Food for Thought - Pitch Feedback

        As expected, when Fiona and I pitched our idea, the majority of the feedback was concerning our two disparate ideas. While our tutor stated that he was more drawn to the animated interview, there were also suggestions that hard facts could be incorporated with the more opinion based interview. Ultimately, we have to decide (very soon) whether we are going to combine our narrative concepts, work on just one, or work co-operatively on both. To me, this last option, of working on two stop motion animations simultaneously, seems highly unrealistic especially given the high volume of work we currently have for other modules.

        Another issue which was raised was regarding the consistency of character designs. Given our desire to each attempt to model a character, there is a chance that we could end up with two characters which do not sit well alongside one another, who don't belong to the same world. To prevent this happening, we will need to work closely alongside one another during the modelling and construction process, to ensure there is as little discrepancy as possible between the characters.

        On a more practical note, questions were also raised about how we would handle the animation of blood. As we have been struggling with agreeing on a single narrative, we have not as yet managed to do any animation tests. There will undoubtedly be a fair amount of blood in either concept, and consequently it is necessary that we consider how to animate with liquid. While we could use semi dry PVA (dyed red), which will be malleable for a time, we could simply film dripping blood in set, as live action, provided there doesn't need to be any animation at the same time. This is something we will have to explore as part of our proof of concept stage, before beginning the animation in earnest.

        Our most pressing course of action, however is to meet with our tutor, and attempt to come to a final decision on the direction of our narrative.

Set Designs

        Once Fiona had figured out the rough layout of our proposed setting, I took charge of the sketches and added some of the props and details one would expect to find in an abattoir, before Fiona added texture and colour. While we did look at photos and videos of actual slaughterhouses as reference, many of them were vast and sprawling, with separate areas for stunning, slaughtering and then gutting and skinning the animals, all of these connected by lengthy chutes, corrals and rails. Indeed, the interview on which I based my rough storyboard describes a 'hundred-foot ramp'. With the time, money, and resources available to us, Fiona and I have had to be more economical with our ambitions.

        We have attempted to keep the set as small as possible, with certain areas closer to one another than they probably would be in reality. However, with careful use of framing we could create the illusion of space. Or, we could take advantage of the cramped, cluttered environment to make the abattoir seem dingy, dilapidated and unpleasant.

        The scale of our set will largely be dictated by the size of the puppets. As we are using an armature kit, rather than building our own from scratch, there are some core elements (the shoulder and hip sections) which are a set size and cannot be changed, which will inform how big we build the arms, legs and other components. My puppet should be the tallest, hopefully no more than 25 cm or so. The set walls need to be tall enough to accommodate this height.

        Fiona and I have also discussed green-screening any elements which appear beyond our physical set, such as anything seen through the open double doors, or behind the curtains where the animals enter the slaughterhouse. This will save us from having to build any additional elements, as we can efficiently insert a digital or hand drawn backdrop. 

If we were to follow my narrative concept, we would not
necessarily even need to build the locker room, which would
save us a considerable amount of time.

        

                It is quickly becoming apparent just how many props and models we will need to consider. With some, we are hoping to use readily available materials (gardening chains and fishing hooks would make good substitute hoists and meat hooks, for example), but others will need building from scratch. Hopefully we will be able to use lightweight material with clever paintwork for some items, but others will need to be substantial. This particularly applies to the hanging rails, which will need to take the weight of the model carcasses and animals.

        The upcoming moulding and casting workshop should provide a useful insight into how we might go about creating the carcasses. We could sculpt one from clay or plasticine, but then cast them in a lighter weight material (latex foam?), which would put less of a strain on our set. The process of casting might also prove to be more efficient than sculpting several near identical objects (as I know that I would be a perfectionist about getting each one 'just right'). There is also the possibility to green screen a single animal/carcass, and duplicate them digitally, although I think Fiona and I are keen on shooting as much in camera as possible.

Pastel visions of various meats.

Character Designs Phase Two

        After my initial designs, Fiona and I each took responsibility for developing one character each. I took on the gangly butcher (who I've named Gordon/Gilbert). In our discussions, we had covered the possibility of making Gordon scruffier, and less well groomed that in his initial form, as his bow tie ensemble is more suited to a butcher's shop than an abattoir.

        During the design process, I began to ponder some of the problems which may be encountered when constructing Gordon/Gilbert as a puppet. Primarily, the issue of what materials we will be using. Fiona and I have discussed the possibility of working with a more substantial material than plasticine, which I found difficult to use last year, as it gives, attracts fibres and dirt, and is susceptible to deforming. We hope to cast the faces and possibly hands using silicone or latex. However, if we can keep as much skin covered as possible, by using gloves, long sleeves etc. then we can minimise the amount of moulding and casting required. For the rest of the body, we are aiming to use foam or sponge as a foundation, before creating miniature costumes out of fabrics which can be fitted to the sculpted foam (hence most of my designs featuring fitted/tailored costumes).

   

        As I sketched out more designs, Gordon began to lose some of his initial height, which was his defining feature. However, he cannot become too tall, as that would mean building the sets bigger. When Fiona and I build our armatures, I feel it would be best if we worked alongside one another, so we can keep the disparate heights which was so important in my first designs.

        Sven, Fiona's character, also changed shape quite markedly, losing some of his stocky angularity. Looking at our two design sheets, our styles are quite different to one another, meaning we will have to be careful that we do not end up with two characters that cannot plausibly inhabit the same space. Yet my models rarely end up with identical features to my designs (my modelling skills are not good enough yet), so as long as we work closely together in constructing our puppets, I am sure they will sit well alongside each other.

        The other major consideration is how to handle the facial animation. The eyes are not too much of a problem, but we don't have the time or resources available to create a vast library of replacements (a la Laika), or use a mechanical 'skull' which can be animated to show mouth or brow movements. So far, we have a number of options: add in any facial animation digitally in post production, cover up the mouth with (movable) facial hair (or a surgical mask) so that we need only incorporate rough movements, or simply don't animate the face, keeping a fixed expression throughout.

        Once we have a firmer picture of our narrative, it will be easier to determine how much facial animation we require, and which approach will be best suited to our project.

WWF - Pitch & Feedback

        Having decided that it would be more achievable to create the presentation slides rather than a 2 minute animation, Rebecca and I needed to put our developmental work and ideas together in the form of pitch boards, to present to the group in order that we could receive feedback. These pitch boards were not as developed as those for our individual practice brief, mainly due to the fact that we hadn't spent as much time on this brief before pitching.

        Consequently, our concepts for the layout and content of the slides do not demonstrate the final visual style, as we haven't yet finalised the narrative/order of information, and what assets will need need constructing for each slide. For the purposes of the pitch, Rebecca and I each selected a number of pieces of information from the Living Planet Report, and drew up some rough sketches of how we would visualise this information. To provide a more rounded picture of how our own presentation slides will look, we included reference to illustrations and animations which have inspired us (a variety of stop motion, paper cut outs and textured surfaces).

My initial sketches, visualising information from the Living Planet Report

      

        Judging from the feedback we received, Rebecca and I should have included our brief analysis in the pitch boards, as many of the comments assumed that we were aiming to produce an animation, rather than the presentation slides. Yet other people's opinions are invaluable to this brief as we are aiming to evoke an emotional response, and our peers all fall within our target demographic. To guide the feedback, we posed a number of questions we wished to be answered:

1. How can we imbue the presentation slides with the appropriate impact needed to inspire action in the audience?

• Inspire action by using cute animals being affected by the issues - might be more emotive.
• The visual concepts shown will create impact, as they are emotionally evocative.
• Show how the issues affect the audience specifically - how their lifestyles impact the planet.

2. As we are producing slides, rather than an animation, how can we communicate all of the facts and information from the report, without the assistance of moving image?

• Storyboard with specific information on it.
• The idea of the CO2 hands holding the Earth effectively shows how pollution is engulfing the world.
• Will need text to help communicate the message, without the assistance of animation.
• Consider using a voiceover to communicate information, or perhaps incorporate minimal animation in some areas (using After Effects animation).

3. Are our design concepts too cliched?

• The responses to this question unanimously agree that our concepts are not too cliched.
• However, is cliche always a bad thing?
• The more cliche the better, cheesy will attract more people.
• One piece of feedback states that they prefer the sketch concepts...
• ...while another prefers the stop motion, tactile material approach.
• The design concepts work, communicating the point effectively.
• The infographic style is entertaining and factual, not cliched.

4. How can we make presentation slides exciting enough to engage the target audience of 16-24 year olds?

• Explain what is going on in the slides more.
• Really like the visual concept, which would work for the target audience, and possibly appeal to younger audiences too. The cut out style is 'awesome'.
• However, one piece of feedback raises the question of whether the visual style may be a little 'young'...
• ...while another questions whether our concept will appeal to the 'always on generation'.
• Making the topics relate to the audience is the key to engaging them. Comedy is also a good tactic, but this may not be appropriate given the serious nature of the report. However, we could consider a comedic approach.
• Relate to young adults' lifestyles - how they specifically are affecting animals/the planet. Make them sympathise.

        Reassuringly, the majority of the feedback is positive and encouraging. What is tricky is when we have two opinions which are in direct opposition to one another: in this case whether the sketch or stop motion style is more appropriate, and whether the the concept is too 'young' for our demographic. With the former, Rebecca and I had never considered using the sketchy style for the finished slides, it was just a means of depicting our intentions. Besides, the rest of the feedback regarding the stop motion style is favorable. 

        In terms of the target audience, Rebecca and I have discussed the suitability of our concept for the 'always on' generation. While there is certainly a propensity for digital animation at the moment, we believe that this climate will help our hand crafted aesthetic stand out, and prevent it becoming too similar to other infogaphic animations (such as Ending Overfishing, which shares certain similarities with our proposed compositions). Our animation being handmade, rather than slick and digital, will also support the theme of a delicate and fragile Earth in need of protection. Besides, a stop motion animation has equal potential to be seen across social media and other platforms accessed by the 'always on' generation. With regards to the visual style being too young, I believe that once we have incorporated text, facts and figures into the slides, it will become more apparent who the target audience is, as the key concepts of biodiversity and ecological footprints are hardly suitable for children. However, a simple visual style may make these wordy and complex ideas more accessible, if we can create strong visual depictions.

Food for Thought - Additional Thoughts

        As I was beginning to feel quite overwhelmed by this project, and the fact that we don't yet have a concrete narrative idea, with the pitch only a few days away, I felt I needed to discuss with my tutor how we could address these concerns.

        Both Fiona and I are quite ambitious (not to mention perfectionists) when it comes to the construction of characters, sets and props, which is probably why we got carried away with these aspects of the project, rather then the writing process. Consequently, I feel we would be better off keeping the story and animation fairly minimal, allowing ourselves more time to focus on producing beautiful puppets and sets. At the moment, some of our ideas are too ambitious, and I am very worried that we simply won't have the time to complete our animation.

         Fortunately, our tutor recognised these concerns, and has suggested ways in which we might prevent our animation spiraling out of control. She even suggested that we could potentially treat our set as a diarama, with the puppets in a single pose, and move the camera through the predominantly still set with the possibility to incorporate minimal animation. This would certainly emphasise the eerie, grim atmosphere we were aiming for, and allow us more time to focus on the modelling and constructing.

        This is an interesting concept, and something we should bear in mind once we discover how much work is involved in creating our miniature abattoir.

Food For Thought - Narrative Ideas

        At the moment, one of our main concerns is how to incorporate the documentary aspect of this module into our narrative. Fiona and I have quite differing ideas on how to approach the topic, and indeed what the main focus and message of our animation should be.

        We have perhaps made a big mistake on beginning the design process without first having a firm idea of what we are trying to communicate. Now we must develop our narrative to suit our setting, which is tricky as some of our later ideas (about the impact of the meat industry on the environment) would, I feel, be better suited to a farm setting than an abattoir.

        As we have been quite ambitious in deciding to create a stop motion animation with minimal digital assistance (we will be building our sets, rather than creating them in Maya, and creating all the props required in a slaughterhouse ourselves), I feel it would be best to keep the narrative simple. We could approach this brief as a 'poetic documentary', depicting some of the things we have seen and read, allowing the viewer to draw their own conclusion. Then again, we could take an 'observational' approach, showing what Animal Aid's investigation claims is taking place in UK abattoirs. 

        An animated interview is my preferred approach. After searching the internet (I felt that it would be difficult to find an abattoir worker willing to disclose their experiences to us, as it is quite a controversial topic. Plus, neither of us have any connections to the meat industry, so where would we start searching for an interviewee?) I managed to come across two interviews which could possibly form the basis of our narrative. 

        The first comes from a former employee of a halal slaughterhouse. This could be problematic, as we were hoping to avoid any religious of cultural subtexts, as this is not an issue of religion, but of animal welfare, and we don't want to embroil ourselves in additional controversy. The second is more promising. It is an extract from a book, and the contact details of the interviewer are given (if we needed to contact her to request permission to use her words). There is no mention of the interviewee working in a religiously or culturally specialised slaughterhouse, and as the animals are 'hogs' this would rule out the abattoir producing either halal or kosher meat.

        The content of this interview is quite graphic and disturbing in places. While we could chose to animate these horrific scenes, it may be more effective to handle the visuals more sensitively, and leave out some of the more horrific things we have seen and read during our research, allowing the impact of the interviewee's words to sink in. The aim is to draw attention to the shocking treatment of animals, but not to frighten the audience away. I have isolated a few passages from the interview which I feel would be best suited to being animated, and have a high impact:

• "I've seen hogs beaten, whipped, kicked in the head to get them to the restrainer. One night, I saw a driver get so angry at a hog he broke it's back with a piece of board."
• "Management was constantly complaining to us about blown loins. They claimed that when the stunner voltage was too high it tore up the meat. The supervisors always wanted it on low stun no matter what size hogs we were stunning. When you got big sows and boars in the restrainer, the stunner wouldn't work at all."
• "When hogs end up in the catch pen alive, the shackler beats them over the head with a lead pipe a couple of times - until they're dazed so he can get a chain around the hog's leg - and then he hoists it up. By then they may have come back to life and be squealing their heads off."
• "The managers would say, 'that's just muscle reaction, nerves. It's not alive.' I'd say, 'then why's the damn hog trying to bite me? Just how stupid do you think I am?'"
• "After they left me, the hogs would go up a hundred-foot ramp to a tank where they're dunked in 140 degree water. That's to scald the hair off...there's no way these animals can bleed out in the few minutes it takes to get up the ramp. By the time they hit the scalding tank, they're still fully conscious and screaming."  

The rough storyboard I began developing based on the animated
interview concept.

The alternative idea we are looking at attempts to incorporate wider reaching environmental issues, in a more docudrama style set up (I like this idea, except for the visual representation of the greenhouse gases):

"Starts off in the Locker Room

Sven and Gordon are putting on their boots, tying laces, grabbing aprons from locker and putting coats in the locker, and putting on hats/hair nets etc. They also clock in. Credits on top, enter slaughter house and switch the lights on. The lights flicker, title screen.

They go to wash their hands, as the water pours out (can use sellophane or something like in the bigger picture), fact overlayed in post, It takes more than 2,400 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat and only 25 gallons to produce 1lbs of wheat.

As the taps are turned off, you hear footsteps walking away and cattle noises then it cuts to the plastic curtain wafting and cows stomping, a bit of dust here to come from under the curtain, at this point the other butcher is testing the stun gun. Red and yellow flourescent strip lights in the cieling really flicker at this point (red lighting behind curtain and maybe above where the meat is hung up?) blue lighting comes out of the stun gun to make it more dramatic. Another fact on screen here, I think the blue stun gun should come out in the pattern of a tree, and be related to farming animals worldwide deforestation. I’ve found a few but they are quite long so I need to find a more succinct one.

Cuts to the other butcher hitting a cow with a sticking into the stun gun area and the cow rearing backwards kicking, cuts to the other one putting the gate down, cow shits itself. Zooms into steamy poo, fact about green house gases here - livestock is more than 18% responsible for greenhouse gases, more than cars, planes and fossil fuels. (18% doesn’t seem like a lot maybe we could find a more dramatic fact. )

The cow is beaten a bit more in the pen to settle and is stunned once. Then the cow cries, close up on tear. Fact on screen about the stress of farming animals puts on ecological systems and how it spoils diversity, or could be one on how it’s contributing to overheating the planet.

So the butchers stun it again and then hang the cow upside down, and cut it open. The cow bleeds out and the camera cuts to the blood pooling on the floor, in post we add fishes swiming and dying in the blood and have a fact on screen about the deadzones in the ocean from the run off from animal livestock. Whilst this is happening theres sound effects of the cow being skinned (still writhing but we don’t actually see this). The skin is thrown in a tub and and we can see footsteps as it builds up to another cow being stunned and the lights flicker.

I thought at this point we could cut to a black and white shot of the scene, like it’s from a cctv camera in the corner of them hanging a second cow up and moving them round, we coul dhave the butchers being really naughty here, drawing on one of them, or taking a selfie with them. And here we could include a fact about CCTV recently being made compulsory in slaughter houses but animal cruelty still happens. The camera could flicker on and off to suggest a lot more time passing (they normally have the time in the bottom corner. We could then cut to having nine cows all strung up and the two butchers hosing the places down. I think at this point we could have text on screen that talks about not all slaughter houses being like this and local butchers aren’t as pressured by demand and follow a better protocol, and treat the animals with more respect. The two butchers then push the carcasses behind the plastic curtain sound of a truck driving away and they come back wash their hands and talk about how they are strapped for cash as the put their shoes one. And we could end with ignorance is bliss but you could save yourself money if you eat less meat and source locally and family butchers.

Or another idea I had was one of the butchers could be new and he could be really shocked by everything. But I haven't really thought this through as much. I still think there's a few holes in this but I think it could be more of an orginal concept, but it probably would take quite a bit more ad libbing work to flesh it out. (flesh gerrit?)"

Fiona's initial storyboard drafts.

Food For Thought Brief Analysis

        To clarify exactly what the Food for Thought brief is asking of us, Fiona and I applied the same brief analysis questions which we have been using for the briefs in the Responsive module.  

What problems are identified by the brief?

The brief, as previously mentioned, is quite vague. We need to create a 1-2 minute documentary animation about food. We've chosen the basic premise (abattoirs) and have begun work on designing the settings and the characters but are struggling with the narrative and the exact message we are communicating. The animation will also be exhibited alongside the work of our peers, with accompanying promotional material.

What is the brief asking you to do about it?

The technical side is that it will require the college sting to be displayed at the start and be presented in H264 format. It will need to be between 1 and 2 minutes long. It also requires a portfolio of work and several blog posts labelled OUAN505 (with at least 5 of these exploring documentary animation). 

For the pitch we are required to present concept art, material testing, storyboards, character designs and any other developmental work. While it would be helpful at this stage to have animation tests as proof of concept, this isn't realistic if we are working with stop motion.

The narrative needs to be be based either on facts, real stories and interviews, docudrama or motion graphics. We have ruled out motion graphics, as we wish to create a more character based animation.

What is the brief trying to achieve?

We are trying to make people aware of the cruelty that goes into animal slaughter in the meat industry. We are not trying to convince people to become vegans or vegetarians, just to consider where and how their meat is produced and insist that regulations regarding the humane treatment of animals in slaughterhouses are stuck to.

One possibility we have also discussed is getting people to consider to cut back on their meat intake, especially the really low quality meat (although Animal Aid found problems with animal cruelty to be present across all standards of abattoir, from Organic to Freedom Food endorsed). Sourcing from their local butchers instead of large scale factories. Maybe even considering Meat Free Mondays (although in the Cowspiracy documentary, Meat Free Mondays is described as a fallacy, and useless, as what does it really achieve?). However, these additional topics and concepts may over complicate matters.

Who will benefit?

The public, who will have a greater understanding of where their food comes from, and be able to make more informed choices about where they purchase their meat from. The animals should also benefit, from an increase in standards, and more stringent enforcement of animal welfare regulations.

Who is the audience?

We are aiming for an audience aged 16+, the people that do the food shopping, mums, dad's meat eaters, restaurant owners and suppliers and the people that work in the houses themselves. We feel that the topic is quite dark and gory, and would be unsuitable for younger viewers.

What is the message?

Our focus is the needless and unacceptable cruelty which is inherent in most abattoirs and slaughterhouses. Although the practice of slaughtering animals for meat is controversial at the best of times, there is no need for the animals to be subjected to unnecessary psychological and physical suffering. They should be treated with respect and dignity, and regulations should be more strictly enforced to ensure that unnecessary cruelty is eliminated.

How will that message/idea/concept be delivered?

Through a short, stop motion animation. The animation needs to be a documentary, based on facts, and research.

WWF - Change of Plans

        Subsequently to the brief analysis, in which I stated we were planning to create a short, infographic animation using stop motion, Rebecca and I have decided that it would be more achievable to fulfill WWF's alternative option to an animation, which is a maximum of 8 presentation slides. The message, audience and intention will remain the same to those identified in the analysis, and indeed we still aim to use a combination of paper, materials and real world objects to create scenes and images which can then be photographed to form the slides.

        After consulting our tutor to discuss whether this would be an acceptable alternative (as producing a 2 minute animation of a high quality in the time available would place a massive amount of pressure on both of us) he helpfully suggested how we might approach these presentation slides. As we are keeping the same aesthetic for the slides as we had discussed for the animation, we could view the slides as a storyboard, and use them to present 8 'frames' of how we envisaged the animation unfolding. If we had time, we could also consider bringing some slides to life, using minimal animation, and submitting these animated sequences as supporting material (as allowed by the brief).

        We have also been advised to keep any text in the slides minimal. Originally, we had hoped not to use any text, letting the visuals speak for themselves. However, without moving imagery, or a voice over, it may be challenging to communicate some of the complex ideas explored in the Living Planet Report without including some text. So that it isn't jarring or out of place, we have been considering the possibility of creating any necessary text out of the same materials used to construct the imagery. The text would then be a part of the picture, as it were.

        Importantly, we need to ensure that we do not over complicate matters. There is a lot of information in the Living Planet Report, and ultimately, 8 slides is not very many. We will need to select key pieces of information from the report, and weave a strong narrative/message which can be carried through the slides. We feel this would be stronger than if each slide were separate from the others, and would be better understood by the audience, while fitting with the concept of the slides as a kind of storyboard.

WWF - Infographic Animations

        Rebecca has done a really great job of researching animations (the films on this website demonstrate a breadth of different approaches) which have to convey a similar amount of information as we are faced with in the Living Planet Report. It is incredibly useful to see how these animators have coped with squeezing so many facts and figures into a short space of time (we will only have a maximum of 2 mins for a video submission). More to the point, it will give us a clear idea of what styles and approaches are engaging and thought provoking, and those which are perhaps a bit dryer or less successful.

        I really, really like this film. We were shown this RSA animation as part of our Food For Thought module, but it is a highly useful reference for mine and Rebecca's collaboration, as not only is it the same length as our maximum allowance, but it features many of the techniques we have discussed using: stop motion and pixilation, with subtle digital elements. The use of actual food and vegetables presents a wholesome, natural image, while the techniques used to create the film do not seem overly complicated, are within our capabilities, yet importantly are highly effective. The message is clear, with the strong visuals effectively illustrating, emphasising and supporting the lecture excerpts. Although the actual animated elements are minimal, from previous experience with stop motion and pixilation, I realise that comprehensive planning will be required to create something as clean and communicative. 

        Ending Overfishing is perhaps the most different stylistically from what Rebecca and I envisage producing. It is slick and computer generated. However, using the globe as an anchor is an effective way of communicating the global implications of overfishing. At various points the Earth forms the basis or graphs, charts and diagrams, a more dynamic method of illustrating figures and statistics which could otherwise have been difficult to engage with.

        A is for Atom, although somewhat outdated (with this style of information film being endlessly parodied in shows such as The Simpsons) is still a strong example of how big scale ideas and large amounts of information can be communicated to audiences. The actual amount of animation is fairly minimal, often just the camera zooming or panning within a largely still image. The vast majority of the information is communicated though the voice over, with the animation/imagery acting as a visual aid, showing the uninitiated how microscopic atoms function, or the power of atomic energy, as represented by a giant, glowing figure standing watch over the landscape. 

        All of the RSA Animate films are interesting examples of animated information films, in the sense that they contain little conventional animation. They could perhaps be better described as illustrated lectures, as a hand is sequentially photographed making notes and quick sketches to reflect the ideas being discussed in the voice overs, which often handle some quite complex ideas. By the end of the animations, often a huge space of paper has been covered, with the camera revisiting areas as necessary, and some images or notes are erased as counter arguments are raised in the voice over. They are very cleverly orchestrated, but for me, the sheer amount of information, coupled with the speed at which images are drawn and then left behind as a new concept arises, means that these films are quite hard to follow and engage fully with. However, the unusual approach, and simple visual style are eye-catching.