> this is one of the places I feel generative AI can do a lot of good. It can get rid of the routine VFX like changing an actors pant etc that VFX artists are inundated with and leave only the artistic work for VFX artists which is hopefully not as taxing and not as requiring of crunch
And the last decades' exponential increases in productivity could have lead to keynes' famous 15 hour workweek - except they didn't.
Instead, productivity got directed to more output and more profit and working hours stayed the same if not increased.
As such, I'm more predicting this will simply lead to less VFX artists being employed by the studios than for there being a substantial improvement in working conditions.
You’re right about the productivity. And many movie studios already own VFX studios. Netflix has Scanline, Disney has ILM, etc. But it is not super common.
I was more thinking about employment by the VFX studios themselves - i.e., if the article is right and VFX companies are already in a race to the bottom with respect to the movie studios (their customers), this race would likely swallow all productivity benefits that generative AI could provide.
It is more efficient for the business to hire the same guy for 45 hours than three guys for 15 hours. If we assume that all of them get their turn eventually, then this can only be done by rotating who gets employed.
I would rather businesses take a hit on efficiency and have our 15-hour work weeks. Maybe that'd provide an incentive for businesses to pursue making project management and hand-off among staff more efficient.
And the last decades' exponential increases in productivity could have lead to keynes' famous 15 hour workweek - except they didn't.
Instead, productivity got directed to more output and more profit and working hours stayed the same if not increased.
As such, I'm more predicting this will simply lead to less VFX artists being employed by the studios than for there being a substantial improvement in working conditions.