4 ms·
There’s an example here: https://app.artflow.ai/gallery/story/video/44e85eaef3c54162979dd2e17f11dc8c https://app.artflow.ai/gallery/story/video/44e85eaef3c54162
by wokwokwok 3y ago
There’s an example here:
https://app.artflow.ai/gallery/story/video/44e85eaef3c54162979dd2e17f11dc8c https://app.artflow.ai/gallery/story/video/44e85eaef3c541629...
Judge for yourself.
My take: doesn’t seem remarkably different in consistency to other options, and the animation is massively inferior to other documented techniques (eg what corridor crew did in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ6z90MuURM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ6z90MuURM several months ago).
- sib301 3y agoSeems really disingenuous to compare to corridor crew’s video which had to film real actors for each scene they want to create.
- tim_artflow 3y agoFirstly you are right, Corridor's video is way more dynamic and consistency is great. However it was made with real human acting, video-to-video style transfer, days of trial and errors and post editing, whereas we are building a tool to drastically reduce the barrier of creation with AI actors and AI scenes, at the cost of several orders of magnitudes lower. Not really in the same league.
- therobotking 3y agoIt's essentially a static image with a mouth moving when a sound plays. There's no real connection between what's being said and what shapes the mouth is making and the lack of any movement on the rest of the face is just incredibly awkward to watch. It might be a first step towards something great, but seems far too rough and early to be showing it off.