Comments on: The Computer Generated Song Hye Kyo

The Computer Generated Song Hye Kyo

chunking express — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:33:34 -0800

The making of the Korean Actress "Song Hye Kyo" by Max Edwin Wahyudi. Computer graphics have come a hell of a long way.

By: chunking express

chunking express — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:34:45 -0800

Be sure to view the large final image. It's amazing stuff.

By: armage

armage — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:36:44 -0800

More about the so-called "Uncanny Valley." This model of Song Hye Kyo looks pretty good -- but the smile is where it still doesn't quite work. Until we can accurately replicate expressions of emotion in CGI, we'll never overcome the uncanny valley problem.

By: kbanas

kbanas — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:38:47 -0800

I was reading about this on Gizmodo and I loved (or rather, was enraged) reading all the various comments - Oh, I totally knew it was CGI. The hair isn't quite right. AND THE SMILE. AND THE WAY THE EARRINGS REFLECT THE LIGHT. Yeah, you guys are like fucking Columbo. Please.

By: grobstein

grobstein — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:39:49 -0800

I don't think you would notice the supposed defect in the smile if the images were presented as real rather than CG. I think you're seeing an uncanny valley in part because you're looking for it.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:42:00 -0800

Sure, it's pretty good, but I was disappointed to discover that he had created only still images. It's a hell of lot easier to make good still images than a convincing animated sequence. As he says: "After that, it's all about tweaking the model to match the ref pic."

By: isopraxis

isopraxis — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:42:39 -0800

Yeah, you're just yodeling up the uncanny valley.

By: DU

DU — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:43:59 -0800

I'm pretty sure this is a double, but the server those links point to isn't serving up the goods so I can't prove it. I've definitely seen these pictures before, though, and it's unlikely I got them elsewhere.

By: DU

DU — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:45:12 -0800

Oh and the hair *is* wack. Look at it--it's semi-transparent and has no weight. (Or maybe that's how her hair really is.)

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:47:11 -0800

Actually, that "finished one" doesn't look very convincing, and something would have seemed off even if I didn't know what. The other pics, OTOH, look great. But yeah, what monju_bosatsu said.

By: Smart Dalek

Smart Dalek — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:48:44 -0800

Yeah, you guys are like fucking Columbo. Well, kbanas, I gotta be honest wit ya, sir...my wife's the kinda person whose the first person t'pick up on to these things. So y'see, sir, after awhile, it becomes second nature. Unless you're like Sherlock over dere - ever met him? He's a nice fella, sir, and he knows a lotta things about cigars I didn't even know myself!

By: armage

armage — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:53:08 -0800

I don't think you would notice the supposed defect in the smile if the images were presented as real rather than CG. I think you're seeing an uncanny valley in part because you're looking for it. No, I would. When first saw this photo last year, it was on one of those "Which of these is real and which isn't" sort of pages. The lines around her mouth when she smiles aren't quite right to me. I can't put a finer point on it than that -- but it does jump out at me. Perhaps I've been looking at too many photos of pretty Korean girls...

By: baker dave

baker dave — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:12:05 -0800

yes computer graphics have come a long way ,like to see any of the above do any better

By: Abiezer

Abiezer — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:14:25 -0800

I just called a Chinese friend over to look, who recognised the actress and was astounded that it was CGI, so I'd have to say good job.

By: disgruntled

disgruntled — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:16:30 -0800

Yeah, but can she act?

By: chunking express

chunking express — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:17:29 -0800

I figured there would be a lot of "that's obviously fake" comments -- this is MetaFilter after all and everyone here is so awesome.

By: concreteforest

concreteforest — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:19:34 -0800

ah, but which one of us is running on a Pentium IV?

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:23:20 -0800

yes computer graphics have come a long way ,like to see any of the above do any better Always a stellar standard. Never sue for malpractice unless you could have done a better job of removing that spleen yourself.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:25:42 -0800

Trolling in your own thread, chunking? Classy.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:26:36 -0800

And only now do I realize that those "other photos" that I said looked great are... in fact photos of the actress. Myeah.

By: bshort

bshort — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:29:44 -0800

Looks like a zombie.

By: CynicalKnight

CynicalKnight — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:30:21 -0800

I just looked in a mirror and it's obviously fake - my hair isn't right and there's something seriously wrong with my nose.

By: Bugbread

Bugbread — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:34:36 -0800

I think it's clear, though, that we're starting to pull out of the uncanny valley, because now people disagree about it. Back in the old days, everyone would agree that some CG image was "somehow creepy". Now you have some people saying "nope, not creepy", and others saying "yes it is!". That's a big change. That, and some people seem to be parsing "uncanny valley" as just meaning "you can tell it's fake". The idea of "uncanny valley" is not about whether something is mistakable for the real thing or not, but about how, as you get closer and closer to photorealistic, things start to get creepy. If something is really close to photorealistic, but you can tell it's actually CG, but you're not creeped out, it's no longer in the uncanny valley.

By: chunking express

chunking express — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:39:51 -0800

A good film about the Uncanny Valley, Sex Dolls, and CG Porno is a Perfect Fake.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:44:08 -0800

Thing is bugbread, Mori was talking about appearance and motion. We'll get past the valley a lot quicker on stills than we will in anything animated, and in CGI a lot sooner than in robotics.

By: basicchannel

basicchannel — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:48:40 -0800

DU praising a non-descript youtube post. chunking trolling his own thread... this is post is bizarro awesome!

By: Malor

Malor — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 08:49:28 -0800

bug, the 'uncanny valley' is the feeling of revulsion and wrongness to a moving CGI actor. It hasn't applied to still images for ages. The Final Fantasy movie, for instance, has great stills, even though most people would put it very firmly in the Valley. It's not that they don't look right... they've looked very good for some time now. But as soon as they start animating, they turn from good still pictures into zombies. They don't move right. It looks like a puppet with strings being pulled, not a human, and it bothers people. As still images go, though, this is a remarkable effort. I think it's very unlikely I'd ever know it was CGI if I hadn't been told. And it's not like the guy painted it, this is a 3D model, an enormously harder project. I can't even imagine how much time it must have taken. That guy must be a serious fan. :)

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:02:13 -0800

This post is fake. You can see the join!

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:06:57 -0800

I linked to this from this. A while ago. Also, they turned the JPG compression way to high on these images, and ruined them. Really annoying.

By: chunking express

chunking express — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:11:43 -0800

Since when is it trolling to make fun of MetaFilter users on MetaFilter? Fuckers. Delmoi that's crazy as well. I look forward to k-pop inspired video games.

By: gottabefunky

gottabefunky — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:06:37 -0800

Definitely talent involved here, but in the end it's still a dude making a fake chick with a computer. Which sometimes seems like 90% of the reason these things were invented.

By: eatdonuts

eatdonuts — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:17:14 -0800

I love her in Full House. I'm mighty impressed with the quality of the image. Sorry, nothing else to add.

By: Gyan

Gyan — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:31:11 -0800

DU : I'm pretty sure this is a double, but the server those links point to isn't serving up the goods so I can't prove it. Topically but not literally a double.

By: subaruwrx

subaruwrx — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 12:19:27 -0800

that final render is amazing. I probably wouldnt have known it wasnt real, for a while. Staring at it, something doesnt seem right. I noticed the hair over the ear and the shadows in the nostril. Its when things are too perfect that they look wrong.

By: Bugbread

Bugbread — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:32:53 -0800

Yeah, the motion thing is the crusher. I didn't mean to imply otherwise, though by omission I did.

By: rob511

rob511 — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:34:42 -0800

I'd hit "it."

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:03:41 -0800

Looks like a zombie. Well, when you'd been coerced into signing an entertainment-slave contract and been forced to blow gangsters for career advancement, you'd look like a zombie too.

By: juv3nal

juv3nal — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 22:53:55 -0800

It's easy to pick out things that are "off" in the big image, but if you look at the small artifacted one in the grid along with all the source pics, you're just lying if you say you can tell.

By: avriette

avriette — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 01:46:35 -0800

Wow. I suppose it's not a real big surprise, but she's got fucking perfect eyelids.