Industry standard, does it still exist?

Can't you see the beauty?

I was inspired today to write an article about a phrase you often hear in creative circles: “industry Standard”. Now that open source alternatives have become a more prominent force in the creative arena, is there still a need for such a thing?

When my previous article on open source filmmaking (and the Blender Foundation) made the rounds, I noticed a particular comment posted by an obviously avid Blender user. They said; “Let’s keep the Blender ball rolling and get some market respect.” One phrase in that comment stood out at me: “market respect”.

The saddest part is, when people in creative circles (such as this user) talk about market respect; it rarely refers to the audience, and almost always refers to industry peers. Peers who, despite having the same goals, may use different tools to accomplish them. However, there seems to be a certain stigma in the industry that unless you are using industry standard (which usually means ridiculously expensive) your work could not possibly live up to the same benchmark of quality.

Sound like something you’ve experienced before?  Well, let’s try and break down this stigma…

Start by looking at the general audience. After seeing some the animation projects produced by groups like the Blender Foundation in their open source software package Blender, most viewers would be hard pressed to even spot the difference between films produced using this package, and ones produced in some of the more popular and expensive industry tools (see my review here for more insight into this: http://mattyler.provisionaustralia.com.au/?p=880). To break down the potential disparity even further; the audience is only ever concerned about the finished product anyway. They don’t care if Mr Director chose to use software A over software B, because at the end of the day the proof is always in the pudding. In fact, if you can achieve the goal of producing something so seamless that your audience is never reminded of the fact it was created by a very savvy animator armed with a trackball and a red bull, you’re already sitting on a winner.

So why is this battle going on behind the scenes of these amazing projects if we know 99% of people are looking at the finished product, and not the ingredients? Why are peers looking at the tools as being true testament to the talent and not the amazing work that is being produced? Let’s look at an example of where we have seen this before…

Tradition comes with a cost

About 8 years ago there was a huge uproar when digital cinema started becoming a prominent force in the film industry. There were numerous debates, primarily started by 35mm film purists, who were concerned that if cinema were to be made more freely available to a wider range of users (with far less ostentatious budgets) the average quality of films would drop substantially. Instead of seeing new doors opening up for the industry by having film production more accessible to the less financially fortunate, and embracing the potential influx of new creative endeavours that may result, the fear stricken traditionalists fell into a panic. The reality was: they were threatened… and rightfully so! They were used to paying substantial amounts of money to produce content, and so it was a very exclusive club. But now comes along a much cheaper way of achieving the same results and many new and talented people are stepping in to take full advantage of this. Why was it so hard for industry professionals to see this as a viable and financially advantageous alternative to their current methods? It was probably because they were more concerned about the industry being “invaded” by a new breed of filmmakers, who not only had the talent, but the means to back it up without the financial overhead, or in this case: the club membership fee.

Kodak was one of the first folks who started playing dirty to fight back. They decided to launch an anti-digital cinema campaign to try and create market cynicism towards the digital revolution. This campaign was not aimed at audiences, because we’ve already exemplified the fact they really don’t care as long as the final product looks good. Instead they aimed it at the industry and its peers. They got testimonials from film directors, editors, DOPs, you name it. Some testimonials went so far as to say: “Unless you are using film to produce your content, you cannot be taken seriously”.

…Seriously Kodak? Is that a challenge? Anyway, this is a perfect example of how an industry standard was being used to not only put down the emerging demographic of lower-budget alternatives, but to turn it into a laughing stock. This is where the issue of respect comes into play, and boy was it hard to gain any respect in the industry as a producer of digital content. It took a handful of already well-established and savvy directors to make the switch themselves and prove all the purists wrong. It didn’t happen overnight, but eventually digital technology saturated the industry, and professionals were beginning to see that despite the tool set, the end result was determined by the talent of the people behind the camera, and not the technology itself.

So how does this relate back to software?

Wait, it costs how much!?

Firstly, I talk from experience when it comes to a lot of what we have covered so far, because as far back as I can remember I have always been a user who sits outside of “industry standard”. When the industry went Final Cut, I went Premiere, when the industry went After Effects, I went Combustion. And now that the industry is Max, Maya, C4D, I am using Blender. But is the quality of work the same, and is it fair to call these non-industry standard variations a no-frills alternative to their apparently more respected counterparts?

We can see the same battle being waged in this part of the industry as it did with digital cinema in general. Only this time to a lesser degree because the financial disparity between the alternatives is far less prevalent, as is the case for video editing packages. It’s only when we get to the 3D animation packages and we bring open source variations of this software into the mix (yes, the free ones) that we start to see the fear factor really striking the hearts of the industry standard purists once again.

When the toolkit comes as a completely open source package (as is the case with Blender) and is capable of matching and even surpassing what is achievable from more expensive tools, it can be a huge kick in the guts for an industry purist. It’s like having someone pull up next to you in a Ferrari they’ve bought to impress the girls, only to see you’re the one with the supermodel sitting in the passenger seat of your Prius. It sucks for the guy who just spent most of his hard earned cash on a vehicle when realistically all it comes down to is how well-endowed the driver is.

A face only an animator could love

So what does it take to convince the industry that people using open source alternatives mean business when it comes to producing content? Will it take another handful of savvy well-known and well respected animators and directors to lead the way again? Will every open source user need to start dating a supermodel? Or, in true open source tradition: is it up to the community to band together and keep doing what they do best? One thing’s for sure: the open source community is making a lot of noise in the industry, and they are doing so in many cases without a hand-up from industry peers. Most of the support is by the community, for the community, in the form of both talent and finance. The river of financial limitation that once stood between the talent and his tools now has a shiny bridge built by the creative community, and it’s growing by size every day.

There is no doubt that the open source user still has an uphill battle to command respect from his peers, especially when they are surrounded by so many angry and insecure Ferrari drivers. But as I said above, the proof is always in the pudding. Being a battle that is still being waged as we speak, I can only speculate what the end result may be, but one thing is for sure: we are going to see some great things come out of this.

So, to you, the open source community, I say one thing: stay motivated by the competition now, so you may bask in the vindication later!

-Mat.

P.S. A Sintel 4K render I’ve put to good use:

My Workstation