|

|

|
Virtual Humans
by Kelly Tyler
After millions of years of natural selection, humans beings
have some serious competition for their lofty perch on the
evolutionary ladder—and the challenger has only been
evolving for less than a decade. Some computer artists contend
that anything we can do, "virtual humans" can do better, and
they're poised to revolutionize moviemaking with a new species
that doesn't require an astronomical salary, works around the
clock without complaint, and lives quietly on a hard drive
between death-defying stunts.
A generation of computer-generated (CG) characters, called
"synthespians" or "vactors," are attracting notice in
Hollywood. Some insiders envision a future when digital stars
compete for roles with the flesh-and-blood variety. While a
photoreal digital actor has yet to carry a major motion
picture, synthespians have captured supporting roles for some
time now, whenever the going gets too tough or too expensive.
Synthespians serve as doubles for breathtaking stunts too
dangerous for mortal stars: a girl leaping from a skyscraper
in "The Fifth Element," Sylvester Stallone chasing through the
skies on an airborne motorcycle in "Judge Dredd," and a
luckless attorney becoming tyrannosaur fodder in
"Jurassic Park."
And producers cut costs on the "cast of thousands" by using
digital extras to stand in for the legions of troops in
"Hamlet," mobs of Washington demonstrators in "Forrest Gump,"
and passengers aboard the doomed Titanic.
Fooling the eye
The leap from extra to starring role for synthespians is a big
one, since it invites heightened scrutiny from the viewer.
Human beings have a finely tuned ability to recognize their
kind, an ability that is thought to be both innate and
learned, and that ups the ante for filmmakers seeking to fool
them with a synthetic stand-in. Creating convincing movement
is particularly difficult. Animators can take the perceptual
challenge head-on and painstakingly create movement for their
characters frame by frame from scratch, or they can use the
real thing. A technique called motion capture allows actual
movement to be recorded and applied to digital characters. An
actor wears reflective markers at key body joints, and
surrounding cameras record the motion of reflected infrared
light in the computer. Later, this motion data is transferred
to the digital character.
The human face presents an even more daunting challenge. Ed
Catmull, a computer graphics pioneer since the late 1970s and
a founder of
Pixar ("Toy Story," "A Bug's Life"), regards it as a central issue in character animation.
"The human face is a unique problem," he says. "We are
genetically programmed to recognize human faces. We're so good
that most people aren't even aware of it while they think
about it. It turns out, for instance, that if we make a
perfectly symmetrical face, we see it as being wrong. So we
want things to be not quite perfect, have a lot of subtlety,
but if they're too imperfect, then we think that they're
strange."
For Scott Ross, President of Digital Domain, the problem is
more intangible: "One of the things that I'm mostly concerned
about in terms of virtual actors is that there's been millions
of years of experience in our genetic code. And I'm concerned
that when you create a close-up of a virtual actor and look
into its eyes, that it will take real skill to be able to give
that virtual actor soul. And I've not yet seen that."
The silicon rush
|
Ivan Sutherland demonstrates Sketchpad.
|
The quest to create virtual actors is comparatively recent;
the first interactive computer graphics program was only
developed in 1961. Designed by Ivan Sutherland at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Sketchpad
generated simple geometrical line drawings for design and
engineering applications. These simple operations required a
state-of-the-art TX-2 defense computer to run.
The silicon rush in Hollywood began in 1985, when a knight
sprang from a stained glass window and handily dispatched a
human opponent in
"Young Sherlock Holmes,"
courtesy of computer animation. A virtual stampede of digital
characters followed: the water creature of "The Abyss," the
quicksilver T-1000 of
"Terminator 2: Judgment Day,"
the menagerie of
"Jumanji," and
the dinosaurs of
"Jurassic Park."
In 1995,
"Toy Story" was released, the first CG film in history, populated
entirely by digital characters in a world made of bits and
bytes.<
Voyager fly-by animation
|
|
The reason for this explosion? Jim Blinn, an early computer
graphics innovator who created the well-known Voyager fly-by
animations for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, credits the
decreasing cost of computer memory. "In my lifetime, the cost
of the basic tools of my trade—of making images with a
computer—has gone from about $500,000 to about $2,000
dollars," he says. "It's a factor of 200 or 300 to one." A
corresponding inverse growth in computer power and memory has
equipped CG Pygmalions to cope with the high degree of
complexity and detail inherent in living creatures. Today's microcomputers have roughly 400 times more memory and
operate about 5,000 times faster than the TX-2 used by
Sutherland.
Scott Ross projects continuing growth in hardware capability,
spurring increasingly sophisticated animation. "The concept of
Moore's law states that the processing power of computing
doubles every year," he says. "We're seeing that in terms of
what we're doing today in the film industry."
Building a better human
With this enhanced technology, animators have turned from
fantasy characters and extinct animals to a new digital grail:
a photorealistic Homo sapiens.
Ellen Poon, a
visual effects supervisor for Industrial Light and Magic who
has been involved with such films as "Jumanji" and "Men in
Black," is optimistic, but sees technical challenges ahead.
"I think we are very close to creating a realistic-looking
virtual person," she says. "There are a few things that have
to be right, and we're still in the process of researching
them. And those elements are hair, skin, clothing, movement,
and facial expressions."
The problem of hair has bedeviled animators for years. There
are thousands of hairs on the human head, which vary in color,
light reflectance, and texture and can move either singly or
together. The lion in "Jumanji" required the modeling of one
million individual hairs for the mane alone. Nadia Mangenat
Thalmann of Miralab, a computer research center at the
University of Geneva, tackled similar complexity as she
developed clothing for digital characters.
"Fabric is very difficult," says Thalmann. "The computer has
to know every moment where the wrinkles are that are created
by the movement of the fabric. We used two or three hours of
calculation for one single frame of animation to get it
right—and there are 24 frames in one second of film."
Questioning the digital grail
Hurdles notwithstanding, the advantages of a virtual actor are
appealing. A child synthespian won't have temper tantrums or
work hours mandated by labor laws. A vactor will never be busy
when it's time for re-shoots after a film has wrapped. A
virtual human never grows old. And, to the delight of
producers, a digital superstar won't require a $20 million
salary, a deluxe trailer and a coterie of bodyguards,
masseuses and aromatherapists to get the job done.
For the animators at Miralab, it's only a matter of time and
computing power before icons of the past take the limelight
again. Thalmann has developed a virtual Marilyn Monroe. She is
uncannily realistic, but the illusion loses its photorealistic
quality in close-up. Continuing technical advances raise the
possibility that there may someday be stars who truly will
live forever.
Even so, many in the special effects industry question whether
silicon actors will ever pose a real threat to the
carbon-based variety. Dennis Muren, visual effects supervisor
for Industrial Light and Magic and nine-time Oscar winner, is
skeptical of the creative benefits.
"What's the point?" he wonders. "If you want to put Marilyn
Monroe in a movie, you could get a terrific actress, give her
a great make-up artist, six months of studying and voice
training, and she could do a better Marilyn Monroe than we
could ever do."
Jim Blinn questions whether synthespians make economic sense:
"A dinosaur doesn't exist, so it's practical to simulate it.
With human beings, however, having a staff of 20 people all
working on the lighting, the modeling, and the motion might
not be a great trade-off, because you can replace that whole
team with one human actor who can do what the director
wants."
To the future...and beyond
Thalmann contemplates taking virtual humans to a new level.
"I'm not so much interested to see pictures, which you watch
passively," she says. "My ultimate goal is to be able to live
in the virtual worlds, and to meet virtual humans that are
collaborators." says Thalmann.
Thalmann is not alone. Computer game developers have begun
experimenting with artificial intelligence (AI), endowing game
characters with the capacity to learn and interact with their
environment and the game player.
John Lasseter, director of "Toy Story," is charting a
different course. "I'm interested in creating a film with
characters that people obviously know don't exist," he says.
"But then they look at it and say, `It seems so real. I know
it doesn't - but wait. I know those toys aren't alive but it
looks so real. No, they can't be alive, no. Are they?' So I
think that's one of the really exciting things that computer
animation can give you: a combination of fantasy and the
photorealistic which has never been seen before."
With the latest generation of talent and tools at their
disposal, visual effects filmmakers see a wide range of
possibilities in the future, with or without virtual humans.
"I think we can do just about anything right now if we had the
time and money," says Dennis Muren. "It's really like your
imagination has no boundaries at the moment...I'd rather put
the work into something that's unique and new, and you haven't
seen anywhere before, and there's no way a person could do
it."
Kelly Tyler is co-producer of the NOVA program, "Special
Effects Titanic and Beyond." She is also associate producer
for NOVA's large format film unit, working on the films
"Stormchasers," "Special Effects" and the upcoming "Island
of the Sharks."
Photos/footage: (1) Reprinted with permission of MIT
Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, Mass.; (2) NASA/JPL; (3)
Miralab.
Reel Timeline
|
50-Foot Chicken
|
Wizards of Ahs
| Be in Pixels
Titanic: What's Real
|
Virtual Humans
|
Resources |
Teacher's Guide
Transcript
|
Site Map |
Special Effects Home
Editor's Picks
|
Previous Sites
|
Join Us/E-mail
|
TV/Web Schedule
About NOVA |
Teachers |
Site Map |
Shop |
Jobs |
Search |
To print
PBS Online |
NOVA Online |
WGBH
©
| Updated November 2000
|
|
|