Animation Under False Pretences: The Moving-Image

Green screen in The Matrix (1999).

In her essay “Cinematography: The Creative Use of Reality,” renowned filmmaker Maya Deren makes the argument that animation (or “animated paintings” as she refers to them) is not the same mode of expression as film. For Deren, “the motion-picture camera… functions as an instrument of discovery rather than of creativity, it does yield a kind of image which, unlike the images of ‘animated paintings’ (animation itself is a use of the telescoped-time principle), is unique to the motion-picture medium.” Essentially, Deren argues that films require the capture of an external, visual reality, thus requiring a camera, while animation does not capture this same reality, but creates it. [1] Despite creating an appealing argument, Deren wrote her essay in 1960, long before the emergence of CGI effects in films and the rise of 3D animation. While many film purists still believe that film and animation are completely separate categories, film is a type of animation.

Typically, animation is thought of as a series of moving, artistic pieces (drawn, sculpted, etc.) that appeals to the children demographic; the idea is that animation does not display a real moment in time, but a created moment placed in time. However, an article on the Center for Animation and Interactive Media at RMIT University describes animation as, “the synthesis of movement through the sequential use of small fragments of time, which gives rise to this wondrous illusion.” In addition, the textbook Illustrated WPF defines animation as, “a sequence of frames, where the objects in each frame are moved just a small bit from where they were in the previous frame. When the frames are shown in rapid succession, the objects in the frames appear to be moving.” [2] Neither of these definitions acknowledge art, but the ability for sequences of images to produce the appearance of movement or “life.” This is because animation is derived from the latin word “anima” which means life or breath. Yet film, or “moving pictures,” is in the end a sequence of photographs that tend to line up in time to produce the resemblance of movement. Likewise, philosopher Jeff Malpas explains that cinematic film and traditional animation, “sit alongside a fundamental similarity: in both cases, one can speak about a movement that belongs to the image, even though the techniques and processes by which this is achieved are in each case different… here we are returned to animation as indeed a making move– something that is not restricted to the cinematic image alone.”[3] While one may believe that what is recorded in film is actual movement, film is a compilation of photographs taken within a given time frame. The human brain perceives this as movement in what is called the phi phenomenon. If film (like traditional animation) is characterized by the illusion of movement, by basic definitions, film or “moving pictures” is just one type of animation.

On the other hand, people who support film theorists like Maya Deren argue that film is not animation as it captures reality, making film unique. However, there are many “films” that have not strictly captured “reality” throughout the history of cinema that are ignored by the film “purists” that believe film is not animation. Early films that were in color (prior to Technicolor) did not use cameras that captured the real color of the moment. Instead, they were initially shot in black and white and then painstakingly painted frame by frame with dyes. While the photographs captured a “real moment,” the colors were fake, painted, and ultimately created. By the definition that film is limited to capturing reality and is not “created,” these early painted films cannot actually be strictly film because they combine real footage with color painted on the film frames after production. If capturing reality is what differentiates film from animation, these original color “films” are all animations.

Sensazioni, by Diego Fazio, is hand-drawn and photorealistic.

While an argument can be made that the painted photographs/frames of the early films still look and feel realistic, what would set these films apart from a series of photorealistic paintings? Works from photorealist artists such as Diego Fazio would confuse viewers into believing that the animation was captured on a camera despite being painted or “created.” This means that one cannot determine where true film (captured reality) begins and ends; a viewer would be left to simply believe that what they see on the screen was captured via camera, but not actually know whether it is film or not.

The problems with realism as the definition of a film and as the difference between animation and film grows larger when considering computer generated imagery (CGI). CGI is the use of computers in order to create special effects, backgrounds, characters, and other graphics. In 1973, Westworld (1973) became the first feature film to include CGI. Since then, CGI has progressed to the point that it is known as virtual cinematography. In the book, Think in 3D: Food for Thought for Directors, Cinematographers and Stereographers, virtual

The use of green screen in Man of Steel (2013) to create a flying Superman.

cinematography is defined as, “The creation of a CG ‘set’ and the choreographing of CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) actors that are animated or their performances motion captured and then directed by the director who with a ‘CG camera’ produces moving pictures that vary from cartoon like renditions, to highly realistic renderings that may be indistinguishable from real world live action scenery and human talent (actors).” [4] The ability of CGI to create a filmic world indistinguishable from reality disrupts Deren’s idea of film being strictly reality presented before a camera. As it is cheaper and easier to make more realistic characters and landscapes through computer algorithms and programs, many of the “films” produced in the past decade have taken advantage of CGI. Films like The Avengers (2012), Life of Pi (2012), The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Star Wars saga, The Great Gatsby (2013), and even the Twilight saga have heavily used computers to create their so-called films. In particular, many of these films have combined green screens and real footage to fake a “reality.” Instead of shooting at an actual beach (something that shouldn’t be too difficult to do), the film Breaking Dawn: Part One (2011) uses a green screen on a bedroom set to insert a fake beach. Instead of using make-up and costumes to create the character Gollum, the Peter Jackson trilogy of The Lord of the Rings uses digital animation. The popular film Avatar (2009) uses real actors combined with motion capture (mo-cap) and green screens to create an artificial, but realistic world. The film Beowulf (2007) takes this a step further, composed entirely of photorealistic CGI with characters that are creepily similar looking to their voice actors. Evidently, fast-paced photography has blended with artificially produced art to produce the “films” viewers see today. Combinations of live action actors and real locations (that characterize “films”) with constructed computer-generated characters and backdrops blend in an animated fashion that is not entirely captured by the camera. Much like the photorealistic paintings mentioned earlier, some entirely CGI films are deceptively realistic, blurring the boundaries of what was shot by the camera and what was artificially produced. These films are no different than a rapid series of images that create the appearance of movement and reality that just so happen to use photographs as one technique among many to create a movie; hence, these “moving pictures” are just a type of animation.

The use of green screen in the Lord of the Rings trilogy to produce luscious backdrops.

Evidently, film is a type of animation as it produces the illusion of movement through its photography. While some filmmakers and philosophers believe film to be different through its capture of reality, for most of film history, many films were not limited to what was placed in front of the camera and incorporated a fabricated reality created in post-production (whether it be painting the frames, adding CGI, etc.). Even the determination of what is real to the viewer is becoming hazy. Nevertheless, the idea that film is increasingly fabricated and serves as one category under animation poses a strange concept: many separate categories of art and entertainment are blending into one; the distinction between different forms of art is becoming harder to define.

_______________________________________________________________

1. Deren, Maya. Cinematography: The Creative Use of Reality. Thesis. 1960.
2. Solis, Daniel M. Illustrated WPF. Berkeley, CA: Apress, 2009. Print.
3. Malpas, Jeff. “With a Philosopher’s Eye: A ‘Naive’ View on Animation.” Animation 9.1 (2014): 65-79.
4. Dsouza, Clyde. Think in 3D: Food for Thought for Directors, Cinematographers and Stereographers. CreateSpace Independent Platform, 2012. Print.