Submitted by Ok_Sea_6214 t3_11d1a0j in singularity

I recently argued that with all these new AI technologies, it would be a matter of time before someone put them all together (prompt to script, text to image, text to audio, prompt to voice, image to video) to create full sized tv shows and movies. I was thinking of live action, but it seems it has now been done for anime.

An FX studio famous for its YouTube channel, called Corridor Crew, seems to have cracked the code, turning live action into a full on anime episode. And while the title of "Did We Just Change Animation Forever?" sounds a lot like clickbait, they might actually have done just that:

They actually didn't use that many new AI technologies, mostly just turning live action into anime frame by frame with Diffusion by locking in the style. But you can see the Singularity effect at work, because they worked this out in just 3 months. They also built on the efforts of other creators, who found simple solutions to existing problems (like flickering), to piece by piece figure out the right way to leverage this new technology into something usable.

This is a revolution for the anime industry, who instead of hiring talented animators, can simply turn live actors into anime with the right AI model. Even better, they can use existing films as a basis for new ones, for example the Vampire Hunter D movie used as a basis here for more releases. The studio that owns it could train an AI on the movie (and other movies in a similar style, like Magnetic Rose) to copy the drawing style, but also the script, the voice acting, the action pieces... to generate infinite amounts of animation, scripts and voice copies in that exact style, allowing them to create sequels with the exact same actors and styles, or spinoffs in the same style but with completely different characters.

At most one would have to give the AI some direction and fine tuning, with live action doubles or rough drawings (which AI can already turn into detailed designs with a simple prompt). The way a director might give prompts to his actors or animators, directors would now only need to prompt the AI to create the animation they want and how they want it.

It's interesting to note that Netflix cancelled a lot of animated shows recently, even ones that were in full production. Which makes me wonder if it's because they saw this trend coming and realized it would be cheaper to wait 6 months and have the AI do it instead. Because Netflix is posed to be the biggest benefactor of this new trend in the short term, having an established and paying audience, as well as the funds and vision to jump on an opportunity to become a market leader before Pixar and the Anime studios figure this out.



You must log in or register to comment.

epSos-DE t1_ja6dwgv wrote

IF they play it right , then the artist will paint sample images for the Ai, and the ai will do the hard work of painting the rest.

Basically anime could reach better value with less effort.


EpicProdigy t1_ja6jtef wrote

Animators do not use video reference to make 1:1 copies of it. And in many cases, its impossible to create 100% reliable reference for what you want to animate. Just look at some crazy anime fighting scenes that straight up defy what humans are capable of doing. Animators often push and exaggerate things to make things more expressive and dynamic. Hell, people even often breaks characters limbs for a frame or two to create a desired effect. Enough to capture a certain feeling from the animation, but not long enough for the person watching to say "what the hell happened to their leg?!" Animation is full of little things like this. And its a highly iterative process.

Unless you can make an high level thinking thinking AI that can understand and apply 12 principles of animation, and also not need to rely on video reference, I cannot see this tech doing the hard work.

What I could see, is people using 3D animation to create reference for the AI to then make 2D animation. Because with 3D animation, you can make more animation in less amount of time, while having the type of movement youd find in 2D that's not possible or easy for a person to do in real life. Because no matter how hard someone tries, they often cant move like a cartoon character. And in some cases, it would be down right dangerous to even try lol.

I could see this for small indie creators who just want an cinematic animation for their story, but dont even have the small budget of a million dollars to pull it off. But personally, I view this tech as a way for 3D animation to finally pull off the 2D look. Which the anime industry has been doing trying to do for a long time because its much cheaper, but can never get it right. (Ok well Studio Orange gets it pretty close)


Nukemouse t1_ja6q7n7 wrote

For many years 3D artists attempted to replicate anime style (and other 2d animation styles) using 3D models. Recently, they began having some success (dragon ball fighterz particularly), but for a very long time their attempts lacked many of those small touches you are talking about, but they were released anyway. I suspect we will simply see a volume of AI made releases despite certain "shortcuts" commonly used in anime that are directly responsible for its style not being replicated.

Also in the 3D animation that tries to replicate anime they always dial down the framerate so it looks choppy and its horrible. Like of all the things to replicate why would you want to replicate the framerate?


EpicProdigy t1_ja6s5e7 wrote

Yes improvements have certainly been made: ultimately, the thing about 3D anime with toon shaders, is that when theyre still, they can look just like 2D. But when they move, you can tell its CGI. Its probably because that they lack the imperfections 2D has which in my opinion is much needed and can be quite appealing. AI has the potential to rectify this issue.

Also any 3D animation that simply lowers its frame rate is not replicating how 2D animation works. They're just making their animation choppy. 2D animation almost never feels choppy despite it being "lower fps". 2D animation typically works on 2s. So for ever 2 frames, theres 1 image. This can change dynamically over a shot. So it can go from being on 2s, to being animated on 4s, to then in some rare instances, being animated on 1s. The youtube link I provided does exactly this. (Go through the video using the < > keys to see where they animate on 1s, 2s, and even 4s) To recreate this effect in 3D, you basically have to animate in the same process as if you were animating using 2D.

The most painful way of doing it, is animating at your standard 24 fps getting a nice result, and then just lowering it to 12 fps and creating a janky mess. Its a lazy practice with bad outcomes in a desperate attempt to make it have a hand drawn feel.


Nukemouse t1_ja6un3d wrote

I would love polygon pictures if they used decent frame rates and embraced being 3D instead of being stuck in the past


Mickhead t1_ja6sy1l wrote

Did we watch the same video? The entire point of the video is that none of this is true. AI did do the hard part -- the small flourishes were done with basic VFX and 2 people. Meaning that you could create really convincing anime with even just a modicum of more resources.

This is an order of magnitude efficiency gain as high as cars were over horses, in my opinion. Sure it doesn't do everything but that's like saying cars aren't better than horses because it can't go over steps.


EpicProdigy t1_ja6tett wrote

My first sentence is that animators do not recreate 1:1 animation based on their video reference. They do not rotoscope over real life images, because you can create much better moving characters by just using irl movements as inspiration, but applying your own knowledge to create moving characters in a much more appealing way.

Im sorry, but I watched the full video on their other channel, and the way the characters move are cool, but weird. But I personally would never watch an anime with that type of movement unless the story was good. This is isnt an issue with flickering or anything. Recreating animation 1:1 with real footage is often just not appealing animation. Its like some weird motion capture 2D animation and can look uncanny.

And why do you think most animation studios don't use motion capture for 3D animation other than when they want to create realistic movement, like for a realistic video game or movie? The power to "replace animators" for 3D has existed for decades. Motion capture is pretty much perfected, its "cheap" and even then, they need animators to clean it up and make it more appealing. Most animation studios (in the category of Pixar, Sony image works, Fortiche, etc) dont use it because they want more stylized animation movements. Because to many its the most appealing type of animation.

Motion capture by small indie 3D animation studios is much more commonly used. But every time they get bigger, they phase that out and hire more hand keyed animators. Like Rooster Teeth and their RWBY franchise. This tech is basically exactly motion capture, but for 2D animation. And so will likely follow the same path. I do not ever see AI that basically rotoscopes over a video reference ever replacing 2D animators. Because thats not what they do.


Mickhead t1_ja6v1du wrote

You seriously interpreted my previous comment as "the boolean inverse of every statement in your post is true" and started arguing against that. I hope you're getting the treatment for your autism you need.

I'm just talking about your thesis, friend. This is like you ranting maniacally about the intricate process of affixing horsehoes onto horses while I'm admiring a car.


EpicProdigy t1_ja6v69m wrote



deltaback t1_jaaa9bb wrote

Just wanted to say I appreciate your responses man. I love people with zero animation experience explaining shit they have no idea about and then when you create a reasonable, coherent response, receive a “lol you mad bro”

Most people here who never animated, let alone work in the actual industry have zero idea of what makes animation good. They look at something that surface- level looks similar and think it changes everything. The fact that we’ve had motion capture for decades, and it’s still preferable to use it as reference and hand animate most things shows it’s pretty clear that simply recording motion and generating images from it isn’t going to cut it.


AllNinjas t1_ja6tj07 wrote

Niko and Dean, the 2 main people coordinated everything and did a lot of heavy lifting, but it was a handful of Corridor folks as they mentioned they worked on that for months r/Corridor


Mickhead t1_ja6v2tw wrote

Sure, I'm just using the exaggerated number they use while filming in the studio.


Beatboxamateur t1_ja6zf5a wrote

Yeah, this is kind of similar to people thinking that changing anime clips to 60fps on youtube using AI interpolation somehow makes it better. People are too quick to think something's already been usurped by new technology, when it really hasn't yet.


Savings-Leading4618 t1_ja74bp8 wrote

Better value, and they could produce a lot more. A single artist could create an entire anime series by itself. Instead of having to wait years for another season of anime, they could produce them much more faster.

It can be a total revolution. Like going from not using computers, to having computers, but maybe even more


NoidoDev t1_ja7ewbf wrote

Yes, this makes more sense. It will make the production cheaper. They can experiment more, take more risks, and smaller players can enter the market easier. This will rather become more of a competition to (western) live-action productions. Especially to those with high production costs but bad story telling. The ones with a good story on the other hand will be made as an animation if a live-action production is too expensive. For example, the r/raisedbywolves fans are hoping for a follow up as an animation or a game at this point.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_ja6lizj wrote

Basically in the future every animator will be a character designer and keyframe artist.


an-invisible-hand t1_jaawp4n wrote

What you expect: advanced tools will lead to higher quality anime with the same amount of work

What will actually happen: we get a deluge of the same or worse quality anime from studios that laid off 90% of their former talent


FoxlyKei t1_ja6m8ce wrote

Anime and animation is grueling work isn't it? Not to mention the labor practices and crunch are soul crushing. Should we be happy this grueling work is going to be phased out? The new jobs would probably be the composition, music, directing, and such. Though I only have one perspective here. I still worry for who gets displaced or how they find footing. We really need UBI already, because while legislation is slow AI is not.


vivehelpme t1_ja7ds4b wrote

> Should we be happy this grueling work is going to be phased out?

Yes. Absolutely. It will increase the production values, make the barrier to produce animation much lower, and it will remove a sweat shop class of laborers that is sweat shop-styled because it's prohibitively expensive to do it in any other way.

Removing a class of zero-social mobility poverty level work is never wrong even if someone gets squeezed by it when it happens.


RikerT_USS_Lolipop t1_ja7f3pz wrote

>Anime and animation is grueling work isn't it? Not to mention the labor practices and crunch are soul crushing.

None of that has to do with animation. It's strictly a problem with Capitalism. The owners of those studios want to squeeze ever last possible cent out of their labor. They could very easily pay their artists appropriately and not assign more than 40 hours of work per week. The end product will be slightly more expensive, but all that needs to be done is slash the amount of trash shovelware anime being produced so that those eyeballs are more tightly concentrated and ad revenue goes up enough to compensate.

If the workers weren't enamored with having that specific job because it has been their dream their whole life, and if they had the ability to walk away from a tilted negotiation table, then all those problems would evaporate.

So using the excuse, "ah, it's fine in this case because that's a shitty job" doesn't work. All jobs are going to be that shitty soon enough. And it never has anything to do with the actual work.


SilentLennie t1_ja7zyff wrote

Sounds to me like the pay for a lot of jobs is gonna go down, because less talented people with an AI can be almost as effective as talented people without an AI.


stevengineer t1_ja8qwt2 wrote

Strong disagree, talented people with AI become geniuses


Chad_Abraxas t1_ja816ni wrote

Yes--UBI is becoming more and more of an obvious necessity by the day.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6oz1f wrote

>The new jobs would probably be the composition, music, directing, and such.

By the time people have made the shift, AI will take that over as well.


>We really need UBI already, because while legislation is slow AI is not.

Indeed. The problem is that there is a much cheaper alternative to UBI, which is to reduce costs, mostly by firing your employees. If a country is a company, then its citizens are its employees, if you catch my drift.


FoxlyKei t1_ja6qtuh wrote

So we all just, die I guess? Then who do they sell to


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6wb9k wrote

If you own a planet, you don't sell, you just take.


liaisontosuccess t1_ja91wcf wrote

maybe come up with a way to make the AI pay the consumer for viewing the content the AI produces?

pit the different AI's against each other to have to outbid each other?


Emory_C t1_ja6w6zz wrote

>By the time people have made the shift, AI will take that over as well.

This is silly. ML is not creative or intelligent. It still needs human direction. What we'll end up seeing is entirely new creative works made by humans with ML software.


LordSprinkleman t1_ja7iyfa wrote

I agree with you. But I think it's not impossible for what he's saying to eventually happen. As long as AI can emulate creativity, people won't know the difference. But I guess AI not needing direction in the areas he's talking about is still a long way off. Maybe.


Emory_C t1_ja87bt2 wrote

Eventually? Perhaps. But at that point, do you think they AI will even care about making creative content for humans?

It’d be like Scorsese deciding to make a movie exclusively for dogs. Why would he?


AdamAlexanderRies t1_jabsilm wrote

Cognitive power doesn't cause rebellious independence outside of teenagers and hollywood plot devices. AI designed by anyone who can even spell a-l-i-g-n-m-e-n-t isn't going to start spontaneously deciding what it does and doesn't care about as if it's reached puberty. Maybe it is very hard to design a loss function aligned with our values and maybe we only get one chance, but if we make a strong misaligned AGI I guarantee it won't manifest as meekly as snobbish refusal to cooperate.

Why does GPT care about predicting the next token in a string? Does it philosophize and self-reflect during training to determine if manipulating vectors is what it really wants? Hell no, it just does the math. Only the final trained model is faintly capable of mimicking wetware traits like desire, and it only does that when prompted to.


Emory_C t1_jadhmbe wrote

We’re talking about two different things. AGI is not machine learning.


AdamAlexanderRies t1_jaeqhy5 wrote

Oops! Let's clarify. First, I agree with you that AGI is not machine learning. Here's how I use the terms:

AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) - entity with cognitive abilities equal to or better than any given human, across all domains.

ML (Machine Learning): this is how modern AI models are trained, typically in the form of neural nets, attention models, tokenized vectors, and lots of data stirred in a cauldron of TPUs. However we train AGI will be a form of ML (maybe one not developed yet), but the term catches all the ways we've been training models for the last decade or so. Maybe all imaginable AI training techniques are technically ML, but I use it to refer specifically to the tech underlying the recent exciting batch - Stable Diffusion (DALL-E, Midjourney), Large Language Models (ChatGPT, New Bing, LaMDA).

Does that work for you?

> at that point, do you think the AI will even care about making creative content for humans? > > > > It’d be like Scorsese deciding to make a movie exclusively for dogs. Why would he?

When you say "the AI" here, what do you mean exactly? What sorts of traits does that kind of AI have?

> ML is not creative or intelligent. It still needs human direction.

Creativity and intelligence are here already, to a limited extent. Generative AIs are creating in the sense that it's not just collage or parroting. The process is ambivalent to understanding completely novel combinations of ideas, and its outputs can vary to match. It's a worse poet than Shakespeare, a worse historian than a tenured professor, a worse novelist than Tolkien, a worse programmer than Linus, a worse physicist than Einstein, and so on, but it's demonstrating actual intellect in all these domains and more, better than most gradeschoolers and some grown adults.

It does not still need human direction, and that's unrelated to its cognitive powers (creativity, intelligence, etc.) anyway. ChatGPT is an implementation of GPT that requires human direction, but that's a design choice, not an inherent limitation. They wanted a chatbot. If they wanted it to exhibit autonomous behaviour via some complex function to decide for itself what to read, when to reply, and where to post, they could've done that too.


NoidoDev t1_ja7duht wrote

You're right, understanding humans and the world is necessary to create a consistent story that resonates with people.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6x9y7 wrote

AI is already creating more art and intelligently written articles than I or most other people can. What is your benchmark then, Mozart and Einstein?

I guess this is the classic moving goalpost argument:

"AI isn't good at this."

"Ok but AI isn't better at this than an animal."

"Ok but AI isn't better at this than the average human."

"Ok but AI isn't better at this than the best human."

"Ok but AI uses an unfair advantage."

"Ok but AI isn't good at this other thing."


Emory_C t1_ja6xspd wrote

Nevermind. I see from this comment...

>AGI has existed for several years now, and has reached ASI, I'm confused why people think they'd be told about it.

...that you're delusional.


Emory_C t1_ja6xwu2 wrote

Oh! And an anti-vaxxer, too. How charming.

>He's killed 5.5 billion people and counting, most of them just haven't started dying just yet.


vernes1978 t1_ja7758c wrote

Try to avoid personal attacks.


FTRFNK t1_ja7svsx wrote

Nah, look at this guy's post history he's a fucking nut.


vernes1978 t1_ja8fsi0 wrote

Yeah but you want to keep them reading your arguments until THEY run out of arguments, and start the personal attacks.


Emory_C t1_ja6xmce wrote

>AI is already creating more art and intelligently written articles than I or most other people can.

AI is not creating art. People are using machine learning algorithms to create art. There's a huge difference.

When there is an actual and true Artificial Intelligence which is creating art (which requires thought and intent) it will be a very different world indeed.

But that would be an AGI -- and I doubt an AGI would even understand the purpose for something as superfluous and silly as art.


RavenWolf1 t1_ja6wkmz wrote

But aren't countries society which are formed by people?


Liberty2012 t1_ja9qf44 wrote

>By the time people have made the shift, AI will take that over as well.

Yes, this is the new rat race. Someone posted elsewhere they had spent the last 3 months working on new AI projects which all became obsolete before they could finish.


alan7879 t1_ja9wmde wrote

so done with the races. singularity should take over asap


SilentLennie t1_ja805o5 wrote

Let's be very clear: a country has no employees, the people employ the politicians and the bureaucrats and other staff.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaawwui wrote

Oh yes, just yesterday I fired a policeman for giving me a ticket.


CrazyC787 t1_jaaf81z wrote

UBI is never happening lmaooo, keep with the cope.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jab56th wrote

If you say so. I think it will, but the fewer people you have to share with, the more you get.


mikestillion t1_jaaboi8 wrote

Does this country you refer to (ours) hate it’s citizens as much as companies do? Will they “fire” these “employees” by taking their access cards and just march them out the “door” too?

Maybe not to all, but some? Or just to many? Or just to “employees” of “type X”?

This metaphor has me asking a lot of questions…


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaaif74 wrote

In the second video you'll notice there's been an edit, where he goes from describing the useless class to the solution of taxing AI and using the money to help people. My guess is they cut out the part where he discusses the fact that there will be no point in retraining anyone if AI does everything.

If you are a horse in the year 1900 you'll be very useful, but by 1920 most of your job has been replaced by cars and tractors. If at that point the horse really can't find a new job, then the cost of it being alive (food, healthcare, living space) will be compared to the market value of horse meat.

Lucky for us there is no market for human meat, but 8 billion people (and growing) worth of carbon pollution, food, living space, healthcare, entertainment, voting rights, property rights, risk of revolution compared to the value of them not being there... Until very recently in human history, the solution has always been to "fire" them.


dasnihil t1_ja7ijd0 wrote

we're fine as long as we're the only sentient entity. whatever machines that surpass our intelligence concern me much and i don't care much about jobs and careers and other societal constructs. this is strictly about what will happen to art as we know it in future.

only sentient beings are capable of experience the qualia of finding art in literally anything. once these machines show sings of sentience, i will re evaluate this but till then we're fine. we'll have to re engineer the societies tho because we'll be automated for almost everything for sustainability soon.


techhouseliving t1_ja7wfeo wrote

Ha ha those things you talk about are already being automated with AI. Nothing is immune


monsieurpooh t1_ja80m6i wrote

Yes, any job which one would describe as "grueling" falls in the category of jobs that people only do because they're paid. These should always be phased out because it's a net gain for everyone as long as there's UBI.

The jobs that we should be more worried about are the ones you listed such as musical composition and directing. These are jobs that people genuinely enjoy and would enjoy even if they weren't paid. Automating these is always a double-edged sword because while there's a productivity gain, there's also a "meaning of life" loss.

The objective metric of unemployment is the unemployment rate, which is still low. We don't need UBI until that becomes very high.

Edit: Actually it also depends on wages. Due to wage stagnation I guess you could make the case we need UBI already.


Weak-Lengthiness-420 t1_ja6a36n wrote

That was really cool. You do have to wonder how long it will be before AI can simply create a movie with a variety of intricate prompts. What a time to be alive.


SpecialMembership t1_ja6dh5f wrote

it's not singularity its narrow ai.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_ja6l4lq wrote

The singularity=/=AGI

The technological singularity is about the rate of technological growth becoming infinite. Which is theoretically possible with only a bunch of narrow AIs.


turnip_burrito t1_ja78g5n wrote

No, the actual definition is the point in time when technological progress makes predictions of the future useless. Usually in context of AI, but it could also be due to other technology.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6obnd wrote

Diffusion has already created infinite, high quality content. But because the market is already saturated, no one cares.

But the anime market is tiny, as someone else pointed out it has been on life support since 2008. But with this technology you could have infinite amounts of high quality anime.

It's not so much the growth of technology but of value production here that amounts to the singularity, but is the difference relevant to the average consumer?

If say the human in customer support is replaced with an AI and I can't tell from the quality or the cost, then that makes no difference to me, even if it is technically the singularity. But if the quality goes up and cost goes down to me the consumer as a consequence, then yes that is an infinite cycle of evolutionary improvement, and thus the singularity becomes reality to me.


[deleted] t1_ja8126j wrote

yeah but singularity could indeed happen right after AGI. Once it can self-improve the innovation rate could go crazy fast almost instanteneously.


Verzingetorix t1_jaaepwc wrote

I disagree. Super human intelligence could end up making great discoveries but they would not deploy overnight.

Manufacturing would require to repurpose or build new plants. Drugs and therapies would require human testing and regulatory approval. Advances in infrastructure, ground, air and sea transportation would also take time to deploy.

An intelligence explosion will not necessarily result in advances that humans are able to implement and even if they could, they will not magically transform day to day life overnight.


AsthmaBeyondBorders t1_ja6kj6s wrote

Really cool but the flickering is still far from solved


__ingeniare__ t1_ja6z4j2 wrote

Flickering is not solved at the moment yes, but how do you know it is far from being solved? Temporal consistency has already been solved in other aspects of generative AI (like inter-frame interpolation for FPS upscaling). I wouldn't be surprised if flickering is solved by the end of this year. Stable diffusion's Emad has already talked about real-time generated videos coming very soon with a recent breakthrough in their algorithm, allowing for something like 100x generation speedup.


Plus-Recording-8370 t1_jaa70ae wrote

Haven't watched it, but aside from solving the temporal issues, another expected issue when it comes to fluidity is that ai is less likely to chose the same key frames as a human would, thus it all flowing less like we know it. However, that too is not far from being solved either.


dwarfarchist9001 t1_ja6lphv wrote

Purpose made text to video models are already pretty much perfect but there are no open source ones right now.

This is like typing on a keyboard one handed compared to the efficiency that near future models will allow.


ideadude t1_ja7c7ne wrote

FWIW, that was one of the new things in the process behind this video. They applied a fluorescent light deflicker effect to the output from Stable Diffusion (sometimes chaining a few together), and it handled the flicker very well.


Plus-Recording-8370 t1_jaa8jzg wrote

Not far from solved. Don't judge from corridor crew, these guys are always late to the party.


depressedpotato0001 t1_ja69wyq wrote

I'm wondering what is going on with the heavyweights here. I haven't seen news yet of industry leaders adopting this tech for anything unlike Microsoft did with Bing.

People are guessing it is just a matter of time but I'm not seeing the potential of the diffusion models truly capitalized.

Yes this could disrupt animation forever, will it though? Until big companies adopt the tech for their workflow all this talk is just a pipe dream.

Hopefully that changes soon.


SupportstheOP t1_ja6b7ta wrote

Blockbuster had the opportunity to buy Netflix and perhaps later pursue the streaming model, but they never did. Sears had its own catalog that made perfect sense to transition to an online store format, yet they never did. Sometimes, big companies fail because they become stuck in their ways. Meanwhile, a new company eager to find its place can uproot them by embracing the new.


depressedpotato0001 t1_ja6c0qc wrote

Of course, but does Stability.AI has any plans of opening a studio? Or is someone licensing this tech for anything at the moment or financing other diffusion models?

All I see is this, enthusiasts and some content creators playing with it, not enough scale to call for the singularity yet.


Nukemouse t1_ja6qfck wrote

All it really takes is one investor to look at that corridor digital video and think "NEW TECHNOLOGY SILICON VALLEY DISRUPTION MONEY" and we will see those companies begin arising. Even before one produces anything, competitors will arise simply because they saw some other investor do it.


Plus-Recording-8370 t1_jaaasjf wrote

No, investors do already see these things. It's just that the studios will tell them that this is not how it works.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6omc7 wrote

That's where new players can come in and shake up the market. This fx crew could start their own business, create anime and sell it to Netflix. But they'll only have a window of a few months at best.

It's something I've said for a long time: the next Google or Apple or Amazon will come into existence over a very short time, months or weeks or days, and will devalue a lot of existing top companies. AGI will instantly bankrupt Google for one thing, because it's a direct competitor.


Plus-Recording-8370 t1_jaab8a3 wrote

That fx crew business model isn't actual creating production level content, it's YT videos for noobs


-NotAFederalAgent- t1_ja6lixp wrote

Considering the legality surrounding the datasets being used are still shaky at best, most companies probably don't want to take any risks with it.

The alternative could be to build their own datasets which are ethically sourced and thus unable to get them into possible legal trouble, but I assume it's just easier to hire individual artist and VFX specialists at that point.


Plus-Recording-8370 t1_jaaa58s wrote

Because in real production you need something you can actually have control over and rely on. For instance, you want to be able to rerender it exactly the same again, you want to make specific changes. You want every frame to be tailored to your needs. The lack of all such things alike doesn't make it compatible with a modern production pipeline yet. But since most people just want to watch anything, regardless of it being shit, im sure it will be adopted soon.


FormulaicResponse t1_ja6klej wrote

The current stance of the copyright office is that AI generated images cannot be copyrighted because they "lack the human authorship necessary to support a copyright claim."

As soon as various motion picture companies and other countries jump on this though, they will change their tune. They're already copyrighting tons of AI generated books, they just don't know it.


Silphendio t1_ja807r3 wrote

I think there's a big difference between generating an image from a text prompt and using stable diffusion to change the style of an image.

But it doesn't matter in this case, because image composition, effects and screenplay should be sufficient to get a copyright, just like AI generated books can get a copyright for writing and the arrangement of pictures.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6n4d9 wrote

The scary part is that by the time we get a final ruling on this, AI will make the decision.


Beatboxamateur t1_ja6zbvn wrote

I won't deny that at some point the anime industry will probably get swallowed by AI, but this ain't it. Ask almost any anime fan if they like this kind of style and I'm sure you'll get the same answer.

Also, so many aspects of animation can't simply be replicated by live action, look at almost any sakuga fight scene. If people liked rotoscoped animation then the anime industry would simply save money and rotoscope everything, but obviously people don't like that style of animation as much, so it's rarely used.


Freevoulous t1_ja743lu wrote

IMHO, I like this better. The limitations of AI-anime would first and foremost get rid of all the annoying nonsense like deeply Uncanny valley faces, illogical choreography, and impossible anatomy.


NoidoDev t1_ja7egpj wrote

You mean the current anime looks? You are trolling.


Beatboxamateur t1_ja757p9 wrote

> annoying nonsense like deeply Uncanny valley faces, illogical choreography, and impossible anatomy.

These are all things that are unique to animation, and what makes it special to most people. If you don't like these aspects of it, isn't that what live action exists for? Not even just anime, animation in general thrives off of these "annoying" aspects.


User1539 t1_ja7mvf4 wrote

This workflow is going to be something highschool students are making compelling anime with in a few months.

I've already seen an industry basically disappear over night. A friend of mine did work where she'd listen to a meeting, and type it out, highlight important sections, etc ... and she was pretty well paid.

One day they just quit getting work. The head of the company realized that most of their clients went with an AI solution to do the same job for pennies instead being charged $100/hour.

I also had some friends who'd supplement their income doing drawings for people, and that all dried up almost entirely, overnight, last summer when all the AI art generation stuff came out.

Again, just, one day they were making decent money drawing things for people on demand, the next day no one was calling them.

We're at the very, very, beginning stage of this, but we're already seeing it happen, and it's so fast it's insane. One day, people need you to produce something. The next day, they don't, and never will again.


ahtoshkaa2 t1_ja8d9qf wrote

>A friend of mine did work where she'd listen to a meeting, and type it out, highlight important sections, etc ... and she was pretty well paid.

I'm a copywriter by trade.

Fuuuuuuckk... i know this will happen to my field as well.


User1539 t1_ja8nijl wrote

It happened overnight too. Some package got popular and it was something where you could download a file to the package and get a sample, and everyone did it, and never went back.

The place she was working folded by the end of the summer.


ahtoshkaa2 t1_ja95txr wrote

Yeah. I'm waiting for all my clients to drop me... I know they will sooner or later. My only saving grace is that, unlike them, I know English and they don't. So even if they try to interact with ChatGPT, they won't be able to get the same quality output as I am able to.

But this won't last for long...

Are you also working in a vulnerable field that will soon disappear?


User1539 t1_ja96kkl wrote

I write software and I've been sort of avoiding a management position for a while.

I'm starting to think I'm going to end my career managing AI to write the software underpinning the processes management comes up with.

If there's any work to be done at all, it'll probably be in a middle-man position like that, because I can tell you from experience the people making the decisions just don't think logically, and will still need someone to point out logical inconsistencies in their ideas, and work through them to something that can be implemented.

Communication with illogical humans has always been the hardest part of my job, so it'll probably be the last thing AI figures out how to do.


czk_21 t1_jaaaaxe wrote

thing is that "management" can be automated as well, why pay CEO 100million dollars when you can have AI doing that for 100 dollars....


User1539 t1_jaado2e wrote

I don't want to get too deep into what I do for a living, but 'tradition' could probably keep it going for 4-5 generations ... long past my retirement age.

That same sense of tradition will keep people in charge for at least as long.


helloareyouuthere t1_ja6laec wrote

First victim?

Bruh, Chatgpt already taking jobs lol.


sickvisionz t1_ja6o47h wrote

Seems fun. I think actually having to have it recorded in real life would be a limiting factor. Other than that, fun experiment. I could see some type of animation doing stuff like this and then having a small team of artists touch it up and draw on top of it.

As far as actual anime production, I think in-betweeners and backgrounds will be the first things crushed by AI.

I'd be curious to see this applied to manga, given the limitations that already exists like no color, sound, movements, etc. Some of these things have multiple hundreds of issues, all drawn by the same person. An AI could probably be trained on both the literal "in the frame" stuff as well layouts.

Interesting times. I want to see the first voice actors and artists who model themselves and sell it. Those would be interesting business decisions to see play out.


Nukemouse t1_ja6qsh5 wrote

It doesn't necessarily have to be live action. Using 3D models, draft sketches or even stop motion you could create whatever "base" necessary for the AI to build upon to make its final product. Lets say for example that rather than a big company im an indie artist, i might just hop on a video game like second life or something, act out and record the stuff i want, then ask it to overlay a different "actor" doing the stuff on top in a different art style.


JackFisherBooks t1_ja7ft8p wrote

I think the anime industry was already primed to take advantage of this technology. Since its inception, anime has always tried to do more with less. It had to because for so long, the industry struggled to keep production costs low. Now, here's a new technology that will help accelerate that effort. It's a bit unrefined now. But after a few years of development and investment, I have a feeling the anime industry and the animation industry as a whole will be in a very different place.


84384047a t1_ja7a8li wrote

Slightly different idea, why not take some basic looking crappy CGI and modify the art style, maybe a lot less work, maynot work. But one thing This will definitely get rid of the is crappy CGI anime, well guys , i think it's over no more crappy CGI anime


razorbeamz t1_ja6x3fj wrote

Within the next three years there will be a feature length movie made with this technique.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6xqn0 wrote

These guys just created a 6 minute anime of really high quality using a fully automated process, once it was set up most of the effort went into acting in front of a green screen.

Now that they've set this up, my question is why not create a feature length movie by next week?

I mean someone like Kevin Smith can write a whole movie script in an hour, probably has tons laying around. All he needs to do is contact them, offer to work together for free, get in some acting and voice talent, offer his script and directing skills, and it'll be finished in a week.


Clawz114 t1_ja77vbe wrote

Sorry, but this was not a "fully automated process" by any means. Not even remotely close. Did you not see the bit where the dude manually placed all of the 250+ camera angles inside their scene? There was a tonne of human hours put into making this.

I think you are massively underestimating the effort that went into the creation of this thing.


Lip_Recon t1_ja7x0xq wrote

Yeah, the main difference is this was done in 2 months by 3 people, instead of dozens or hundreds.


razorbeamz t1_ja6yj7g wrote

> Now that they've set this up, my question is why not create a feature length movie by next week?

Because feature length movies take a lot of time to make.


Freevoulous t1_ja73xs6 wrote

But we already HAVE millions of movies. Why not say, take an old movie like the Predator or ALIENS and re-do them as animations?


NotASuicidalRobot t1_ja8epdk wrote

That's called copyright infringement


Freevoulous t1_ja9o9sh wrote

no, I mean it if the studios that owned the movies did it themselves.


NotASuicidalRobot t1_jac5vz6 wrote

Oh ok. Still, i feel like if this becomes a "wave" it's going to be worse than the bunch of live action films Disney insists on "remaking" their old animations into


Freevoulous t1_ja73vkn wrote

the main problem I see, you still need actors and stuntmen, which ends up being more/equal expensive as pure animation.

IMHO, the first move should be to take old action movies and re-do them as animations.

Like say, anime-up the original Predator, frame by frame, and put it in the cinemas again.


NoidoDev t1_ja7e88y wrote

Why? It's about creating different stories. People don't just watch anime because it looks like anime.


bitchslayer78 t1_ja75x2b wrote

So this is how we finally get a decent Berserk anime


KamikazeArchon t1_ja71c4z wrote

The technological details are neat.

Turning live action into anime, however, doesn't really seem like a "killer app". Certainly I could be mistaken, but a cursory examination suggests that live action is more expensive than animation - at the high end, significantly more expensive. They handwave savings from "using fewer people", but it's unclear that this would actually bring the costs down to where it just equals the cost of animation, much less below it.

Developing new animation based on existing animation is a separate and much more clearly "cost-efficient" course.


GreatBigJerk t1_ja8xpox wrote

There are text to video generators being worked on now. Some are looking promising. In a few years, some combination of these techniques could eliminate the need for live actors.

Also, this technique could be done using 3D animations as the base. It could turn something rough into something pretty damn professional.


azriel777 t1_ja743zz wrote

What I really want is AI to be able to bring back the old hand drawn Cell Shaded art that had so much detail and life that was common in the 90's. The current CGI stuff coming out in anime is so flat, bare minimum and generic looking.


GreatBigJerk t1_ja8x2by wrote

I mean that's what Cooridor Crew were going for. It isn't perfect, but it's proof that the style can come back.


Ken_Sanne t1_ja6nlk7 wrote

Recently read about text to video generative AIs, the whole tv show and movie industry is about to get disrupted.


Furrulo878 t1_ja6t66e wrote

Yes and no, Part of what makes animation so appealing is that with enough skill, anything you can imagine can be done: a dog would never turn into a horse but jake the dog can do it. Now, with this new “full AI” technique, you may be able to make nice and dynamic scenes, but it may not be able to make everything, think about the fight sequences in jujutsu kaisen, at what point does recreating the choreography becomes impossible for real life actors? Will using this ai technique remove some of the fluid and dynamic movements? It may be possible to recreate with camera tricks and cables, but it won’t look fluid, this kind of sequences are so unreal, so exaggerated that even trying to emulate them in a low budget might be too demanding and won’t give the expected results. So, in short, yes this technique will be used to make production times shorter, but in doing so the genere as a whole risks to loose its real appeal, anime is not just waifus or husbandos, it’s sakuga, it’s imagination and impossible situations brought to life. So the path forward I see is that this technique may be used for the boring static conversation shots that plague the genere while making them a lot better, a lot more animated while keeping the sakugas for the high demand scenes.


LordSprinkleman t1_ja7m4b0 wrote

Except you're forgetting that this won't be limited to redrawing live action recordings. 3d models, drawings, dozens of things I'm not thinking of could easily be used here as a base to build the animation from. Saying this tech isn't useful because live action isn't fluid and dynamic is such a basic and unrealistic idea of what's actually possible here.


Furrulo878 t1_ja7z6cr wrote

Never said it’s not useful, quite the opposite, it’s a tool that will revolution artistic production. What I meant is that ai is still not replacing human part in the process completely just yet, even using 3d and drawings you would still need some humans to do it, that’s it.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja6wlwx wrote

If you train it on an example, then yes it can learn any style you want. With the right prompts you can take it from there.

If you want it to learn a brand new style, you'll have to tell it to make stuff up and then spend a lot of time sifting through the output. Or you can give it some rough examples what you want as inspiration and go from there.

Already it becomes extremely hard to differentiate between AI and human content, and if you mix the two (AI still struggles with hands) then it becomes truly indistinguishable.


Furrulo878 t1_ja702ig wrote

It still wouldn’t be able to convey a narrative, so much so that the video you shared uses a live action base to keep it together, but how would they be able to do that with the high action scenes that are the anime money shot? My argument is not that ai is just a fad or will become obsolete, quite the opposite, ai will be a tool on every artistic production, but like every tool it’s not perfect, some human intervention is still needed at least in the foreseeable future. Anime (along with a lot of animation productions) will change, but human made animation will still be needed, it’s just they won’t have to churn out inhuman volumes of work (animators are among the most exploited jobs in the art entertainment industry) and instead will be able to focus their expertise in works that will be more fulfilling for them. Ai is a good thing for artists, it makes their life easier


vernes1978 t1_ja77kig wrote

Great for youtube productions.
Those who have eaten Ghibli anime do not share you enthusiasm.
(I can't believe I typed enthusiasm correctly in one go)


play_yr_part t1_ja7cm26 wrote

just what we need, even more lazy trash on our streaming services

careful curation is good, actually


j_dog99 t1_ja7l4nc wrote

This might be off on a tangent, But with the increase in memory and processing power I wonder if it would be advantageous to slice the content of a film into Pixel vectors instead of frame vectors, i.e. the data would consist of a pixels worth of data blocks, each containing a vector of that pixel's RGB value from from frame 0 to final frame. Currently machine learning on video data consists of blocks of data containing a frame of pixels, not a 'pixel of frames'


TheBoundFenrir t1_ja9s36d wrote

Relevant; they mention that it took their studio 2 months to create the 8-minute video. So while they developed a process that works, and that spared them having to hire any animators/artists, their process isn't yet completely removing the anime industry. Just downsizing it, and that's if you have enough pre-existing art in the style you're wanting to operate in. They also had to custom-train a model with the artstyle and each character/actor to get the faces stable.

I'm super excited for what creators will make using this process, but it's not going to be toppling an entire industry just yet.

I bet Netflix downsized because the animations weren't getting enough views and decided to cut their losses.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaaqc7v wrote

Well that's the question, now that they've set up the process, how long would it take to repeat it? A month, a week, a day? Can other people pay them to use the process? Can other people copy their process for free? Has filming on Avatar 5 started yet?

On top of that, you're forgetting about AI. How long will it take AI to figure out how to do this process and automate it? Then you just pick a movie as a style guide, tape yourself doing something, and the AI will turn it into an anime instantly.

Whatever the reason Netflix did it, they are now in a position to jump on new technology.


duffmanhb t1_ja7cc6u wrote

Just posting criticism because that's more interesting: The problem it's going to encounter, especially based off their video, is human acting is far from exaggerated animation. Animation has a smooth flow to it with intense extremes when wanted. That's something the AI can't really replicate.


No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_ja7f0sc wrote

I did an OpenGL course once but had to bail because of a more important project. Bought a book and attended classes. A friend of mine made a rough animation of several seconds without sound. I guess it is fun to do stuff like that. But what will the professionals do now? Maybe they will teach amateurs for a while. If teachers get replaced...


randomredditor87 t1_ja7j0b2 wrote

I am quite certain Netflix will release some animated show this year that we later find out is actually mostly AI generated without directly mentioning it.


SkaldCrypto t1_ja7ka2f wrote

What? They just found a more expensive way to make anime.

Shooting live action is much more costly than the slave wages you can pay animators in Japan.

"Hiroyuki Moriyama mentioned that wages for artists in their early twenties can be as low as 1.1 million yen (USD$9,500) annually."

From a Tokyo law firm. My own research has found an average closer to 30k. Roughly $15 an hour, or less than my McDonalds pays.


PoliteThaiBeep t1_ja7mjt6 wrote

It's very interesting and indeed a huge progress, but arguably the most difficult part of story telling is hiring actors.

Maybe it isn't for big studios, but it is for a myriad of small studios. So real progress is when you don't have to hire an actor. When you can use voice generators, and sequential video generation - that's where the real shock is.

Because as soon as this happens to be available to single storytellers without any stuff, even at relatively low quality - it will transform the whole industry.


SomeNoveltyAccount t1_ja7qi6j wrote

The singularity hasn't happened yet.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_ja7u8et wrote

I'd like to see every secret AI lab in the world before I'll believe it.


ArgentStonecutter t1_ja8128z wrote

Whether some people have developed a possible trigger for the singularity or no, the singularity itself hasn't happened because if it had we would be scurrying like rodents around the virtual feet of intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, if we even still existed in corporeal form.


SomeNoveltyAccount t1_ja88fzh wrote

The singularity isn't something that can be hidden.

If there's an AI that's capable of starting the singularity but is being contained in a secret lab then the singularity still hasn't happened.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaavwh2 wrote

Well if I made an ASI, I wouldn't tell anyone about it, and just use it to trade the stock markets until I own everything, and no one would ever know it was AI related. I might become famous as being the smartest and richest man in the world, I'll have to start wearing a top hat and a monocle, but no one would suspect it's really thanks to the ASI, "because that can't be hidden".

On top of that I'd get the ASI to develop cutting edge technologies. The most obvious being software, I'd tell it to develop next gen viruses and crypto and apps, but to make it look like a human might have designed it. I'd use those to gain more control over the world, but no one would suspect it's really thanks to the ASI, "because that can't be hidden".

And with all those resources I'd start companies, and tell the ASI to design next gen technologies and products that my companies would build. I'd be considered the smartest man alive, creating things that no human ever thought of, but no one would suspect it's really thanks to the ASI, "because that can't be hidden".

And with my unfathomable wealth I'd finally create really advanced technologies in secret, where the ASI doesn't have to pretend a human could have designed it. Things like teleportation and telepathy, which I'd use in secret to become the ruler of the entire world. And people will wonder how I became so powerful, how I could do things that can't be explained, but no one would suspect it's really thanks to the ASI, "because that can't be hidden".


KultofEnnui t1_ja7tky1 wrote

But can it fix the voice-over problems?


HuemanInstrument t1_ja86psa wrote

the anime industry has always kept up with the times, implementing new methods and such to produce their animations, this isn't any different, they may use these methods or they may not, it doesn't mean anime is over by any means.

And as a huge anime fan I can tell the difference, it would annoy me to watch an anime like that, animes fans get pretty anal about the visuals myself included.

not to say that this won't happen though! I'm looking forward to asking a.i. to give me new episodes of my favorite anime


thecoffeejesus t1_ja86siw wrote

This is really incredible. I want to work in the AI industry so bad.

I have a degree in journalism, maybe I should start by writing opinion pieces on Medium…


Laicbeias t1_ja8c7qs wrote

i mean anime is anime. you have had it with 3d render models and others. the user will most likely able to tell.
what can be hoped for is that this can be used to speed up their way of drawing. man if they just can make a car turn the right way while the camera moves, that be a win.

good animes are drawn by genius animators, if you watch it frame by frame it looks weird, but they make it so that it has all the energy of movement in the right place. its one of the most hard things in the world. just try to draw an movement that follows frame by frame. i do not think AI can copy that.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaar5us wrote

>i do not think AI can copy that.

Back in 2019 Google said they'd make an announcement concerning their AI playing Starcraft. As we discussed what it might be, some people commented that it'd never be able to beat a top player, the game was just too complex. Then Google announced the AI had beaten the top world player in every game, several months earlier.


Laicbeias t1_jaawtso wrote

yeah but how can we train that. even if we show it the best anime artists that use certain technics. it can copy style and it may can follow up on animation. but real high end animations im thinking of are set together in your brain. if you look at them on how they are animated frame by frame they make no sense. for the coming years ai will do amazing things. but i think from the current transformer based, diffusion and reconstructing we may just get another style filter that looks cool but not 100% fitting. i think we may not be able to shake that unnatural feeling that comes with those ais for quite some time. but happy to be wrong


nexus3210 t1_ja9ok0t wrote

I studied 3D animation in college and this is a complete game changer. Something like this would take countless people and months to make and now the bulk of the work the AI is able to do in one day. Mind freaking blown!


ThMogget t1_jaa9ftb wrote

This is not anime, not even close. It doesn’t look like it or feel like it. It’s cool and new and deserves a chance, but call it something else.

One of the great features of anime is its ability to show us the impossible. Things that might never work with live action, no matter how much CGI you throw at it. This method starts with the limits of live action and goes from there.

This reminds me a bit of graphic novels that are made from real photos and then stylized from there. It’s a cool new look, but it’s also limited in form.


Flatlander93 t1_jaaaump wrote

I would like to know if they had any conversation with the originators of Vampire Hunter D, sorry don't follow anime so I don't know who that is. The issue of IP is different here from the Ai image generators that have caused so much controversy among the artist community where digital and physical images were scraped from the Internet and used as seed for the Ai to learn from. I think they avoided the conundrum because they used the Vampire Hunter D film to train the Ai in a style and then processed their own original images into the style with the help of the Ai. I don't see a difference between what they did and a creative director saying, "give me a caricature in the Anime style" to an illustrator.
Basically, I think that what we are seeing is a base change in the visual art for entertainment space. Some people are going to get left behind by the technology.

I can see the other side of the issue too. If we allow training Ai in this way without permission or compensation to the originator of the art used as input, then we deny the originator any say in the use of their art. Ever since the first cave paintings there have been originators and wannabes. But, isn't that where all originators of art start out? They wanted to be an artist for whatever reason. Unless they were insanely gifted they started by trying to copy some other person's art. Until, through seemingly endless repetition they made their own original work.


Ok_Sea_6214 OP t1_jaapi7g wrote

Yeah AI is set to change our laws. The problem here is that they admitted that they used this specific anime as a basis, but if they hadn't or used something else, or mixed up different styles, then it becomes pretty impossible to tell.

It'll come down to governments, if they side with the old guard they'll declare style is IP and knee cap this art. At which point all AI movies will be generated in a country that doesn't give two cents about IP and doesn't care to force people to disclose what material they trained the model on.

Our laws are based on human efforts, and as I said before, AI is going to smash right through that.

For example if you create an AI that kills people because you trained it on The Terminator to it could make a sequel, then are you to blame? Is the AI? How do you punish an AI? What if the AI creates a slight variation, is that AI also dangerous? Is it a copy or a relative?

So yeah this is the Singularity in my opinion, because it is changing a whole industry with just a sample.


Flatlander93 t1_jab9zs3 wrote

I understand. I believe there is a long way to go between Ai (trained on one specific task) and AI (generalized human level or greater machine intelligence). So, a killer Ai would be able to rant madly in it's interface but stopping the process would end that.
On the IP question, there are lots of messy details that get in the way. In this case, is the IP of "Style" owned by the originators or has the whole property fallen into public domain? Issues and questions around permissions and definitions of IP will be hard fought. For me, if the current owners were contacted and asked permission, then it clearly lands in the "in the style of" area and it becomes a moot point, Who would object to an art director telling staff, "I'd like to see some concept panels in the style of "A Starry Night"? It is a very interesting piece of work. They need better dialogue though.


messerschmidt96 t1_jaaph65 wrote

My plan is to build a video game by linking all these tools


Cr4zko t1_ja69gf2 wrote

The anime industry pretty much declined after the fallout of the 2008 stock market crash and never recovered since. It was never the same.


EpicLites t1_ja6divu wrote

care to provide any more specifics?


Cr4zko t1_ja6ekeo wrote

You'll probably find amazing dissertations on the matter over at ranime but basically while we didn't get the sheer amount of anime we do today we had better produced shows and untested IPs had their shot to get an anime adaptation. Today they make anime on the basis of 'what profits more' and most studios heavily outsource to taiwan and korea because the industry simply can't handle the pressure being put on it by having 40+ shows airing at the same season. Animators are literally dying from overwork. It wasn't this bad when the japanese economy imploded in the early 90ies (the problem of the day was a bunch of OVAs being left unfinished, this killed the OVA market) so I'm not really sure what gives. But at least for me I can say anime peaked in 2007.


GreatBigJerk t1_ja8z40b wrote

What, you're saying a season full of anime named stuff like "That time I was reincarnated as a slime demon lord with slave harem in an RPG" isn't high quality?


ilesdelamadmeme t1_ja6popz wrote

Corridor Crew FTW

Love these guys they are amazing at what they do. So much entertaining and witty!


Bierculles t1_ja75v6i wrote

This is really cool but anyone who worked on animation for even 5 minutes knows that mocap stuff like this does not replace anime, they are way too diffrent.


NoidoDev t1_ja7dkch wrote

&gt;victim: the anime industry

You got it wrong: More anime will mean less audience for other productions. Smaller players will be able to enter the market.

&gt;allowing them to create sequels with the exact same actors and styles, or spinoffs in the same style but with completely different characters.

This doesn't necessarily work and stories also matter.

&gt;Netflix is posed to be the biggest benefactor of this new trend

There are other anime studios, the good anime in Netflix came from Japan, and the tech will make it easier for smaller productions. If the tech exists, then Netflix doesn't own it.

&gt;as well as the funds

They're broke as hell


I doubt it.


Arseypoowank t1_ja7dbnw wrote

Interesting video but I couldn’t get past that dudes excited self satisfied face and wavy arm movements, shame they couldn’t AI that out really