6 ms·
Jeffrey Katzenberg Says A.I. Will Eliminate 90% of Artist Jobs on Animated Films
- xbmcuser 3y agoForget Animated movies we are fast moving towards a world where acting jobs can be eliminated from movies. I think the latest sora shows that all background acting jobs can soon be eliminated how long after will they come for the main parts.
- ozim 3y agoThere already was a discussion somewhere about no more new main actors. Why would studio executives bet on some new talent when they can generate Bruce Willis, John Depp or already put their faces on some less known actors in convincing way. Then they make a reboot of a reboot of previous generation movies and it rolls ad infitum.
- dvngnt_ 3y agobecause people connect with human actors more than AI constructs for non-animated films
- tempaccount1234 3y agoAssuming you’d want to watch that. There’s already too many movies and people get bored watching more of the same. If thanks to AI there’s a flood of cheaper mediocre movies content it could kill the remaining excitement.
- nox101 3y agoYou can choose your favorite actors/characters/avatars and have the AI re-render the story featuring these people. Watch Lord of the Rings with all the hobbits replaced by Bratz dolls or your favorite K-pop girl band.
- incrudible 3y agoThat is fun for like five minutes.
- jedberg 3y ago> Why would studio executives bet on some new talent when they can generate Bruce Willis, John Depp or already put their faces on some less known actors in convincing way Because AI Willis can't sign autographs, do press tours, and get randomly sighted by fans. Hollywood is about more than just content, it's about cult of personality, and to have that, you need a living person.
- saiya-jin 3y agoWhy couldn't it? Imagine doing some Comic Con 45 min special with your virtual actor. Yes its not the same fame, but people will adjust quickly. If they mix together good voice recognition in real time they can do press conferences rather easily, its just about gluing well together already existing pieces. There may be hilarious glitches from time to time, but who cares? No real fame was achieved about stupid stuff like opening restaurants or random sights in the town, I think we as society can easily live without that.
- crooked-v 3y agoWe already have that, though - the Gorillaz, Hatsune Miku, etc. They've had success, but not nearly enough to drive any kind of mass-market adoption of the concept that would displace real-life celebs from the talk show marketing circuit.
- ozim 3y agoI would argue that for 90% of people on earth this does not make a difference. For me any big movie star is exactly the same as some virtual entity, never seen one, never been close to any places where I could meet one. There is difference where I could make effort to fly to places where they give autographs and meet with fans but I also don't care enough. I imagine people that do care about that either live close by where they can have easy access or are weirdos.
- lodovic 3y agoYou are assuming that's what people want to see. We still have a long way to go before any human can be eliminated from the big screen. Issues with details such as hands and eyes are still way to obvious.
- stavros 3y agoHow do you reconcile "issues with details such as hands and eyes" and "a long way to go"? Seems to me that "details" remaining means we're almost there.
- Ygg2 3y agoLast 10% takes 90% of the time.
- saiya-jin 3y agoIt takes hundreds of man years of various to produce even cheap looking b-movie. A-level one have easily tens of thousands of man years overall, just watch the credits on some Marvel movie and put 3-18 months of effort there. If you want to achieve almost the same for 0.1% of the cost with 1 very talented person and some computing power (or small team of talented writers/artists), it won't take long and Hollywood's business will collapse. You don't need to pay a cent to that old guy in the video. Current A-listers will slowly fade while milking their residual fame, but more importantly there won't be a next generation in same way it was till now. A major shift indeed, bigger than Hollywood ever saw. If the quality is there it will be unstoppable and unions won't make any difference, next country with more liberal laws can render very same stuff.
- stephen_g 3y agoThe point still stands though - if people won’t pay money to see AI generated movies but will to see human made ones, then the market doesn’t collapse. As the cost of producing it drops, AI content may come to be seen as worthless background noise to culture and verified human-made media valued.
- MichaelMug 3y agoThis is from November 2023 prior to Sora. Reading this in the context of Sora, this is contingent on: 1. movie or tv show length generation needs to be reasonably affordable, 2. the generated output must look real beyond first look (text is readable, physics is correct, no dream-like morphing), 3. continuity between scenes 4. prompts can accurately produce the artistic vision from directors and producers faster than a human just doing it 5. the public will accept it I am reminded of a scene in Westworld, where basically a someone can sit a desk and describe in natural language a scene to a computer for instant rendering. The user can now concern himself exclusively on the details of the story. Perhaps roles will transition to becoming full time story tellers, and the minutia of vfx, animating, rigging, 3d models, actors, cameras, set designers, trucks, food, lighting, electrical, location, licensing, permits, etc. all go away.
- throwaway5959 3y agoSome people like doing that minutia.
- euroderf 3y agoSimilarly, some people like making ceramic coffee mugs, even tho the mass produced stuff is super cheap. And some people like buying the former, even tho the mass produced stuff is super cheap. There will always be a market for handmade. But, will this translate to less tangible goods ?
- earthwalker99 3y ago[flagged]
- ksec 3y ago>This is from November 2023 prior to Sora. Before I would have said we have plenty more to do before A.I takes over. And a.i ( Assisted Intelligence ) would aid those creative process. So it will be 50% job cut in the near 10-15 years, while the other 50% being basically double as effective if not more. After Sora I think future is quite bleak for a lot of artist. Sora is like 80% there, I think we would be 90% there in 2 years time with 5-10x more GPGPU power training. And in 6 years time 95% there by 2030. Even if it didn't eliminate 90% of job but 80%. The redundancy would mean the job market is flooded with animators and their salary will likely stagnant if not fall. At the same time I finally understand why Nvidia is worth so much.
- mips_r4300i 3y agoThe training data still has to come from somewhere. This just means churning out cookie cutter filmography can even more shortcuts than green screen CGI.
- gmerc 3y agoOh, the guys at Nvidia think Sora was trained on synthetic data from Unreal …
- danielbln 3y agoMost films don't reinvent cinematography, but follow established patterns, maybe with a twist. Sure, there are the Roger Deakins of the world, but I'd wager that most cinematographers aren't that.
- coolandsmartrr 3y agoWhat shots by Roger Deakins did you find unconventional or inventive?
- kmeisthax 3y agoI find this to be the real strange bit of the "AI art debate". All the management and publishing are very bearish on AI, even though its legality relies on wide-scale copyright infringement. Actual artists are far more skeptical, begging for copyright to become a de-facto AI ban, even though they're way more likely to infringe copyright than to own it. And then you have the Free Software people - i.e. the people opposed to software copyright entirely - who were the first to actually point out that AI training was infringement and trying to sue over it.
- 5350-uiop-1130 3y agothe other side of this. more people will be able to create their own animated films without requiring studios, execs and all the gatekeeping and bs that comes with that. that's why i think the future really will be in content curation. unless these companies can find a way to block the average person from having access to the same level tools. which i think they will try and they probably can to some extent.
- yanderekko 3y agoYep. Maybe there will be a net reduction in jobs but I can't help but feel like catastrophic 90% reductions involve "lump of labor"-type fallacies where we just imagine taking the given set of work being done and imagine how much of that will be handled via AI vs. humans in 5 or 10 years or whatever. When the reality is that good AI tools will cause lots of projects to add video content where it wasn't before, or to spend more time creating high-quality video content. And this will undoubtedly involve some new labor.
- croes 3y agoSo we will get a lot a bad animation movies and and will be harder to find the good ones.
- bamboozled 3y agoI think everything is getting like this though, music, art, everything? Even trying to find something worth watching on Netflix is already so hard for me I just don't bother. I usually just default to watching classics because I can trust they're worth watching. Once there is unlimited content, maybe I'll just go outside and watch the stars or something.
- l33tman 3y agoMaybe we'll come full circle back to the 80's and 90's movie scene where you had movie stars and directors who people would go to the movies to see, and for each of these you have about 100,000 2 hour AI generated movies with bland content that will have 100 views each. If that's the outcome, it's not as dystopic I think... I mean already now you have an incredibly large fraction of sh*t on spotify, netflix etc. Will it matter if it goes up another factor of 1000x? Meanwhile hopefully the really creative and interesting content creators will leverage the AI stuff to further take the art forward. They have much more ways to test out alternatives and scenes before committing to a $250M production shoot for example..
- throwaway49849 3y agoThere will still be a job for animators, at the very least. They'll flesh out the armature (skeleton) animations, and AI will paint over it, like a style transfer. Imo human-driven animation will stay around for a bit longer because of the nuance of movement and connection to storytelling.
- nmz 3y agoWhich will be automated in 5 years considering where we were 1 year ago.
- lobochrome 3y agoQuibi
- sunshine_reggae 3y agoAI will also eliminate any and all user interface design/construction work (UX). So if you're a designer, prepare yourself for professional reorientation now.
- 123yawaworht456 3y ago1. everyone seems to be under the assumption that generative AI will continue advance at rapid pace. this might very well not be the case. 2. writers and artists are very unlikely to be replaced by generative AI, because big corporate models will always be lobotomized and sterilized.
- Drakim 3y agoPersonally I find both of these assumptions to be unlikely to be true. Obviously a subjective evaluation, but they don't ring true to me.
- ben_w 3y ago2. Disney can train its own models and make its (oh how I dislike this metaphor) "lobotomy" match the corporate policies the were otherwise going to force on human writers and artists.
- orbital-decay 3y ago> oh how I dislike this metaphor Seems pretty fitting, no? I don't think it's just a metaphor. Any "alignment" detracts from the model.
- ben_w 3y agoNo. Which surely you ought have predicted me saying. Most humans are constantly given positive and negative reinforcement to social norms, aligning us. This is not even remotely like a lobotomy. The only thing I'd count as a "lobotomy" on an AI would be a search-and-delete of a substantial subset of the neurons in the network. Permanently delete, rather than temporary — ablation studies, which do the same thing, are used to make sure functionality is not compromised.
- throw_pm23 3y agoAI will also eliminate 90% of the audience. I certainly don't see myself queuing up to watch any AI-produced or -enhanced movie. TBH, they lost me much longer time ago, but I assume it will be a larger transition.
- jstummbillig 3y agoWhy not? Why do you assume you could tell if its AI-produced or -enhanced?
- throw_pm23 3y agoI find art to be a communication (however indirect) between people. I have no interest in it if there is no other person on the other side. It could be that production gets technically so good that I cannot recognize it, but I will check out much earlier when the suspicion will already be there.
- flohofwoe 3y agoCGI jobs are already boring and repetitive industrial "cog in the machine" type jobs though. The grunts doing the actual work don't have any say what their output should look like, there is no "personal touch" or creativity involved. It's all been professionalised to death long ago.
- throw_pm23 3y agoYou are right of course, which is partly why I find almost everything produced in the last decade totally uninteresting, except maybe small independent stuff.
- ben_w 3y agoEarly computer generated visual effects were obvious and bad, they had to be used sparingly to avoid alienating the audience. Now, they're on basically every frame of basically every film.
- hasty_pudding 3y agoAI is over hyped. It has major flaws as anyone who has used it can see that are next to impossible to fix. I could see it at most being an enhancer with a human there to fix the AI flaws.
- ben_w 3y agoHyped? Yes; Major flaws? Minor, these days; Impossible to fix? No, not even at the pure AI level, though at the consumer level I could believe any percentage impact on how many artists it would take to fix vs. having the artists create in the fist place.
- hasty_pudding 3y ago> Minor, these days Lol Minor https://youtu.be/kVnK2OgbgeQ https://youtu.be/kVnK2OgbgeQ
- ben_w 3y agoYes, minor. Which is different from "none". Even significant post-processing is easy these days: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHx4xVhfS3w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHx4xVhfS3w
- hasty_pudding 3y agoThe flaws are major.
- ben_w 3y agoI saw two errors, both of which are trivial to hide. One of them was only visible after someone else pointed it out to me. The other was just about in the realm of things I've seen in the pre-AI era where single fixed camera perspectives create odd visuals despite capturing reality. So no, they are not major. "Major flaws" look like last year's video output, whose subject has only just gotten around to parodying: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5S0inm1bR08 https://youtube.com/watch?v=5S0inm1bR08
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- returnInfinity 3y agoDoes this mean more episodes of shows like Game of Thrones because of advances in AI ?
- deafpolygon 3y agoI doubt that 90% of the jobs will be eliminated. 90% of the existing jobs may be eliminated, but that will free up more artists to work in more animation studios. Therefore, we will see a resurgence in animated films. When the assembly line came into being, we didn't end up losing all of the workers to the factory - we built more factories instead.
- pylua 3y agoPrompting as a creative commodity ? That is the saddest conclusion of the article. I was surprised the article didn’t mention voice actors .
- bdjsiqoocwk 3y agoGood. Having people work in entertainment always seemed to me like a huge waste of human potencial.
- punkbit 3y agoThe people who believes that have a very poor taste in film.