—

Post: Bill Strickland on artists and entrepreneurs

Rob Johnston says:

I always remember Bill saying that his life was “saved by pottery.” He relates that he saw a high school art teacher throwing a pot, and that man introduced him to the skills and disciplines required to make pottery and a life. A better argument for arts education in the schools is hard to find.

—

Post: Tim Burton on tools

Mark Sigal says:

I am not sure why hand drawing versus computer animation is such a meaningful distinction. A crappy, un-imaginative hand drawing artist with no story to tell isn’t magically more of a great artist because he is drawing.

These are tools. What you do with them is where the real artistry lies.

Burton’s rant is as much a function of his frustration with the herd-like mentality in Hollywood as it is a specific commentary on drawing versus computer animation.

Ben says:

A good article on Pixar (in agreement with the original post and with Mark’s comment up near the top) is the Dreamworks article in June’s Wired.

Katzenberg (Dreamworks) knows that he can’t match Pixar for creative quality, he knows he doesn’t have a Brad Bird (Incredibles) working for him and he doesn’t give his directors the kind of freedom that Pixar does. Pixar is a fairly unique studio in that regard I think. It’s not just that they are producing “family” “fluff” films, they are producing GOOD “family” “fluff” films. A place like Dreamworks is more concerned with producing LOTS of “family” “fluff” films. Every single Pixar release has done well in the box office and in long term sales… not many (any?) other studios can claim that. Dreamworks’ whole mission is to crank out many many films using this newfangled computer animation thingamajig and hope some of them catch. It’s not about art for them, it’s purely a money thing. (Granted I’m sure there are many smart creative people working at Dreamworks doing great Art, but that’s not what Katzenberg is interested in, and it shows.) As the article states, Pixar versus Dreamworks == Quality versus Quantity.

—

Post: A sweet experience at Sweetwater

Brady says:

Competing on price is an ineffective model in today’s economy for most industries. On top of the practice being extremely destructive to the market as margins plunge to zero, the rewards are short-term. Someone may buy your cheaper product today, but price alone is typically isufficient for creating a lasting customer relationship. This is especially true as we see more and more products becoming commoditized.