within a few panels. That, plus their portfolio, should be all that is required to adequately judge. Any more than that is total overkill.<BR/> </B><BR/><BR/>For the record, this is pretty much what I've been arguing for ... oh ... eight or ten years.<BR/><BR/>Studios cling to long tests, I think, because staff producers and directors <I>like</I> them.Steve Huletthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05537689111433326847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-91975022647748024972008-04-19T17:05:00.001-07:002008-04-19T17:05:00.001-07:00I wouldn't say storyboard artist is an entry level...I wouldn't say storyboard artist is an entry level position. A lot of places like to see a resume full of studio credentials when hiring their board artists. I have seen entry level artists in storyboard <I>revisions</I>, but that is a position I think is good for entry level board artists. It allows them to adapt to the style of the show without worrying about other obstacles like staging, continuity, and character perspective. And if they do good revisions, they could possibly move up to storyboards. Maybe even higher.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-59439589436428535622008-04-19T17:05:00.000-07:002008-04-19T17:05:00.000-07:00[i](I'm the producer-director who posted earlier)N...[i](I'm the producer-director who posted earlier)<BR/><BR/>No, it's not hard - but I've been bitten in the ass by that before. Someone's portfolio looks great, they seem eager and able in person so I hire them... then I come to find out they can't adapt to the style of the show or they just outright suck.[/i]<BR/><BR/>Did you read their resume? CALL THEIR FORMER EMPLOYERS? <BR/><BR/>I mean really, that seems to be the missing link here, and the funny thing is, when someone recommends a friend, they know that their own reputation is on the line if that friend "sucks" or is flakey schedule-wise, etc.<BR/><BR/>You'd think that a producer and/or supervising director would have the capability to call former employers on someone's resume to find out if that someone did OK, sucked, or was the most fabulous thing since pre-punched animation paper. It at least gives the producer/supervising director a clue-by-four of the potential employee.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-80934388738186805752008-04-19T15:36:00.000-07:002008-04-19T15:36:00.000-07:00-all in the name of preserving the artistic integr...-all in the name of preserving the artistic integrity of some asinine TV show-<BR/><BR/>Why are you pursuing entertainment positions? I feel bad for the team that hires you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-8879521153321258312008-04-19T12:30:00.000-07:002008-04-19T12:30:00.000-07:00Thanks for all the condescension, anonymous, as we...Thanks for all the condescension, anonymous, as well as your good advice and concern for my mental health, but all of the "monsters" I know are human. Happily, they are few and far between. What I had a hard time swallowing was someone lucky enough to be in a supervisory position not only defending the testing process, but eliciting our sympathy for having to "deal with" under-qualified artists. On a union blog, that's just plain bad manners.<BR/><BR/>The real "monster," just as in the economy as a whole, is corporate greed. They get tax breaks for sending jobs overseas and are constantly looking for ways to squeeze schedules and micro-manage expenses, regardless of their profit margin. They have long ago shipped anything resembling an entry-level position out of the country. That's the real reason for the "mediocre" story board artists; story board has become an entry-level position. In the past, that would have been absurd. CG companies also don't want to "waste" money investing in training. That's the real reason so many CG artists are being hired from overseas- plug 'n play! Testing is just another way to cut costs. Learn the show at your own expense and maybe we'll hire you. The longer and more challenging the test is the more prepared the artist will be to "Hit the ground running," as the vilest human monster I ever met said to me recently. (There are a few people who know who I am,now). <BR/><BR/>The only fair procedure would be for studios to look at your portfolio and resume first, then pay or compensate you in some way if they feel they still need to see a test.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-51098928355837535212008-04-19T08:08:00.000-07:002008-04-19T08:08:00.000-07:00Okay, I'm not sure what is going on in all areas o...Okay, I'm not sure what is going on in all areas of animation, but again, it sounds like some people are handing out unreasonable tests. That doesn't sound fair. As for not giving live interviews, I'm not sure what studio would opt for that policy at all, and for what reason. I, as a candidate, would be highly suspect of any job offered to me without them at least - ahem, here goes - MEETING ME!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-28371644652367051052008-04-19T08:02:00.000-07:002008-04-19T08:02:00.000-07:00Wow... you REALLY need therapy. Your ability to pe...Wow... you REALLY need therapy. Your ability to perceive reality has clearly eroded into some bizarre netherworld of goblins and monsters. Seriously. Put yourself in a doctor's care. Today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-71693047095882701502008-04-19T02:09:00.000-07:002008-04-19T02:09:00.000-07:00I'm the one "workedbothsides" was reacting to. You...I'm the one "workedbothsides" was reacting to. You lecture me on attitude and karma? You call me "paranoid" as if the exploitive abusive hiring practices that are now common in our industry exist only in my imagination? No. it's called experience, and judging by all the other comments, I am far from alone.<BR/><BR/>I was addressing a corporate pit bull, a walking ego who gets off on telling hard working professionals they "suck," a soulless monster who pats himself on the back for destroying some poor slob who is only trying to support his family or save his house, all in the name of preserving the artistic integrity of some asinine TV show or saving some multi-billion dollar global corporate entity a few bucks. Don't worry about me, a nice steady paycheck always puts a broad peaceful smile on my face. By the way, when was the last time anybody actually had a live interview for a storyboard position?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-55897174750324506062008-04-18T22:34:00.000-07:002008-04-18T22:34:00.000-07:00Wow, peace and love blazing forth in the happy ani...Wow, peace and love blazing forth in the happy animation family.<BR/><BR/>A somewhat simple solution to this would be that if a test is absolutely necessary to determine whether an artist is capable of the style of the show, the test should be designed to take a MAXIMUM of four hours. Tops. <BR/><BR/>Why the need for these lengthy tests? If someone is or is not capable, it should be immediately apparent within a few panels. That, plus their portfolio, should be all that is required to adequately judge. Any more than that is total overkill.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-83337504950126446652008-04-18T18:37:00.000-07:002008-04-18T18:37:00.000-07:00>>Sounds like a bit of guilt-ridden self justifica...>>Sounds like a bit of guilt-ridden self justification. You were an arrogant imperious asshole who killed someone off you had committed to support for fear of possibly displeasing your boss and now you're rationalizing your insecure narcissistic and destructive behavior.<BR/><BR/>I imagine you carry this attitude with you on job interviews?<BR/><BR/>>>They do it at home for free. How convenient! Then they pick the artists who look the most like they can jump right into the production pipeline.<BR/><BR/>This statement carries that nice touch of paranoia that works so well in team environments. You should be given three or four tests for this self-absorbed bs. Good luck getting work with the karma you're carrying around.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-55000883901841688792008-04-18T17:09:00.000-07:002008-04-18T17:09:00.000-07:00What strikes me as odd is I've heard complaints fr...What strikes me as odd is I've heard complaints from several directors and artists who say that there are too many storyboard artists working in LA that are just mediocre or complacent, and don't really put the extra effort into it.<BR/><BR/>However, as far as I can tell they keep hiring these people back to work. Most of them have a nice resume and a good record of making deadlines. As long as you've got that, the studios are willing to put up with your average ability. It's a safe hire.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-45798375984471061292008-04-18T17:05:00.000-07:002008-04-18T17:05:00.000-07:00To the producer-director:"MANY times?" I seriously...To the producer-director:<BR/>"MANY times?" I seriously doubt that. Did you ever actually lose a job for hiring the wrong artist? And what are the odds that a talented artist with a great portfolio and a deep resume "just outright sucks?" I guess they managed to fool all of their previous employers until their mediocrity was finally exposed by you, the great animation genius. Sounds like a bit of guilt-ridden self justification. You were an arrogant imperious asshole who killed someone off you had committed to support for fear of possibly displeasing your boss and now you're rationalizing your insecure narcissistic and destructive behavior.<BR/><BR/>The germ of truth in your defensive self righteous tirade is the part about adapting to the "style of the show." That finally reveals the true reason for all of this rampant "testing."<BR/><BR/>What the "testing" actually is, is a cheap easy way to train artists to work on a show at their own expense. Every show has it's own design and story telling style. It would take any artist a certain amount of time to completely learn and adapt. By testing everyone, the cheap companies don't have to pay anyone a salary for learning the style of the show. They do it at home for free. How convenient! Then they pick the artists who look the most like they can jump right into the production pipeline. <BR/><BR/>The reason they get away with it is they don't pay anything for it, as someone mentioned in a previous comment. If a company likes your work and wants to give you a test, there should be some kind of "quid pro quo," either money, or a cancellation of the probation period on hiring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-66745582013347080002008-04-18T15:48:00.000-07:002008-04-18T15:48:00.000-07:00(I'm the producer-director who posted earlier)No, ...(I'm the producer-director who posted earlier)<BR/><BR/>No, it's not hard - but I've been bitten in the ass by that before. Someone's portfolio looks great, they seem eager and able in person so I hire them... then I come to find out they can't adapt to the style of the show or they just outright suck. <BR/><BR/>This has happened many times, and it winds up slowing the production down by weeks and costing loads of money to fix and it makes ME look bad to the folks who sign my checks.<BR/><BR/>So, as I said, I don't LIKE handing out tests, but I would rather test someone and be sure I know what I'm getting into than just hire someone based on a decent portfolio and 'good vibes' only to lose my job because of someone who can't do the job.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-60068801343321986352008-04-18T13:45:00.000-07:002008-04-18T13:45:00.000-07:00Tests are, for the most part, pure crap.An experie...Tests are, for the most part, pure crap.<BR/><BR/>An experienced director/producer should be able to figure out how to look at a portfolio, read a resume, and pick up a phone to check out the reputation of an artist applying for a position on their show.<BR/><BR/>Really, is that so hard?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-5822806462333482472008-04-18T13:44:00.000-07:002008-04-18T13:44:00.000-07:00why would they call you?Los Angeles is a city of p...why would they call you?<BR/><BR/>Los Angeles is a city of people speaking out of both sides of their mouth. no one - and i mean no one - in this town wants to give someone the answer no. especially not to their face. its because they are afraid that later down the road that very person might hold it against them when they are in a position of power. so they would rather not say anything and leave you hanging in the lurch. your posrtfolio or test sitting in a pile. <BR/><BR/>only in LA are blind drop offs of portfolios the absolute standard. anywhere else(or any other field) you walk in and meet the director or the HR person for them to go thru your portfolio in front of you and actually meet you. if they didn't like what they saw they tell you. its called professional courtesy.<BR/><BR/>studios here will tell you that they don't have the time to do that, but they do. they just don't have the guts to do it. which is sad because it would benefit everyone who is in animation in this town, the studios, the artists, the community, the business.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com