I do wish that the Elden Ring artbooks included earlier pre-production materials, and interviews about the development process with the artists themselves. There used to be similar things for DS1 and AC back in the day. We're lucky to have the CGWORLD article, I suppose!

I wonder if their criticism is a reaction to being disappointed that FromSoft doesn't usually include any early concept art - like iterative sketches - in their artbooks anymore. As if key art, or final passes, don't count as "real concept art"? (w/ general ignorance of photobashing in digital art)

I was a little worried my DMs were going to show up in the video, but I'm thankful they didn't. I didn't realise there was so many bad-faith arguments being thrown at you. Or that artbook debate even existed - they aren't aware of what photobashing is, and its common uses in digital concept work.

This introduction is machine translated, with human edits by me. But the next sections will translated into Japanese by a native speaker - FarEastForest on Twitter!

I'll share the next section tomorrow. But after that, new sections will be posted either biweekly or triweekly! 😁

Meanwhile, using Le Chat, the result was:
"This sequence does not form meaningful words in any known language. It is possible that the runes are decorative or symbolic rather than intended to convey a specific message."

I think Chat GPT just makes things up when you ask it to decode images. 😅
I put it through Chat GPT, and it said the inscription was:
"Sweet dreams to the foes of St. Trina."
But when I asked it to map the runes to the letters, the results were completely nonsensical.

I just saw your post on Twitter yesterday. I'm glad you're feeling happier, Abyss! I'm also really happy I can still see your wonderful art here 😁

*WAS justified damn autocorrect lol

I disagree that it was a "lofty future goal". The context is that they were asked "what do you intend in making this/showing this to the world?" It was a stepping stone.

I don't think Miyazaki's reaction wasn't justified. But these aren't completely seperate things - the team itself says that.

I'm saying that talking specifically about physics sims - and their potential use as reference material for artists - is a little tone deaf in the context of what that team actually wanted to achieve.

It isn't "conflating". Gen AI is what they wanted.

I think animators being angry - in the context of a team literally saying "we want to create a machine that can draw the way humans do" - is completely understandable.

I'm not defending Miyazaki's language, but I don't feel sorry for this team, when their long term goal was gen AI.

Again, it's not just a physics sim.

When they were asked "what is your purpose with this demo?" their response was "we would like to build a machine that can draw pictures the way humans do".

The physics sim wasn't the end goal - gen AI for drawing was. It isn't "conflating" to acknowledge that.

How are you clearly delineating "gen AI" from what this team clearly stated they actually wanted to make? (Don't mean to be confrontational, but I think looking at the nature of the tech demo in isolation isn't good. What they wanted to make was image gen AI, like you say you're against).

To be fair, they weren't just trying to create procedurally generated animation. They were very clear that their long term goal was AI image generation. I don't think you've acknowledged this yet? He was rude, but it wasn't just Miyazaki who was insulted - there were other Ghibli producers there too