A Bit of Exploration With Steve Gaub, Co-Producer, TRON: LEGACY

CP:
You have a grasp of some very complex technologies powering the creative vision.  How did you get here?

Steve:

From the time I was a young kid I was into computer technology.  We were the first house in the neighborhood to have an Apple IIc computer.  I quickly got into basic computer code and started writing my own little computer programs and games.  In those early days that was fairly easy to do, but it was incredibly exciting to venture into something for which there were really no instructional manuals.  I was also really interested in explorers.  Geographical explorers like Columbus and Lewis & Clark, or technology explorers like Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Graham Bell always fascinated me.  I think that working and playing on the bleeding edge of technology is our version of being explorers.  There are many times when we begin something, and there simply is no road map.  Sometimes, it’s very exciting to me to not be able to ask for help, because that means no one has yet walked that path.  And at the basis of everything is telling a story, which I love.  The story will always be the most critical part of the filmmaking process.  But finding new ways to push technology for the purpose of allowing us to tell our stories better, faster or cheaper is a never ending pursuit that, for me, keeps the process of capturing, molding and delivering those stories always interesting.

CP:

You were able to outline an end-to-end workflow for TRON.  When you got the script, looked at the schedule, checked the budget, how did you begin to analyze the process and figure out the path?

Steve:

It started by identifying what technology was going to be the backbone of our process.  What camera were we going to shoot on?  Were we going to shoot in stereo, or dimensionalize in post?  Were we going to edit on the Avid or Final Cut?  What Stereoscopic tools were out there for us to use?  The answer to that last question, in mid-2008, was virtually "none."  Once we were able to answer those questions, I just started from point A.  OK, we have a camera, the Sony F-35, and we're going to shoot in stereo using the Pace/Cameron 3D rigs.  So, how do we best capture that image and how do we get people's eyes on that image?  It was really mostly about breaking down the process and asking very simple questions all geared toward the goal of making the workflow resemble a normal flat (2D) film workflow as much as possible.  That's a workflow that everyone in our industry understands and can relate to.  Manuals have been written and the path has been walked a million times.  So, if I were able to relate each part of my workflow to the familiar processes that everyone has been involved with, then I knew I'd find success with a workflow that would prove understandable and executable for everyone.

After identifying all of the technology and developing some basic ideas for how we wanted to capture, view and edit, then it was time to start asking a LOT of questions.  One of the great things about working on the edge of technology is that everyone is pretty much in the same boat as you are.  Everyone is asking questions and trying to figure things out at the same time.  So it becomes a very collaborative, mutually-supportive environment.  I had countless lengthy conversations with all of the parties critical to our success.  We had Pace/Cameron handling the stereoscopic rigs and data capture services.  We had Codex covering the actual data capture technology for our all-digital shoot.  We had Laser Pacific who would eventually be handling our online assembly and DCDM creation.  We had Digital Domain who would need to plug into this pipeline with the extensive visual effects component.  And we had the editors who would really need to understand and appreciate the DNA of the workflow to help execute it properly.  After endless roundtable discussions, a near infinite number of sidebars, and multiple camera tests, the workflow eventually got hammered out to something that proved a viable road map for everyone to follow.

CP:

In that frontier of workflow, information, and questions – was there one aspect that was the most challenging?

Steve:

I would say that the sheer volume of visual effects shots was daunting.  Once the all-digital workflow was locked down in Pre-Production, that part of the process went relatively smoothly.  We ended up with one of the most problem free online assemblies that I've ever been through.  Stereoscopic had its share of challenges, but those were always manageable challenges.  In a way, our preparation for an all-digital workflow probably went a long way to put us in the right frame of mind for the onslaught of digital delivery of all the VFX shots.  And I'm not really talking about the delivery of just the final shots, of which there were 1,576.  But that number doesn’t account for the endless stream of different versions of all of the shots.  Managing the daily trafficking of incoming shot versions and outgoing shot notes was a monumental task.  Our VFX house was using Shotgun for their internal shot management and we were using Filemaker Pro, so that presented another familiar challenge of making sure we were always on the same page as the vendor regarding versions and applicable notes.

The second hardest challenge was the tight timeline we had in getting all of those shots finished and delivered, which only added to the impact of the volume of shots.

CP:

How do you see creativity and technology interweaving?

Steve:

Technology allows us to properly convey a filmmaker's vision to an extent that was never possible before.  Movies like AVATAR, INCEPTION and TRON could not have been effectively told even 5 years ago.  You read a lot about the frustration of directors in earlier days not really being able to convey the full vision that was in their mind, like George Lucas during Star Wars.  TRON's creator, Steven Lisberger, had to deal with that frustration on the making of the first TRON in the early 80's.  The vision in his mind was way beyond what ended up in the movie, because technology hadn't evolved far enough to properly convey his vision.  So, technology has come a very long way in eliminating creative roadblocks.  It feels like we are at a place now that if you can imagine it, we can find a way to put it on the screen with a realism that was not previously achievable.

CP:

Are there any tools or technologies that you see as particularly important in this technology-creativity interweaving?

Steve:

A really critical development in the dynamic between technology and creativity rests in pre-visualization tools.  It’s as though we are working our way backwards in the pipeline.  The goal is to allow directors to begin seeing their vision for the final movie as early in the movie making process as possible.  Effective pre-visualization reaps many rewards.  It helps directors realize and shape their visions prior to production, and it also allows all the other members of the crew to gain a level of insight into the director's vision that simply didn’t exist in the past.  Another important development is that editors are starting to come onto projects much earlier, because more and more, the visual part of the story is being developed in conjunction with the script.  That is a new and really powerful dynamic.  Cutting sound effects and music into Pre-Vis is becoming very common, and I believe that having an editorial presence at those early stages pays off in the long run and becomes a wise investment.  Again, the most critical part of our process will always be to tell the story.  If we don't have a good story to tell, then we're all just wasting our time... and having fun with technology along the way.

CP
Let’s really step out in front of the way workflow and the production pipeline are now.  If you could design the post process of tomorrow, what would you hope for?

Steve:

You have heard the old phrase "I can do it for you faster, cheaper, or better.  Now pick 2."  Too often in post, the emphasis is on faster and cheaper, to the exclusion of better.  I believe that technology will ultimately allow us to hold on to the "better" as well.

I want to see all digital workflows continue to evolve.  They still haven't reached their maximum potential.  Many productions are claiming to be all-digital, yet are still recording to tape stock, which is not all digital.  I would strive to eliminate recording to hard drives or media cards.

The evolution in cameras has given us the ability to simultaneously record raw native master frames, and have an instantly transcoded file at the appropriate codec for direct ingestion into the Avid or Final Cut system.  That's an example of getting images faster and cheaper, and the sooner editors receive their dailies, the more time they have to be creative, which delivers the "better."

We should continue to improve the transcoding codecs that allow for higher quality offline images to be used in Post.  The higher quality image that picture and sound editors have to work from at the beginning allows for better, more informed work through the Post process.

I'm also hoping we can effectively harness all of the possibilities of working in "the cloud."  We shouldn't just treat that as a buzz word or fancy trend.  It's the future and the future is now.  This is when we'll really start to become fully "all digital."  I have a lot of interest in harnessing the cloud for feature film production – it is something that I am passionate about.

My ultimate Post workflow would be one that doesn't include any transcoding... one in which the master file generated from the camera is carried through every step of the process.  This will be made possible by improvements in minimizing storage file size of the captured images and by increasing speed of commonly used internet bandwidth.  But there should be a day soon when the following workflow is commonplace.

Here is how, right now, I think a future workflow could look:

• Cameras wirelessly "record" full-resolution 4K dailies directly to an online server.
• Editorial accesses and cuts with those full-resolution files.
• Sound and Music receive full-resolution cuts for their respective work.
• Sound Mixing and Score Recording are done to full cinema resolution picture.
• Editorial delivers a cinema resolution finished edit to the color timing facilities for direct 1-to-1 ingestion and color timing.
• The final Digital Cinema Package is uploaded to an online server, from which theaters around the world stream directly into their projectors and onto the screen.