3 ms·

The Matrix Reloaded credits include 550+ VFX artists. Yes it was possible to fully render people 20 years ago, but it took a well paid army. We are quickly ap

The Matrix Reloaded credits include 550+ VFX artists. Yes it was possible to fully render people 20 years ago, but it took a well paid army. We are quickly approaching the point where a team of 3 can procedurally generate crowds in minutes. It's a whole different beast.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
>We are quickly approaching the point where a team of 3 can procedurally generate crowds in minutes Have you checked the VFX in recent movies? Most look worse than 20 years ago precisely because clueless directors have been tricked to believe that one guy with a computer can do the work of 100 VFX artists used to do by hand in the past, so VFX get rushed and end up looking like dogshit. Yes, modern tech can get you 80% there of what used to be long painful manual labor, but you're still in uncanny valley so you still need the careful eye of experienced artists to do the rest to make it actually believable.
- nebula8804 3y ago
  At least amateur hour(ie. Youtube) is about to go up a major notch.
retrocryptid 3y ago
Yes. But people who acted in that movie were told ahead of time their bodies were going to be digitized and manipulated and their agents were able to negotiate terms surrounding the use of those 3D models. Imagine you were an extra in a Star Trek : Next Generation episode where the editor didn't notice you were caught on camera picking your nose. In the modern era, decades later, someone notices it on blue-ray and the scene goes viral. Should Paramont have the rights to generate a collection of NFTs based on your image? [Forget for the moment that NFTs are stupid.] The law in this case leans towards "no" because it recognizes that as an actor, your image is a valuable asset actors usually control. Also, the idea of an NFT didn't exist in a form made manifest or even predictable in 1987 when you were an extra. Who owns the rights to your image applied to new technology? That question has been a little harder to answer recently. And that's sort of what's going on. It's not that CGI and AI exist, it's that they're being applied in a non-traditional way without an explicit agreement ahead of time to divvy up the cash.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago

>We are quickly approaching the point where a team of 3 can procedurally generate crowds in minutes Have you checked the VFX in recent movies? Most look worse than 20 years ago precisely because clueless directors have been tricked to believe that one guy with a computer can do the work of 100 VFX artists used to do by hand in the past, so VFX get rushed and end up looking like dogshit. Yes, modern tech can get you 80% there of what used to be long painful manual labor, but you're still in uncanny valley so you still need the careful eye of experienced artists to do the rest to make it actually believable.

nebula8804 3y ago
At least amateur hour(ie. Youtube) is about to go up a major notch.

retrocryptid 3y ago

Yes. But people who acted in that movie were told ahead of time their bodies were going to be digitized and manipulated and their agents were able to negotiate terms surrounding the use of those 3D models. Imagine you were an extra in a Star Trek : Next Generation episode where the editor didn't notice you were caught on camera picking your nose. In the modern era, decades later, someone notices it on blue-ray and the scene goes viral. Should Paramont have the rights to generate a collection of NFTs based on your image? [Forget for the moment that NFTs are stupid.] The law in this case leans towards "no" because it recognizes that as an actor, your image is a valuable asset actors usually control. Also, the idea of an NFT didn't exist in a form made manifest or even predictable in 1987 when you were an extra. Who owns the rights to your image applied to new technology? That question has been a little harder to answer recently. And that's sort of what's going on. It's not that CGI and AI exist, it's that they're being applied in a non-traditional way without an explicit agreement ahead of time to divvy up the cash.