Chris Wedge Quotes

I've always been excited by rotoscoping, the technique used in films like 'Waking Life,' which fuses animation with real-life emotion. It seemed like it was a process ripe for innovation.

Animation has always been about technology. You can't have animation without technology.

The nature of motion capture is only going to work for certain films. It's not going to put any other type of movies out of business.

We can do things that we never could before. Stop-motion lets you build tiny little worlds, and computers make that world even more believable.

It's amazing what they can do with animation nowadays. It's really beautiful. The 3D stuff is out of hand.

Animation offers a medium of story telling and visual entertainment which can bring pleasure and information to people of all ages everywhere in the world.

The thing with computer-generated imagery is that it's an incredibly powerful tool for making better visual effects. But I believe in an absolute difference between animation and photography.

If Michaelangelo or Leonardo Da Vinci were alive today they’d be making Avatar, not painting a chapel.

I am a bit evangelical, I know, but performance-capture is still misunderstood.

I know a lot of games have been going to the facial capture. And movies like 'TinTin' are using it, as well.

Yes, actually. Animation's a very easy thing to watch on tour.

I always considered Ray Harryhausen's work so fine that it was way out of my league: in terms of realism and naturalism, in terms of animal movement.

Animation is very singular. Like, even the 'Toy Story' movies. People will go, 'Oh, gosh, you're so lucky, getting to play opposite Tom Hanks!' And it's, like, 'It may have appeared to be that, but we were never in the room together.'

When I started work with LucasArts Computer Division back in 1984, I went to the Palace of Fine Arts and saw the Festival of Animation for the first time. I loved the diverse collection of animated films the festival held.

The days when you needed amazing Silicon Graphics machines to run animation software are gone now.

What's happened with computer technology is perfectly timed for someone with my set of skills. I tell stories with pictures. What I love about CGI is that if I can think it, it can be put on the screen.

Animation has completely changed, and I've always been a big fan.

I mean I've seen 3D films so far and I think it's a long way to go before they replace actors. It's a funny thing with 3D, I haven't quite got it yet. Yet.

Computers don't create computer animation any more than a pencil creates pencil animation. What creates computer animation is the artist.

And then you start getting into the technical side of it and the aesthetic side and with those areas you can come up with new ways to visualise things, new ways to render and use the computer to make things look different and new and stuff like that.

I'm not a big fan of CGI. I'm not a fan at all, unless they use it in a way that doesn't call attention to itself.

If you take a regular animated film, that's being done by animators on computers, so the filmmaking is a fairly technical process.

When you take something that's inert, and through motion, give it life, make it appear to be alive, living, breathing thinking and having emotions, that's animation. But when you take something that's live-action, and move a part of it, that's a special effect.

Currently computer graphics are used a great deal, but it can be excessive.

'Smurfs' just seemed like a great way to represent a young father to be, guy in a marriage, work in conflict, and I was really interested in the technical CG side of things. I'd never done a movie that I thought would be so physical and yet so precise. So I was intrigued by all of that.