[Reader-list] Fwd: RCFoC for March 12, 2001 - Consuming All Those Cycles

[Arun Mehta]

What do the artists on this list think -- movies without actors? I find it 
significant, though, that according to Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, 
you will need humans to speak!
Arun
>Oh My Goodness.  I've just seen the first good indication of why
>"actors" may have something to worry about.
>
>I'd heard talk about the video game-inspired "Final Fantasy" movie due
>out this summer, and I've been looking forward to its arrival with
>interest. Not because I'm into the Final Fantasy video game, but
>because this movie is supposed to feature the most impressive to-date,
>computer-generated humans.  Now that RCFoC reader TM Mak has pointed me
>to the online trailer
>(http://www.apple.com/trailers/columbia/final_fantasy/), I AM
>IMPRESSED.
>
>These comments are based only on my watching this trailer, which shows
>just a few seconds of the heroine and a male character, but I must say
>that I have never seen more convincing computer-generated people.  In
>the context of this movie trailer, they are convincingly real to me.
>The way the girl's hair swirls as she moves, the fluidity of her
>movements, seem, well -- real!
>
>Of course, these characters are set in a fantasy environment, which may
>help them to appear "real" by comparison -- I would like to see these
>characters inserted into a real street scene in New York, for instance,
>to see how closely they compare to "real life," side-by-side...
>
>I found it interesting that my son felt that these characters looked
>TOO real -- he said that real people are not quite so perfect and
>graceful. But if this turns out to be the common perception, I expect
>that future computer-generated people will take on realistic human
>foibles.
>
>I hope the movie's story line turns out to be as interesting as this
>first glance at its characters' animation, because it's going to get my
>$7.50 as soon as it opens.  And I'd like to remain impressed.
>
>But even if this movie falls flat on its digital face, the level of
>computer-generated human animation that I've already seen makes be
>believe that the day of completely-convincing computer animation is not
>an "if," but only a "when."  And of course, once it can be done for a
>"movie" with the enormously expensive "best" computers of the day, it
>will only be "a little matter of Moore's Law" before our PCs can
>generate convincing photo-realistic environments, populated by
>convincing photo-realistic humans...
>
>
>
>For Example!
>
>In fact, while not exactly the same thing, RCFoC reader Jeff Daly
>points us to groundbreaking work being done in this area by National
>Medal of Technology recipient Ray Kurzweil.  At the recent TED
>(Technology, Entertainment, & Design) conference, Kurzweil demonstrated
>a real-time virtual performer, named Ramona.
>
>Several special motion-tracking videos cameras watched Ray on-stage,
>digitizing his movements.  At the same time, his voice was digitally
>altered to change his gender.  Then, his movements and new voice were
>transferred, in real time, to a photorealistic 3D model of Ramona,
>where she exactly mirrored his movements and spoke his altered voice
>within her virtual environment!
>
>  [Image - Ray Kurzwile in the foreground, with his real-time
>   computer-generated alter ego in a virtual version of the stage in the
>   background.  From QuickTime video at
>   http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/ted11/index.html ]
>
>The picture, above, is a very poor screen shot taken from an online
>QuickTime video that you can view at
>http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/ted11/index.html .  Ray Kurzweil is
>in the foreground, where his body movements are instantly translated to
>the virtual model, Ramona, who is standing behind him in her virtual
>representation of the same stage.
>
>In effect, if you only watched Ramona's video image, she appeared
>"alive" and seamlessly reacting to the environment around her.  While
>she did not appear quite as "perfect" as the Final Fantasy characters
>(she was being animated in real-time, after all), this is quite
>something to see.   A more detailed explanation of how this was
>accomplished is at http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0095.html .
>
>
>
>Where This Is Headed...
>
>I don't want to imply that either of these examples of
>computer-generated humans is actually lifelike -- yet.  And today,
>achieving these results required the special configuration and
>integration of products and technologies from dozens of companies.  But
>one day (not too far away, I expect), photorealistic real-time avatars
>will be generated from a single easy-to-set-up-and-use product, and the
>results (powered by our ever-faster processors) will be even more
>lifelike.
>
>Did you think we WOULDN'T come up with ways to consume all of our new
>processing power?
>
>This consumption of our computing cycles will have fascinating
>implications far beyond entertainment -- such as for virtual meetings,
>for online trade shows, and certainly for immersive virtual communities
>that go far beyond today's somewhat "cartoonish" (although still
>convincing, in their context) virtual worlds, such as EverQuest -
>www.everquest.com .
>
>(Additional insights into today's virtual environments, and the
>"avatars" that represent us there, are at
>http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0096.html) .
>
>I think Tom Hanks' job is safe -- for now.  And Steven Spielberg and
>George Lucas seem to feel that way as well, as reflected by their
>comments in the March 4 Nashua Telegraph,
>
>     "...Animation, whether it's hand-drawn or computer-rendered, still
>     needs to be voiced by a real person...  The need for actors to add
>     'the emotions' will always be there...  Audiences will go away
>     before actors go away."
>
>Indeed, even the best computer-generated speech is a long way from
>HAL's compelling and emotion-laden dialog in the movie 2001.  So far.
>But this too will improve.  And I did notice that Spielberg and Lucas
>didn't actually rule out synthetic actors, only synthetic voices...
>
>Meanwhile, virtual actors will continue to take the stage and
>experiment, as they "improve."  For example, witness the birth of a new
>computer-generated rock star, "T-Babe" from Glasgow Animation.  She's
>about to launch her first music video, "Peter Pumpkineater."
>(http://www.glasgowrecords.com/tbabe2.htm)
>
>If the Screen Actor's Guild isn't worried, I expect they soon will (or
>should) be...