KEY TAKEAWAYS:
1. AI doesn’t necessarily increase efficiency or save time
Video 1, my AI generated animation, ended up taking more time: 57 hours, compared to Video 2, made in After Effects, which clocked in at 42 hours of labor. This was because I hand-made my assets as a way to offset the project’s environmental footprint. There was also a learning curve to the AI tool, Luma, which added time.2. AI animation was most successful following a traditional animation workflow
I set a start frame and an end frame and let the AI interpolate between them. Asking the AI to generate long stretches of complicated action was less fruitful. I had more success with my AI output when I got granular with the key frames I was setting, and using simple prompts like “stop motion transition”, “ radiate,” or “paper collage texture.”3. When using AI, look for opportunities to go analog
One of AI’s major criticisms is its exorbitant use of limited resources like water and energy. Since my topic was sustainability in design, I decided to hand-collage my assets for Video 1, rather than generate them. Creating a guardrail around where I’d use AI, and more importantly, where I wouldn't, allowed me to maintain integrity with my climate-conscious subject matter. Hand-collaging was also a welcome break from the intense screen time this project required and infused more creative play into the process.
4. AI is another tool in my creative toolkit
I assigned AI to a specific role in this project, animating key frames, and I anticipate using it similarly in the future, as one of the tools I use to uplift my human-creative intelligence: my ability to come up with interesting and conceptual ideas.