4 ms·
Except that traditionally took a wild amount of work, from a very large team. Think of it as if the virtual "actor" is a puppet, which requires careful design a
by digdugdirk 3y ago
Except that traditionally took a wild amount of work, from a very large team. Think of it as if the virtual "actor" is a puppet, which requires careful design and construction from a team of highly skilled craftspeople, and then another separate team of craftspeople to make it move in a natural way. And then another team for all the little finishing touches - lighting, clothing, skin textures, reflections, etc.
These teams are all full of wildly skilled people, with huge amounts of experience with digital tools (obviously), biomechanics, physics, cinematography, etc.
As AI tools get better, you start lowering the barrier to entry and shrinking the size of those teams until you get to the point where someone can film something with a smartphone and AI does the rest to make it cinema quality. Or just hallucinates something from a prompt.
Its a whole different ball game.
- Barrin92 3y agoI don't see it as any larger of a jump than moving from hand-drawn to computer animation. Just look at that industry and how incredibly labor intensive traditional animation was. This is already commodified now as animation work is usually outsourced to some cheap studio for almost any new Netflix show. (often with mediocre results). Just compare the new Ghost in the Shell show they did to the old one. If someone wants to put out something that has genuine artistic merit they'll still employ people who can leverage new tools to make something that stands out, but visual art production is being automated for a long time now.
- digdugdirk 3y agoBut it is a jump. And each jump means fewer people working in the industry, and more of the work that exists going to less experienced workers.