Idk, seems like it would be an easy fix to tell the AI to generate more in-betweens to make the animation smoother. Not like you'd normally put that much work into hand-made animation that is not specifically made to showcase what animation CAN look like.
Also, the video might profit from actually comparing the sequences, at least by having the AI one and the hand-animated ones run side by side.
Edit: I'm saying the video is bad because it doesn't actually do any comparing and just lets the viewer guess what it wants to convey.
I watched a video talking about smoothing is actually not always better in animation.
Easy example, in an action scene smoothly and consistently animation of impossible action is just a blur. An animator is deciding to punctuate the scene by letting certain frames linger, or just generally reducing the frames for a certain type of scene.
Not saying anything about AI assisting in authoring that, but "smooth" is not always better.
Sure but since the video doesn't say and gives no further context, I have to conclude that smoothness of animation is what it's comparing.
Have you ever generated an image or video with AI before? It seems you are looking through rose tinted glasses, since it cannot create higher quality outputs just by you telling it to.
Not to mention, real animation is done through start and end frames of a specific sequence, then going in between, completing that cycle multiple times until a full animation is made.
AI does it by calculating what's next from the start, so it inherently cannot produce animations that show consistency, let alone even follow deep prompts or a series of edits for image generation, from my experience.
I'd give the generative AI businesses around a decade or more to improve it enough to be a suitable tool for animators, but even then, they still would need to edit it AND cause inconvenience due to not properly animating (using assets, stringing them into an animation through motion and other tweens, and other tools), but just producing a video file.
Idk, seems like it would be an easy fix to tell the AI to generate more in-betweens to make the animation smoother.
Adding more frames would not fix the issues with the AI animation as it entirely lacks purpose, meaning that it is only jiggling around the place. Just look at the arms in the AI animation and compare that to the real animations. The AI also does nothing with the character's face in sharp contrast to the real animation, if you look at the real animations again pay close attention to all the small details the animator includes.
I do not think the purpose of the animation was to compare the framerate, instead I think it was to compare the overall quality and to showcase the lack of intent AI 'art' in general has.
Not like you’d normally put that much work into hand-made animation that is not specifically made to showcase what animation CAN look like.
Those are animations that they did for fun and practice.
but recently, I started animating him doing different dance moves—partly to practice animation, partly to keep myself drawing.
Idk, seems like it would be an easy fix to tell the AI to generate more in-betweens to make the animation smoother. Not like you'd normally put that much work into hand-made animation that is not specifically made to showcase what animation CAN look like.
Also, the video might profit from actually comparing the sequences, at least by having the AI one and the hand-animated ones run side by side.
Edit: I'm saying the video is bad because it doesn't actually do any comparing and just lets the viewer guess what it wants to convey.
I watched a video talking about smoothing is actually not always better in animation.
Easy example, in an action scene smoothly and consistently animation of impossible action is just a blur. An animator is deciding to punctuate the scene by letting certain frames linger, or just generally reducing the frames for a certain type of scene.
Not saying anything about AI assisting in authoring that, but "smooth" is not always better.
Sure but since the video doesn't say and gives no further context, I have to conclude that smoothness of animation is what it's comparing.
Have you ever generated an image or video with AI before? It seems you are looking through rose tinted glasses, since it cannot create higher quality outputs just by you telling it to.
Not to mention, real animation is done through start and end frames of a specific sequence, then going in between, completing that cycle multiple times until a full animation is made.
AI does it by calculating what's next from the start, so it inherently cannot produce animations that show consistency, let alone even follow deep prompts or a series of edits for image generation, from my experience.
I'd give the generative AI businesses around a decade or more to improve it enough to be a suitable tool for animators, but even then, they still would need to edit it AND cause inconvenience due to not properly animating (using assets, stringing them into an animation through motion and other tweens, and other tools), but just producing a video file.
Adding more frames would not fix the issues with the AI animation as it entirely lacks purpose, meaning that it is only jiggling around the place. Just look at the arms in the AI animation and compare that to the real animations. The AI also does nothing with the character's face in sharp contrast to the real animation, if you look at the real animations again pay close attention to all the small details the animator includes.
I do not think the purpose of the animation was to compare the framerate, instead I think it was to compare the overall quality and to showcase the lack of intent AI 'art' in general has.
Those are animations that they did for fun and practice.
-Video description