The Kurt Russel de-aging is the best I've scene. Plus that was bright and you could see more detail in the scene. The Indy opening sequence is very dark, and that may help make it look better. All the tech is useless if you make a bad movie. So, let's hope it is amazing. So far the early reactions say otherwise.
Honestly, most deep fakes I see still squarely fall in the uncanny valley - particularly due to the eyes and skin. They just lack clarity in the lighting (particularly sub-surface scattering), even with the processing power and training data at Disney's disposal. I think most good de-aging or head replacements rely heavily on more traditional techniques like "digital doubles" - for example, Rachel in Blade Runner 2049. I understand why Disney would want to use AI though, since they seem hellbent on churning out flop after flop at the moment - this would potentially be much cheaper in the long run and save them a lot of money.
The reason Rachel works in BR2049 is because you're supposed to think she's fake. Or at least *almost* real. It's more of a narrative trick, even if the technology is impressive.
Yeahhhh, it kinda makes sense. I just don't know why they needed 30 minutes of it for this movie. I think this movie would be much better if they realized the fact that the actor was 80 years old and the movie really should play to that. It's a typical disney move trying to just do fan service and make everything the same as it used to be
It is only going to get better. The only problem is that upcoming actors cannot compete with veteran actors. Instead of having original actors who bring a unique style of acting, they would have to mimic older actors who are either too old or have passed away, thereby diminishing originality.
De-aging is fine if used sparingly, for example, in brief flashback scenes. With de-aged characters, minimize clear shots of the face while the character is talking or expressing a lot of emotion. The technology is usable, but still hasn't climbed out of the uncanny valley. As with a good magic trick, if you let people get a close look at it, the effect is ruined.
Every time I see the bts footage of Rogue One’s Tarkin actor, even in the side by sides, I cringe. The actor they got to play him was a perfect recasting! He had the voice down, the mannerisms were fine, and he fucking LOOKS just like the guy!! The smoothed out PS4 cut scene Tarkin is so distracting in all those scenes, where they painted out a perfectly good acting job.
I don’t know why they gave themselves more work than they needed to. Ford should look approximately how he did she was in Clear and Present Danger. I am not sure why he looks like he’s supposed to be in his mid 30s in DOD opening
It's like anything else effects related. You can only work with what you have. It's roughly the same as the artists who worked at Madame Tussaud's wax museum; if the life sculpt is good, then it'll look reasonable. If the make up is good, it'll look better. if the lighting is good, then it'll be a tad bit better. If something isn't good, then the end result won't be as good as it could have been. That was true in the age of Harryhausen, and it's still true today. I still remember VALLEY OF GWANGI, and the color of the dinosaur changing because the work was rushed, and the lighting didn't match, so the final result was off.
Watching part of the movie so far, the tech and output are both quite amazing. The only thing that kind of bothers me is that the bulk of the face seems to not have enough gravity to it. It doesn't snap around fast enough during movement and has sort of a "floaty" feel to it. Also the lip sync still seems a bit mush mouthed.
@@FrameVoyager Ah yeah to be fair you explain Tarkin as a digi double later on, just early in the video you'd used footage of that to explain the deepfake process.
There's nothing problematic about it in terms of the tech. In Rogue One the technology clearly wasn't properly ready and Carrie Fisher looked like a cartoon, but in the new Indiana Jones it looks fantastic. Of course some people might be able to point to areas where it looks slightly different on screen to how it would if it was genuine 1981 Harrison Ford footage, but seriously, this looks bloody great, I've seen it at the cinema and was very impressed by it. The issue of whether this gets used in the future to de-age actors who haven't agreed to be de-aged and have new words put in their mouths which they didn't agree to say, well that's another matter altogether.
In 1923 Walt Disney was highly insulted by reactions to his "I'm an animator, I make cartoons." It was a grudge he carried to his grave. Then there was Ray Harryhausen. I'd like to show those late animators what's possible today and see their reactions. Even live action is animated, sometimes more animation than live action. Any tool can be misused. Deep Fake technology is going to have impact on the legal field in two areas. First, how much ownership do actors have of their images and voices? Deep Fake can make their images look and sound like someone else. Second, we are rapidly becoming a surveillance society and now video footage is more believable than eyewitness testimony by people trained in observation and reporting. Need to remove a political rival in a close election? Arrest that enemy and get him convicted of a felony because Deep Fake provides uncontestable evidence. "Nothing is real."
In 3/4 takes de-aged Indy looked better than young Kurt Russell (who looked cool but facial features were too much built on his older face). 1/4 ones were less lucky under certain angles and lighting conditions.
Its a weird thing.....we cannot recreate the very first time that we saw it......and when i saw it the second time many months later, it seemed like they had improved the bag head scene, but i don't know if they did?, or it was the exact same?......did my brain, had my brain got use to it?.........I'll tell you this, the very first time i saw it something was off, and i'm not talking about the old Harrison Ford voice (which was a mistake to do)....but yeah, what a fascinating and weird one. They did really well in some shots, and other shots just looked terrible.
Usually, first time I watched a movie, I turn off my brain and just enjoy it. Trying to find mistakes, bad CGI, continuity errors just sucks the fun out of it. It's entertainment, not a task or a contest of who will spot issues first. So I'm looking forward for this movie, to say goodbye to Indy and just be entertained!
Same! Very much looking forward to this movie as well. I hope they nail it as it's the last attempt at it. But I just have a feeling the story will just be "ok"
Normally I'd say don't do the deaging such as with rogue one which is the extreme, but I'd rather watch a whole movie with deaged/deep faked lead over one with an old man trying to relive his glory days. Clint Eastwood more or less knocked action on the head post in the line of fire which incorporated his age and the problems therein. Still some way to go to make it look convincing and cost effective but they will get there, question is, should they as we don't want reboots of classic movies deaging all the characters
Lots of the footage still seems partially 3D. People have been experimenting with 3D face controlled deepfakes. It's a lot more expensive but the results are much better and you get more control over it as well.
I watched the new movie twice; I think some scenes of young Indy look really good, but a few others look too fake. I've also watched the behind-the-scenes clips with Harrison having dots on his face for the opening sequence; I wonder if it would have looked better if the makeup department had taped his skin back and maybe add a darker haired wig to make him look young in-camera, then the deep fake software might not have had to work as hard to make him look younger? I think they did that with Kurt Russel in GOTG2, and I think his de-aging was the best.
I think one of the big error they did is using deepfake directly on "old harrison ford": when you're older your nose, ears and face are little bit bigger and so 40's Indy looks like quite different there, you can see is nose is bigger and his nasal deviation accentuated (and weirdly large) on the punch scene. Sometimes you also notice some bad blending like they didn't use the deepfake druing all the action time. There's also bad contrast/blending of light. I was quite hyped knowing Shamook work at lucasfilms but i must admit this deepfake is really disappointing. But yeah the interesting thing it to project onanaother actor, why they didn't take this actor who did solo, he was pretty good at making han manierism. Somehow Shamook deepfake about solo movie looks better than this one.
But to answer your question, yes we cut out some inhalations depending on the pace of the video. It's a common RUclips edit that you'll find everywhere. Sometimes the balance is a bit hard to find but we try to leave in breaths here and there. But the analytics and research shows that this is the most effective method for editing, retention, and engagement for youtube videos.
I feel like feeding the machine data of Harrison ford spanning from 1976 to 1990 isn't exactly accurate. Wouldn't you want to try and capture as much data as possible from one point in his life? Even if it means less data overall?
Honestly I think the tv show Suits has really convincing de ageing. Hair has a be roll in making it believable. However they do use different actors for kid versions of characters.
I stopped watching Hollywood altogether for years now. But because I have a huge interest in deepfake content and its tech, this makes me want to watch latest Indiana Jones for the Deepfakes alone.
I think people complain about deepfakes because they KNOW ITS fake! Just look at the ending of BTTF 1 vs. The same scenes in BTTF 2. Same scenes reshot with the same actor. People point out the differences but few complains! The faces look fine.
I'm not really a fan of this stuff. Idk, you can make a compelling story without needing to resort to essentially bringing an actor back from the dead like this. It just comes across as hackneyed storytelling to need to need to unironically digitally recreate an actors performance to get your narrative to work.
I agree. I think there is already an interesting story relating to an 80 year old actor and an indiana jones outside of his prime. Almost like a Logan kind of movie
Dude, it's really not nice to use a video of President Putin. Unlike your American and pro-American European "leaders," Putin is not an actor or a showman. He's a real man who serves his people, because that's the way things work in Russia. And even though I think your channel is good, I will have to refer this case to our hacker department for such misdeeds.
@@FrameVoyager I'm Russian - of course you can't understand if I'm joking or not. One thing's for sure, you can't joke about Putin. If we make jokes about Putin, at some point we might get the impression that he is just like English-speaking politicians, who are more bloggers, actors, boxers and transgender people, but not politicians. Putin is real. And it is because of this fact that this civilization has a chance to avoid the Apocalypse.
VIDEO NOTE: We accidentally added and "s" to "Luscasfilm" and the "Young Indiana Jones" part at the beginning we pulled the wrong clip of. Apologies!
How dare you! :P
It's an improvement.
The Kurt Russel de-aging is the best I've scene. Plus that was bright and you could see more detail in the scene. The Indy opening sequence is very dark, and that may help make it look better. All the tech is useless if you make a bad movie. So, let's hope it is amazing. So far the early reactions say otherwise.
Yeah, I think this movie has bigger problems than the de-aging.
Well Russels d-aging was mostly make up.
Lol thought you meant the one in tron legacy 😂
Honestly, most deep fakes I see still squarely fall in the uncanny valley - particularly due to the eyes and skin. They just lack clarity in the lighting (particularly sub-surface scattering), even with the processing power and training data at Disney's disposal. I think most good de-aging or head replacements rely heavily on more traditional techniques like "digital doubles" - for example, Rachel in Blade Runner 2049. I understand why Disney would want to use AI though, since they seem hellbent on churning out flop after flop at the moment - this would potentially be much cheaper in the long run and save them a lot of money.
Watch Deepfake Neigbour Wars then you'll see just how convincing deepfakes are now.
Ones online are the best. The movie fakes are just atrocious.
The reason Rachel works in BR2049 is because you're supposed to think she's fake. Or at least *almost* real.
It's more of a narrative trick, even if the technology is impressive.
Yeahhhh, it kinda makes sense. I just don't know why they needed 30 minutes of it for this movie. I think this movie would be much better if they realized the fact that the actor was 80 years old and the movie really should play to that. It's a typical disney move trying to just do fan service and make everything the same as it used to be
It's crazy to me how people on the internet can do a better job at it than studios can.
It is only going to get better. The only problem is that upcoming actors cannot compete with veteran actors. Instead of having original actors who bring a unique style of acting, they would have to mimic older actors who are either too old or have passed away, thereby diminishing originality.
Yeah, I think you have some good young actors now who do their own thing, but it's getting weird with so many of them having to play remake roles .
The deep-faked Indy face feels "mushy." Especially when they take the bag off his head.
yeahhhhh, I mean it doesn't look all that bad to me. But I think it's still just not fully there yet. Maybe James Cameron should give it a go
De-aging is fine if used sparingly, for example, in brief flashback scenes. With de-aged characters, minimize clear shots of the face while the character is talking or expressing a lot of emotion. The technology is usable, but still hasn't climbed out of the uncanny valley. As with a good magic trick, if you let people get a close look at it, the effect is ruined.
Every time I see the bts footage of Rogue One’s Tarkin actor, even in the side by sides, I cringe. The actor they got to play him was a perfect recasting! He had the voice down, the mannerisms were fine, and he fucking LOOKS just like the guy!! The smoothed out PS4 cut scene Tarkin is so distracting in all those scenes, where they painted out a perfectly good acting job.
Still looks like there's a difference in resolution between the face & the rest of the body.
I don’t know why they gave themselves more work than they needed to. Ford should look approximately how he did she was in Clear and Present Danger. I am not sure why he looks like he’s supposed to be in his mid 30s in DOD opening
Lol, really taking chances with the hat.
People didn't like my beanie 🥲 plus Indiana Jones. It's ok, my wife doesn't like the hat
It's like anything else effects related. You can only work with what you have. It's roughly the same as the artists who worked at Madame Tussaud's wax museum; if the life sculpt is good, then it'll look reasonable. If the make up is good, it'll look better. if the lighting is good, then it'll be a tad bit better. If something isn't good, then the end result won't be as good as it could have been. That was true in the age of Harryhausen, and it's still true today. I still remember VALLEY OF GWANGI, and the color of the dinosaur changing because the work was rushed, and the lighting didn't match, so the final result was off.
The only thing that throws it off is the lighting and colorgrading techiqnues are from 2023 but we aren't used to seeing young Indy like that.
Could be. I still think there is a lifeless quality to it, but then again I can't tell if I'm just biased because I know it's deepfake
@@FrameVoyager they should've graded the young footage wtih an Eastman 100T 5247 & Eastman 5383 lut, I bet you it would match.
As the ol saying goes....
" It's Not the Years honey, just the Mileage "
Indiana Jones
Lol 😂
Watching part of the movie so far, the tech and output are both quite amazing. The only thing that kind of bothers me is that the bulk of the face seems to not have enough gravity to it. It doesn't snap around fast enough during movement and has sort of a "floaty" feel to it. Also the lip sync still seems a bit mush mouthed.
I thought Tarkin was a straight-up CG head replacement? I wasn't aware the deepfake process was in use back then
Hmm... I think he was a digital double replacement. But there has been some debate if they maybe mixed the 2.
It was completely CGI, deepfakes didn't exist back in 2016.
@@FrameVoyager Ah yeah to be fair you explain Tarkin as a digi double later on, just early in the video you'd used footage of that to explain the deepfake process.
Yeahhhhh, I think I just made a mistake on the b-roll for that one 😅 I blame the monster energy
True!
There's nothing problematic about it in terms of the tech. In Rogue One the technology clearly wasn't properly ready and Carrie Fisher looked like a cartoon, but in the new Indiana Jones it looks fantastic. Of course some people might be able to point to areas where it looks slightly different on screen to how it would if it was genuine 1981 Harrison Ford footage, but seriously, this looks bloody great, I've seen it at the cinema and was very impressed by it.
The issue of whether this gets used in the future to de-age actors who haven't agreed to be de-aged and have new words put in their mouths which they didn't agree to say, well that's another matter altogether.
Love the advent of new tech in modern mainstream cinema.
Same! Still in the era of them trying to figure it out. I feel like it's still just not there yet but 🤷♂️
In 1923 Walt Disney was highly insulted by reactions to his "I'm an animator, I make cartoons." It was a grudge he carried to his grave. Then there was Ray Harryhausen. I'd like to show those late animators what's possible today and see their reactions. Even live action is animated, sometimes more animation than live action.
Any tool can be misused. Deep Fake technology is going to have impact on the legal field in two areas. First, how much ownership do actors have of their images and voices? Deep Fake can make their images look and sound like someone else. Second, we are rapidly becoming a surveillance society and now video footage is more believable than eyewitness testimony by people trained in observation and reporting. Need to remove a political rival in a close election? Arrest that enemy and get him convicted of a felony because Deep Fake provides uncontestable evidence.
"Nothing is real."
The mouth is always a giveaway.
Yep! And the facial movement.
Linux in the filmmaking world finally getting some attention on Frame Voyager!!! 🥳🥳🥳
Oh yeah!
In 3/4 takes de-aged Indy looked better than young Kurt Russell (who looked cool but facial features were too much built on his older face). 1/4 ones were less lucky under certain angles and lighting conditions.
Its a weird thing.....we cannot recreate the very first time that we saw it......and when i saw it the second time many months later, it seemed like they had improved the bag head scene, but i don't know if they did?, or it was the exact same?......did my brain, had my brain got use to it?.........I'll tell you this, the very first time i saw it something was off, and i'm not talking about the old Harrison Ford voice (which was a mistake to do)....but yeah, what a fascinating and weird one. They did really well in some shots, and other shots just looked terrible.
Usually, first time I watched a movie, I turn off my brain and just enjoy it. Trying to find mistakes, bad CGI, continuity errors just sucks the fun out of it. It's entertainment, not a task or a contest of who will spot issues first. So I'm looking forward for this movie, to say goodbye to Indy and just be entertained!
Same! Very much looking forward to this movie as well. I hope they nail it as it's the last attempt at it. But I just have a feeling the story will just be "ok"
Linus just casually being in a random shot lmao
😏 watch Linus tech tips all the time
Yeah his face looked expressionless.
Yknow- if I ever become a really famous actor- I’m just gonna always wear a hat- that way it’s gonna be a disaster to deep fake me
Smart
it didn't improve and it's a shame they disfigured the movie like that
the mostly digital set backings didn't look good either
Agreed. Honestly didn't even really need that beginning part
Everyone looked fake, not just harrison ford. It was bizarre.
How long until we all are DE-AGED in real life? 👀
I recon about 264 years and 146 days
@@jonahplayscello or just when we all wear AR glasses 👀
I dunno about me, because I'm already 69 yo, but I do follow Bryan Johnson on youtube.
👀
Normally I'd say don't do the deaging such as with rogue one which is the extreme, but I'd rather watch a whole movie with deaged/deep faked lead over one with an old man trying to relive his glory days. Clint Eastwood more or less knocked action on the head post in the line of fire which incorporated his age and the problems therein. Still some way to go to make it look convincing and cost effective but they will get there, question is, should they as we don't want reboots of classic movies deaging all the characters
the leia fake in rogue one was terrible she looked like a cartoon
Yeahhhh, that one was rough
The problem with this movie is not the de-aging.
To me in some of the trailer shots the skin looks a little too gummy and plasticy.
Lots of the footage still seems partially 3D.
People have been experimenting with 3D face controlled deepfakes.
It's a lot more expensive but the results are much better and you get more control over it as well.
I would assume that would be the best option. Seems like a good way to blend the 2 together
Those Disney Research Hub videos are as disappointing as Epcot in 2023 💀. Like how many PhDS does it take to add audio
De-Aging was the least of its problems xd
I watched the new movie twice; I think some scenes of young Indy look really good, but a few others look too fake. I've also watched the behind-the-scenes clips with Harrison having dots on his face for the opening sequence; I wonder if it would have looked better if the makeup department had taped his skin back and maybe add a darker haired wig to make him look young in-camera, then the deep fake software might not have had to work as hard to make him look younger? I think they did that with Kurt Russel in GOTG2, and I think his de-aging was the best.
I think one of the big error they did is using deepfake directly on "old harrison ford": when you're older your nose, ears and face are little bit bigger and so 40's Indy looks like quite different there, you can see is nose is bigger and his nasal deviation accentuated (and weirdly large) on the punch scene. Sometimes you also notice some bad blending like they didn't use the deepfake druing all the action time. There's also bad contrast/blending of light. I was quite hyped knowing Shamook work at lucasfilms but i must admit this deepfake is really disappointing. But yeah the interesting thing it to project onanaother actor, why they didn't take this actor who did solo, he was pretty good at making han manierism. Somehow Shamook deepfake about solo movie looks better than this one.
Does this guy ever inhale? Ever notice that his monologue has all inhalations removed?
I'm singlehandedly stopping global warming by not inhaling.
But to answer your question, yes we cut out some inhalations depending on the pace of the video. It's a common RUclips edit that you'll find everywhere. Sometimes the balance is a bit hard to find but we try to leave in breaths here and there. But the analytics and research shows that this is the most effective method for editing, retention, and engagement for youtube videos.
@@FrameVoyager That is too bad. It makes the presentation feel force-feed.
Analytics seem to encourage the worst in us.
@@FrameVoyager That is actually quite funny
@@dwpix I mean honestly, I think most people are used to it now and don't notice it. I watch content like this all the time and don't feel this way.
I feel like feeding the machine data of Harrison ford spanning from 1976 to 1990 isn't exactly accurate. Wouldn't you want to try and capture as much data as possible from one point in his life? Even if it means less data overall?
Honestly I think the tv show Suits has really convincing de ageing.
Hair has a be roll in making it believable.
However they do use different actors for kid versions of characters.
I stopped watching Hollywood altogether for years now. But because I have a huge interest in deepfake content and its tech, this makes me want to watch latest Indiana Jones for the Deepfakes alone.
I justsaw it and it was amazing.
I want to know when you can deaged Arnie into CONAN the Barbarian.
I think people complain about deepfakes because they KNOW ITS fake!
Just look at the ending of BTTF 1 vs. The same scenes in BTTF 2. Same scenes reshot with the same actor.
People point out the differences but few complains!
The faces look fine.
I'm not really a fan of this stuff. Idk, you can make a compelling story without needing to resort to essentially bringing an actor back from the dead like this. It just comes across as hackneyed storytelling to need to need to unironically digitally recreate an actors performance to get your narrative to work.
I agree. I think there is already an interesting story relating to an 80 year old actor and an indiana jones outside of his prime. Almost like a Logan kind of movie
De-aged voice problem.
Why? It was v well done. It’s not as if Lucasfilm doesn’t have a ton of footage from a younger Harrison Ford
The only good thing of the movie.
The first 21 minutes
Lucasfilm*
Yeahhhh, sorry about that. That "s" got added in on accident
There is in the trailer a screencap with double ears at ruclips.net/video/R-YEqrPR1hc/видео.html
Like his ear melting, good spot
I always enjoy a good Kathleen Kennedy joke err I mean quote. 😂
Oh... Always a Kathleen Kennedy joke. She is a great producer, but I don't think she understand today's media culture
I don't watch an Indiana Jones movie for deepfakes. I go in looking for adventure. If I want deepfakes I'll watch a sci-fi flick.
I mean... Indiana Jones kinda is sci-fi and deepfakes are not sci-fi specific
@@FrameVoyager just saying deepfakes aren't really important.
@@curtisjeffries-ki2do not really no
Dude, it's really not nice to use a video of President Putin. Unlike your American and pro-American European "leaders," Putin is not an actor or a showman. He's a real man who serves his people, because that's the way things work in Russia. And even though I think your channel is good, I will have to refer this case to our hacker department for such misdeeds.
Technically not a video of Putin there 👀
@@FrameVoyager dont use Putin, you have no moral rights.
Can't tell if your joking with me or not lol
Tell the hacker department that I want fries with my order
@@FrameVoyager I'm Russian - of course you can't understand if I'm joking or not. One thing's for sure, you can't joke about Putin. If we make jokes about Putin, at some point we might get the impression that he is just like English-speaking politicians, who are more bloggers, actors, boxers and transgender people, but not politicians. Putin is real. And it is because of this fact that this civilization has a chance to avoid the Apocalypse.
yeah AI is just beggining now, but if they keep pushing it, in ten years it could become way smarter and capable than us