Scientists create animated human that bridges the "uncanny valley"

Well being into 3D modelling myself, that's definitely the most realistic computer generated model I've yet seen. In the wrong hands, it's very alarming where all this technology might be taking us. Voice morphing technology now exists that can apparently replicate anyone's voice and in combination with computer generated models, you could basically replicate anything or anyone. In the near future, manipulation, propaganda and lies will no doubt increase ten fold. Maybe it's time to turn off the TV.

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
www.washingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by kindred
Maybe it's time to turn off the TV.

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
www.washingtonpost.com...

Who says it will just stay at TV?
Remember CHAD Drone?

Originally posted by kindred
Well being into 3D modelling myself, that's definitely the most realistic computer generated model I've yet seen. In the wrong hands, it's very alarming where all this technology might be taking us. Voice morphing technology now exists that can apparently replicate anyone's voice and in combination with computer generated models, you could basically replicate anything or anyone.

In the near future, manipulation, propaganda and lies will no doubt increase ten fold. Maybe it's time to turn off the TV.

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
www.washingtonpost.com...

Virtual reality here we come!

I personally can see the benefits of the real fun the future can give us

But I see the negatives too.

Originally posted by kleverone

That is a pretty cool vid. There are a few facial expressions that still need workd but for the most part that was very real. Certainly the most realistic computer animation that I have ever seen.

Cool Post.

I picked up on the slight quirks too, but being the first, I give that .. need more thumbs to be accurate .. UP for sure !!

Oooh... saucy interweb prons just got really interesting !! 8]

but seriously, that is amazing, I've used some face modelling software that you apply a photo to, and it renders 'realistic' expressions and movements based on the tone of, and tweaks applied to, an audio track that it is synced to, and they still appear cartoonish. Fun to play with but obvious.

Can't wait to see where this leads!!

Originally posted by whatukno
Also kiss adult film stars goodbye, why pay someone that ages when you can create a timeless "model" that will do anything you program her to do.

Criminals have an easy defense now. That isn't me they digitized my likeness!

Ahh, Id prefer the select a model - similar to the futurama episode where fry got himself a Lucy Liu robot

It wouldnt be the same as a robot, but a Kiera Knightly on screen model would be timeless in my books

Originally posted by Matt.Trakker
Heres a better quality version. www.awntv.com...

I wouldnt mind seeing a HD version though, Thats awsome. Although i think the only thing animated is the actual face & not the whole scene (i could be wrong). But even so its pretty damn good



[edit on 8/18/2008 by Matt.Trakker]

Ahhh.. that takes a bit away from it, imo - you still need an 'actor' there to perform the facial work etc, but it doesnt take the usual method to map fake the face over..

it might have worked for the olympics, instead of replaceing the little girl, just use a cgi one.. Why not, some of the fireworks were cgi.

but yeah, it doesnt remove actors from a film etc, just means 1 actor can play many roles.

Still, very nicely done for not point mapping areas.

Wow, she sure is a hotty, lol...

Well with CGI getting better every month im sure combating hoaxed videos & photos is gonna be harder then ever, that really did look real, aside from the speed of her eye movement, but im sure they'll figure that one out soon...

Originally posted by Dulcimer
Also, this is still crap in my opinion. Watch the eyes. Dead.

Well of course the eyes look dead, they are dead.

The eyes are the windows of the soul and if a soul is not present it will look dead.

Gollum's eyes were also dead....just really good detail was all there was to them but they still looked dead.

Originally posted by StargateSG7


After about 2000+ hours of 2D and 3D computer animation,
I think I can make a professional opinion as to
how and why moving images look real or not!

I hope this critical look helps the 2D and 3D animators out there....

thx

Henry Eckstein
aka StargateSG7

I think you missed the point. Anyone can do the imperfections...even amateurs using Poser get more realistic skin. This was representing a Hollywood actress or model and through makeup and lighting they look prefect.

This was about animation not modeling. Two different things. This has the right snap without too much...this has all the little subtle quirkiness of a human.

Its also about animating the model. I think even most of the "mistakes" some are pointing out in the animation, like the mouth being funny was because the real life actress that this animation was controlled by was quirky.

Edit to add: just my opinion...

[edit on 19-8-2008 by LoneGunMan]

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
This was about animation not modeling. Two different things. This has the right snap without too much...this has all the little subtle quirkiness of a human.

The article had elements about photo-realistic CG (Claiming that people are coming close to ''life-like'' graphics), though the title and the text are mainly about how good the animation has become.

This *includes* modeling as it defines how real the face looks when doing nothing.

If I made a sphere and slapped 2 spheres on it and cut away some bits and called it a face, then even that Image Metrics thing won't save me, it'll still look crap.

As such it is as much about animation as it is about modeling, even though I do admit that the emphasis in the article was more about the animation aspect.

[edit on 19/8/08 by -0mega-]

Hmm.

Does that mean that "Oceans 31" will star Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, James Dean etc?

Just imagine the implications of that. Fully digitally recreated actors.

Originally posted by neformore
Hmm.

Does that mean that "Oceans 31" will star Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, James Dean etc?

Just imagine the implications of that. Fully digitally recreated actors.

That would become more plausible yes.

However movies with fully digitally created 3d ''actors'' are not exactly new.
There are quite a few movies out there who already use full 3d animation in their movies, or at least a big part of it. (Both Real people + 3d, Full 3d, and Anime characters + 3d)

So the potential is already there, this would just make them look more realistic.

[edit on 19/8/08 by -0mega-]

Originally posted by neformore
Hmm.

Does that mean that "Oceans 31" will star Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, James Dean etc?

Just imagine the implications of that. Fully digitally recreated actors.

Since your mentioning old timers.
I frequently go to cgsociety forums, and I must say I would love to see this in animation.
Ingrid Bergman
forums.cgsociety.org...

[edit on 19-8-2008 by _Phoenix_]

Hope I'm not repeating anyone -


The company making this is called Image Metrics


Is that a spelling mistake?

A whole new level of critical thinking... This really is Matrix stuff, but then I am already convinced of the "veil" of reality.

We don't just worry about faux-credentialed news anchors being tools of the NWO, using NLP and sorcery (and hypnotism), hiding the truth of reality from the masses for their evil agenda; but, now, we're talking about them doing it at super-computer speeds, with scientific precision, with new AI technology, making no legal mistakes at the same time.

I've been telling everyone to turn off their TV/computers/video-games/etc. and GO OUTSIDE for years, since 1992! Go meet your neighbor, have a beer, go for a trip, grow something, learn something real, play music, dance, experience your life; because, your life is being substituted for by the media. You're a tool of the system; get it? They want us all compartmentalized in our homes and minds, because once we are divided, they will conquer. I'm not talking to the current audience, so much, as the world in general. Spread the news.

Tune in, and drop out,
~dnb~

Yeah...that is pretty cool, but I believe this is the step to virtual strippers, kiddies, interactive teachers, etc...I just wanna see her dance!!!

What makes you think that this technology hasn't already been used to create politicians on TV for the last 12 years? You think Pixar is behind all these breakthroughs?

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Nowalive]

Oh man, I can see them using this for the porn industry. Or worse, make someone you do not like appear in a porn film...

reply to post by neformore


That may happen...I am awaiting a remake of Who framed Roger Rabbit? Or maybe a new Clockwork Orange...that would be cool!

Originally posted by amatrine
Oh man, I can see them using this for the porn industry. Or worse, make someone you do not like appear in a porn film...

Or someone who you *really* *really* like, lol.

But for someone to be perfectly recreated people usually need reference material to re-create the face.

It *could* be done with any photo, but the less ''designed'' for modeling these photo's are, the lower the accuracy will be.

Note that with ''designed'' from modeling I mean front / side perspective etc. To map out all the details of the face of said person.

[edit on 19/8/08 by -0mega-]