Disney Animator REACTS to AI Animation!

13 Replies to “Disney Animator REACTS to AI Animation!”

1. Check out the video description for links to the original videos by the Corridor Crew! – Also, if you want to learn more about animation check out my site for nearly 700 Hours of Art & Animation Lessons! https://CreatureArtTeacher.com

2. "Thou shalt not allow an AI Artist to render"

3. As an animator, I've gone from 2D to 3D animation, and sometimes back to 2D, I do not think this will replace human artists. It's a really fascinating tool that has a LOT of possibilities. My concerns are primarily centered around the ethics of the technology.

   I really did appreciate your take on this, and I agree that the technology is here and we will eventually have to learn to use it. It wouldn't be the first time I had to learn new programs or tools. That doesn't mean we have to use it as it is.

   There are currently a lot of ethical reasons that need to be addressed before anyone embraces it without concern. The lack of concern is what is really worrying for me. This is not like other technologies that have come before, and treating it as such is a little shortsighted. These false equivalencies, only highlight how little people understand about AI, and the speed that it is improving, downplaying its dangers.

   The photography comparison is the most common argument, but cameras in almost all their forms have been used along side artists as tool for centuries. Much longer than most people are aware of. Da Vinci used a very early form of camera to great effect to capture a lot of details in his studies, and the technology has continued to evolved alongside artists, becoming its own form of art. There is a very big difference between a tool that auguments a creative's abilities, and one that replaces entire creative processes.

   You're very correct that good stories will always be the deciding factor, and while AI may not replace artists anytime soon we should consider two things. The people making AI, and how it's being advertised to people.

   1 – These tech companies have used stolen data from an insane number of people to create an AI from a "non-profit" and making it open source, which somehow is still making people pay a premium to use. That's data laudering on a massive scale, and while it is be debated in the legal system, it is obviously unethical. It's theft and exploitation. The aim for the illustration variants is to replace the need to hire an artist, and instead steal from them to produce images. Taking away work opportunities from a vast majority and consolidating it to a few larger entitis is not progress, that's called a monopoly.

   2 – Companies selling the AI are giving the impression to people that they are suddenly "creatives". Everyone has ideas, ideas are not special, they are an expectation. Art is a skill that manifests those ideas through time and effort. A tool that does that for you is not augmenting your abilities, it is selling you a delusion. While I am very happy that this can allow so many people to realize their ideas, the dishonesty and disconnect that some have developed is deeply troubling. It's like ordering off of Uber Eats and calling yourself a chef. Even worse, a lot of the AI community actively promotes theft of artists to improve their datasets.

   When we don't talk about how bad the theft and exploitation is, we allow bad elements to dictate the direction of the technology.

4. Ordered your free and payed tutors a couple years ago really appreciate your support for artists starting out in the field, I’d definitely recommend EbSynth plug-in for After Effects is got a really good use for rendering your keyframes with shadows and lighting on characters or objects.

   Here’s a good example for it: https://youtu.be/_QEbnTWBqC8

5. Great attitude

6. Allow me to mention here, if someone has not already brought it to your attention, the point that the main reason we have jobs at all, we work only because someone wants something from us, faster and cheaper. These are the people we often work for. The suits really do not care about anything except the bottom line. Their profits.The suits want us to obey, to do what we're told. Faster. Cheaper. And maybe looking like something else they've seen and liked (or they've heard someone else higher up on the echelon had liked). Please, correct me if I'm totally wrong.

7. Thank you for sharing your professional perspective with us. I learned a lot from this video!

8. CC is just trying to incite drama and get money out of this. It's not about passion or about a new tech.

9. I've been saying since I found out about AI artbots, it's a tool. It's not a replacement for artists and animators. Totally agree with your assessment about training them on datasets that they don't have permission to use.

10. There is not Ai! Just it's composition, filters and visual FX but the vid is good

11. I think your view of A.I. is spot on. Thanks for bringing it to a higher level. I really think the fear is misplaced and stagnant. A lot of artists are going to get left behind. Their stand could end up causing them to lose their jobs, when if they embraced it, or at least accepted it, it would secure their jobs.

12. Well, I'm glad that this kind of tech is cheap or free, because all I'm seeing are things that I really wouldn't pay for watching. I don't know really, I appreciate the effort and work that people put into making animation, even in 3D animation which has it's own difficulties. Even if the story is ok, this will make me go "meh" (which is the feelling I get when I see an ai generated image, as beautiful as it might be). I would like that for help me with shading a drawing, but again that would make my work cheaper or people will ask only for sketches or flat line work. Anyway, great take on the subject and if you are interested in this, then there might be something cool to see in the future…. I'm hoping.

13. The key issues is the IP is an easy problem to solve.

    1) large companies like Disney or Dreamworks have vast libraries the can legally train on.

    2) just like pose image libraries or other kind of libaries that currently being sold – companies can also sell animation sample for training AI on.

    3) not a lawyer but I heard styles can't be copyrighted?

    CorridorCrew made a mistake of training on IP they didn't own or ask permission from – which is sad – since at their level of popularity, asking for permission is an easy one. This is an example of you are as strong as your weakest link. Almost all of this work destroyed by that single fact – they didn't own the IP – and that is the only thing their opponent is hanging on – IP issues.

Comments are closed.