Virtual Cinematography in 3D animation

Since ILM made technological inventions to liberate the analogue camera in terms of spatial movements in the 1970s, one would expect that Pixar would take advantage of the limitless freedom of the digital 3D virtual camera in the 1990s. But what I discover when studying the first fully digital 3D animated feature film, “Toy Story” (John Lasseter, 1995), is that it does little to explore the narrative possibilities of a truly virtual camera with its full spatial freedom.
With its cinematic cutting and marginal camera movements, it does nothing to expand upon the current cinematic grammar, as the classic cartoons did. Even though they had possibilities of full freedom of camera movement with no technical limitations holding them back, they still kept to the codes of the traditional cinema.

As a contrast, Disney’s animated test from the early 1980s by the same director, “Where the Wild Things Are” (John Lasseter, 1983), explores the possibilities of a virtual 3D space and the freedom of a virtual camera. “Where the Wild Things Are” is using digital 3D modeled backgrounds with digital 2D characters drawn on top of the final render. They utilize this to show off camera movements that would be practically impossible to do in traditional animation and cinema, using swooping camera movements like dolly and crane moves, pans and two 180 degree tilts in the opening shot. By doing these movements seamlessly in a long take, it introduces new grammars for a new medium. It show that what 3D graphics brings to the movies is the ability of freedom of movement and positioning in space (“Vanishing Point: Spatial Composition and the Virtual Camera”, Mike Jones, 2007).

Another animated short that is playing with the freedom of a virtual camera, is “Jumping” (Tezuka Osamu, 1983). Even though “Jumping” does not apply computer technology like “Toy Story”, it does demonstrate the possibilities of a camera free from the physical limits. The story is told through the eyes of the protagonist (first-person point of view) and it is all one seamless shot, where the protagonist starts by walking, and by each step he elevates a bit higher from the ground till the extremes where he starts from jumping over trees to jumping to different continents. The camera also does an 810 degree turn midair over a cityscape.

Although these two examples show an unbridled use of the possibilities of the animated or the virtual camera, these examples are few and far between. Cinematic grammars dominate and proscribe the actions of the virtual camera, even as it is free to explore any combination of motions. While animation is often the first to experiment with novel camerawork and spaces, it is nevertheless mostly constructed using traditional grammars.

By examine the production process of “WALL-E” (Andrew Stanton, 2008), I discover that Pixar took its conservative approach on the virtual camera even further. By hiring experienced cinematographers, they did an effort in simulating the trademarks, and weaknesses, of an analogue camera being operated by a camera man. They wanted to do this in order to make what is happening in the virtual world on-screen more convincing, or more authentic, for the audience. “I want to make you feel that you really was there!” comments the director Andrew Stanton (“WALL-E: Pixar Goes Space Age”, Pixar, 2008). What he suggests is that if you want to make the audience feel like they are present in the virtual cinematic space, just must communicate with them in with a traditional cinematic language, and through the lens of a 35 mm camera.

A good example of this approach is the scene where EVE is in the foreground searching for a plant, and WALL-E comes in to the picture, crashing with a lot of shopping carts in the background. The camera is initially focused on EVE, but when trying to get WALL-E into focus the virtual cameraman adjusts the lens too much making the picture blurry, and has to re-adjust. Another example is in the scene when EVE and WALL-E floats around in space, the camera acts like it is being controlled by a cameraman floating around with them. This approach pushes the use of the virtual camera forward in terms of “cinematic realism”, which is based on old cinematic grammars made for a different medium. Rather than creating a new language for a new medium, they are using the technical properties of a real camera as a part of the virtual camera narrative.