I don't want to diminish how interesting the path is, but in my experience, it's still too far out of the way and too purpose-driven to have the organic spontaneity of a good third space.
Indeed, on the first point, I live in a condo connected to the path, so obviously extremely useful for me. Not sure if you've been inside recently, but as I mentioned the renovations they've done in the core core core (2-3 blocks of CIBC tower) has really opened it up, before it was just a tunnel to me, it's slowly turning into a "place" - but I do overall agree today it's not quite there for most of the core (and will never be great for those outside it, it's way too hard to navigate if you don't use it daily)
This is one job I am actually hopeful will be fully automated. I've heard before that the people doing this 'tween' frames make less than minimum wage on contract.
That being said, I'm sure this is going to take a while to fully replace the manual efforts. There will probably be awkward phase in between the outset and the perfect modelling efforts, and I'm sure lower budget shows (or ones looking to cut corners) will be the early adopters.
Anime already cuts corners by using cheap 3d models in place of 2d hand drawn objects.
The more rigid the object, the better this works. 3d cars look better than 2d cars, even in an otherwise 2d show. Mechs look a bit worse. And human characters look horrible.
Yet anime studios still do it. Including for critical highlight scenes like dance scenes (Check out Love live dance scens), because it is so, so hard to draw humans dancing.
So if anime studios are willing to do something, that looks obviously bad, as a widespread practice. There'll be 0 barriers to AI inbetweening adaptation, which would likely look BETTER than human inbetweening within a year of release.
AI anime art has already wiped out the lower-end of patreon artists, and is heavily impacting the mid-tier. Because AI has gotten more technically proficient than the average mid-tier artist. Pretty much only the higher-end can hold their heads above water. Or they have to transition to drawing comics with storylines, instead of just simple images.
A lot of the dancing stuff is about the ability to spin the camera around a moving subject to the music, which is quite difficult otherwise.
There's a lot of impressive work in 3D animation that looks quite good. Outside of Bandai Namco's work on idol anime, Studio Orange has made some of the best looking 3D modeled anime lately and a few other studios have been getting into it. I'm more familiar with video game animation, where Arcsys Works has made great strides too, by using animation on threes, manual tweening, stretch and squish bones, and carefully UV mapped textures for crisp color boundaries.
It was a major consideration for Initial D, which is pretty much the definitive car anime. Animating movement in tandem with dynamic camera movement is very difficult (also why shows like Love Live use 3DCGI for dance scenes, and why Disney was using 3D elements in films like Beauty and the Beast) and modeling accurate vehicle physics in hand drawn animation is also difficult. It simply wouldn't have been viable without 3D animation.
I have never seen Bluey but from the software you linked it is clear that it looks 2D because of how inconsistent the character looks at different angles, for example when you rotate the character the mouth changes position, the hands jump from one sprite to another, it's cel shading with a lot of 2D element on top, it works with simple animation but for anime I'm not optimistic.
I've seen 3D animation where the people are still quite fluid and not awful to look at. Not as good as 2D animation but still pretty good and more than watchable.
Friend, but anime was never about quality of animation. In fact, it was a prime example how to cut corners to get to animations. That was always the case. It doesn't reflect on the quality of character designs, environments, storytelling, camera action, directing, etc. Motion was not one of them; Never was. Anime is the first place I'd expect to see new ground breaking, just like it was with all the tools from 90's onwards (Toonz, anyone?).
Anime is much better at action animation than anyone else, simply because noone else remembers how to do it because they've stopped trying.
I'm not sure if I'll be able to find this, but there's an episode of Steven Universe with an extended reference to a scene from Kill la Kill of a transformation sequence.
It looks maybe 1% as good; not only that, but the character turns into a pure white silhouette for the entire transformation because it doesn't have a character design suitable for being transformed. (Instead it has one designed to make the animators' lives easier.)
Most of that could be dealt with via proper compositing of the shots and managing the layers/lights. When it's good, you only recognize the 3d computer drawn effect because it's so good that you realize no human could have ever done this.
When it's bad, you recognize that it's janky crap tier 3d animation from a company that either didn't care or was put under such a tight timeline that they simply couldn't care.
> I've heard before that the people doing this 'tween' frames make less than minimum wage on contract.
An employee of an animation company describes in a comic book his experience on working with people drawing the in-between frames. They were paid literally with rice bags [1].
Speaking what might be obvious, but I would love a social media experience optimized in a similar way to this: Least amount of time & attention spent on the platform while facilitating the most in-human contact.
Morality aside, I do like the open source work coming out of Meta. It's possible for a company to be "bad guys" in one area, and "good guys" in another.
Preposterous, it’s not like Zuck got on the horn with his algorithm devs and was like “let’s get rid of some people in Myanmar in a really roundabout way.” Do you hold the guy behind Curl to the same standard every time his software gets used in a way he didn’t intend?
Basically it's accusing Meta of should have knowing that their algorithm and their user generated stickers was spreading this content.
Yes in an ideal world they should catch any campaign of this sort, but global moderation is difficult and they offer no proof that Meta knew about this.
It's disingenuous to say that Meta agitated this event. Those specific users of Meta agitated it and Meta did not catch it.
> Yes in an ideal world they should catch any campaign of this sort, but global moderation is difficult
It really isn't, it just is expensive to do it. They could just hire people to do that. Thats the accusation. Of course they don't catch it if they don't try.
Meta (or TikTok or Twitter or any other social media company/product) can't both algorithmically create specific types of discourse (because higher engagement means more ad views) and deny responsiblity for the side effects of said discourse.
It would be difficult to manage, but not impossible. Certainly if you have a strong organizational culture and know what your org values. Like universities, for example. At least in the past.
Otherwise you’re just dependent on the popularity of the market, which I don’t think is a great thing all of the time. There are a lot of things I’d enjoy reading or writing that have zero monetary value and thus are strongly incentivized against existing.
You just discovered what a corporation is. Corporations have "boards" that decide what is "good" and can invest in those things to develop them and sell them or give them away with approval from this board. The corporation receives funding from customers and investors to keep going.
The main roadblock for content creators is the distribution channels. Content creators require attention. Attention is the hardest thing to obtain. TikTok broke through and stole lots of attention away from YouTube. Content creators aren't able to grow a massive following of their own because of the discoverability crisis on the Internet. Google and many other platforms are putting up high wall prisons (I refuse to called them "walled gardens") to hold on to user attention as tightly as possible.
These "privileged" netzen who were able to shoot web for free because they had other sources of income could also be accused of knowing things.
We now have [for example] content creators who build their own workshop and make an effort to figure out something interesting. This is different from people who already have a workshop where they do practical things. The later will teach you stuff that is applicable, useful and/or marketable. It is deeply baked into their soul.
Yeah, just because OpenAI has gotten away with using open source ideology for regulatory capture in the AI space, but that doesn't mean they can get away with it in the intellectual property space.
I'm not a gamedev, but I am hoping one of the actionable things from this situation is a call to action from the gaming community to put together more open-source game engine platforms, and for them to be more easily sharable.
I am sure there are reasons this is difficult, but with so many industries built on open-source compliant tools, gamedev feels like a no-brainer for it as well.
I'm not privy to the news on this particular fact, but the fact is that Ketamine IS used medically as an anti-depressant now, just at far below the dosage range to get "high".
So if he's just endorsing its usage in a clinical context, that is way different than railing lines.
