239
edits
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
For me it's mainly about the content, the idea of talking to a human being who is convinced that his or her world is in the screen. I don't think it's necessary to have photorealistic faces as interlocutors for that, if the narrative is coherent. While I don't want to rule out the use of MetaHumans at this point, I will definitely focus on a style that tries less to visually mimic reality. Instead, the goal is to create a different reality with its own believable rules. | For me it's mainly about the content, the idea of talking to a human being who is convinced that his or her world is in the screen. I don't think it's necessary to have photorealistic faces as interlocutors for that, if the narrative is coherent. While I don't want to rule out the use of MetaHumans at this point, I will definitely focus on a style that tries less to visually mimic reality. Instead, the goal is to create a different reality with its own believable rules. | ||
'''== A new idea in between ==''' | |||
MetaHumans can also be animated manually by hand. In doing so, facial parts behave realistically to each other and one can go into enormous detail. However, to create realistic animations this way, much more time is needed to also understand human facial expressions and their connection to feelings you want to express. In a self-experiment that could be small little artistic work, I would like to experiment with this manual animation and document the process. In addition to "finished" emotions, one would also see the process in time-lapse and real-time on other screens. In doing so, one would see the rig of the face as well as my mouse movements. Accompanying the visual work, a concise written reflection on the complexity of human emotions , personalities and artificial intelligence is conceivable. | |||