Actors Express Concern Over Artificial Intelligence-Created ‘Synthetic’ Performers

In the realm of cinema, monsters have been depicted on the big screen for over a hundred years. However, come 2023, the true embodiment of fear appears to be indistinguishable from ourselves.

Since June, Hollywood studios and performers have been discussing the use of artificial intelligence in film and television. The failure to deal with artificial intelligence terms was one of the reasons SAG-AFTRA, the union representing actors and media professionals, joined the Writers Guild in its first simultaneous strike in 63 years last Friday.

One of the biggest fears of actors? Synthetic performers.

Although the parties have negotiated issues ranging from using images and performances as training data for AI systems to digitally altered performances in the editing room, the Actors are concerned that their roles will be stolen by Actors produced entirely by artificial intelligence, or “meta-humans”.

“If it wasn’t a big deal to plan to use artificial intelligence to replace actors, it would be a no-brainer to make a deal and let us sleep with peace of mind,” Carly Turro, an actress who has appeared on TV shows such as “Homeland,” said at a picket line this week. “The fact that they don’t is scary when you think about the future of arts and entertainment as a career.”

One problem is the creation of synthetic performers from combining images of actors. According to studio sources, this has not yet happened, although they are working to reserve this right as part of contract negotiations.

Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s chief negotiator, said AI poses an “existential crisis” for actors concerned about their past, present and future work being used to create “synthetic performers who can take their place.”

Crabtree-Ireland said the union is not seeking an outright ban on AI, but rather that companies consult with it and obtain approval before choosing a synthetic performer to replace an actor.

Major film and TV producers say, according to sources familiar with the matter, that they have taken the union’s concerns into account in their latest proposal. However, the union has not responded to their proposal, these studio sources say.

The studios, which wanted to retain creative options, agreed to notify SAG if they intended to use such a synthetic performer to replace a human actor otherwise hired for the role, and to allow the union to negotiate the producers’ position, according to sources familiar with the matter.

DIGITAL REPLICA

Another threshold point in the negotiations is the creation of digital replicas of the background performers.

The major studios, represented by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, said they would seek permission from the actor to use their digital replica in any film outside of the production for which the performer is hired, according to sources familiar with the producers’ proposal.

Producers said they would negotiate with the actors for payment when a digital double is used – and suggested that the virtual version of the actor would not support the minimum number of supporting actors required by the SAG contract.

SAG says studios have agreed to obtain consent upon first employment, which it says is inconsistent with the idea of additional compensation.

“What that really means is that those companies are telling background performers, ‘If you don’t give us the required consent, we won’t hire you and we’ll replace you with someone else,'” said Crabtree-Ireland. “That’s not meaningful consent.”

The studios also plan to continue the long practice of 3D body scans to capture an actor’s likeness, in this case creating AI-generated digital replicas. Such images would be used in post-production, to accurately replace an actor’s face or create an on-screen double, said a person familiar with the mechanics of film production.

Sources say that the producers have promised to obtain the performer’s consent and to negotiate separately on the subsequent use of the actor’s double.

Studios can do that now with proper consent and compensation, said Crabtree-Ireland. The union’s problem is the desire to retain the rights to digital reproductions for future works, which in effect takes ownership of the virtual persona.

Likewise, studios want the right to digitally alter a show in post-production in a way that is consistent with the character, the script, and the director’s vision. That ability to replace a word or two of dialogue or make a quick digital wardrobe change can save hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs over reshooting a scene, said one studio source.

According to sources, the producers offered to request the performer’s consent to any changes that are not typical post-production changes.

SAG interprets this as an overreach by artificial intelligence and requests permission before any changes are made to the actor’s image, likeness or voice.

“Traditional editing methods cannot create a new scene that never existed before,” said Crabtree-Ireland.