Episode 248- AI with Niko Pueringer

Episode 248- AI with Niko Pueringer
Subscribe: @pencilishstudios
IG: @pencilishstudios
Website: www.pencilish.com
Niko IG: @nikodig
Corridor Crew YT: ‪@CorridorCrew‬
The long awaited “AI discussion” episode is here! The Bancroft’s talk all things artificial intelligence and animation with special effects guru and KZbinr Niko Pueringer of the Corridor Crew channel! They discuss the ins and outs of the issues behind the technology that is potentially changing the animation industry. Is there a way to use it as a tool, is there a hopeful future living in the new AI world, or are we all doomed? Let’s start the discussion!
THANK YOU TO OUR INVESTORS!
#2danimation #podcastplaylist #aianimation

[@pdjinne65]

You need to train a CNN with: Animation key frame + motion vectors pairs (extracted from an existing animation dataset) Then you can predict the motion vectors for every drawn frame and create the in-betweens, using the trained CNN model.

[@blakebonecutter]

This would be neat, I think a clean up tool/ink and paint tool that could take a few keyframes done by a human and extrapolate that to the rest would be awesome and take away less creative decisions from human beings.

[@pdjinne65]

@@blakebonecutter It sounds simple in my comment but would probably be very complicated 🤣🤣

[@blakebonecutter]

@@pdjinne65 I’m sure haha

[@blakebonecutter]

Interesting episode. I agree with most of the points made. I think that AI 'stealing' artwork from the internet can and will eventually be resolved. However, I think studios in the future can, and will train AI on art that they, the studio, owns. When that's the case, it won't be stolen art, but human artists will be replaced nonetheless. I'm not sure I share Niko's optimism for humans rejecting souless art. The Lion King CGI remake made over a billion dollars. I know a lot of human beings worked hard to bring that film to life-- but there's doubt it lacked the artistry of the original in favor of shiny realism generated by machines. And people ate it up.

[@WillKristiansen]

I think fear of being replaced by this technology is based in a capitalist mindset. People are fearing for their jobs, not their art (a VERY reasonable fear I might add) but the art isn't going anywhere. I experiment with stable diffusion on a daily basis but I also still paint, write, perform stand-up, etc. Just because something can do it better than me doesn't mean I'm gonna stop creating. Corridor have always pioneered new tech so hating on them for doing what they've always done is really reductive and small-minded.

[@streetratdraws]

I love this conversation. I’m only 17 minutes in, but my first thought for “how can I (as an animator) use this kind of AI?” Frickin INBETWEENING. Love that it was the first thought for Tom too.

[@DoctorLoudonclear]

I’ve found myself on the fence with Corridor’s use of AI. While I don’t think they were unethical in their latest use of it (with RPS part 2 they commissioned artists to train the AI on their work and essentially just used AI as a filter over a live action short), I think they’ve opened up a can of worms by showing what it can do. And even though they might have used it ethically, most companies and individuals aren’t going to share their mindset. It also doesn’t help that they released part 2 in the middle of two strikes in which AI was one of the major concerns.

[@dying_souls]

I agree with a couple of points. Firstly, releasing the video in the middle of the strike was a bad move. It felt like kicking someone while they are down. Secondly, there is no doubt that companies and individuals will use the technology unethically for their own gain, without regard for others. However, Corridor in part two showcased an ethical and "moral" way of using this technology. It depends on the individual and how they use AI, which is why I personally do not dislike Corridor regarding this topic.

[@ithurtsbecauseitstrue]

all gen ai is unethcial. they also pushed offensive ideas like "democratizing talent." Pretty inexcusable.

[@joshualichkay7047]

😎

[@stephbytibbs]

Very interesting conversation

[@Benlito108]

Really interesting. But seriously someone needs to turn off or silence their WhatsApp web…

[@PalimpsestProd]

Too many negative whiners in this comment section.

[@ithurtsbecauseitstrue]

"Artificial Walls" around things... like training ai on someone else's content and imagery? These guys still just don't get the offensive language and disrespect that somehow permeates their overall attitude about all of it at all times. "Can we pull it off" "We weren't making money off of it" Not the point. And loaded their presentation with being dismissive of artists, disparaging the idea of talent itself - as if artists are GATEKEEPERS for their own talent and skill. Their position on this is just pure unethical, demeaning, and just plain without excuse. Is theft okay if you're not "making money off of it?" Is portraying artists and talent as the bad guys acceptable because "they were the first to" try ai like this? Simply NO. Ai is not a tool. It's forgery fueled by theft. It can't get around it. The purpose is forgery. Photoshop is NOT built around the entire purpose of forgery. Even for inbetweening - we don't need this in animation. Inbetween. Inbetweening is not nothing. It's part of the aesthetic, the style and skill. Bill Plympton's low frame rate style was used by him as a creative artistic choice to work with his skill, his style, his time, his budget. And it doesn't need ai inbetweening. Nor should it dare touch it. It would make it very much NOT Bill Plympton. NOT creative. NOT a wonderful solution. It would make it LESS distinct. LESS inventive. And LESS authentic. Ai is the opposite of art. The opposite of a tool. And the opposite of authenticity. Letter to a Pig is inventive and GORGEOUS. And authentic and unique. One of the coolest uses of roto ever. And Ai can just learn it and gobble it up and turn it into a filter or claim it as a "style" in it's "tool." No. It's forgery by theft. No one got excited about Letter of a Pig and exclaimed: now we can ALL do this with ai!!!!! Why? Cause it's obviously an idea, at it's core, that is OPPOSITE of art. Opposite of a tool. Opposite of Authenticity. Ai has to be avoided and straight up crippled for the inhuman, dehumanizing, fraudulent, forgery that it is. It is not progress. Opposing it is NOT being anti-technology. It's be simply being IN FAVOR of technology that actually is a tool, for artists, for humans - and not this abomination that is regressive, damaging, dangerous, and pathetic. Like Google Glass was killed by being called "Glassholes" - ai needs to be massacred in the public mind as the stolen soulless empty shell that it is. Because these Aissholes will, indeed exploit anything they can. We have SOOOO many great art tools. Ai is not one of them. "Training ai" is not the answer. That is a low-rent, dehumanizing, unartistic, unethical excuse - and nothing more. The training material is simply the IP theft issue. But it is NOT the entire problem by ANY MEANS with ai. Ai itself is the problem. They way it works IS THE PROBLEM. Full stop. Niko is NOT the face of ethical ai. Cause ai has no ethical face. And Niko has no respect for artists. The Bancroft's are not doing themselves any favors here. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for being sorta sandbagged by Corridor. But I guess I was wrong. Tony tried. But it's not Katsenberg that is the problem. It's ai. Guys - it's inhuman, dehumanizing, and unethical. At it's core. Katsenberg is simply stating the obvious, inevitable consequences of "adapting or falling behind." It's unethical. Adapting it IS FALLING BEHIND. To ignore what Katsenberg is saying ...and act like it was "just him" is delusional. It's purpose is removing humans. And that includes "Training it yourself." The same people pushing this are the SAME people pushing population reduction and UBI. It's human replacement. It's making humans economically unneeded. PERIOD. There is no tool to this. There is no other purpose to ai. There is no adapting to being made intentionally unneeded and economically useless. And it ain't just artists.

[@TheFi0r3]

Too long, didnt read and probably wrote by AI.

[@ithurtsbecauseitstrue]

@@TheFi0r3 Too stupid, and probably your AI, "Actual" "Ignorance"

[@theriddleman7648]

I get that you might not be feelin' AI in art and animation, but hatin' on it ain't gonna get you nowhere. When AI first came out, I wasn't feelin' the whole AI and art scene. It seemed like it was gonna steal shine from the hardworking artists who already get a raw deal in the industry. I always figured that AI art was all about snatching other artists' work online. I messed up on both. I learned about it and how it works. Get the lowdown on how this stuff works and start using it. Make the most of it, 'cause it's here to stay. If you don't, someone else will and you'll get left in the dust.

[@ithurtsbecauseitstrue]

@@theriddleman7648 whatever. The more i learn about ai, the more i find it unethical. And from my use of it - i have no interest in adding genie cheat-mode to my art, while my own creativity, talent, skill, mind, hand eye coordination and humanity atrophies. No thanks. If Ai is an abomination - its acceptance is where the dehumanization really makes contact. Get us to degrade and submit ourselves, rather than dream, excel, practice, and craft. Ai is like anything the serpent sells: a poisonous curse wrapped in a sweet tasting fruit that is lust to the eyes.

[@c.t.nelson4314]

Corridor, Nico especially, are a bunch of scabs Betraying their affinity for creating cool stuff for rapid AI trash Was a fan, not anymore

[@dirtiestharry6551]

This. People are literally losing jobs it is already happening. But Niko speaks as if we are just worried about nothing.