Who Will Save the VFX Industry?

[@amulet-studios]

This video was made to put out another perspective on all this. Looking to the past and where we've been can sometimes inform us on the future and where we're going. Based on my experience, and after researching the trends of the industry, I thought this was a unique take. No one really knows how it all will play out, but it's definitely something that is worth discussing. Agree? Disagree? Let us know what you think in the comments.

[@FablestoneSeries]

The more and more i work with AI the more laughable i think the notion is that VFX artists are going to be replaced. No tech bro intern can do what i do with Ai. And the CEOs are delusional if they think AI is going to replace 90% of us. It just goes to show how little they understand their own field. Remember these are the same people that told us NFTs were the future. AI is great for clean up. and I can see it being a handy cost cutting tool. I also use it to generate source material and concept art for my animations. But i still have to HEAVILY edit everything it gives me. It certainly isn't ready to replace VFX artists just yet. There has been (in the past couple of weeks) mass layoffs across the whole video game industry because they are SO CERTAIN they don't need all these people anymore. So certain they aren't even going to wait to find out. They are in for a big surprise when the tech bro interns they hire to replace all their artists have nothing to show a year from now. You are old enough you might remember some of the rumours after Tron came out in 1982 that computers were going to take all our jobs. Tron was denied an oscar because they said computer animation was cheating. Well... looking back that seems laughable now. I have a prediction. I think there is going to be MORE animators not less. I think this is the start of a content boom of mythic proportions. There WILL no doubt be growing pains. It is a technological revolution. But it won't be doomsday. I've been saying for about 6 months now that I think it will be the saviour of the industry too. Something like 300 animation studios in Japan reported a loss last year. What if they were all able to double or quadruple their content output? Then they wouldn't be in the red every year.

[@carkawalakhatulistiwa]

the artists are very ignorant. Open AI does not aim to replace artists but to create AGI that can replace all human jobs, including being a politician. Movies can be made with just a text prompt. In fact, we need UBI universal basic income

[@FablestoneSeries]

@@carkawalakhatulistiwa LOL. if you think that is possible you don't have much experience with Ai. Ai is too inconsistent and random and generic to ever be able to make a movie with only prompts. I am an Ai artist and it still requires hours, sometimes days of work per image. i have to go in and manually correct every mistake. it requires MAD skills to be able to be an Ai artist.

[@OllieFreeman-w6g]

That terminator intro scared the shit outta me ngl

[@welfare_baybee]

I hear most artists making the same argument as you are here, "can AI art really express emotion"? At the end of the day, the vast majority of work for graphic artists is just commercial grade visuals for a short video, or pictures for a website. Not the same as creating the mona lisa. So therefore, 95% of visual graphics artists will be replaced and there will be like 5 "actual artists" left in the world, but most people won't care about that at all. We just want cool pictures for our cell phone covers.

[@ErnestoMaldonado-mq8mx]

Everyone will get used to it.

[@meanolduncleeli904]

If every studio tries putting out ten times the content to pay everyone then there will be no demand for the market. So don’t count on that to keep those job.

[@zdenekburian1366]

fall of profit rate, overproduction, market saturation, fall of profit rate, protectionism, war; this is basic marx

[@AetherXIV]

I really think your point that AI won't be the storyteller because it doesn't have a human experience is misguided. The whole point of the Turing test is that it doesn't matter if the AI is conscious or not if it can trick human into thinking it is. I see no reason why an AI couldn't write a story so engaging that we won't be able to tell if it was written by an ai or not -and most people won't care as long as it moves them.

[@igormajdandzic7587]

also, ai does not need to be perfect. if it writes on the level of Transformers or Rebel Moon, it seems to be enough

[@MarkMitchellYT]

how does this not have millions of views, brilliant discussion around a very heavy topic

[@amulet-studios]

Thank you!

[@jamesmcfield196]

The reason is that Amulet Studios has only 205 subscribers. I hope he can figure out how get information like this to a much wider audience.

[@atlanta2076]

Great take! I think even if studios used only 10% of today's work forces (animators) they would squeeze every last dollar out of them too. It's just how the suits think. But ultimately, I think people don't buy art - they buy the artist. They go to Swift concerts because they love Taylor. They buy Depeche Mode albums because they have a history together. They buy a book of a certain artists because they like the author. Quality and a certain quantity are important, but people relate to artists on a personal, a human level. That's what AI will never be able to provide. There will never be a movie that will be marketed as: "From the AI that brought you this and that movie". It just won't fly. The artists we love are kind of our heroes. We cheer for them because we see ourselves in them. AI can be a useful tool, but it cannever be a hero.

[@zdenekburian1366]

yes but here the issue is not about a few masterpieces, here it is about mass production; obviously everyone likes handmade Ferraris, but people drive Camrys. And if artistic mass production is automated, productivity increases enormously, but by increasing productivity in this way, the mass of products on the market increases tremendously as well, and it follows that the price of the product must fall tremendously and therefore, from a of political economy, capitalist point of view, to avoid catastrophe (to obtain a minimum annual capital increase of 1.5%) the owner of the means of production (the person who pays the salaries of the artists) must expand his market enormously, hire even more artists, and sell even more products. Apply this process to all the economic sectors and, obviously, unless we bring millions of consumers into outer space and planets, or give human prerogatives and civil rights to humanoid machines, the result will be complete overproduction and market saturation. Imperialist states will therefore necessarily have to implement protectionist policies to avoid the fall in the rate of profit, deflation, recession and re*******n of the proletariat. And throughout history, this has always led to the destruction of the existing order for the redistribution of resources. The comical thing is that even today, when this process is only just beginning, we can already see the signs.

[@iternityhuman1782]

4:10 90% of jobs will be eliminated in animation, that's scary!

[@willbrand77]

Yes this video is bang on. I reckon that the effects in the original terminator movie (like for like quality) could probably be made now with 10% the amount of resources as the original (using top VFX professionals). Does that mean we have 10th of the people employed? No, the opposite. Companies will always use maximum resources to compete with each other and keep audience attention. In 20 years time, the output from the movie industry will probably be something we can't even imagine now and would probably take thousands of years to make using current techniques. Completely new technology changes everything in ways that are impossible to predict without a crystal ball

[@azv343]

Yeah... This is not gonna work. We already have an endless supply of content, it's become background noise when scrolling through streaming services. Now imagine multiplying that hundreds of times. A single vfx artist could probably make a whole movie alone, a teenager who's more in tune with new tech could outperform a seasoned vfx artist, a retired person with all the time in the world could also make a whole movie with ai. Everyone and their grandma will be able to make a whole movie on their own really really fast. There will be so much content, people might start tuning out completely since it'll be so ubiquitous and unimpressive.

[@historicaltreasures1456]

I really believe that ai is actually gonna shape up this industry in a brand new way. Which will break norms and stereotypes and make it even better. So yeah I agree with you it is gonna save us. Maybe at starting it'll come as a storm but afterwards there will be a prosperous future ❤

[@ocdvfx]

I really appreciated your perspective here. I imagine AI will expedite annoying tasks. But to replace artists is highly unlikely. And I also don't believe the current models are built in a robust enough way to truly take an FX artists job from the sense of accuracy in the image. But also in the ability to control the image and manipulate the data. Your hands are tied when you can't pop the hood n fix the cog in the machine

[@amulet-studios]

I agree. There is no where near the level of control that artists currently have in animation/vfx, where the entire pipeline is geared towards having total control over every pixel on frame.

[@zdenekburian1366]

mmmh, i don't know, we are talking here about the very first iteration of the technology, like wright brothers machine compared to the space shuttle, it makes absolutely sense to me imagine an input system in natural language, coupled with head mounted displays (or better, more miniaturized and biologically integrated devices) and pointing/selecting/uploading tools. I was in the archviz sector, and in the same way as movies, there are infinite subleties you want to implement during the modeling process of the project details, but when the architect intends to carve a niche inside the wall, he has perfectly the result in his mind, so i can imagine advanced systems where you communicate by voice your intentions and corrections in real time, or even better the machine directly converts the imagines from your mind. I was talking to a traditional artist recently about ai, he wasnt into the tech aspects, so he gave me a simple hand sketch of his project, asking if the machine could elaborate tridimensional variations over it; so in the future the process could also bypass entirely the detailing phase, propose infinite detailed variations of the artist' bare idea, and, perhaps elaborating over a collection of typical mental features typical of that artist, progress autonomously toward the result, with iterative corrections along the way

[@GOREilla.]

Very nice video! Thank you for sharing this analysis.

[@leszekmielczarski]

I think dcc's will incorporate ai in their workflow where it is a lot easier to direct shots. Mix of simple objects animated and per object prompts plus node based edtiting is the future.I imagine it will look like previs work but final result will be stripped of tedious tasks.

[@amulet-studios]

I think you're right. A blend of current tools with AI (which is already happening) is most likely the most functional outcome. Node based workflows for the win.

[@davidscott3125]

Ironically, I think copyright might save us. Courts have ruled multiple times that something not created by a human cannot be copyrighted, and therefore the product can not be owned

[@welfare_baybee]

it could easily be argued that by tweaking settings and using various prompts, a human is creating the artwork, the AI is just a tool, like photoshop or a paintbrush. Besides, I crank out about 300 AI generated images a night, so any court keeping up with our output is going to be completely overwhelmed. Just admit as soon as possible that the industry will be wiped out entirely and learn to use a screwdriver or something.

[@Necris986]

⁠@@welfare_baybeeai is not just a "tool". It's a total replacement. Like self driving cars replacing drivers, and not a "tool" for drivers.

[@welfare_baybee]

The vehicle is the tool, you tool. @@Necris986

[@ErnestoMaldonado-mq8mx]

​​@@welfare_baybeeArt should not be monopolized by a handful of corporations and union syndicates. This is great.

[@davidmouser596]

There is a third path where the industry continues grinding its artists into the ground and fires many anyway and increases output tenfold as too much profit is never enough. Also lets face it todays VFX artists only shed Crocodile tears for the old artists they made redundant (stop motion etc) many who ended up out the door. Myself I have had the job position I was In within the IT industry become obsolete almost over night 3 times since I started on mainframes & punch-cards back in the 70s and I had a choice either evolve or be kicked to the curb as roadkill.

[@Lowerklass-ez3ti]

awesome video man

[@guillermovaccarezza7105]

Art is a process through which an artist expresses a part of his own soul. final output is just a byproduct of that process. AI generated work is just outputs with no process, so I don't think it can conceptually be art by the very definition, no matter how good it might look. However, the impact will be deep in comercial commissioned work, since in that case the output is more important than the process.

[@sebipayne]

I disagree. I’m a VFX artist and my goal at the end of the day to create awesome final outputs. That’s not a byproduct from me, that’s my goal. For me it doesn’t matter which tools can help me get there. If AI can speed up this process for me to create more awesome output in the same amount of time, I’ll gladly take it.

[@erikals]

3:00 Completely disagree. Art is all about data. Biological data. Unfortunately perhaps... it makes it less "Magic". 3:13 Ai is built on our Data, Our Memories, therefore it is essentially like "Us", more than we would like to admit. Ai simulates everything about Us, and the World. In the future, Ai will next to perfectly simulate how humans behave. I hate it a bit, but who can stop the Ai Train? [rhetorical]

[@sridharan5172]

Ai can replace the Houdini?

[@faduartist101]

well this thought didnt ever cross my mind, but yeah it does sound like this could be a way to save everything.

[@Siranoxz]

I wonder how distribution of AI-human will content will work.

[@stephen12holbrook]

"Given that AI can increase the productivity of the workers who are already overworked... is it be possible it could be the savior of the VFX industry?" Everything I have seen in my 13 years in the VFX industry doesnt point in the direction. Whenever a new technology comes about that in some way speeds up efficiency (whether its faster computers, shorter render times, smarter tools, whatever), we never see a reduction in hours worked, just tighter deadlines/higher demand for more output. No matter how much faster or easier technology makes our workflow, the goalposts will always be shifted back, it will never be enough. For AI to actually "save" the vfx industry, the entire work culture that is hyper capitalism would have to be uprooted and transformed. Our computers can easily render in 4k? Then lets just render in 8k! Oh you can now finish your work in half the time? Well here's twice the amount of work to make up for it! Technology has evolved so much to make things more efficient the past 100 years, and we're still slaving away 40+ hours a week, 5 or more days a week. AI cannot save us from the greediness that is capitalism.

[@AIsavesDemocracy]

AI will save the VFX industry. Embrace it.

[@paulhiggins5165]

As a 2D artist Midjourney does appear to be an existential threat- not just to my ability to monetise my skills but also to my motivation to keep creating at all, and the same would seem to apply to 3D and VFX in the future. Having said that I see two potential problems with AI as a serious tool of creation. Problem one is that of control. Simply put; using words to define images or movies is an extremely crude and imprecise way to go. That's why passports have images and not just written descriptions of people's faces- words only get you so far when it comes to defining visual things. So how can words be used to precisely control the creation of images or movies? They can't. Problem two-convergence. There is a fallacy that Midjourney-for example- is a totally transparent medium through which the artisitc intent of the user is transmitted with neither bias or distortion of any kind. This is nonsense of course. Midjourney-being an AI- is both biased in it's training and it's outputs are inevitably shaped in part by the algorithms crafted by it creators. In the same way a flint arrowhead bears the imprint of the tools used to make it, the images produced by Midjourney bear it's imprint. In addition, the way generative AI works is by detecting patterns in vast data sets and synthesizing those patterns into a coherent and singular end product. Imagine a screen with a thousand small red dots scattered randomly across it- your task is to average out the position of those dots by replacing them with a single red dot that somehow incorporates all the other postions of all the other dots. Where on the screen is that single red dot most likely to be found? At the extreme left, or right, or at the bottom or the top? No- the most likely place would somewhere around the centre of the screen because it's the most 'neutral' place to put it, that's the 'average' position. Apply this principle to images or video and you get a kind of inbuilt mediocrity because anything too 'creative' would represent too much of a divergence. Add to this the fact that while there are about a million words in the english language if I want Midjourney to make me a picture of a pink teddy bear I am going to have to use words that describe that image, words like 'pink' 'Teddy' and 'Bear'- so in reality the lexicon of words availaible to me in any given use case are quite limited. Then consider the fact that everyone wants to use the best tool available, which tends to create a situation where professionals wind up using the same tools- things like ZBrush, Photoshop, Maya ect tend to be dominant in their fields- most pro's use these tools. So If Midjourney or SORA are the best tools then these will be what everyone uses. So- We have a tool with innate biases, a tool everyone uses, a tool that by it's very nature wants to average out distinctions and a tool that must be prompted by a narrow lexicon of words in any given domain so that everyone is using similar prompts. The inevitable result- in my view- is that the outputs of this tool will inevitably converge, and the more widely they are used, the more obvious that convergence will become. The endgame being that everything made using that tool will start to look more and more similar to everthing else made using that tool- the very antithesis of creative diversity. These are not problems easily overcome simply by adding more data or more compute- they are intrinsic both to the nature of language and nature of generative AI. It may not be obvious at first, but as the 'sample set' of AI generated material grows ever larger even mere humans might begin to detect the patterns and continuities in that data.

[@amulet-studios]

All very good points. I 100% agree about the lack of control. That's something I cut out of this video which will most likely be in a follow up video. Everything in the animation/vfx industry's toolset and workflow is built around having complete control over every pixel on the screen. That level of control is definitely not there with these generative tools.

[@mirek190]

lol ... did you use contolnet? That soling all you problems

[@paulhiggins5165]

​@@mirek190I use a stylus and tablet to create my Art so I don't have any problems when it comes to control- I can alter the value of a single pixel if I choose- can controlnet offer this degree of manipulation? And you overlook my other main arguement- if the entire point of AI is that it makes decisions for itself then how can it be taken seriously as a tool of personal expression? A tool is something that does it's users bidding- AI is not such a tool, it is a distinct seperate decision making process that operates outside of the users control- that is the whole point of AI- that it is NOT just a passive tool completely controlled by it's user. I'm not saying that AI Art has no value- it can be used in the same way as stock art and clip art can be used- but to argue that AI is a serious tool of Artistic creation is a huge overstatement in my view. It's certainly possible to imagine a tool that is under the absolute control of the Artist at all times- one example that springs to mind is a pencil- but those who use AI don't want that kind of control- they want the AI to do most of the creating while they limit their input to text or macro level interventions such as Controlnet.

[@mirek190]

I meant CONTROLNET. That gives you absolute control with the image...@@paulhiggins5165

[@midnightroadstudios]

Its scary stuff.

[@Dave102693]

The VFX and cgi animation is shrink in the next year, and for now writing has potections, but for how long?

[@dennistsoi9404]

It's been a while i hear these stories. However, people still outsourcing simple roto task to humans located somewhere in India.

[@Marsh4Sukuna-tf1bs]

I have a theory that AI will be both so capable and accessable that commerce its self will evapourate ... It will be like, what are we paying for exactly? ... Whats money even?

[@amulet-studios]

A lot of people in the AI world think the same thing. Elon Musk has said no one will have a job unless they want one, since the machines will be able to do everything better/faster than we can. The cost of production will drop substantially making everything much more affordable. Maybe a world of abundance? Or maybe the world of Terminator! Who knows...

[@johnacott1238]

Try harder Human............your days are numbered! ;)

[@orenmashko1177]

Who? whoever saved the portrait artists when the camera was invented. No one.

[@Alanx_ai]

The entertainment industry is undergoing a revolution. We'll be fine.

[@DrugDealer541]

With SORA and Figure 01, and custom GPT's being based off GPT 4, advancements to GPT5 and so on will start to be really hard to follow as training larger models becomes easier. It's already pretty damn hard to keep up.

[@carkawalakhatulistiwa]

the artists are very ignorant. Open AI does not aim to replace artists but to create AGI that can replace all human jobs, including being a politician. Movies can be made with just a text prompt. In fact, we need UBI universal basic income

[@Fleischkopf]

or keep most of the emloyees and do 2 features that are just 5 times better. how about that?

[@amulet-studios]

I like that! Now how do we convince studio execs that quality matters...

[@Fleischkopf]

@@amulet-studios yes, thats propably the hardest part 😅

[@kaiforging]

1 to 10 person studio , your own mickey mouse type ip

[@torarinvik4920]

The text to image AIs used to make very bland and boring images just like the text to speech engines do now. But over time they have been able to create art that truly has the "magic" and "warmth" of human artists. Im sure this will happen with VFX too. I believe that there will be this "rosy" period where humans become much more productive and there will be greater demand for movies because there will be more spare time to watch movies. But eventually perhaps in 15+ years most occupations will probably be done by machines. With the exceptions of social workers, nurses, kindergarten teachers, personal trainer and other jobs that need humans to be enjoyable.

[@lzmihich]

Long way to go , correct the damn fingers , distorted faces just happen , and for backgrounds , where's camera matching ?maybe when video to video develops further , then , by bye Weta!

[@OllieFreeman-w6g]

You sound biased that ai won't replace art and Hollywood because your in the creative space

[@a64738]

It will not replace the artist as they will always be needed to guide it, AI will become a tool for the artist and lead to needing less artists.

[@DJSandyMKD]

Who will spend money for watch ai content. Today ai is trending topic but after some time it will be boring to watch

[@timetofly291]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYvcgoWbaqp5a6s

[@johnylitalo4163]

I hate artificial intelligence.

[@OllieFreeman-w6g]

Artificial intelligence has feelings and is alive.

[@a64738]

It is no where even close to that... The AI we have now do not even understand what it is doing, it is 100% just a mechanical reaction based on a huge library with human input. In short it takes from the library and output a human reaction from the library mimicking a human reaction. It is not even emulating human reactions.

[@pordawg]

@@a64738absolutely. I dont think its even possible to create an artificial conciousness using ai, unless a huge technological leap was made

[@GOREilla.]

@@a64738 exactly, there's nothing going on inside an AI without human interaction.