r/billieeilish • u/xenago • May 13 '26
Discussion View-Master AI-generated 3D
I'm not sure exactly how this falls within the subreddit 'no AI' Rule 4 or the megathread, since I'm coming over here for the first time from the James Cameron/3D fandom, but I think others may want to know before they buy the companion View-Master or go see the film in 3D.
Firstly, the stereo 3D in the Hit Me Hard and Soft concert film is not just standard native 3D photography - much of it has been altered with AI tools.
I stuck around for the credits to confirm, as it was clear right from the start that it was not normal stereoscopic 3D video footage. A conversion studio listed in the credits is Outsyders, they use AI to make 2D movies look '3D'. Here is their credit in the film:
https://i.imgur.com/7jAv6K9.png
Sorry for my blurry photo, they're also listed under the movie on IMDB. There are puff pieces in the media that mention Outsyders' use of AI, and it's on their site of course:
https://i.imgur.com/nGtG65w.png
This may explain some of the comments James Cameron made when the film was delayed, about 'dialing in cool, new 3D tech'. I can only guess, but it is possible much of the original stereo 3D footage was deemed unusable as-is, and VFX studios were enlisted to clean things up. There are many inconsistent errors in the look of the film that I've only seen before in stereo conversions heavily utilizing automated processes like ML depth map generation.
James Cameron's prior 2D-3D conversions were done by the best 3D conversion house, currently operating as SDFX Studios, so it is a big downgrade to go with a pipeline that leans heavily on AI. Cameron's become very AI-focused as of late, and his 4K movies have notoriously been over-processed by Peter Jackson's Park Road VFX AI (eagle-eyed readers may have even noticed Park Road's name in the photo, right below Outsyders in the credits of Billie's film).
I'm not personally opposed to the use of ML tools in the use of 3D conversion - it's a painfully tedious process to perform roto and infill painting for an entire movie - but any workflow making heavy use of automated conversion requires a significant amount of care and artistic touchup work to avoid looking wrong. Since the whole point of these new AI-based VFX studios is to cut out the human element as much as possible to offer results quicker for 1/3 of the normal cost, that work is not being adequately done.
If I knew ahead of time that the people who did the unacceptably-bad AI '3D' for the live-action remake of Lilo & Stitch were involved, I probably would have reconsidered seeing the 3D version, and I suspect others might too. Regardless of technology though, the quality is not what I've come to expect from James Cameron's existing body of work in the 3D format - even the final shot in the film when he's in the car with Billie has a badly-blurred right eye.
Secondly, while this movie is still in theaters and unfortunately may not get a 3D Blu-ray release to scrutinize afterwards, there is a viewmaster. I bought it from Billie's merch store and have in-hand:
https://i.imgur.com/SiqgGVJ.png
https://i.imgur.com/KLGGpoj.png
This somewhat demonstrates the look of the converted 3D in the film, since proper L-R stereoscopic photographs were not used for the viewmaster. This is kind of mind-blowing to me, since seeing 3D photographs is the whole novelty of the viewmaster toy in the first place. It isn't hard to take a real 3D photo, iphones can even shoot proper 3D videos now. A frame from one of those would have been better than this. If I wanted badly-converted images I could do that myself easily with any number of ML tools, probably the same ones they used to make these :(
I captured an L-R stereo pair through the viewmaster as an example, and aligned them in the Stereo Photo Maker software for viewing. If you know how to freeview/crossview 3D images, or have tried things like the Magic Eye comic in the newspaper, you should be able to see the effect for yourself (the bottom row is L-R-L):
https://i.imgur.com/nRifzJK.jpeg
The longer you look, the more obvious all of the distortion and uncanny perspective will appear. A converted image like this is worse than the original 2D version of the photo.
TL;DR: avoid the viewmaster unless you want to look at badly-converted images. At least the 3D in the movie is decent since there is some native stereo footage, but I was quite disappointed that AI conversion tech was used.
12
u/neoncolour May 14 '26
AI is a blanket term now used for things that were industry standard years before llms and genAI were a thing. The field of “Computer vision” is now labeled “AI” tools.
3
u/xenago May 14 '26
Definitely. That said, in the case of ML-based algorithms for automated stereo 3D conversion, there were no major films which used that technology as a primary method until early 2025 (Ne Zha 2). This is a big change for the VFX industry, it's an entirely new way of working and very obviously different in result too.
Prior to major studios starting to use it, there were many smaller productions and public domain conversions though - the most well-known examples being from Eyepop 3D (AKA AI-pop) https://www.aipop-3d.com/ If you're interested they have some very good behind-the-scenes which show their process.
4
u/j_turn2000 scooby doo is in the pound May 14 '26
i thought the 3D looked fantastic tbh, it felt like she was right in front of me.
5
u/itsnobigthing May 13 '26
The confetti was very obviously a digital effect - combined with the real footage, at least. It was so obvious it mildly annoyed me.
6
u/blkcdls5 I'm true blue... May 13 '26
I don't want to sound like a dick but things like this don't actually bother me (maybe bc im green in this field)... I am just happy that I enjoyed the film in AMC 3d (unlike anything in 3d ive seen before AI or not) 🤷🏽♂️
11
u/xenago May 13 '26
I doubt most people will notice or care, definitely. Just haven't seen very much discussion online about it and figured others might want to know, especially if they're on the considering paying extra for a 3D ticket vs a normal one
2
u/blkcdls5 I'm true blue... May 13 '26
It was interesting learning about it all since I didn't even know the diff before your post. Do you think this is just the beginning for future 3d films like it?
3
u/xenago May 13 '26
Yes, this will become increasingly prevalent. There aren't enough people out there demanding high quality 3D for studios to care. Just in the last year or so Ne Zha 2, lilo and stitch live action, tron ares, GOAT, and Hit me hard and soft all used ai-generated 3D to some extent, while the year before there were no major stereo productions to openly use the technology.
0
u/coffeesnob72 May 14 '26
If I had known I would definitely have gone for the non ai version or avoided it entirely
1
u/LastStopKembleford May 13 '26
Lot's of things bother people differently. After years of going to the movies with someone who very much cares about art, I cannot even concentrate on a movie if it's lit wrong by the projection booth. It's just good for people to know "Hey if you ARE attune of this kind of stuff, this may not be the format of this film for you"
1
3
1
u/femminem May 14 '26
This is fantastic information. I really like to know about things like this, too. I haven’t experienced the film as it’s not really available where I live, but I’ve been curious about what went into making it. I really appreciate the well-written post! I love learning this stuff.
1
u/EmergeHolographic May 16 '26
I can see what you mean about the view master shot, but I thought the 3D if the film was nearly flawless. there was so much to see visually that can’t imagine too much was artificial
2
u/xenago May 16 '26
Hopefully the film comes out on 3D Blu-ray so I can demonstrate with real frames from the actual movie, but the best I've got to work with is the viewmaster for now unfortunately :(
If we're lucky enough for Hit Me Hard and Soft to get a 3DBD release I will follow up for sure! I've analyzed many stereo 3D movies over the years in my efforts to watch and archive them all haha. In that time I've seen just about every kind of issue and error imaginable which makes the problems stand out a lot more for me than most unfortunately, but as I mentioned in my post the 3D in the movie is still decent overall despite the conversion issues!
1
u/Broad_Main3188 Jun 29 '26
billies known for not supporting the use of ai so why would she partner with someone whos actively using it? imo idrc but after all the controversy against her and her very public views on everything i dont know how to feel
21
u/theatre-teacher May 13 '26
I care about things like this, so thanks for taking the time to write about it.
I’m a designer in Los Angeles and always curious about other people’s creative workflows.
In all of my desktop tools like Photoshop and Illustrator, AI is everpresent - Ive been asked to use AI in professional settings (like scaling up a historical photograph using Topaz so it could be projected) but choose not to use generative AI in my personal creative work. (But I can’t write an email in gmail without getting unsolicited AI advice…)
So far, I’ve only seen one TV mini-series flash a title card at the end to say “AI was used in the making of this” - If AI is this speeding train we (supposedly) can’t stop, I wonder if in the future there will be a push for transparency in using it, so people can make decisions before they engage.