The YouTuber who improved ILM's CG Mark Hamill landed a job with Lucasfilm

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 3,116   +862
Staff member
In context: If you are a fan of The Mandalorian, you may have been surprised and excited to see a young Mark Hammill show up in the Season 2 finale. If your excitement was short-lived because of Jedi Master Luke's unnatural look and performance, you were not alone. The CG stand-in created by Lucasfilm's Industrial Light and Magic received plenty of criticism from fans.

One fan who goes by Shamook on YouTube attempted to "fix" Lucasfilm's footage of the scene using deepfake technology and did a spectacular job. He posted his version in a side-by-side comparison last December, and it went viral, gathering over 2.2 million views (above). It still has that uncanny valley vibe, but Luke looks more natural and alive in the post edit.

Shamook's work was so good that he just announced that ILM/Lucasfilm hired him to help with de-aging (making living actors look younger) and re-animating (bringing dead actors back to life) on future projects. In fact, Lucasfilm was so impressed that it gave him a senior-level position.

"As some of you may already know, I joined ILM/Lucasfilms a few months ago and haven't had the time to work on any new YouTube content," Shamook wrote in the comments of a recent upload. "[My position is] Senior Facial Capture Artist."

Companies don't generally hand out Senior designations like visitor passes. Either Shamook has a CV showing extensive work in the industry, or ILM was just that impressed with what they saw on his channel. Speaking of which, his channel contains a ton of deepfakes from a wide range of movies, including several Star Wars clips (example directly above). Perhaps that is Curriculum Vitae enough.

Permalink to story.

 

Thretosix

Posts: 97   +106
It does make you wonder with all the talent Lucasfilm has that things like this even happen in the first place.
 

mctommy

Posts: 400   +135
This is nothing new... just "new" in the sense of individuals rather than companies. Plenty of mergers happen for one main reason: to absorb the talent. If a company makes it better than yours, buy them out.
 

p51d007

Posts: 2,822   +2,174
If I were LIVE actors, I would be a bit worried that eventually they can be replaced by a
"made up" CGI character. No headaches, no huge salary demands etc. And by made up,
I mean not a CGI likeness, which the real person would want to be paid for, but, a completely
made up CGI "person".
 

Ravey

Posts: 314   +138
You Tube has a hoard of content creators and streamers who are absolutely amazing at what they do. I'm surprised more of them don't end up in high end jobs. I know national television could do with looking at You Tube to hire the future generation of television actors/presenters.

My kids are never off You Tube, and they would go nuts if their favourite streamers landed their own shows on TV.

(the only issue is the most successful streamers probably make more money than those on tv lol)
 

Irata

Posts: 1,657   +2,772
If I were LIVE actors, I would be a bit worried that eventually they can be replaced by a
"made up" CGI character. No headaches, no huge salary demands etc. And by made up,
I mean not a CGI likeness, which the real person would want to be paid for, but, a completely
made up CGI "person".
CGI characters also never age…

This offers the possibility of combining real life human acting with CGI looks, I.e. might allow studios to combine acting talent with computer generated good looks.
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,845   +3,733
TechSpot Elite
If I were LIVE actors, I would be a bit worried that eventually they can be replaced by a
"made up" CGI character. No headaches, no huge salary demands etc. And by made up,
I mean not a CGI likeness, which the real person would want to be paid for, but, a completely
made up CGI "person".
It's not just actors that have to worry.

But... maybe they'll become vtubers in the future. Cute anime girls sell :)
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 6,366   +4,675
If I were LIVE actors, I would be a bit worried that eventually they can be replaced by a
"made up" CGI character. No headaches, no huge salary demands etc. And by made up,
I mean not a CGI likeness, which the real person would want to be paid for, but, a completely
made up CGI "person".
Maybe I am wrong, but somehow, I think that is still in the relatively distant future. AI, IMO, especially that exhibited by "robot clerks, etc." is still not up to the task of true human emulation. Even so, I bet there would be far more complaints of "bad acting" if such were to happen.
 

p51d007

Posts: 2,822   +2,174
Maybe I am wrong, but somehow, I think that is still in the relatively distant future. AI, IMO, especially that exhibited by "robot clerks, etc." is still not up to the task of true human emulation. Even so, I bet there would be far more complaints of "bad acting" if such were to happen.
Well, probably, but if it wasn't for special effects, most movies would be terrible. But, I blame most of that, on the writers. ;)
 

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 3,116   +862
Staff member
Showing my age, but anyone remember Looker from 1981. Probably before most of your time but showing exactly that message.
Yes. I do remember Looker. But as a 14-year-old boy, my main interest was not really in the technology used in the film if you know what I mean. I don't think I ever watched the whole thing. I did a lot of fast-forwarding and pausing. lol
 
I think that's true with most guys that watched the movie. Wore out the VHS, and was so glad it came out on Laser Disc, then DVD. <Grin>
The concept was quite ahead of it's time though. Interesting watch.