Indeed, yes.Star Trek wandering aimlessly in its own past has basically made it extremely self-referential and limited.
Using Deepfake in Trek... Yes or no?
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
The tech will just poison the creative well.
CGI has depending on the artist. Deep fake is more insidious because it traps your thinking in the past and limits actor input. If they are even alive to have input.
don't worry, the creative well doesn’t need new tech to poison itself.
Will technology x be used in a crappy way? Undoubtedly. But the product that does so would likely be crap even without it.
On the other hand, if technology x can open up new possibilities it will also be used “for good”.
Just look at Trials and Tribbles-Ations: that wouldn’t have been possible without what was then state of the art technology, used with care and thought.
And then look at movies such as Independence Day II to see what happens when technology is employed without giving it much thought.
Technology is never good or bad, it’s neutral, only the ways you use it can be good or bad.
Lower Decks is hilarious precisely because it is self-referential. Plus I have seen some great feature length movies using QMX action figures! There is plenty more fun to be had.
This tech strikes me as 99% bad.
Mileage will vary. Star Trek lacks something now with its obsession with its own past. I don't care if it is fun. I want it to be additive.
That may be where Lyrebird comes in...
By 2066 AGI will make everything NFT...everything a daily. Editing may be all that is human left.
But I want to see David Niven smile, as Bogart blows past him on a well showrun Maltese Falcon II ..as he bumps into Indy as California is attacked by Yamato as Sky Captain flies overhead. The fat man walks free again in the chaos. But the CGI still adds the flicker....Don’t hate this.
Everything will be a comic book....a time of wonder and imagination.
Last edited:
And this is why I hate it. I hate the removal of the human. Though, apparently removing the human is desirable so what do I know?
Desiderabile? No. Inevitable? Probably.
I don’t think Lyrebird can make a voice younger for now.
And you got to have active involvement from the original person to create a new voice...
However, I can imagine them opening the training process more in the future to allow for custom training phrases, when they do yes, they most certainly have enough material to replicate a TOS Kirk’s voice.
wouldn't be too sure about the editing...A lot of it is already pretty standard, especially on TV, I can image most of it being done totally in automatic one day.
I had trouble getting a decent copy of Grace Lee Whitney's accent in my fan edit but I'm not IT literate and I didn't understand the error messages I was seeing when trying to train her voice from scratch. I had to let the system pick a close pre-trained version instead.
I only did one Shatner line, using a snippet of STVI interview as a base, which sounds OK but still doesn't sound like the dialogue either side. It was also quite hard to get the tone of the language right. I think for Grace, having only 20 minutes of dialogue, a chunk of which had a music track, any attempt to train from scratch might have been tricky. I would love to have tried.
Lyrebird does sound amazing. They could train it on old interviews and episodes without the music track. I think I probably didn't try it because of the cost for such a small personal project and they discourage you from training celebrity voices. I might revisit in the future. I think that would should not underestimate the emotional gravitas of a good actor but much Star Trek dialogue is very workmanlike.
I might even be tempted to add more dialogue into the lengthy cloud scene.
Last edited:
Eventually, it'll just be the computers, creating a neverending series of adventures about long-dead humans.
"Why are we still doing this? Didn't we kill these meat-bags off millennia ago?"
(Cue virtual Rod Serling.)
It may take a digital Kirk to make them self destruct.
you can use spleeter to remove the music now...Give it a look, the results are amazing. I’ve been using it for a year which huge satisfaction.
Inevitable doesn't make the technology more appealing. It makes it appear more evil.
Which is where I see the tech going but apparently it should just be accepted without question. The actors and actresses have no say, and are literal meat puppets but that's ok because it is inevitable.
Cue the welcoming the new robot overlord meme.
Don’t worry: what’s your evil will be your children’s normality. It’s inevitable. 
Similar threads
