Skip to content
1981
Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2042-7875
  • E-ISSN: 2042-7883

Abstract

New ways to produce creative content based on open technologies, co-productions and global networking of experts and non-experts with different skills have affected the animation industry in recent years. Many productions have been possible thanks to the involvement of open source software and online communities sharing suggestions about narratives, technologies and technical issues. This article examines and deconstructs the production phases of the short film in CGI , directed by the Italian animator Luca Di Cecca in 2019 and made entirely in Blender, an open source software that experienced a strong development in recent years and focuses on the fundamental contribution provided by the online community to its production. By going through the criticisms, suggestions, feedback and the constant and motivating participation of the Blender community, the article outlines a new production process based on an asynchronous and virtual collaboration of experts and non-experts interested in the project and graphically visualizes it as a multi-circular and inter-connected model. This collaborative approach, furthermore, can have social and educational consequences since it opens to a more democratic and mutual share of technological skills, knowledge and experience.

© 2022 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/ap3_00031_1
2023-12-20
2026-04-14

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, T. and Dron, J. (2011), ‘Three generations of distance education pedagogy’, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12:3, pp. 80–97, https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.890.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anon. (2021), ‘Made for everyone’, 3D World, 268, pp. 24–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Aziyen, M. A. B. M. and Ahmed, E. M. (2020), ‘Determinants of Blender 3D (open source) usage in Malaysian animation industry’, International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 22:1, pp. 1–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bannerman, S. (2013), ‘Crowdfunding culture’, Wi: Journal of Mobile Culture, 7:1, https://learn.lasalle.edu.sg/pluginfile.php/66542/mod_resource/content/1/Recommended%20reading_Crowdfunding%20Culture_bannerman.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barone, P. (1997), La materialità educativa. L’orizzonte materialista dell’epistemologia pedagogica e la clinica della formazione, Milano: Unicopli.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bassi, A. (2017), Design Contemporaneo. Istruzioni per l’uso, Bologna: Il Mulino Editore.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Belluzzi Mus, C., Caccamo, A., Fazi, R. and Maselli, V. (2021), ‘Socialità digitale e COVID-19. Service Design per l’analisi del coinvolgimento emotivo nella città digitale’, AGATHÓN, 10, pp. 250–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Benkler, Y. (2006), The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Blender (2018), ’Arturo e il gabbiano – corto in animazione con Blender’, n.d., https://community.blender.it/forums/topic/sully-tales-corto-in-animazione-con-blender/. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  10. Blender (2022), ‘Blender Foundation’, https://www.blender.org/about/foundation. Accessed 24 September 2022.
  11. Blender Artists (2018), ‘Arturo e il gabbiano | short film’, https://blenderartists.org/t/arturo-e-il-gabbiano-short-film/1118271. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  12. Blender Studio (2022), ‘The creators who share’, https://studio.blender.org/welcome. Accessed 24 September 2022.
  13. Boeuf, B., Darveau, J. and Legoux, R. (2014), ‘Financing creativity: Crowdfunding as a new approach for theatre projects’, International Journal of Arts Management, 16:3, pp. 33–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Bruner, J. (1966), Toward a Theory of Instruction, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Code Blender (2018), ‘Blender 2.8 beta and roadmap’, https://code.blender.org/2018/10/blender-2-8-beta-and-roadmap. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  16. Cummings, J. N. (2004), ‘Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization’, Management Science, 50:3, pp. 352–64.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Dale, E. (1969), Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching, 3rd ed., New York: Dryden Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. D’Amato, F. and Cassella, M. (2021), ‘Cultural production and platform mediation: A case in music crowdfunding’, New Media & Society, 23:9, pp. 2575–92, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820932555.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. D’Amore, N. and Di Cecca, L. (2019), ‘The making of Arturo e il gabbiano: A Blender short film’, BCON, 26 October, https://conference.blender.org/2019/presentations/500/. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  20. Dewey, J. ([1899] 2008), The School and Society, New York: Cosimo Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Dewey, J. ([1938] 2014), Esperienza e educazione, Milan: Raffaello Cortina editore.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Majchrzak, A. (2011), ‘Knowledge collaboration in online communities’, Organization Science, 22:5, pp. 1224–39, https://doi.org/10.2307/41303115.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Flavell, L. (2010), Beginning Blender: Open Source 3D Modeling, An imation, and Game design, New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Flowers, S., Mateos-Garcia, J., Sapsed, J., Nightingale, P., Grantham, A. and Voss, G. (2008), The New Inventors: How Users Are Changing the Rules of Innovation, London: NESTA.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Gardies, A. (1980), Approche du récit filmique, Paris: Albatros.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Gizycki, M. (2019), ‘Animation since 1980: A personal journey’, in F. Bruckner, N. Gilic, H. Lang, D. Šuljic and H. Turkovic (eds), Global Animation Theory: International Perspectives at Animafest Zagreb, New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 3–9.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gronroos, C. and Voima, P. (2013), ‘Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and co-creation’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41:2, pp. 133–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hampton, K. and Wellman, B. (2003), ‘Neighboring in Netville: How the internet supports community and social capital in a wired suburb’, City & Community, 2:4, pp. 277–311, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1535-6841.2003.00057.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. von Hippel, E. (2005), Democratizing Innovation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Hooks, E. (2017), Craft Notes for Animators: A Perspective on a 21st Century Career, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Jones, A. and Oliff, J. (2006), ‘Bridging the 2D and CG gap’, Computer Graphics World, 29:11, pp. 8–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaye, N. (2021), ‘Blender movies’, 31 August, https://all3dp.com/2/best-blender-movies-made-with-blender. Accessed 24 September 2022.
  33. Lee, H. K. (2011), ‘Introduction: Animation industry at a crossroads’, Creative Industries Journal, 3:3, pp. 183–87, https://doi.org/10.1386/cij.3.3.183_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Ma, L., Qian, C., Liu, Z. and Zhu, Y. (2018), ‘Exploring the innovation system of the animation industry: Case study of a Chinese company’, Sustainability, 10, pp. 1–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Mantegazza, R. (1998), Filosofia dell’educazione, Milano: Mondadori.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Manzini, E. (2015), Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Massa, R. (1975), La scienza pedagogica. Epistemologia e metodo educativo, Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. McDowell, L. (2018), ‘Co-creative remote media production teams’, Journal of Alternative and Community Media, 3, pp. 33–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Mitchell, B. (2017), Independent Animation. Developing, Producing And Distributing Your Animated Films, Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Montag, C. (2018), Homo Digitalis, Berlin: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Nieborg, D. B. and Poell, T. (2018), ‘The platformization of cultural production: Theorizing the contingent cultural commodity’, New Media & Society, 20:11, pp. 4275–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ohler, J. (2005), ‘The world of digital storytelling’, Educational Leadership: Journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, 63:4, pp. 44–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Olsson, T. (2009), ‘Understanding collective content: Purposes, characteristics and collaborative practices’, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Communities and Technologies, University Park, Pennsylvania, 25–27 June, New York: the Association for Computing Machinery, Inc., pp. 21–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Opensource (n.d.), ‘What is open source?’, https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  45. Orange Blender (2006), ‘Creative common license’, https://orange.blender.org/blog/creative-commons-license-2. Accessed 14 April 2022.
  46. Piller, F. T., Ihl, C. and Vossen, A. (2010), A Typology of Customer Co-creation in the Innovation Process, RWTH Aachen: Technology & Innovation Management Group.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J. (2008), ‘Co-creation and the new landscapes of design’, Co-Design, 4:1, pp. 5–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Scott, S. (2015), ‘The moral economy of crowdfunding and the transformative capacity of fan-ancing’, New Media & Society, 17:2, pp. 167–82, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814558908.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Shaw, A. (2016), Design for Motion: Fundamentals and Techniques of Motion Design, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Shearer, R. L., Aldemir, T., Hitchcock, J., Resig, J., Driver, J. and Kohler, M. (2020), ‘What students want: A vision of a future online learning experience grounded in distance education theory’, American Journal of Distance Education, 34:1, pp. 36–52, https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1706019.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Thacker, J. (2015), ‘The art of open source’, Linux Format, 204, pp. 44–48, https://download.blender.org/documentation/pdf/LXF204.feat_3d.5cjt.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. University of Glasgow (2018), ‘Creative Commons licenses’, https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_464806_smxx.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2022.
  53. Velkova, J. (2014), ‘Thresholds for participation in open animation production: A critical exploration of some assumptions on peer-production’, Internet Research, 15, pp. 1–3, http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-26147. Accessed 24 September 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Yoon, H. and Malecki, E. J. (2009), ‘Cartoon planet: Worlds of production and global production networks in the animation industry’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 19:1, pp. 239–71, https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtp040.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Ziaie, P. A. (2014), ‘Model for context in the design of open production communities’, ACM Computing Surveys, 47:2, pp. 1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/ap3_00031_1
Loading
Collaborative production model and the animation industry: The role of the Blender community in the making of the Italian short film Arturo e il gabbiano
Animation Practice, Process & Production 11, 7 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1386/ap3_00031_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ap3_00031_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ap3_00031_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): 3D animation; democratization of tools; multi-circular and interconnected model; open movies; open source software; participation; production process

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test