YouTubers, and visual effects experts, Corridor Crew, released a video yesterday detailing all the recent CGI and AI techniques that can be used to insert digital actors into movies and TV shows.
As most of you know, the Hollywood writer and actor unions are currently on strike and one of the main issues is AI. While the WGA is demanding a complete ban on AI-generated scripts, the actors union isn't so restrictive. Here's what they are demanding (taken from the SAG-AFTRA official Status of Negotiation document)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: Establish a
comprehensive set of provisions to protect
human-created work and require informed
consent and fair compensation when a "digital
replica" is made of a performer, or when their
voice, likeness, or performance will be
substantially changed using AI.Far from a ban, the actor's union is mainly asking for a system to compensate actors when replaced by a digital version of themselves. So it appears that they are fully expecting digital replacement to continue at a more rapid pace. I don't think most outside of Hollywood A-listers really understand the outcome of creating a clear set of rules for using digital actors as replacements. This would allow a studio to purchase the digital rights to ANY actor that has ever performed in a movie or TV show, even if that actor is long dead. This is a huge win for the studios as they wouldn't have to pay as much for digital version as the real thing and it's a win for A-list actors as they can continue to perform long after their bodies have made it impossible to keep up the schedule. OTOH, this is terrible news for unknown actors who now have to compete for jobs with every actor that ever lived.
There are several "dream project" that can now be attempted, such as making a new James Bond movie with 1960s' Sean Connery or getting comic accurate superheroes that actually look like their comic counterparts.
[EDIT] One thing that is clear is that using the digital image of an actor doesn't necessarily require AI, as you can use body doubles and motion capture. So saying actors will be replaced by AI isn't what is happening although it might be closer as AI tools improve.
Quote
or when their voice, likeness, or performance will be substantially changed using AI.
So, what's stoping the actors from claiming ANY AI/digitaly generated voice/character is really them?
Did anyone see the movie "Looker"?
Down with AI !!!
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 21, 2023, 07:12:44 PM
OTOH, this is terrible news for unknown actors who now have to compete for jobs with every actor that ever lived.
So acting is now dead forever is because Hollywood replaced it with AI. I can't imagine how much that will improve human creativity and art...
not.
Fuck Hollywood. Let it die. Kill it if you have to. Traitors to humanity should be rewarded as traitors deserve. Viva la Butlerian Jihad!
Quote from: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2023, 08:55:49 PMSo, what's stoping the actors from claiming ANY AI/digitaly generated voice/character is really them?
An army of lawyers.
I do think that using the digital images of real actors is just the first step. People will be willing to accept some jankyness to see Bela Lugosi return as Dracula. Once the bugs get worked out, the studios will move to using generated digital actors that they own 100% and can use without payment. There are huge advantages to owning a character like that and there are many that already exist: Yoda, Thanos, R2-D2, Alita, M3gan, the blue people from Avatar etc. Just look at the upcoming Deadpool 3 where the average age of a superhero actors is around 47 years old. If they had created a digital Wolverine in the first place, they'd be able to use him forever.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on August 26, 2023, 03:43:19 PMSo acting is now dead forever is because Hollywood replaced it with AI. I can't imagine how much that will improve human creativity and art... not.
There still will be actors, only the acting that is done will be used to animate a digital character. Exactly like how video game have been done for over 20 years. So there will be a handful of actors performing all the movies, regardless of which characters are in the movies. At least, that is, until AI improves sufficiently.
QuoteFuck Hollywood. Let it die. Kill it if you have to. Traitors to humanity should be rewarded as traitors deserve. Viva la Butlerian Jihad!
If you hate Hollywood, you should be 100% behind the advancements in AI as it will eventually allow individuals to be able to ask the AI to create any movie or TV show they can image. Star Wars with you as Luke, a new season of the Brady Bunch, and exact adaption of your favorite novel are all things that will eventually be possible.
News flash. Movies and TV have been doing this via other means for many many years. Just not on such a grotesque scale.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 26, 2023, 03:52:16 PM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on August 26, 2023, 03:43:19 PMSo acting is now dead forever is because Hollywood replaced it with AI. I can't imagine how much that will improve human creativity and art... not.
There still will be actors, only the acting that is done will be used to animate a digital character. Exactly like how video game have been done for over 20 years. So there will be a handful of actors performing all the movies, regardless of which characters are in the movies. At least, that is, until AI improves sufficiently.
QuoteFuck Hollywood. Let it die. Kill it if you have to. Traitors to humanity should be rewarded as traitors deserve. Viva la Butlerian Jihad!
If you hate Hollywood, you should be 100% behind the advancements in AI as it will eventually allow individuals to be able to ask the AI to create any movie or TV show they can image. Star Wars with you as Luke, a new season of the Brady Bunch, and exact adaption of your favorite novel are all things that will eventually be possible.
Sounds like hell on earth. Make new shit. Stop recycling carrion.
We need a dinosaur-killing asteroid or nuclear war ASAP.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 21, 2023, 07:12:44 PM
YouTubers, and visual effects experts, Corridor Crew, released a video yesterday detailing all the recent CGI and AI techniques that can be used to insert digital actors into movies and TV shows.
Those are NOT "digital actors". They are REAL actors with digital make over. Not dissimilar to physical make overs. Just easier to do. There is no digital acting going on. Talk about stupid, fake FUD.
Quote from: Scooter on August 27, 2023, 10:27:28 AMThose are NOT "digital actors". They are REAL actors with digital make over. Not dissimilar to physical make overs. Just easier to do. There is no digital acting going on.
At the end of the video, they showed a fully digital avatar acting according to an AI. AI acting is something that's been used in movies since Lord of the Rings, granted only in background roles.
But I agree that "digital actor" isn't a very clear term. SAG-AFTRA uses "digital replica" but this applies to any method used to make an actor appear who isn't on set, such as face swapping (aka deep fake). I think a better term is "digital character" which covers any fully CGI character regardless of how it is animated. Studios have animated digital characters with 3D animators sitting at a computer, motion capture artists, and AI, or even using multiple methods for the same character.
But the characters available today are well beyond anything possible with "physical make overs".
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 27, 2023, 07:05:37 PM
Quote from: Scooter on August 27, 2023, 10:27:28 AMThose are NOT "digital actors". They are REAL actors with digital make over. Not dissimilar to physical make overs. Just easier to do. There is no digital acting going on.
At the end of the video, they showed a fully digital avatar acting according to an AI.
They've had that capability for YEARS (for those who don't track on this) and it is crap and unusable as actors for any but the terminally dim or very young. Like I correctly stated, FUD
Remember Sony's plan wayyyyyyyyy back for a "digital Actress" when they put out the Final Fantasy movie and it bombed?
Quote from: Omega on August 28, 2023, 09:19:28 AM
Remember Sony's plan wayyyyyyyyy back for a "digital Actress" when they put out the Final Fantasy movie and it bombed?
Sony would have made money with her if OnlyFans was a thing back then. While I can understand, back in 2001, the idea of a digital actress appearing in multiple films, as the cost to create such an actress would have been significant, today it would make more sense to craft individual characters for specific movies. So if you make a digital Wolverine, for example, that model would only be used to play Wolverine. In the same way that the digital Thanos only appears as Thanos.
The only time it would make sense today to make a digital actor is if you are making a version of a real person that appeared as multiple characters, such as Han Solo and Indiana Jones.
Digital women then:
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSLyl-BLAGQEIv-DLFw3ReIjpPToAAD-wMQ0pAg88BSOCtkjyqja4AnWHqc9R6AQGJgMjE&usqp=CAU)
Digital women now:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2rw1N5WEAAJ5r0?format=png&name=small)
I suggest to everyone interested to watch The Artifice Girl.
It is a movie about these topics, written, directed, edited and even acted by a first time director, Franklin Ritch. I won't spoil how this topic enters the movie, because the script it is built so that it is a surprise (whereas everyone who told me "Watch this!" also spoiled the surprise; try to avoid).
It is a movie shot with no budget, made of people talking in small rooms (it could become an excellent theatrical play) - and yet it explores these themes both in-depth and also looking at the possible futures beyond entertainment. It is more "Black Mirror" than the last season of Black Mirror, and a must-see IMHO.
I downloaded and read the new contract language on AI that was agreed upon by the WGA negotiators last week. From my reading, it appears that the AMPTP got everything they wanted on AI. The company can use Generative AI (GAI) to create drafts for movies or shows which the WGA writers will modify. The only protection for the writers is that modifying an GAI script won't be considered a "rewrite" and the writer will be considered to have written the finished product. Also, the contract says that companies can't force a writer to use GAI to create a script from scratch, so the generation of GAI scripts will need to be done by someone else (or a more flexible WGA member).
Also, if a writers holds the rights to a script, that script can't be used to feed the AI. But no such restriction applies to all the vast number of scripts whose copyrights are owned by the studio.
Finally, the restrictions of generative AI, such as they are, don't apply to CGI and VFX which is more of the point of this thread.
You can read it yourself if you are as insane as I am. The AI stuff is on page 68
https://www.wgacontract2023.org/wgacontract/files/memorandum-of-agreement-for-the-2023-wga-theatrical-and-television-basic-agreement.pdf
Quote from: hedgehobbit on September 27, 2023, 02:56:11 PM
I downloaded and read the new contract language on AI that was agreed upon by the WGA negotiators last week. From my reading, it appears that the AMPTP got everything they wanted on AI. The company can use Generative AI (GAI) to create drafts for movies or shows which the WGA writers will modify. The only protection for the writers is that modifying an GAI script won't be considered a "rewrite" and the writer will be considered to have written the finished product.
What is it that you think AMPTP wanted? I think the AMPTP wasn't interested in GAI-written scripts because of the high quality. They wanted GAI-written because they thought it'd be cheaper than using human writers. If they still have to pay a writer full price and give them full credit, then I think the WGA won on this.
This is the summary language from the WGA overview of the settlement:
QuoteArtificial Intelligence
Regulate use of artificial intelligence on MBAcovered projects: AI-generated written material is not considered literary material, source material or assigned material under the MBA. AI is not a writer under the MBA.
Writer can elect to use AI when performing writing services, if Company consents and provided writer follows applicable company policies. Company cannot require writer to use AI software (e.g., ChatGPT) when performing writing services.
Company must disclose to writer if any material given to writer has been generated by AI or incorporates AI-generated material.
Source: https://www.wgacontract2023.org/WGAContract/files/WGA-Negotiations-Tentative-Agreement.pdf
It sounds to me like the company isn't saving any money by generating an AI draft.
Quote from: jhkim on September 27, 2023, 04:32:41 PM
Quote from: hedgehobbit on September 27, 2023, 02:56:11 PM
I downloaded and read the new contract language on AI that was agreed upon by the WGA negotiators last week. From my reading, it appears that the AMPTP got everything they wanted on AI. The company can use Generative AI (GAI) to create drafts for movies or shows which the WGA writers will modify. The only protection for the writers is that modifying an GAI script won't be considered a "rewrite" and the writer will be considered to have written the finished product.
What is it that you think AMPTP wanted? I think the AMPTP wasn't interested in GAI-written scripts because of the high quality. They wanted GAI-written because they thought it'd be cheaper than using human writers. If they still have to pay a writer full price and give them full credit, then I think the WGA won on this.
This is the summary language from the WGA overview of the settlement:
QuoteArtificial Intelligence
Regulate use of artificial intelligence on MBAcovered projects: AI-generated written material is not considered literary material, source material or assigned material under the MBA. AI is not a writer under the MBA.
Writer can elect to use AI when performing writing services, if Company consents and provided writer follows applicable company policies. Company cannot require writer to use AI software (e.g., ChatGPT) when performing writing services.
Company must disclose to writer if any material given to writer has been generated by AI or incorporates AI-generated material.
Source: https://www.wgacontract2023.org/WGAContract/files/WGA-Negotiations-Tentative-Agreement.pdf
It sounds to me like the company isn't saving any money by generating an AI draft.
You fail to notice that while there'll be a writters room it's way smaller than the WGA wanted and that the studios will choose to make multiple 6 episode seasons instead of bigger ones.
In the end the studios won, they got out (with out paying a penny) from deals they wanted out, now there'll be far fewer shows with fewer writters which means they get to "fire" the activists (if they are smart) with ZERO economic repercusions.
Whatever increase in pay the writters that keep working get is offset by the months without any payment, so the first year (at least) for the writters is a wash.
In short: Less shows means less jobs for the writters, shorter seassons means smaller writter's rooms, the studios still can use AI (if they are dumb) and the few writters that get to work will bend backwards not to join their comrades in the unemployment line.
Like I said several times, there's currently NO AI period, and whatever bots exist aren't capable of writting shit, not even to the shitty levels of She-Hulk on D+.
Now, the studios hired AI people, they ARE developing inhouse bots, probably feeding them whatever they own/is in the public domain and will use the next 3 years (the duration of the contract) to train their bots, with the help of the writters/showrunners.
Say in 4 years a studio wants to test an "ai" generated script, they find some strawman, pay him handsomly (still cheaper than a bunch of writters) to say they bought the full rights from him which includes several more scripts.
Then they give the script to a showrunner to produce.
Heck, they don't even need to pay no one, just say they found it in their vaults and use the name from some dead person with no descendants.
Quote from: jhkim on September 27, 2023, 04:32:41 PMWhat is it that you think AMPTP wanted? I think the AMPTP wasn't interested in GAI-written scripts because of the high quality. They wanted GAI-written because they thought it'd be cheaper than using human writers. If they still have to pay a writer full price and give them full credit, then I think the WGA won on this.
In the WGA's initial list of demands they wanted three things: 1) WGA writers can't be asked to edit GAI written material 2) AI can't be used to rewrite or modify WGA written material and 3) that no WGA written material can be used to train AI. They didn't get any of those demands. The only exception is that if a WGA writer owns the rights to the script, that script can't be used to train AI. So the AMPTP only "won" in that they didn't give the WGA what they wanted.
As to the cost, I don't know how much of a show's budget is writing nor do I know whether the average cost per script is much higher than the minimum payment for a script. So I don't know if there is any significant cost savings for studio to use GAI. There might be time savings and they might also be able to hire the minimum number of writers as well.
However, there is also a exemption to minimum writer room requirement if the studio hires a single writer or team to write all the episodes. (My understanding is that the team is paid per script, not per week like a hired writer). So a well run team that uses GAI to assist in writing could, potentially, write a show for significantly less money.
The big win the studios got was in canceling a bunch of doomed to failure projects before they lost even more money on them. They also still get a version of GAI to play with and a much smaller labor pool with lots of people looking to fill any openings to actually keep the writers doing the job of writing instead of being activists.
My sense, particularly with the move to throw Biden to the wolves* is that the smarter progs have seen they've done about all the damage they can do this cycle so they're going to pull back, retrench and let the pendulum swing a bit back (but not even close to where it was before) and once things have simmered down... resume the push (reclaiming the ceded ground quickly because "it's already been done once") even further.
* prediction; they won't impeach, so Kamala doesn't become President, but Biden will have a "health emergency" between the primaries and the convention to throw the selection process entirely into the hands of the party elites (who will pick Gavin Newsom because he's basically the only remotely telegenic non-complete idiot and non-geriatric member they've got to run... and because it keeps the grift in the extended Pelosi family).
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on August 26, 2023, 05:16:44 PM
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 26, 2023, 03:52:16 PM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on August 26, 2023, 03:43:19 PMSo acting is now dead forever is because Hollywood replaced it with AI. I can't imagine how much that will improve human creativity and art... not.
There still will be actors, only the acting that is done will be used to animate a digital character. Exactly like how video game have been done for over 20 years. So there will be a handful of actors performing all the movies, regardless of which characters are in the movies. At least, that is, until AI improves sufficiently.
QuoteFuck Hollywood. Let it die. Kill it if you have to. Traitors to humanity should be rewarded as traitors deserve. Viva la Butlerian Jihad!
If you hate Hollywood, you should be 100% behind the advancements in AI as it will eventually allow individuals to be able to ask the AI to create any movie or TV show they can image. Star Wars with you as Luke, a new season of the Brady Bunch, and exact adaption of your favorite novel are all things that will eventually be possible.
Sounds like hell on earth. Make new shit. Stop recycling carrion.
We need a dinosaur-killing asteroid or nuclear war ASAP.
Our real world version of a Megacorp dystopia is going to be so much worse than any writer's worst nightmare.
It looks like the first step has been taken. Deadline has reported that SAG-AFTRA has signed a deal with AI voice company Replica Studios to allow digital version of actor's voices to be used in video games.
https://deadline.com/2024/01/sag-aftra-deal-replica-studios-ai-voice-replication-video-games-1235700341/
This came as a bit of a shock to actors which just shows that they didn't actually read the agreement between SAG-AFTRA and AMPTP. In the agreement, which is 129 pages, it clearly lays out the restrictions for using AI. At first reading it sounds good for the actors. The studio needs consent to change the actors performance, or dialog, and must pay the actor for days of work equivalent to the work that what the digital replica replaces. However, those restriction only apply if the digital replica was created for a specific movie that the actors was hired to perform in. The next section details "Independently Created Digital Replica" where the only restriction is that it requires the consent of and compensation for the actor or the actor's estate if the actor is dead. A studio could pay an actor to scan him and then use that scan to bypass four pages of contractual restrictions.
This deal for voice work with Replica Studios is covered by this Independently Created Digital Replica section and seems to follow the guidelines exactly.
Also, the contract uses the term "Digital Replica" to describe a digital actor which resembles a real person and "Synthetic Performer" to describe a digital actor that doesn't resemble a real person. The only limit on the use of a synthetic performers is that the studio must give the Union the right to "bargain in good faith over appropriate consideration" for using a real actor in the role.
They just need to create artificial voices that possess the pleasant qualities of voices people like, and use those in their properties. They will become popular and familiar, won't cost you a dime long term, and you'll never lose the rights.
products like video games MASSIVELY overestimate name recognition for voices.
IMHO all actors = professional liars. They have to believe lies in order to act: https://expressioncity.com/5-acting-techniques-every-actor-should-know/
Especially lying to themselves. Pathetic.
But look on the bright side of AI: It will be safer, cleaner, and the screenwriting will be better in the pr0n industry! No more abused people, just robots!
:D
I have a bigger concern around actors. I look and think, "Just what did this person have to do to get this part", and given the stories we hear (which means good lord what sort of stuff happens we will never hear about) about some of the literal faustian pacts some of the people in entertainment have made...it makes me queasy. I suspect they are about abused a group of people (the ones who do what they must to get that every fleeting fame) as history has even seen. I feel bad for them.
Quote from: Timothe on August 26, 2023, 12:45:19 PM
Did anyone see the movie "Looker"?
Down with AI !!!
No, but I saw S1m0ne.
OpenAI just released an add-on called Sora which is a direct text-to-video generator. This is significantly better (and easier) than the stuff we were seeing when I started this thread.
The prompt for this video was: "A stylish woman walks down a Tokyo street filled with warm glowing neon and animated city signage. She wears a black leather jacket, a long red dress, and black boots, and carries a black purse. She wears sunglasses and red lipstick. She walks confidently and casually. The street is damp and reflective, creating a mirror effect of the colorful lights. Many pedestrians walk about."
Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 16, 2024, 08:47:06 AM
OpenAI just released an add-on called Sora which is a direct text-to-video generator. This is significantly better (and easier) than the stuff we were seeing when I started this thread.
The prompt for this video was: "A stylish woman walks down a Tokyo street filled with warm glowing neon and animated city signage. She wears a black leather jacket, a long red dress, and black boots, and carries a black purse. She wears sunglasses and red lipstick. She walks confidently and casually. The street is damp and reflective, creating a mirror effect of the colorful lights. Many pedestrians walk about."
My new life goal is to live long enough to waste the remainder of my life making full length What If-style movies for myself and my family.