#how to make animation video with ai tools

[reallytoosublime]

Creating animated educational videos for kids using AI tools can be a fun and effective way to engage young learners. These videos can cover a wide range of subjects, from math and science to storytelling and language skills. In this video, we'll be exploring how to create animated educational videos for kids using AI tools.

👉 Subscribe to our channel to stay tuned: https://cutt.ly/uwmAPVIQ

AIPRM stands for Artificial Intelligence-Powered Response Manager. It is a technology that uses AI to power chatbots, allowing them to interact with users in a more human-like way. The extension is designed to help users generate high-quality content by using artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms.

Script Writing: Write a script that effectively communicates the educational content. Keep it simple, engaging, and tailored to your target audience. Ensure the content aligns with your educational objectives.

[yuumei-art]

I've been told that there are rumors about me using AI for my paintings. Please use some common sense, I've been posting on DeviantART since 2003 and sharing full video recordings on Patreon since 2018. If I'm a fake, wouldn't my Patrons have noticed by now? Since AI has been turning artists against each other, accusing each other of using AI, I have no choice but to share of some the Patreon rewards as proof. Here is the 10 full video recordings of me painting A Thousand Skies from scratch

I built the 3D model base for this painting in Sketchup, which you can see here

When AI was at it's infancy, I was very excited to have a new tool to help me make comics. Long time followers will know I struggled with repetitive strain injury that forced my comic making to a crawl. A decade before AI, I was experimenting with 3D backgrounds for comics.

I still remember the hate I got for using 3D models in my comic backgrounds, even though today nobody blinks at other artists doing the same. 3D is now accepted as a tool to help artists create. I even remember hate for being digital instead of traditional.

I tested out painting over AI generated backgrounds a few times in the very early stages of AI. There are a lot of screenshots taken out of context from my Discord where I share how I paint everything with complete transparency.

The only other time I've used AI in my art is for a gag scene in my comic, the full context is my character, Vance, who is a weeb and tech nerd, was objectifying women by seeing them as anime cat girls pasted over AI flower backgrounds.

If I had downloaded a flower stamp brush from ClipStudio and made a similar flower background, nobody would care. But somehow this is not okay even though it fits the theme and joke of the comic?

It's 2AM where I am now so I won't say much else other than I wish people would stop taking my posts out of context. With everything going on in the world, artists should support each other, not make up reasons to hurt each other.

[youtubemarketing1234]

The world of animation and animated videos has been revolutionized by the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology. AI has proven to be an invaluable tool in the creation of visually stunning and lifelike characters. This article delves into the applications of AI in animation, the realism it brings to animated characters, and how content creators, including YouTubers, are utilizing these AI-powered solutions to generate revenue.

For animators, AI offers a consistent impact across both 3D and 2D animation. AI will accelerate the interpolation of production-grade animations, enabling animators to transition from key poses to final output more efficiently, while maintaining the character’s arcs and weights. If they are dissatisfied with the result, they can introduce new keyframes and interpolate the animation.

AI algorithms can analyze human movement data and create fluid animations for characters, mimicking realistic movements with unprecedented precision. These algorithms take inspiration from motion capture data or deep learning techniques, producing smooth and lifelike animations.

Text-to-video models can be used to create short-form video content from a provided text script. These models can be used to create engaging and informative marketing videos. For example, a company could use a text-to-video model to create a video that explains how their product works.

While AI is making significant strides in animation, it is unlikely to completely replace 3D animators. Instead, the future is likely to see a collaboration between AI-driven tools and human creativity. AI technology is a valuable tool that can greatly enhance the work of animators.

How AI Magically Turns Novices into Animation Wizards Overnight

[imsobadatnicknames2]

How can you consider yourself any sort of leftist when you defend AI art bullshit? You literally simp for AI techbros and have the gall to pretend you're against big corporations?? Get fucked

I don't "defend" AI art. I think a particular old post of mine that a lot of people tend to read in bad faith must be making the rounds again lmao.

Took me a good while to reply to this because you know what? I decided to make something positive out of this and use this as an opportunity to outline what I ACTUALLY believe about AI art. If anyone seeing this decides to read it in good or bad faith... Welp, your choice I guess.

I have several criticisms of the way the proliferation of AI art generators and LLMs is making a lot of things worse. Some of these are things I have voiced in the past, some of these are things I haven't until now:

Most image and text AI generators are fine-tuned to produce nothing but the most agreeable, generically pretty content slop, pretty much immediately squandering their potential to be used as genuinely interesting artistic tools with anything to offer in terms of a unique aesthetic experience (AI video still manages to look bizarre and interesting but it's getting there too)

In the entertainment industry and a lot of other fields, AI image generation is getting incorporated into production pipelines in ways that lead to the immiseration of working artists, being used to justify either lower wages or straight-up layoffs, and this is something that needs to be fought against. That's why I unconditionally supported the SAG-AFTRA strikes last year and will unconditionally support any collective action to address AI art as a concrete labor issue

In most fields where it's being integrated, AI art is vastly inferior to human artists in any use case where you need anything other than to make a superficially pretty picture really fast. If you need to do anything like ask for revisions or minor corrections, give very specific descriptions of how objects and people are interacting with each other, or just like. generate several pictures of the same thing and have them stay consistent with each other, you NEED human artists and it's preposterous to think they can be replaced by AI.

There is a lot of art on the internet that consists of the most generically pretty, cookie-cutter anime waifu-adjacent slop that has zero artistic or emotional value to either the people seeing it or the person churning it out, and while this certainly was A Thing before the advent of AI art generators, generative AI has made it extremely easy to become the kind of person who churns it out and floods online art spaces with it.

Similarly, LLMs make it extremely easy to generate massive volumes of texts, pages, articles, listicles and what have you that are generic vapid SEO-friendly pap at best and bizzarre nonsense misinformation at worst, drowning useful information in a sea of vapid noise and rendering internet searches increasingly useless.

The way LLMs are being incorporated into customer service and similar services not only, again, encourages further immiseration of customer service workers, but it's also completely useless for most customers.

A very annoyingly vocal part the population of AI art enthusiasts, fanatics and promoters do tend to talk about it in a way that directly or indirectly demeans the merit and skill of human artists and implies that they think of anyone who sees anything worthwile in the process of creation itself rather than the end product as stupid or deluded.

So you can probably tell by now that I don't hold AI art or writing in very high regard. However (and here's the part that'll get me called an AI techbro, or get people telling me that I'm just jealous of REAL artists because I lack the drive to create art of my own, or whatever else) I do have some criticisms of the way people have been responding to it, and have voiced such criticisms in the past.

I think a lot of the opposition to AI art has critstallized around unexamined gut reactions, whipping up a moral panic, and pressure to outwardly display an acceptable level of disdain for it. And in particular I think this climate has made a lot of people very prone to either uncritically entertain and adopt regressive ideas about Intellectual Propety, OR reveal previously held regressive ideas about Intellectual Property that are now suddenly more socially acceptable to express:

(I wanna preface this section by stating that I'm a staunch intellectual property abolitionist for the same reason I'm a private property abolitionist. If you think the existence of intellectual property is a good thing, a lot of my ideas about a lot of stuff are gonna be unpalatable to you. Not much I can do about it.)

A lot of people are suddenly throwing their support behind any proposal that promises stricter copyright regulations to combat AI art, when a lot of these also have the potential to severely udnermine fair use laws and fuck over a lot of independent artist for the benefit of big companies.

It was very worrying to see a lot of fanfic authors in particular clap for the George R R Martin OpenAI lawsuit because well... a lot of them don't realize that fanfic is a hobby that's in a position that's VERY legally precarious at best, that legally speaking using someone else's characters in your fanfic is as much of a violation of copyright law as straight up stealing entire passages, and that any regulation that can be used against the latter can be extended against the former.

Similarly, a lot of artists were cheering for the lawsuit against AI art models trained to mimic the style of specific artists. Which I agree is an extremely scummy thing to do (just like a human artist making a living from ripping off someone else's work is also extremely scummy), but I don't think every scummy act necessarily needs to be punishable by law, and some of them would in fact leave people worse off if they were. All this to say: If you are an artist, and ESPECIALLY a fan artist, trust me. You DON'T wanna live in a world where there's precedent for people's artstyles to be considered intellectual property in any legally enforceable way. I know you wanna hurt AI art people but this is one avenue that's not worth it.

Especially worrying to me as an indie musician has been to see people mention the strict copyright laws of the music industry as a positive thing that they wanna emulate. "this would never happen in the music industry because they value their artists copyright" idk maybe this is a the grass is greener type of situation but I'm telling you, you DON'T wanna live in a world where copyright law in the visual arts world works the way it does in the music industry. It's not worth it.

I've seen at least one person compare AI art model training to music sampling and say "there's a reason why they cracked down on sampling" as if the death of sampling due to stricter copyright laws was a good thing and not literally one of the worst things to happen in the history of music which nearly destroyed several primarily black music genres. Of course this is anecdotal because it's just One Guy I Saw Once, but you can see what I mean about how uncritical support for copyright law as a tool against AI can lead people to adopt increasingly regressive ideas about copyright.

Similarly, I've seen at least one person go "you know what? Collages should be considered art theft too, fuck you" over an argument where someone else compared AI art to collages. Again, same point as above.

Similarly, I take issue with the way a lot of people seem EXTREMELY personally invested in proving AI art is Not Real Art. I not only find this discussion unproductive, but also similarly dangerously prone to validating very reactionary ideas about The Nature Of Art that shouldn't really be entertained. Also it's a discussion rife with intellectual dishonesty and unevenly applied definition and standards.

When a lot of people present the argument of AI art not being art because the definition of art is this and that, they try to pretend that this is the definition of art the've always operated under and believed in, even when a lot of the time it's blatantly obvious that they're constructing their definition on the spot and deliberately trying to do so in such a way that it doesn't include AI art.

They never succeed at it, btw. I've seen several dozen different "AI art isn't art because art is [definition]". I've seen exactly zero of those where trying to seriously apply that definition in any context outside of trying to prove AI art isn't art doesn't end up in it accidentally excluding one or more non-AI artforms, usually reflecting the author's blindspots with regard to the different forms of artistic expression.

(However, this is moot because, again, these are rarely definitions that these people actually believe in or adhere to outside of trying to win "Is AI art real art?" discussions.)

Especially worrying when the definition they construct is built around stuff like Effort or Skill or Dedication or The Divine Human Spirit. You would not be happy about the kinds of art that have traditionally been excluded from Real Art using similar definitions.

Seriously when everyone was celebrating that the Catholic Church came out to say AI art isn't real art and sharing it as if it was validating and not Extremely Worrying that the arguments they'd been using against AI art sounded nearly identical to things TradCaths believe I was like. Well alright :T You can make all the "I never thought I'd die fighting side by side with a catholic" legolas and gimli memes you want, but it won't change the fact that the argument being made by the catholic church was a profoundly conservative one and nearly identical to arguments used to dismiss the artistic merit of certain forms of "degenerate" art and everyone was just uncritically sharing it, completely unconcerned with what kind of worldview they were lending validity to by sharing it.

Remember when the discourse about the Gay Sex cats pic was going on? One of the things I remember the most from that time was when someone went "Tell me a definition of art that excludes this picture without also excluding Fountain by Duchamp" and how just. Literally no one was able to do it. A LOT of people tried to argue some variation of "Well, Fountain is art and this image isn't because what turns fountain into art is Intent. Duchamp's choice to show a urinal at an art gallery as if it was art confers it an element of artistic intent that this image lacks" when like. Didn't by that same logic OP's choice to post the image on tumblr as if it was art also confer it artistic intent in the same way? Didn't that argument actually kinda end up accidentally validating the artistic status of every piece of AI art ever posted on social media? That moment it clicked for me that a lot of these definitions require applying certain concepts extremely selectively in order to make sense for the people using them.

A lot of people also try to argue it isn't Real Art based on the fact that most AI art is vapid but like. If being vapid definitionally excludes something from being art you're going to have to exclude a whooole lot of stuff along with it. AI art is vapid. A lot of art is too, I don't think this argument works either.

Like, look, I'm not really invested in trying to argue in favor of The Artistic Merits of AI art but I also find it extremely hard to ignore how trying to categorically define AI art as Not Real Art not only is unproductive but also requires either a) applying certain parts of your definition of art extremely selectively, b) constructing a definition of art so convoluted and full of weird caveats as to be functionally useless, or c) validating extremely reactionary conservative ideas about what Real Art is.

Some stray thoughts that don't fit any of the above sections.

I've occassionally seen people respond to AI art being used for shitposts like "A lot of people have affordable commissions, you could have paid someone like $30 to draw this for you instead of using the plagiarism algorithm and exploiting the work of real artists" and sorry but if you consider paying an artist a rate that amounts to like $5 for several hours of work a LESS exploitative alternative I think you've got something fucked up going on with your priorities.

Also it's kinda funny when people comment on the aforementioned shitposts with some variation of "see, the usage of AI art robs it of all humor because the thing that makes shitposts funny is when you consider the fact that someone would spend so much time and effort in something so stupid" because like. Yeah that is part of the humor SOMETIMES but also people share and laugh at low effort shitposts all the time. Again you're constructing a definition that you don't actually believe in anywhere outside of this type of conversations. Just say you don't like that it's AI art because you think it's morally wrong and stop being disingenuous.

So yeah, this is pretty much everything I believe about the topic.

I don't "defend" AI art, but my opposition to it is firmly rooted in my principles, and that means I refuse to uncritically accept any anti-AI art argument that goes against those same principles.

If you think not accepting and parroting every Anti-AI art argument I encounter because some of them are ideologically rooted in things I disagree with makes me indistinguishable from "AI techbros" you're working under a fucked up dichotomy.

[exeggcute]

interesting links roundup #10

>>> permalink <<<

reading

Animals as chemical factories

Are "algorithms" making us boring?

Big Food Gets Jacked

Can the Human Body Endure a Voyage to Mars?

Century-Scale Storage

Crypto trader kills himself on X live to create a meme coin

A Dark History of the World’s Smallest Island Nation

The End of Children

The Getty Family’s Trust Issues

The hardest working font in Manhattan

How Diablo hackers uncovered a speedrun scandal

I Tasted Honda's Spicy Rodent-Repelling Tape (And I will do it again unless someone stops me.)

If You Ever Stacked Cups In Gym Class, Blame My Dad

The Kiss That Changed Video Games

Patterns in confusing explanations

Photographers Are on a Mission to Fix Wikipedia's Famously Bad Celebrity Portraits

The Real-Life Consequences of Silicon Valley’s AI Obsession

Removing Jeff Bezos From My Bed

‘Technofossils’: how humanity’s eternal testament will be plastic bags, cheap clothes and chicken bones

The “Unhinged Bisexual Woman” Novel

Unique formation of organic glass from a human brain in the Vesuvius eruption of 79 CE

What a Crab Sees Before It Gets Eaten by a Cuttlefish

When Your Last Name Is Null, Nothing Works

Who Killed the Footless Goose?

The Worst 7 Years in Boeing’s History—and the Man Who Won’t Stop Fighting for Answers

tools/reference

Ableton: Learning Synths

Cover Your Tracks: See how trackers view your browser

European word translator

OneLook

Refuge Restrooms

River Runner Global

other

BLUEJEWELED

jacksonpollock.org

London Transport 25: ride 25 different forms on transport in one day

What if Eye...? [warning for some flashing graphics/gifs]

10,000-Year Earworm to Discourage Settlement Near Nuclear Waste Repositories

[weepingpussywillowtree]

I think we need to make Generative AI use embarrassing and lame the way that we made anti-feminism embarrassing and lame in the era of like, pickup artist critical and right wing cringe videos.

Like, forget getting mad about Generative AI use and the environment and stuff. This anger is in many ways justified, but a lot of the people who are huge LLM simps enjoy pissing people off. Their politics are basically pissing people off. What would really get them is pointing out how lame it is.

All those ads where people use the tool to run their book club or make photo collages for their loved one's birthday present last minute or try to make themselves look cool at a party by 'knowing everything' about something. That's lame. Using c.ai is lame. Having an AI girlfriend is lame.

If I'm going to get constantly bombarded with ads about LLMs, both from scammy apps that serve up weird looking generated anime porn by the truckload as well as Facebook legitimately telling me I'm too stupid to come up with book club questions for moby dick by myself, there needs to be a truckload of opposing content pointing out how lame it is to not even try to be your own person and produce your own creative work. How much of a douchebag it makes you look like when you spout facts you got from chat gpt at a party. The default response to someone showing people their LLM generated art should be pitying dismissal, not anger. It should be bewilderment and mild disgust.

'oh... Okay dude.' and then continue your conversation.

[deepdreamnights]

Vidu and the Quest to Make More Toons

So, a ways back I talked about Minmax, but I've been trying out basically all the video generators looking for the tools I need, and low and behold this week I find out I've been accepted into the Vidu Artists program now, wherein I get credits and access to access their cooler features in in exchange for... talking about the tech and how I use it.

Well twist my arm. I shall endeavor to be objective and informative despite free stuff (a challenge my spirit needs practice withstanding if anyone else wishes to test me)

So let's talk Vidu.

(outside of being converted to gif, no animations in this post have been cut or edited)

Also, everyone say hi to Maureen the Lizard Queen, every hero needs an evil queen that really wants in his pteruges, and she's that for TyrannoMax.

Vidu's got a bit more oomph under the hood than MinMax (no shade to MinMax, they're brand new and very promising) and it's way too early to be picking winners when it comes to video.

Anyhow, basic features that are nice include the options to upload start and end frames, options for a 4 or 8 second duration (more about that later), and a cleanup/upscale. Credits line up more or less with seconds. 4 credits for a 4 second clip, 8 for an 8 second, and again at upscale. It's straightforward in a way a lot of services aren't.

Apetomic Pyle, done on the fast settings. (not to shabby still, and it gave him monkey legs which a lot of systems balk at)

If you're on the $30/mo tier, you can choose to do a double-cost "quality" over "speed" option. Thankfully, the artist program gets me access. Since there's not yet a seed option it's hard to do a direct comparison, but the quality is going to be a must if you're doing anything that looks like cel. Much cleaner, much smoother.

(4 and 8 second quality gens)

One of the nicest features is the character reference feature. Basically it's like Midjourney's --cref, but with a very strict adherence to character details.

The above images used reference shots of Maureen and Dr. Underfang, and it got the stripes on Underfang's tie right in basically every gen. That's a ridiculous level of character model adherence and, for my purposes, all but essential.

It did misinterpret Maureen's undertail coloration for a sort of fin or drape, but the shot I used was oddly cropped, and sometimes stuff like that happens with gen AI. Given my measuring stick for errors is the era of animation I'm emulating, whatever does slip through is only going to make it more authentic.

There is a limitation in that character-reference and text-only prompts default to 16:9 presently with no options to adjust, but some room to pan is always handy and most people are going to be outputting for phone and not outdated CRT televisions, so, it's understandable it'd be a lower priority feature for the devs.

Walk cycles! By Saint Eniac it's a miracle!

On the left we have one prompted with TyrannoMax's control art, and on the right we have one using that art as the starting frame (4 and 8 seconds, respectively).

Way More details under the fold.

Vidu likes a hefty prompt.

A lot of detail and evocative language helps, and older prompting tricks like mojo-jojoing important concepts are back. For the Max walk cycles above I used:

1986 vintage cel-shaded cartoon character walk cycle. The orange dinosaur-anthro wearing blue gladiator armor walks toward screen right, the camera tracks him, holding him in center-frame. He completes a full, brisk walk cycles from the side view. He walks boldly, back straight, head high, heroic. His tail sways behind him as he moves. The whole clip has the look and feel of vintage 1986 action adventure cel-animated cartoons. The animation quality is high, with flawless motion and anatomy. animated by Tokyo Movie Shinsha, studio Ghibli, don bluth. BluRay remaster. flat chroma-key green screen background

The potential for use with my Filmation-inspired technique is readily apparent. Both versions are on-model as much as any two shots in a 1980s action-figure shilling cartoon would be, some minor blurring to clean up in post but nothing serious. It should be pretty easy to extract the needed frames for looping and compositing.

Some Extra Points

There are the usual issues with hands, though more often than not it corrects my four-fingered anthros to having a human five-fingered hand. Buzby Spurlock animation was known for those kinds of inconsistencies, though. So an opening credits video is much less far off than it was at the last post.

It's also generally impressive how well it does with my dinosaur characters. Non-humanoid dinosaurs are difficult for most image generators, much less anthrosaurs in a vintage aesthetic. Vidu has yet to override the character art to give Underfang or Max the Jurassic Park style t-rex jaw, which is something both MJ and Dall-E 3 have trouble with.

Human characters like Kitty Concolor here, much more stable.

As always, clips are curated. I didn't choose my absolute best ones (gotta have something for the videos), and I'm working on a fun series of jank reels across all the generators.

[theomeganerd]

The Witcher 4 Tech Demo Debuts

CD PROJEKT RED and Epic Games Present The Witcher 4 Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo at The State of Unreal 2025!

At Unreal Fest Orlando, the State of Unreal keynote opened with a live on-stage presentation that offered an early glimpse into the latest Unreal Engine 5 features bringing the open world of The Witcher 4 to life.

Spotlight:

Tech demo showcased how the CD PROJEKT RED and Epic Games are working together to power the world of The Witcher 4 on PC, PlayStation, and Xbox, and bring large open-world support to Unreal Engine. The tech demo takes place in the never-before-seen region of Kovir.

As Unreal Fest 2025 kicked off, CD PROJEKT RED joined Epic Games on stage to present a tech demo of The Witcher 4 in Unreal Engine 5 (UE5). Presented in typical CDPR style, the tech demo follows the main protagonist Ciri in the midst of a monster contract and shows off some of the innovative UE5 technology and features that will power the game’s open world.

The tech demo takes place in the region of Kovir — which will make its very first appearance in the video game series in The Witcher 4. The presentation followed main protagonist Ciri — along with her horse Kelpie — as she made her way through the rugged mountains and dense forests of Kovir to the bustling port town of Valdrest. Along the way, CD PROJEKT RED and Epic Games dove deep into how each feature is helping drive performance, visual fidelity, and shape The Witcher 4’s immersive open world.

 Watch the full presentation from Unreal Fest 2025 now at LINK.

Since the strategic partnership was announced in 2022, CDPR has been working with Epic Games to develop new tools and enhance existing features in Unreal Engine 5 to expand the engine’s open-world development capabilities and establish robust tools geared toward CD PROJEKT RED’s open-world design philosophies. The demo, which runs on a PlayStation 5 at 60 frames per second, shows off in-engine capabilities set in the world of The Witcher 4, including the new Unreal Animation Framework, Nanite Foliage rendering, MetaHuman technology with Mass AI crowd scaling, and more. The tools showcased are being developed, tested, and eventually released to all UE developers, starting with today’s Unreal Engine 5.6 release. This will help other studios create believable and immersive open-world environments that deliver performance at 60 FPS without compromising on quality — even at vast scales. While the presentation was running on a PlayStation console, the features and technology will be supported across all platforms the game will launch on.

The Unreal Animation Framework powers realistic character movements in busy scenes. FastGeo Streaming, developed in collaboration with Epic Games, allows environments to load quickly and smoothly. Nanite Foliage fills forests and fields with dense detail without sacrificing performance. The Mass system handles large, dynamic crowds with ease, while ML Deformer adds subtle, realistic touches to character animation — right down to muscle movement.

Speaking on The Witcher 4 Unreal Engine 5 tech demo, Joint-CEO of CD PROJEKT RED, 

Michał Nowakowski stated:

“We started our partnership with Epic Games to push open-world game technology forward. To show this early look at the work we’ve been doing using Unreal Engine running at 60 FPS on PlayStation 5, is a significant milestone — and a testament of the great cooperation between our teams. But we're far from finished. I look forward to seeing more advancements and inspiring technology from this partnership as development of The Witcher 4 on Unreal Engine 5 continues.”

Tim Sweeney, Founder and CEO of Epic Games said: 

“CD PROJEKT RED is one of the industry’s best open-world game studios, and we’re grateful that they’re working with us to push Unreal Engine forward with The Witcher 4. They are the perfect partner to help us develop new world-building features that we can share with all Unreal Engine developers.”

For more information on The Witcher 4, please visit the official website. More information about The Witcher series can be found on the official official website, X, Bluesky, and Facebook.

[boreal-sea]

So something I realized watching a few videos and reading a few articles is that most of us aren’t angry at the idea of AI in general. Many of us are excited to learn about AI systems that can identify cancer better than doctors, for instance.

What we’re angry about is generative AI being used to destroy the jobs of artists (and I mean all creatives here), who have already been dealing with their work being devalued by modern society.

And I’m not sure how to deal with it. I do remember learning that when photography became a thing, many painters were horrified and terrified of would erase the art of painting. It didn’t obviously, and in fact photography because a whole new art form.

I grew up during the birth of digital art. I distinctly remember the phase digital art went through where many people declared it to not be “real art” and that it was “cheating” etc. I’m sure other millennial artists also remember this transition. But graphic designers pretty quickly adopted digital tools, and websites like DeviantArt popped up, and I don’t think there are too many people nowadays who would say a digital painting isn’t “art”. Still, I do imagine there is a gulf between how some people would view the “artistic merit” of a 3 ft tall oil painting hanging next to a 3 ft tall print of a digital painting, even if the subject and styles were similar. So the worries that digital art would erase physical painting was also proven false. And for the record, I think digital art is 100% art. The merit of digital art is equal to that of physical art.

On the other hand, I can’t say these changes didn’t affect older forms of art. Like, photography did affect the world of painting. I don’t have statistics, but it seems like it probably affected the world of portraiture the most. And I wonder if many of the 20th century art movements were influenced by photography. None of my art history classes touched on that and it’s kinda weird to me. There is definitely something about a Dada or cubism or surrealist painting that transcends beyond what a traditional photo of a landscape or a portrait can do. There is no location in the real world with actual melting clocks or people whose faces show multiple angles at once.

And then there was the digital photograph that changed everything again! Film has become a niche art form.

There were specific kinds of jobs lost due to the digital transition, too. I’m thinking of things like murals being replaced by printed banners, or book covers often being done in photoshop. Oh, and that’s another tool that was faced with fear: Photoshop! There was a fear it would destroy the need for professional photographers because everyone could just fix their own photos. Turns out nope, and in fact people skilled in photography and photo editing are still in demand. And of course there’s the loss of 2D animation in favor of 3D animation, the loss of practical effects for digital, etc.

And you might argue that in some of those cases people can tell corners are being cut and that they won’t stand for it, but Marvel movies still make billions of dollars so…

So I don’t know what’s going to happen with AI art. I am NOT saying “all current artists are stupid and wrong, in the future history students will laugh at how stubborn they were to resist this idea”. AI art is not comparable to photography or digital painting.

With a photograph, you still need to compose the image in the frame, you need to position yourself in the real world, you need to know your equipment, whether you’re using film or digital. You also need to know how to process that photo either in the dark room or in Photoshop. These are skills the average person does not have. You cannot tell an AI “that shot was good but can you increase the contrast?” It’ll just produce a completely new image.

I read an article about an art director who was encountering difficulties as the department tried to incorporate AI. They got back first drafts of art ideas from the people employed to work with the AI, gave critique, and the second round was just completely new images that didn’t include the suggestions… because they couldn’t. AI does not understand color theory. It does not have the ability to take critique. It can’t slightly alter the layout of a design.

And all of that applies to painting too. AI (currently) can’t do what a trained art student can do. It doesn’t know that to create a sense of atmosphere you should make distant objects bluer. It doesn’t know how to use human physiology and psychology to draw a viewer’s eyes across a large painting to reveal a story.

AI also can’t replicate INTENTION - and intentionality is a HUGE part of art. WHY an artist chose those colors, that medium, that composition, those tools, why they chose to display it a certain way, why the composition is like this instead of that - all of that adds meaning to the painting that you can’t get with AI.

(Yes, there is an absolutely valid field of art critique that evaluates a piece of art on its standalone value and the message it conveys without the context of the artist’s intent, but that should be compared to the analysis that DOES include the artist’s intent! That comparison can bring about so much understanding!)

Anyway I’m going to end this post now because it has gotten WAY too long. I focused mostly on painting and photography in this post because those are my particular fields of speciality, but this applies to ALL ART. It applies to music and writing and scripting and acting and composing music and just. Everything. All art.

I don’t think there are any forms of art AI doesn’t threaten. Now granted, AI can’t currently pick up a paint brush. It can’t use a crochet needle. It can’t hold a camera. And maybe there will be some sort of return to physical media in response to AI produced digital art. Or maybe there will be a response in digital art to stylistically distinguish it from AI in a way AI can’t reproduce. I’m not sure what will happen. Maybe some proof the image was digitally painted by a real person, somehow. Or that it’s a real photo, or a real article. I saw someone mention there may end up being labels like “100% human made” like we do for organic food lol. Maybe work in progress videos or photo metadata will become more commonplace as evidence of authenticity.

Anyway, NOW I’m ending this post. Whew.

[selamat-linting]

me : obviously any business would want to cut costs and the adoption of ai makes sense when you see it from that perspective. i think LLMs is a tool, its not inherently bad especially if you look at how it helped with biomedical researches, and honestly the issues i've seen with it is mostly related to labor rights issues, the nature of a fragile economic bubble, and people's general incuriosity enabled and amplified. that being said, i've seen mostly small business that are cheap and kinda shitty that uses it so "ai art" has that tacky vibe i dislike just like how i hate the microsoft corporate art style. seeing wwe using it is not exactly surprising to me, they've never really got rid of the tacky "company on the verge of bankruptcy" image no matter how high their production budget gets. like, every show, every video package seems like one last bid to tell their investors theyre profitable even when they've been number one in pro wrestling for decades.

that being said i probably wont start gassing them up if they actually hire artists for the show. its wwe, lol. a corporation like any other. i mean, hollywood hires artists and its mostly underpaid vfx and cgi workers, a lot from the global south. plenty of us animation studies outsource their work to other countries like korea and japan, underpaying them in the process, and erasing the work and skill that goes into it by slapping a US brand to it. or i can argue the whole scale of it and how normalized it is makes it more harmful than the occasional use of "ai art". also, back before CGI was a thing there are cases of actors left disabled or very ill from special effects make up too! everything has its downsides and risks, and as long as mainstream / pop art is produced under capitalism, its not going to be free of exploitation. and i think hyperfocusing on one issue while forgetting the rest and losing the bigger picture is pretty silly isnt it?

my inflammatory reddit user alter : your disgusting and exploitative use of artists (ai art) vs our authentic display of human collaboration and ingenuity (outsourcing and underpaying animation workers from "nameless" studios in asia)

[justanotherblonde]

I don’t think Ne Zha 2 used Ai because I have seen behind the scenes videos on how the movie was made.

https://youtu.be/v7malQgDT_U?feature=shared

But this person on twitter/X is claiming the film used Ai (this person is a Disney fan so maybe that’s why)

https://x.com/CjstrikerC/status/1891468055114387869

https://x.com/CjstrikerC/status/1891483998448234894

this X user is doing exactly what i predicted and trying to scaremonger about something rather insignificant. the link they provide in their first post to iWeaver, an "AI-powered knowledge management tool", states that AI was used in the following ways in Nezha 2:

Question: What key roles did AI play in the production process of “Nezha 2”? Answer: AI played significant roles in the production of “Nezha 2”. It accurately predicted the box – office trend through AI, foreseeing the record – breaking moment 72 hours in advance. In the production process, it carried out automated complexity grading for 220 million underwater particle effects, generated resource allocation plans based on the profiles of over 3,000 artists, and could also track the rendering progress of 14 global studios in real – time, helping to improve production efficiency and quality. (Source: iWeaver)

now, if that's true, it's probably something the studio will keep on the DL simply because they don't want people to turn it into "they used AI? they made the whole thing with AI??!!! Terrible!!" (which, if you ask me, might be a dumb approach because in a lot of circles it will look worse if their "cover" gets "blown"). but even tho iWeaver says "significant roles", the first "role" of AI was just in predicting box-office gains, not in animation. the second "role" is what i suspected from having watched the movie: that AI was used to help render some scenes (one scene?). this makes perfect sense, and if you ask me is a really legit use of AI tech. dare i say it, perhaps even something the studios should be proud of.

OBVIOUSLY they did not use AI to create this whole movie. 14 animation studios were involved, thousands of animators, SO MUCH more work than "just" throwing some prompts at an algorithm and telling it to "make a movie". there are a ridiculous number of small details that can only be attributed to human work. a couple of my favs: when Li Jing [Nezha's father] lies in front of Shen Gongbao's little brother on Shen's behalf, the soldier behind him gives him a look of mild shock😲; when Nezha's parents have Shen Gongbao over for dinner during the siege, one of the Guardian Beasts is snoozing 😴.

use of AI always opens up the floor to discussion of what is "Art", but that's a debate humans will have for as long as we exist and are still making art. hell, people used to say it was cheating to try and paint something from a photograph, rather than a live model. they're ALWAYS going to be like that. critics are a necessary evil. haters are always gonna hate.

making art is about creating with integrity. artists use the tools available to them, and some artists are better at using tools than others. AI is also a creative tool. that's the world we live in in 2025.

consider this: i'm a teacher at university level, and obviously we've got loads of students trying to use AI to complete their assignments. what we're moving towards is having an "admission of AI use" declaration for them to make, because we acknowledge that this tool can be helpful! for example, SPELLING AND GRAMMAR. i'd LOVE if my students used AI to fix those mistakes. then i could smoothly read their work. AI can also help you get a basic understanding of concepts (thus improving your ability to write about them), but you still have to check the sources it provides you. that's what makes you look dumb at university level: citing imaginary sources and authors that the AI generated for you. AI tools are also pretty crap at actually "understanding the assignment", so it's easy to tell when a student used AI to write the whole essay because it won't be the right format, and thus can't get a good score. but if a student is smart enough to figure out what's required according to the rubric, what parts of the essay are needed, what arguments they need to make to get points, and they use AI to help them write those out, i see no reason to penalise them for using assistance - as long as they admit they used it. lying about one's abilities doesn't serve anyone, least of all the person themselves.

i think it's really easy for some armchair critic to look at a "fact" like "AI was used in the production of this film" and get angry about it. but i'll bet they haven't even been to see the movie, or spent any time looking for "behind the scenes" reports like you did, and that means we can ignore that idiot, because they don't know what we know 😌

thanks for reading!!

[reallytoosublime]

The world of animation and animated videos has been revolutionized by the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology. AI has proven to be an invaluable tool in the creation of visually stunning and lifelike characters. This article delves into the applications of AI in animation, the realism it brings to animated characters, and how content creators, including YouTubers, are utilizing these AI-powered solutions to generate revenue.

For animators, AI offers a consistent impact across both 3D and 2D animation. AI will accelerate the interpolation of production-grade animations, enabling animators to transition from key poses to final output more efficiently, while maintaining the character’s arcs and weights. If they are dissatisfied with the result, they can introduce new keyframes and interpolate the animation.

AI algorithms can analyze human movement data and create fluid animations for characters, mimicking realistic movements with unprecedented precision. These algorithms take inspiration from motion capture data or deep learning techniques, producing smooth and lifelike animations.

Text-to-video models can be used to create short-form video content from a provided text script. These models can be used to create engaging and informative marketing videos. For example, a company could use a text-to-video model to create a video that explains how their product works.

While AI is making significant strides in animation, it is unlikely to completely replace 3D animators. Instead, the future is likely to see a collaboration between AI-driven tools and human creativity. AI technology is a valuable tool that can greatly enhance the work of animators.

How AI Magically Turns Novices into Animation Wizards Overnight

[canmom]

it was a matter of time but pure-generative-AI animation has progressed to the point of looking 'not utterly shit'.

it's obvs a blatant ghibli pastiche, there's sometimes e.g. some inconsistent spacing (the leg on the walking cat for example) that I would criticise in a human animator, but the level of spatial and temporal coherence is much, much higher than it was before and it basically 'feels like' human animation, or at least a lot closer to it, than previous efforts that I've seen.

the process used involves a lot of 'human in the feedback loop' iteration - the artist used one generative model to produce still shots, and a second generative model to produce animations out of them, and additional generative models to get foley and music - but this was done in a weekend, compared to the weeks of work (months if you include preproduction) by experienced experts that it would take to produce comparable animation by the traditional techniques. the video generation is controlled by a text description of what you want to happen in the shot, but it doesn't seem like there is much fine-grained control over the details here.

traditional animation is a thoroughly collaborative process (unless you're Don Hertzfeldt), it takes large teams, and generally speaking only functions at all in the modern world by outsourcing large parts of the labour to countries where the cost of living is lower. the most celebrated (and higher-paid) roles in the process tend to be roles like storyboarding and key animation, where artistic choice is highest. animation lore is full of frustration from artists at this end of the pipeline, about the intent of a cut being lost through rushed or thoughtless inbetweening and compositing.

although image generation competes with this 'planning' stage, its unpredictability and lack of a connection to a 'personality' means I think that direction and key animation will still be a thing in animation to come. I'm less sure about inbetweening. current techniques for AI gen aren't there yet, but it doesn't seem to be far off the point where we can give an AI some keyframes and have it generate a reasonably convincing path between them, taking over the roles of cleanup, inbetweening, and compositing.

I doubt it will stop here either. the question will be how amenable it is to artistic control. for making an impressive-looking non-narrative twitter video you can just take a few generations that look good and staple them together, but these tools will only be useful for filmmaking if they can maintain consistency of character designs and respond reasonably to tweaking, without having cumbersome text input.

at the demoscene event this weekend, I was struck by how, as much as there is plenty of excitement about exploring new techniques, there was perhaps even more work being produced in the 'old school'/'mid school' categories targeting machines like the Commodore 64, Amiga, BBC Micro, or even modern low-level fantasy consoles like the TIC-80. new techniques are still being discovered for C64 demos, despite the hardware being decades old and no longer produced, and oldschool demos are still being made and appreciated by an audience who didn't necessarily grow up with the tech. not to mention the fact that we still draw and paint as furiously as ever.

art and medium are intimately connected; knowing how someone made something is a huge part of the context I bring to interpret it. so I don't fear that nobody will ever want to produce animation anymore.

but a demo is something that can be produced by a solo coder and generally not done for money. animation is produced in a variety of ways - there is a strong subculture of solo or small-team independent animators - but animated films are rarely made except by a whole studio working full time. I'm not sure how AI is going to affect that whole economic structure, and affect the future of this medium I love, but it's getting much closer to the day that we find out.

[qweerhet]

I see some of your pro-ai stuff, and I also see that you're very good at explaining things, so I have some concerns about ai that I'd like for you to explain if it's okay.

I'm very worried about the amount of pollution it takes to make an ai generated image, story, video, etc. I'm also very worried about ai imagery being used to spread disinformation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to go by the stance that since we can't un-create ai, we should just try our best to manage. How do we manage things like disinformation and massive amounts of pollution? To be fair, I actually don't know the exact amount of pollution ai generated prompts make.

so, first off: the environmental devastation argument is so incorrect, i would honestly consider it intellectually dishonest. here is a good, thorough writeup of the issue.

the tl;dr is that trying to discuss the "environmental cost of AI" as one monolithic thing is incoherent; AI is an umbrella term that refers to a wide breadth of both machine-learning research and, like, random tech that gets swept up in the umbrella as a marketing gimmick. when most people doompost about the environmental cost of AI, they're discussing image generation programs and chat interfaces in particular, and the fact is that running these programs on your computer eats about as much energy as, like, playing an hour of skyrim. bluntly, i consider this argument intellectually dishonest from anyone who does not consider it equally unethical to play skyrim.

the vast majority of the environmental cost of AI such as image generation and chat interfaces comes from implementation by large corporations. this problem isn't tractable by banning the tool; it's a structural problem baked into the existence of massive corporations and the current phase of capitalism we're in. prior to generative AI becoming a worldwide cultural trend, corporations were still responsible for that much environmental devastation, primarily to the end of serving ads--and like. the vast majority of use cases corporations are twisting AI to fit boil down to serving ads. essentially, i think focusing on the tool in this particular case is missing the forest for the trees; as long as you're not addressing the structural incentives for corporations to blindly and mindlessly participate in unsustainable extractivism, they will continue to use any and all tools to participate in such, and i am equally concerned about the energy spent barraging me with literally dozens and dozens of digital animated billboards in a ten-mile radius as i am with the energy spent getting a chatbot to talk up their product to me.

moving onto the disinformation issue: actually, yes, i'm very concerned about that. i don't have any personal opinions on how to manage it, but it's a very strong concern of mine. lowering the skill floor for production of media does, necessarily, mean a lot of bad actors are now capable of producing a much larger glut of malicious content, much faster.

i do think that, historically speaking, similar explosions of disinformation & malicious media haven't been socially managed by banning the tool nor by shaming those who use it for non-malicious purposes--like, when it was adopted for personal use, the internet itself created a sudden huge explosion of spam and disinformation as never before seen in human history, but "get rid of the internet" was never a tractable solution to this, and "shame people you see using the internet" just didn't do anything for the problem.

wish i could be more helpful on solutions for that one--it's just not a field i have any particular knowledge in, but if there's anyone reading who'd like to add on with information about large-scale regulation of the sort of broad field of malicious content i'm discussing, feel free.

[do-you-have-a-flag]

putting aside the ethics of 'A.I' videos in their creation/usage/waste/economics, just on a purely technical level one thing i find interesting is no matter if the result looks photorealistic or like 3d CGI- it's all technically 2d image generation.

unless specifically used as an add on in a software for 3d rendering, of course, pretty much every ai video you see online is 2d art. the space rendered is a single plane, think of it like doing a digital painting on a single layer. the depth/perspective is an illusion that is frame by frame being rendered to the best ability of prediction based on data it has been fed.

obviously videos of 3d models in animation are a 2d file. like a pixar movie. but in video games you do have a fully rendered 3d character in a 3d rendered space, that's why glitches that clip through environments are so funny. it's efficient to have stock animations and interaction conditions programmed onto rigged dolls and sets.

by contrast if you were to use a generative ai in a similar context it would be real time animating a series of illustrations. of sounds and scenarios. the complexity required for narrative consistency and the human desire to fuck up restrictions hits up against a much more randomised set of programming. how would it deal with continuity of setting and personality? obviously chatbots already exist but as the fortnight darth vader debacle recently shows there are limits to slapping a skin on a stock chatbot rather than building one custom.

i just think that there's so many problems that come from trying to make an everything generator that don't exist in the mediums it is trying to usurp because those mediums have a built in problem solving process that is inherent to the tools and techniques that make them up.

but also also, very funny to see algorithmic 2D pixel generation being slapped with every label "this photo, this video, this 3d render" like it is at best description cgi, let's call it what it is.

but i could of course be wrong in my understanding of this technology, so feel free to correct me if you have better info, but my basic understanding of this tech is: binary code organised by -> human programming code to create -> computer software code that -> intakes information from data sets to output -> pixels and audio waveforms

[demifiendrsa]

The Witcher 4 — Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo

The Witcher IV is in development for PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X|S, and PC. A release date has yet to be announced.

Latest details

As Unreal Fest 2025 kicked off, CD Projekt RED joined Epic Games on stage to present a tech demo of The Witcher IV in Unreal Engine 5. Presented in typical CD Projekt RED style, the tech demo follows the main protagonist Ciri in the midst of a monster contract and shows off some of the innovative Unreal Engine 5 technology and features that will power the game’s open world. The tech demo takes place in the region of Kovir—which will make its very first appearance in the video game series in The Witcher IV. The presentation followed main protagonist Ciri—along with her horse Kelpie—as she made her way through the rugged mountains and dense forests of Kovir to the bustling port town of Valdrest. Along the way, CD PROJEKT RED and Epic Games dove deep into how each feature is helping drive performance, visual fidelity, and shape The Witcher IV‘s immersive open world. Watch the full presentation from Unreal Fest 2025 now at LINK. Since the strategic partnership was announced in 2022, CDPR has been working with Epic Games to develop new tools and enhance existing features in Unreal Engine 5 to expand the engine’s open-world development capabilities and establish robust tools geared toward CD PROJEKT RED’s open-world design philosophies. The demo, which runs on a PlayStation 5 at 60 frames per second, shows off in-engine capabilities set in the world of The Witcher IV, including the new Unreal Animation Framework, Nanite Foliage rendering, MetaHuman technology with Mass AI crowd scaling, and more. The tools showcased are being developed, tested, and eventually released to all UE developers, starting with today’s Unreal Engine 5.6 release. This will help other studios create believable and immersive open-world environments that deliver performance at 60 FPS without compromising on quality—even at vast scales. While the presentation was running on a PlayStation console, the features and technology will be supported across all platforms the game will launch on. The Unreal Animation Framework powers realistic character movements in busy scenes. FastGeo Streaming, developed in collaboration with Epic Games, allows environments to load quickly and smoothly. Nanite Foliage fills forests and fields with dense detail without sacrificing performance. The Mass system handles large, dynamic crowds with ease, while ML Deformer adds subtle, realistic touches to character animation—right down to muscle movement.