Well, this is depressing...

It won't happen.

I mean, it might happen --- in 300 years. Technology moves more slowly than magazines would lead you to believe --- whether that magazine be Cracked or Popular Science. I enjoy the artwork from the 40s and 50s about what life would be like in the 80s and 90s.

But where's my jet pack? Where's my flying car? Where's my robot housecleaner (the Roomba is not what they had on the Jetsons).

The 80s looked like the 50s, but with different clothing styles, a few nice gadgets, and uglier cars.

Today looks like the 80s, but with different clothing styles, a few nice gadgets, and even uglier cars.

2050 will probably look like today, but with different clothing styles, a few nice gadgets, and --- oh, how I hate to imagine the cars!
 
Something big will happen with the new technology ... but probably not like described in the article.

Much of this has been discussed in other threads. The green-screnery/VFX will keep getting cheaper and cheaper. The popular animation will follow suit. The robotic arms (controlled by an operator's joystick) will become less robotic and more lifelike.

At some point, there will be a feature that will make everyone jump up in excitement. Most of them, however, will be directed by Denis Villleneuve and met with complete indifference.
 
The way I see the development of the technology (AI in creating films) at this current stage is that it is all based on motion - when to make the edit, wher to place and when to move the camera, where to place the light source, where the actor should be (i.e. in the bathtub that is talked about often in the article). But what makes a movie work is a subtle glance, a turn of the head...emotions, which come from the face. That will be harder to achieve. The Peter Cushing attempt leaped off the screen (in a negative way) when I saw it - the body worked, the face gave it away.
 
Interesting article, Josh. As usual with "civilian" articles, there are misunderstandings about the specific job duties...yes, light field technology will reduce or eliminate focus pulling on set, but that's a job I haven't done myself since sometime in the 80's, so I think I'll be OK there. And I'm all for eliminating green screen, that's nothing but a pain for everyone involved. I can only dream of working on the big shows where they simple shoot whatever they want and roto everything later. I just came off a tough green screen shoot and keeping green contamination off the actors on a tight schedule and small stage was a constant battle.
 
CharlesPapert said:
.... I can only dream of working on the big shows where they simple shoot whatever they want and roto everything later...
Click to expand...
That's where my thinking was going. But, I thought, this would be easier with a green screen.

And, wouldn't the stuff that has to be roto'd in be best if shot on a Lytra type device, so you have a focus/distance option?
 
DLD said:
That's where my thinking was going. But, I thought, this would be easier with a green screen.

And, wouldn't the stuff that has to be roto'd in be best if shot on a Lytra type device, so you have a focus/distance option?
Click to expand...

Yes, that was my point, that the light field system will improve the ability to pull mattes which is currently either clunky (shooting against green/blue) or slow/expensive (roto).
 
In the 70's they said that synthesizers would replace musicians. That hasn't happened, although from the sound of 90% of the music I hear these days many believe technology can substitute for talent.
 
So, my question is... If every job is eventually replaced by robots and AI, what do people then do for jobs/money to allow them to buy/consume the products/services that the corporations are turning out with robots and AI? Does the world eventually turn into one of those movies where there are a few ultra-rich people and everyone else living in sewers, abandoned buildings, and subjugation of our corporate overlords?

There are corporations working on how to eliminate multiple cameras and camera people on productions. There are self-driving cars. Fast food restaurants are working on restaurants with almost no employees. Vehicles are largely assembled by robots.
 
Run&Gun said:
So, my question is... If every job is eventually replaced by robots and AI, what do people then do for jobs/money to allow them to buy/consume the products/services that the corporations are turning out with robots and AI? Does the world eventually turn into one of those movies where there are a few ultra-rich people and everyone else living in sewers, abandoned buildings, and subjugation of our corporate overlords?

There are corporations working on how to eliminate multiple cameras and camera people on productions. There are self-driving cars. Fast food restaurants are working on restaurants with almost no employees. Vehicles are largely assembled by robots.
Click to expand...

Every job won't be. Those that rely on human emotional and social awareness will be bulletproof for a long, long time. Even with editing and shooting, someone will have to make artistic decisions that I can't see AI replicating for a while.
 
DBP said:
Every job won't be. Those that rely on human emotional and social awareness will be bulletproof for a long, long time. Even with editing and shooting, someone will have to make artistic decisions that I can't see AI replicating for a while.
Click to expand...

The people watching the movies may be braindead robots who don't care though.
 
This is written by someone who doesn't understand filmmaking.

Automation will be great for many things and will hurt the low end of the market. Automated camera tracking for live events, automatic alogorithim editing of sports highlights, slideshows, etc.

Creative storytelling is not on it's way out to tech, there is simply no way. I know this as an editor who just spend 50+ hours on an emotive story piece. Cadence, intonation, subtle human expressions, pacing, and the way something "FEELS" is impossible to replicate until we have truly human like AI. Not in our lifetime.

Creative storytellers, directors, and artists will not and cannot be replaced. But I do agree that if you're a mere tech-head camera op your job will likely become a lot harder in the next few decades. Basically, if you're doing something a machine can do, your job security is limited (though even there I think this is going to take a while as the human touch is still something needed on most things).

If you're doing something only a talented human can do, I highly doubt that will be machine replaceable in any of our lifetimes.

True filmmaking is about feeling and emotion. Machines can't do this, until we reach Blade Runner, and I doubt we'll be there even by 2049 ;)
 
What the Internet did was 'cutting out the middleman' Amazon, uber, financial services, youtube for film and video.

But whatever happens, like the Romans knew, 'Bread and Games' will always be needed. 7 billion people with no jobs, what an audience!
 
Run&Gun said:
Does the world eventually turn into one of those movies where there are a few ultra-rich people and everyone else living in sewers, abandoned buildings, and subjugation of our corporate overlords?
Click to expand...

Aren't we pretty much their already?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top