
Bill Hader Channels Tom Cruise – DeepFake [video] - sinak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWrhRBb-1Ig
======
echelon
Does anyone know what models / software this person is using? I assume it's
something off the shelf, because there are an abundance of other videos in
this space produced by different people:

[https://www.cnet.com/news/parks-and-recreation-ron-
swanson-d...](https://www.cnet.com/news/parks-and-recreation-ron-swanson-
deepfaked-as-every-full-house-sitcom-character/)

I've been doing ML for audio (Tacotron, WaveRNN, etc.), but haven't stepped
into the video world. I also work in film and want to apply this technique to
my work.

How do they keep the frames from blurring or not needing to be rekeyed? The
motion tracking is spot-on.

Would someone operating in this space be open to meeting over Hangouts or
Skype to discuss the tech? I'd be happy to pay someone for a short survey of
the space.

~~~
kibibu
Pretty sure most of these crew are using DeepFaceLab,
[https://github.com/iperov/DeepFaceLab](https://github.com/iperov/DeepFaceLab)

This was in the news for being the first(?) public GitHub repo that you needed
an account to access. I believe to try and stem the tide of deepfake revenge
porn or celebrity porn.

~~~
pragmatick
The shots in the gallery aren't nearly as impressive, though...

------
pwinnski
This video is helped by some superficial similarity between Hader and Cruise,
and the transition to and from Seth Rogen's face is slightly less smooth.
Still, this is incredibly well done.

~~~
manjana
The unsettling part is how fast the quality of deep fakes seems to have
improved, to me that's unsettling.

------
anonu
The Arnold Schwarzenegger video from the same guys is arguably better:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPhUhypV27w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPhUhypV27w)

~~~
dylan604
Why have they not made the actual video they discuss with a baby's body in a
diaper with Arnie's head on it. That would be classic.

------
whamlastxmas
This is the first deep fake I've seen that was good enough to fool a random
Facebook user that wasn't looking for fakeness. Cool how far it's come.

~~~
pfalafel
Your friend was fooled to think that Hader did that on his own?

~~~
oliyoung
I'm technologically experienced enough to be posting and reading on HN.

It fooled me on the first view, I just didn't even see it, it was seamless.

~~~
manjana
Me as well, I thought to my self ' _that dude has some resemblance to Tom
Cruise_ ' for a second and the next moment the similarity had dissapeared and
I fully dismissed my initial reaction since he afterwards had no real
resemblance.. Dismissed it and thought my mind had played a trick on me
because of sleepiness or something. Only after glancing the video comments
(after first full view) did I understand what was going on.

~~~
maroonblazer
Same. I came across this clip a few days ago without the context.

It's a little embarrassing frankly. I kept thinking that he's such a good
impersonator that he's able to manipulate his facial muscles in just such a
way as to embody Tom Cruise.

My defenses are now up a bit higher.

------
Deimorz
Same creator as "Bill Hader impersonates Arnold Schwarzenegger", which I think
is easier to see the shift in since there's less resemblance and higher
quality:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPhUhypV27w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPhUhypV27w)

~~~
JshWright
I think the subtlety of Hader/Cruise makes it even more disturbing.

~~~
tictoc
What's disturbing is that people think he's literally shape shifting. Or they
are trolling and I am getting too affected by it.

------
aegirth
Same user also did the Jim Carrey in Shining deepfake which is as well done as
this and at times really unsettling. From now on I can safely say that I can't
trust any video footage I see. This is that well done. The algos will only get
better and do a convincing blend in 4K in the future.

~~~
hunta2097
Those The Shining clips are simply the best. Here is another that always make
me chuckle:

[https://youtu.be/aUphMqs1vFw](https://youtu.be/aUphMqs1vFw) [Full House of
Mustaches]

~~~
anonu
Thank you for that link. As a kid growing up in the 90s, that is just pure
gold. Cant believe it only has 3000 views...

~~~
ralfd
It is a repost as YouTube removed the original.

------
jasode
Once that deep fake technology algorithm gets in the hands of the masses
(Adobe Premiere After Effects plugin, Instagram/Snapchat filter, Apple
Facetime filter, etc) ... so many obvious directions it will take:

\- dating / flirting apps

\- job candidates being interviewed remotely via webcams will use software to
make them look younger

\- "facelift" every television personality (news anchors, etc) and every movie
actor. Both for creative purposes (younger/older timeline aging), for vanity,
and for extending careers.

\- generate fake but convincing political ads to put words in the mouth of
opponent that he/she never said

\- a growing distrust and skepticism of all videos _including archive footage_
because we never had SHA256 authenticated hash of the old videos widely
disseminated _before_ deepfakes became ultrarealistic. E.g. There will be a
subset of tomorrows kids that will not be convinced JFK ever actually said, _"
landing a man on the moon"_. The WTC towers were never hit by airplanes. All
that old footage will be dismissed as fake. Video evidence becomes useless.
Yes, society will try to counteract it with software the detects deep fakes
but some of the public still won't be convinced. (Same as evidence against
anti-vaccine being rejected.)

~~~
pcmaffey
Counterpoints:

1\. We don't have videos of The Gettysburg address. History existed before
video.

2\. There will never be another generation (in the near future) like boomers
who didn't grow up tech savvy

3\. Videos, like any form of documentation, are anecdotal evidence easily
manipulated by what's "not in the frame"

4\. The general problem you are describing comes from a faulty attribution of
truth to video in our current day and age. The sooner we dismiss that the
better

Yes, the transition will be awkward, but no need for hysteria.

~~~
jonahx
I don't know if there's need for hysteria, but I think this is a much bigger
change than you're making it out to be. It's a different league than artful
editing and framing.

------
batbomb
I've been thinking a lot about this one, and it gets a ton of help in the fact
that Bill Hader is actually good at facial impressions, and that's what really
sells it.

~~~
hesk
Yeah, he really nails Tom Cruise's mannerisms when he shakes his head at 1:27.

------
11thEarlOfMar
Directors can use any actor to portray any character, and then make the
character appear any way they want. Decouples acting talent from appearance.

Peter Jackson's Bolg and Azog could have been much more convincing, just 7
years on.

~~~
paxys
It isn't too hard to image a future where actors no longer sell their skills
but rather just their name and likeness. And – similar to photoshop or
autotune — expressions, dialog, posture and everything else can be edited as
needed.

~~~
l33tbro
How does one become a name actor then?

Assuming you mean they build up a name and then license their image ... I'm
not sure you've met an actor before. This goes against every impulse of a
great actor. They're completely obsessed with controlling their image and
practicing their craft.

I think you may have meant celebrities.

~~~
krapp
>They're completely obsessed with controlling their image and practicing their
craft.

I'm sure textile workers said the same thing before their skill and craft was
replaced by a machine. Every artist and artisan thinks they're irreplaceable.
Currently, many programmers think theirs is the only industry that can't be
automated because there's some magical golden juice in their minds that
produces some creative and intellectual quality no machine will ever be able
to replicate. Like textile workers of old, their time will come too.

As much as actors may want their work to be art, their work is also product.
When it becomes possible to manufacture an acceptable equivalent product
through automation, then artists of all stripes will simply have to adapt to
the new terms of the market like everyone else, or find other work. No one is
going to care about the effort an actor puts into their performance when it
becomes feasible to pay a few dollars to stream Marlon Brando into the
original Star Wars.

~~~
l33tbro
Elite actors of the world are extremely rare, talented individuals. They
compete in one of the most cut-throat fields I can think of. How is that
analogous to a textile worker?

As long as there are humans, then actors, musicians, dancers, etc will be
fine. People are fascinated with artists because they demonstrate a spectacle
of skill and a genius which we don't have.

~~~
krapp
>Elite actors of the world are extremely rare, talented individuals. They
compete in one of the most cut-throat fields I can think of. How is that
analogous to a textile worker?

The textile workers replaced by automation were also once extremely rare,
talented individuals. Rugs were once prized works of art, infused with culture
and artisanal techniques passed down through generations. Now you can buy them
at Wal-Mart. Unfortunately, the post-industrial market doesn't optimize for
skill, it optimizes against it.

>People are fascinated with artists because they demonstrate a spectacle of
skill and a genius which we don't have.

Most people aren't fascinated with skill and genius, they're fascinated with
celebrity. Art isn't made to be appreciated nowadays, it's mass produced to be
consumed like fast food, with little regard beyond the immediate satisfaction
it provides, and the familiar comfort of mediocrity.

Sure, there will always be a place for human artists, dancers, musicians, etc,
just as there is still a place for people who can weave rugs. But I do believe
that most mainstream art will be automated as soon as the result is acceptable
to the mainstream, and that includes automating the persona of the artist as
well.

~~~
l33tbro
Artisanal textile workers, categorically, were not as talented as elite actors
because the size of their competitive pool and the barriers to creating work
were minuscule compared to that of Hollywood actors - who emigrate from all
over the globe and assimilate to US culture to use their talent.

While a lot of cultural products (not art) like movies and shows are created
like fast food, people are drawn to them because of the unique talent,
charisma, looks, presence etc of the actors that participate. I don't see
Avengers: End Game breaking box office records if it didn't have those
rarefied individuals.

If you go back to my initial post, I pondered whether the original comment
meant celebrity.

------
SketchySeaBeast
Some of the tracking is still janky, but I'm surprised by the transitions - I
can see when they shift, but I don't see any weird morph.

~~~
Waterluvian
I think our brains are helping the transition along, given that before and
after are both believably configured faces.

~~~
SketchySeaBeast
Totally, but that's exact same for our brain fooling us about the motion
itself. And in motions case our brain throws in interpolated middle frames,
not so in the face morph.

------
benburleson
Is the (poor) video quality intentional? I'm curious if that is used to
disguise the effects, or just due to the original video.

~~~
kickopotomus
I believe it is due to the quality of the original video:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS1Aee2X3Yc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS1Aee2X3Yc)

------
tombert
These are super cool, but it makes me wonder how much longer before we get to
an era where video evidence is no-longer admissible in court.

Yeah, you can see occasional artifacts and glitches with current deepfakes,
but surely the software will only get better.

~~~
29athrowaway
Clipping a video, reordering scenes, or reversing it, or just showing it in
the wrong context can be enough to manipulate the viewer.

We should add integrity checks and digital signatures to videos.

~~~
tombert
That's an interesting idea; how would you go about suggesting we do that? Have
some kind of hardware-signing thing that we put into video cameras, and sign
every keyframe with it before its written to the SD card?

~~~
29athrowaway
Reusing concepts from existing DRM technology.

------
b_tterc_p
I feel like it was just last year when some deep fakes were coming out and
people waved them off as having obvious artifacts and too easy to ignore

------
buboard
I thought these effects were going to be real fun, but it's kind of spooky and
scary now. Perhaps good for horror movies.

------
kcolford
I don't see any change throughout the video. I don't see tom cruise even once.
Where is he?

~~~
echelon
Tom Cruise was the source video. His face has been replaced by Bill Hader.

~~~
kcolford
Ah, I've never seen the source video so that's why I didn't pick up on it.

~~~
herenorthere
I can't tell if you both are joking or not but watch the whole video. The
source video is of Bill Hader. Bill hader's face changes to Tom Cruise
everytime he talks from Tom's perspective. And then once to Seth Rogan for
that impersonation.

~~~
kcolford
I honestly can't see much change in the face throughout the video.

It probably doesn't help that I am so horrible at celebrities that I couldn't
picture Tom Cruise or Bill Hader in my head if I tried, nor do I know what
they're famous for. I just know that Tom Cruise sounds familiar and everyone
seems to act like Bill Hader is significant so I go along with it.

I guess there's a some change in the face when he switches "voices". It's not
nearly as exciting as the one of Obama saying stuff he's never said before
though.

~~~
antonvs
If you know Bill Hader's face, the change to Cruise is pretty obvious. The
Cruise resemblance is subtle but strong.

Part of the point with fakes like this is it's not just gluing a head on
someone else's body, like a bad photoshop. It's actually changing the facial
features of the target to resemble someone else.

------
dylan604
Only on LSD have I seen faces change that seamlessly. There were a couple of
spots that I noticed the transition, but that was like the 3rd viewing. I hope
I never piss off someone with these abilities to make me say/do things I'd
never imagine. The damage that can be done is mind boggling when used for that
purpose.

------
throw7

       Photos do not lie, it is said. But frequently they tell partial
       truths. They tear moments out of time's flowing river and separate
       them from what has come before and what will follow. They can
       misrepresent as well as represent.
    
                    - JIM HOAGLAND

~~~
EForEndeavour
And that's before we even begin to discuss intentional manipulation.

------
Semiapies
I liked this Tom Cruise Deepfake by Node from a month back:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vHvOyZ0GbY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vHvOyZ0GbY)

(With making-of.)

