Submitted 1 year ago by theangriestbird@beehaw.org to technology@beehaw.org
https://www.404media.co/star-wars-shows-the-future-of-ai-special-effects-and-it-sucks/
Kubrick did more compelling practical effects with matte backgrounds, invisible wires and dudes in monkey suits in 1968.
Modern Hollywood would rather film everything in a greenscreen closet and then “fix” it in post. The result is uninspired garbage that doesn’t look good in any era.
I recommend skipping the article and instead skimming through the TED talk. It at least sounds like they’re using it as a tool to assist their artists, but the end result still has the same exact uncanny valley look we see on every AI video any ol’ person on the internet can make.
And there is where art truly goes to die. Suddenly every creative outlet is using the same tools and everything comes out with the same exact weird sheen. ILM is supposed to be a pioneer in this stuff and I respect that they’re not straight up replacing artists (yet) with this, but they’re ultimately sacrificing any aesthetics they’ve employed for years.
At the end of the day, all of this stuff is boils down to speed, and that endless increase in speed is driven… by capitalism. We’re sacrificing aspects of our creative processes so that we can churn more out, instead of taking the time needed to make something truly unique.
Since nobody else has linked to it, the video in question:
I just want artists to keep making art. That’s what makes it cool. If you just offload it onto a machine, it cheapens whatever you created. There’s definitely some good reasons to use AI. But it feels like the majority of companies are just using it for the buzzword, and in the hopes it will make them money
This looks like the trailer for an ILM remake of CryptoZoo.
lmao… the TED talk is hilarious. Midway through, he starts explaining how Jurassic Park did vfx, basically showing how absolutely beastly and talented they were overcoming challenges in practical effects at that scale; then goes on to show this slopshit garbage.
It’s really sad that it took the “artist” 2 whole weeks to make this.
Yeah, that was weird to watch. Not sure if the speaker realizes how bad this new tech still looks.
And in the end he said that it is very important to use these AI models “with the full permission of the talent” and that they “had full access and the rights to the training data”. He obviously just considers Harrison Ford in this moment, but does he realize what that would mean regarding the AI models and their training data they use? And was the presented short film also created with full permission of all artists contributing to the training data? Was this just a blatant lie to make it sound like they work responsibly with AI?
The things in that video aren’t even a new idea, much less an innovative way to do it. People have been mixing animals for decades.
Sad to see the fall of ILM
[Archive link] (web.archive.org/…/star-wars-shows-the-future-of-a…)
I love how the majority of things being made since like 2020onwards, can be defined 9/10 times as literal shit.
Yeah, with old stuff we just don’t remember the crap, so only the gold sticks around.
True of music too.
Sturgeon’s Law has been around a lot longer than that.
muhyb@programming.dev 1 year ago
Lol, and they think people would watch things like this? No idea if they noticed but it lacks the creativity part.