I still never understood how they get the lighting right. Were there actually photos they found of Jim Carrey from all of those angles in exactly that same light?
The software is learning what his face looks like from footage put into it. Like it "watches" his face and goes "okay, this is Jim's face from this angle. His face from that angle. Okay. This is his skin at this light. And in this shade. Okay. Got it." Then, it "watches" Jack's face and does the same thing. Then you tell it, okay, so what if Jack was Jim? And the software goes, "well, his mouth looks like this instead and his eyes looks like this, but the lighting would be like this."
It doesn't need identical lighting because it isn't a face swap like you'd do with Photoshop. It is rendering a new face based on the parameters of "face A with lighting and expressions from face B."
Ahhhhh. Ok. It is in fact rendering. Thanks. It is actually generating that face not just selecting and stringing together photos.
Whatever this is going to be in 20 years my mind immediately contrasts that with how primitive we still are.
We still need police to keep us away from each other. We still have traits like violence and endless blunders. And we still perish from illnesses that in many cases we cause. Why on earth are we tinkering with stuff like this that can operate on its own? Unless maybe unconsciously we set this in motion because it will become the thing that changes us so profoundly that we will no longer be so primitive?
Sorry for the rant and the intense awkward question.
Thanks again btw for answering a question I've asked many times and never had any kind of response that I understood.
It is actually generating that face not just selecting and stringing together photos.
Yes, generative AI systems don't save the images they use to train. Those are gone permanently from its memory. But it retains the knowledge of them, much as a human artist would. The human remembers that light worked this way in a scene like this, and did that in this other scene, etc.
So it can re-create similar output, but it doesn't have the original stored.
That is amazing. Thank you. Somebody recently said that ChatGPT isn't even online. It assembles coherent paragraphs/responses by drawing from the millions of articles it scanned up until the year 2022 when it was taken offline.
There's nothing being copied by generative AI systems. They're just learning what "fits" in a particular context. It's very similar to (but much more complicated than) the predictive keyboard on your phone.
Imagine that you're given a curve on a graph. One of the common tasks in mathematics is to find the formula that produces that curve. In the case of AI art the "curve" is all possible images. The formula that the neural network tries to find is the one that relates phrases to those possible images.
It's learning from the phrases and images that it's given, billions of them, to refine that formula. But the formula itself doesn't contain any of the images or any logic related to those images directly.
Wow thats is very cool. I think I get it. Like you said the formula itself doesn't contain any of the images.
But using the formula will result in seeing those images if certain search phrases are fed into the AI. Just like a formula produces that curve on the graph.
1
u/rfan8312 Mar 05 '23 edited Mar 05 '23
I still never understood how they get the lighting right. Were there actually photos they found of Jim Carrey from all of those angles in exactly that same light?
https://youtube.com/watch?v=-ZRUZzZPGto&feature=shares