Forum - View topicAnswerman - Anime and AI
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Greed1914
 Posts: 5383 |
|
|||
|
That demand side of the situation is going to be a problem. People are very prone to concede on the quality if they get something fast and cheap.
There is also a lot of belief that artists will still be needed to do things to make those generated images acceptable, but how well trained will people be to do that? Even if higher-skilled or more senior animators are around, they will age out over time. It would likely take a big shift in how animators are trained at animation studios to not end up with a giant knowledge gap. As risky and costly as it may be to do something about it legally, I think it has to be done. Actual legislation is unlikely and would definitely be too late, and the prospect of courts siding with AI companies is offset by the fact that they do not care and will not curb themselves if it means anyone else gets ahead. |
||||
|
||||
MarshalBanana
 Posts: 5738 |
|
|||
|
The response I have seen around the internet, is that AI is fine in animation, if it cuts out the grunt. The issue being, what constitutes grunt work and where, if ever, do you draw a solid line in the sand.
If AI has to be something we have to accept, why can't it do none creative jobs. |
||||
|
||||
Joe Mello
 Posts: 2564 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||
|
On the lawsuit, I'm specifically hoping that the ruling is that Midjourney used copyrighted images without expressed consent from the respective owners and thus are in violation. I think that would be a narrow ruling that it would successfully address the core issue while minimizing the chance of unintended consequences.
|
||||
|
||||
justsomeaccount
 Posts: 553 |
|
|||
|
Please don't forget the energetic cost. Even if there weren't copyright or artistry concerns, no piece of art or meme is worth destroying the environment in one of the moments where the problem is at their limit (unless people of course have just given up, think "well it won't affect ME, I'll die sooner" and carpe diem their way through life). In 2024 alone all this new AI has expended as much energy cost as Switzerland, and its use is still growing without any concern for eficiency.
|
||||
|
||||
FishLion
 Crazy Fangirl Posts: 861 |
|
|||
This is really relevant to the knowledge gap that Greed1914 mentioned. Let's say we have perfect AI that takes the "grunt work" out of animation. Not making any claims that there is any valueless work in animation, but it's something I hear a lot. Let's say you can be a director and ask AI to make your perfectly formed movie and it's great quality, nobody is necessary except the director. How do we train new directors when they stop making movies? How do we expect people to do nothing but consume anime and never work on an anime production but still develop enough of a trained eye to prompt AI to make something worthwhile? Using your example, will that animator push their craft and their love of animation to become a part of the industry encouraged by seeing a test of their vision come to life or will they just ask AI to generate 100 prompts to compare and find the best version before polishing it because that is what the industry forces you to do to actually break into the industry post-AI? If every kid that wants to move to Japan and become an anime director is now in competition where they have access to tools that let them generate as many animations as they want, then what is stopping them from using those tools? I feel like we would waste less energy if we straight up handed every ten year old a coal powered boat and said whoever makes it to Japan gets to be an animator. That's clearly an exaggeration but I really don't think it will be a net positive for art or those kids dreaming of being animators even if some companies do find ways to use it in ethical and creative ways without wasting energy, but every reality where AI tools are successful means that more people will be forced to use them to compete which means even more energy with those energy wasting tools more accessible than ever. I am curious about "ethical data sets, my understanding of genAI is that even though you can train a model from scratch, the tool is still developed using all images scraped. You can train an open source version of ChatGPT on ethical data, but ChatGPT has still already copied the world's homework to make the tool. In that case, even if we give it an ethical data set and tell it to only produce images in that style how ethical can that tool be? I don't think it's especially heinous that studio used that tool as they were attempting to work within ethical parameters, but I do think that AI companies like to sell that image as the main usage when we know the usage will be more along the lines of what the Lionsgate Vice-President said:“We can't make it for $100 million, but we'd make it for $50 million because of AI.” On repackaging and reselling an existing action franchise, Jones told Shapiro, “Now we can say, 'Do it in anime, make it PG-13.' Three hours later, I'll have the movie...Within an hour, you've got 12 different versions of it...“When a director asked for a small element — a swirl of smoke or a spark of flame — he would create it using generative AI. It didn't look as good as it would have if he'd used traditional VFX software like Houdini or Maya, but he didn't think most people would notice the difference.” That is the end game of these scenarios. It certainly isn't about accessibility or quality for the people pushing these tools that would very much appreciate us forgetting the huge downsides. In fact, he's proud of the fact that he could afford to make 12 versions just because he could waste the energy. I bring that up because people do occasionally claim that generating art still takes less energy than making it by hand, but if you make 12 versions and then an artist still has to sit at a computer to polish the output then it is definitely going to be wasteful by comparison. "AI will aid skills-based learning for inquisitive creatives" is a very generous read of the changes AI will bring. There are plenty of accessible tools online that help learn art making for free to the point that AI helping someone with Blender does nothing to advance art, it will only help them start generating more content to try and attract the attention of people while likely never breaking into the industry. That is one of my biggest question marks with arguments AI has a beneficial effect to creators getting started. We expect AI to help them get started in an industry that was already extremely competitive that is now only more so because there are less positions and many people that got fired are likely competing for those positions? I just can't square "AI will aid skills-based learning for inquisitive creatives" with the circle that is "Once AI workflows become common in anime studios, we'll see improved quality and consistency, but also reduced animator numbers," no matter how many ways I see people say it will balance out. Do people think we'll produce 200 anime a season and people will still find time to watch them all and there will be no quality drop? Which leads me to the point that AI is a situation where the negatives deeply drag down the positive once you put in a little thought and many of the positives are hypothetical. AI could help new artists but if all wannabe artists started using it, especially with the way social media demands constant content, then we will be wasting vastly more energy than if it was only a tool for studios and we still don't have proof it improves skills. Animation directors could bring more of their visions to life than before, but if it stunts the growth of the next generation of auteurs then we will not have visionary creators to continue innovating. Someone could polish AI output and make something neat, but if it doesn't enable anything new except taking shortcuts and discourages people from sharing original art online to prevent it being scraped then that is going to harm art going forward by taking away positions and making people afraid to share their ideas more than enable new creations. AI could become more energy efficient, but from what I've seen they are planning to build massive data centers that require huge amounts of water and energy just to keep up with demand. If this is the amount of energy demand AI produces now, widespread adoption would only make it worse. Sure, AI could eventually be up to anime fan's standards and used to assist in making real art, but so far every use I've seen is just the 2D equivalent of those cheap CGI shots they use to cut down on production costs... the stated purpose of introducing AI to art production. One day we could figure out ethical ways of using AI without theft on a mass scale, but even without addressing my conundrum of "unethical tool with ethical data set," the recent Ghibli stuff makes clear the main purpose is to scratch the serial numbers off of popular franchises and make stuff we want with them. That's why AI fan art is so popular, all most fan art is attempting to do is slot an existing character into a preexisting style of art work and AI is good at that. Basically, all the positives are vaporwave that may or may not manifest at all, even if the benefits manifest we certainly don't have any proof the positives will be useful or beneficial on the same scale as the energy waste and theft that has occurred. Even if it becomes the norm I'm not sure I could stomach the harm caused to all those animators if it became more popular and accepted. Not to mention we have already seen major harm caused by AI just recently by Microsoft according to BBC.
I will acknowledge upfront that this is a company firing people to invest in AI infrastructure and not AI replacing jobs, but with the MS game studios here experiencing massive lay offs it is a very clear example of creatives getting shafted to build servers so people can generate their Ghibli memes. When one of the main companies trying to sell AI is firing 9,000 people just to build more servers for it's technology that will supposedly improve creativity I just really don't buy it. Not because this is some zero sum game where Microsoft being Microsoft and cutting workers means AI is bad, but because pretty much all modern AI development comes from companies that act this way and will 100% value technology over the creatives that make art except when it makes them look useful to artists. The three main companies in AI investing right now are Meta, Microsoft, and ChatGPT, do we really expect any of these companies to make the best tools available to the public once they have enough goodwill to profitable? Do we really expect those three companies to help uplift creativity and help people's visions come to life for any reason except they have a fancy new subscriber model you can pay extra to prompt so animation studios notice your slightly better content generation? I'm all for not making conspiracy theories or always assuming the worse just because a business is large, but I equally just can't come up with a world where Microsoft is investing $80bn dollars in a technology and that tool will be built for uplifting people rather than targeting self enrichment or stealing your data to sell you ads. Personally, I really really don't think it will benefit anyone nearly as much as the C-suite that has ridden the hype of AI to billions and billions of dollars. I will leave it there because this is already a ramble, even by my standards. If anyone else has more info on how "ethical data sets" are made and function I would appreciate the info. To me the best way this could shake out is that the law changes and all this becomes illegal for businesses to use. If it was only for fun and writing emails then people would just continue to waste the same amount of energy instead of it increasing rapidly as every industry moves to automate. |
||||
|
||||
|
GoGoGoFalco
Posts: 58 |
|
|||
|
Not sure about these high-end companies and platforms but I see a lot of pro artists using AI on pixiv with good results. It's been a smorgasbord of artwork. All the Ghibli memes people are sharing are whatever and just a trend like those action figure starter pack images but in the hands of actual talented people and not people making Facebook memes I see worthy output being made.
|
||||
|
||||
NeverConvex
 Posts: 2690 |
|
|||
In this context, I think 'ethically trained' genAI should, in a strict sense, mean AI trained purely on either public-domain inputs, or inputs whose creators provided consent for use (whether freely or through some compensation scheme). e.g., Wired reported in 2024: "A group of researchers backed by the French government have released what is thought to be the largest AI training dataset composed entirely of text that is in the public domain. And the nonprofit Fairly Trained announced that it has awarded its first certification for a large language model built without copyright infringement, showing that technology like that behind ChatGPT can be built in a different way to the AI industry’s contentious norm." And, having done that, you don't worry about whether the outputs reproduce the style of something, whether it was in the training data or not, since training in this way makes it clear the LLM's outputs don't depend at all on anything other than non-copyrighted material (unless someone feeding it prompts manages to provide a level of detail equivalent to copyrighted material, like asking the LLM to generate an altered version of an uploaded image or something; presumably that'd be the responsibility of the user, though, so long as it isn't in turn reused for further LLM training). Of course, whether any LLM company that claims to train ethically actually does so in this strict sense... |
||||
|
||||
writerpatrick
 Posts: 699 Location: Canada |
|
|||
|
If companies could sue over style, then Disney would have been able to sue Don Bluth Studios for using the same style. Artists have been copying the style of other artists for millennia. And two artists that have learned at the same school might produce similar styles because that's how they were taught to do things.
Artists also learn by copying the style and work of other artists, regardless of copyright. After a while they develop their own style. What we're dealing with using AI isn't copyright infringement by visual plagiarism. It takes the designs of others and presents it as it's own. It's not something one can sue over, and it would cause a mess if it were. Big studios would sue smaller studios if their style looked too similar. And who would own big eyes? |
||||
|
||||
FireChick
Subscriber Posts: 2775 Location: United States |
|
|||
Oooogh, they actually did that?! That's just disgusting. I can't believe someone would even do that. If I were Miyazaki and they pulled something like this, I'd be beyond pissed and demand they stop. |
||||
|
||||
Chakmon
 Posts: 26 |
|
|||
What if they switch to just having someone draw it and copy the Ghibli style instead of using AI? Would that make it okay? Nobody ever said anything when people were just photoshopping fictional characters like Superman or Monkey D Luffy punching or killing real people they disliked. It's only now that is AI involved does it suddenly become an issue or disrespectful to the character or artist it seems like. Miyazaki himself is no stranger to people attributing fake quotes he never said to him and passing around images that make him say things he never did. That seems far more disrespectful and not to mention defamatory than simply mimicking his art style. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ezuruu
Posts: 15 |
|
|||
|
This is such a real problem. You can tell when a season 2 gets new animators—everything feels off. Investing in training and in-house staff is the way forward. Honestly, training programs should’ve been a bigger focus years ago. The freelance model just doesn’t work long-term when you want to build quality anime franchises. Facts! Relying on freelancers too much kills the momentum. Studios building their own animator teams could finally give us the consistency we’ve been missing.
Finally someone addressing the root issue! Animator training is so overlooked. Studios shifting to in-house makes total sense, especially with freelancers constantly switching between projects.Training programs in Japan need more attention. If studios want sustainability and consistent quality, they need dedicated, in-house talent, not just freelancers who disappear after season 1. People always blame the studios, but nobody talks about how freelance animator turnover affects long-term projects. In-house teams might actually fix this. Last edited by Ezuruu on Mon Jul 07, 2025 11:52 pm; edited 2 times in total |
||||
|
||||
|
Nekbone
Posts: 215 |
|
|||
Trying to copyrighting a style seems like a huge misstep and would only lead to a lot of terrible things for creative freedom. Especially in a market where people already think all anime looks the same or that there's a default "anime style" to mimic. I worry that anti-AI people will unwittingly advocate for draconian copyright laws in their pursuit to stamp out AI without considering the consequences and greater effects they would have on artistic freedom. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ezuruu
Posts: 15 |
|
|||
It’s crazy that there are more Japanese animators working freelance than 6000 in-house in 2023. No wonder studios can’t keep the same team for a whole series. More Japanese animators are freelancers now than in-house staff. That explains why it’s hard to maintain quality between seasons. Most Japanese animators are working freelance instead of in-house now. It’s no surprise studios are struggling to keep consistent animation teams. Honestly, seeing all these talented Japanese animators leave in-house positions to go freelance says a lot about the current industry conditions. It’s crazy how many Japanese animators on X are switching to freelance. Makes you wonder what’s going on behind the scenes at studios. It’s wild how many new Japanese animators are starting their careers as freelancers instead of joining studios. Honestly, I bet they not count color artists as ‘animators’ in that 6,000 in:house figure, even though their roles are pretty different. Makes the numbers look smaller than they are. Sony developing AI for coloring is actually smart. That way colorists can shift to more creative roles or even move up to key animation. Honestly, using AI for coloring makes sense. It frees up human animators to focus on key and in-between animation, where creativity actually matters. If AI handles the coloring work, maybe studios can finally use their human resources better—like training more key animators instead of overloading colorists. AI for coloring isn’t about replacing people—it’s about letting actual colorist focus on more skilled parts of the pipeline. Coloring is important, but if AI can do it reliably, then that opens up space for studios to invest in stronger key animation and direction. |
||||
|
||||
|
ATastySub
Past ANN Contributor
 Posts: 845 |
|
|||
There aren’t studio jobs. The studios eliminated those positions in order to pay freelancers less and discard them once their current job is done. This is entirely on the studios not the animators. This industry push for AI is for the same reasons. They want to pay less and don’t care about consistency or quality. They are pushing a terrible “solution” to the own problem they made, all of which could be fixed by not hoarding all the money in the industry at the top and actually paying the people that make it run and exist. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ezuruu
Posts: 15 |
|
|||
|
Seeing more anime companies and studios shift toward in-house production is a great sign. It means they’re finally thinking long-term. The animator shortage might be a wake-up call. Glad to see studios responding by growing their in-house teams—this is the way forward. The fact that studios are starting to expand their workforce shows they’re taking the situation seriously. In-house is the future.
Studios aren’t cutting people— japanese animators are choosing freelance on their own. Can’t blame studios for that. People keep blaming studios for low pay, but it’s the production committees that set the budgets, not the studios. If you want to talk about wages, blame the committees. Studios can only work with what they’re given. I honestly don’t have a problem with AI replacing colorists. If it helps speed up production and lets colorist focus on more complex work, why not? People act like studios are evil for using AI to help with coloring, but it’s just one less bottleneck. It doesn’t mean artists are getting kicked out. Do you people even check official studio websites? Almost all of them are constantly hiring animators. They need more animators, not fewer. Studios are literally trying to grow, but people don’t want to see it. Check their websites—they’re hiring nonstop. I get where you're coming from, but I disagree with all of it.
Most Chinese animators today are trained in 3DCGI, not traditional 2D. The chinese domestic pipeline for 2D animation is still underdeveloped, which is why a large portion of Chinese 2D projects are outsourced to South Korean studios. This includes everything from in-between work to full episodes, especially for mobile and streaming content. China outsources a lot of its 2D animation labor due to workforce limitations. On top of that, Tencent has been encouraging the use of AI tools in animation in chinese animation industry, which raises concerns about the future of creative jobs in the industry. While AI might help with efficiency or cost-cutting, it could also lead to fewer opportunities for actual animators in China, especially those working on entry-level or assistant roles. This isn't just a technical shift—it could reshape how the entire chinese industry functions. Also South Korea’s generative AI animation market was worth about $21 million in 2023 and is projected to reach nearly $278 million by 2030, with a 44% CAGR. Surveys show around 36% of South Korean webtoon creators in 2023 are already open to using AI in creation. AI adoption in the wider content sector doubled, with 43.5% of animation firms reporting generative AI use in 2024 (up from 12.7% in 2023). Honestly, Japan really needs to focus more on in-house production. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/horizon/outlook/generative-ai-in-animation-market/south-korea https://www.reddit.com/r/korea/comments/18if9jq https://en.topdaily.kr/articles/3729 |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group