\u201cColourization\u201d <\/strong><\/h2>\nIn the first stage of a \u201cbrought to life\u201d style video, the image is colourized and\/or enhanced. Content creators often automate this work with AI programs<\/a> like Gradient<\/a>. The labelling of these images as simply \u201ccolourized\u201d or \u201cenhanced\u201d obscures the true amount of modification.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/AI_Enhanced_1-resized.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/AI_Enhanced_2-resized.png\")
\nScreenshots of an AI \u201cenhanced portrait\u201d from Mystery Scoop video<\/a> \u201cHistorical Figures Brought To Life (King Henry VIII, Catherine Howard, Queen Mary I, Verdi, Tesla)\u201d<\/div>\nThe screenshots above show the before and after of an AI-enhanced portrait of a \u201cSouthern Belle\u201d from a Mystery Scoop <\/em>video. The subtle differences are made more noticeable through the animated GIF below.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/AI_Enhanced_GIF-resized.gif\")
GIF created by Cate Cleo Alexander<\/p>\n
Note how the eyes shift upwards, the hairline changes, the shadow under the chin deepens, the cheekbones sharpen, and the highlights and shadows of the face increase in contrast. This is not so much digital restoration as a digital facelift.<\/p>\n
Sometimes the changes are less subtle. Historicly<\/em>, Mystery Scoop<\/em>, and Randomly Digest <\/em>all use AI to add makeup to female-presenting subjects. These makeovers range from subtle eyelash extensions and lipstick to a dramatic smoky eye. Often, the content creators who post these images seem unaware or uncaring of the physical limitations of makeup: noses and faces are slimmed, cheekbones change location, eyes are enlarged, and \u2014 most problematically \u2014 skin is whitened.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/RussianBall1-resized.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/RussianBall2-resized.png\")
\nScreenshots of an AI \u201ccolourized\u201d Alexandra Feodorovna from Historicly\u2019s video<\/a> \u201cRomanov Family – 10 Striking Photos From Romanov’s Last Ball – Brought to Life\u201d<\/div>\n\u201cModernization\u201d <\/strong><\/h2>\nOne of the most insidious implications of this content is that in order to be \u201cmodern\u201d and \u201crelatable,\u201d historical figures must be proximate to Western ideals of beauty<\/a>. One prominent example of this comes from videos featuring the portrait of a once-known woman who is referred to as \u201cMestiza de Sangley,\u201d an antiquated term for someone of Chinese and Filipino descent. In their video<\/a>, Randomly Digest <\/em>posits: \u201cWhat if she lived today? Loose interpretations with modern make up and hairstyle.\u201d The AI generated image is barely recognizable. The woman\u2019s face shape, cheekbones, lips, hairline, and body positioning are all shifted, bringing her in closer proximity to gender normative and white supremacist ideals of beauty.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/OnceKnownWoman.png\")
Screenshot of an AI-generated \u201cmodernized\u201d woman from Randomly Digest\u2019s <\/em>video<\/a> \u201cMestiza de Sangley, 1875, Brought To Life\u201d<\/p>\nAnimation\u00a0 <\/strong><\/h2>\nAfter \u201ccolourization\u201d and \u201cmodernization,\u201d the final stage of a \u201cbrought to life\u201d video is animated movement. Through AI tools like Deep Nostalgia<\/a>, these uncanny personages tilt their heads, look around, blink, and smile.<\/p>\nUnlike the other channels, RoyaltyNow<\/em> manually creates portraits and conducts research<\/a> to make their recreations as accurate as possible. In the example below, RoyaltyNow<\/em> recreated Mary Queen of Scots through studying her death mask, other portraits, and contemporary descriptions. However, after all that meticulous work, the image was fed into AI animation software \u2014 thus distorting the image.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/MaryQueenofScots1-resized.png\")
Screenshot from RoyaltyNow<\/em> video<\/a> showing their original recreation of Mary, Queen of Scots<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/digitalhumanities\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/233\/2024\/09\/MaryQueenofScotts2-resized.png\")
\nScreenshot from RoyaltyNow <\/em>video<\/a> showing how the recreation has been distorted after being fed into the AI animation program<\/p>\nThese AIs homogenise, flatten, and contrast features based on the racialized and gendered norms established by their training data. Yet, because the YouTube algorithm rewards posting frequently,[1]<\/a>\u00a0content creators are pressured to speed up their workflows with AI automation<\/a> in order to remain algorithmically visible<\/a>. Staying on trend is also key to maintaining an audience, which likely influenced RoyaltyNow<\/em>\u2019s decision to use AI animation. After all, it\u2019s clear that audiences react to this content.<\/p>\nYouTube and Public History <\/strong><\/h2>\nAt the time of this writing, the four channels that I reviewed have a combined total of 186,939,185 views.[2]<\/a>\u00a0<\/sup>The comment sections are filled with emotional reactions \u2014 viewers report tearing up, feeling \u201cmoved\u201d or \u201cemotional,\u201d and having chills or goosebumps. As one comment <\/a>stated, \u201cWho else got chills and a tear in their eye when the Grand Duchess Romanova \u2018came to life\u2019? Honestly, when she began to smile and move her eyes around I just got so emotional.\u201d<\/p>\nIn her book on queer archives, Ann Cvekovitch<\/a> describes \u201cthe quest for history as a psychic need.\u201d\u00a0 More and more, people are turning to the Internet to fulfil their thirst for learning about the past. There is a desire to create affective intimacy with these historical figures. However, these AI algorithms are creating this intimacy by contorting and distorting these images, creating the false impression that gender expression is immutable and positioning “modernity” and “relatability” alongside whiteness. Given the substantial impact of this content, this uncanny new practice in digital public history must be investigated further.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
Endnotes <\/strong><\/h2>\n[1]<\/a> Probably; it\u2019s tricky to figure out how YouTube\u2019s algorithms work. However, because there\u2019s a lot of algorithmic gossip<\/a> that frequency is rewarded (see examples 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, and 3<\/a>), many creators will strive for frequent uploads.<\/p>\n
\nScreenshots of an AI \u201cenhanced portrait\u201d from Mystery Scoop video<\/a> \u201cHistorical Figures Brought To Life (King Henry VIII, Catherine Howard, Queen Mary I, Verdi, Tesla)\u201d<\/div>\n
The screenshots above show the before and after of an AI-enhanced portrait of a \u201cSouthern Belle\u201d from a Mystery Scoop <\/em>video. The subtle differences are made more noticeable through the animated GIF below.<\/p>\n Note how the eyes shift upwards, the hairline changes, the shadow under the chin deepens, the cheekbones sharpen, and the highlights and shadows of the face increase in contrast. This is not so much digital restoration as a digital facelift.<\/p>\n Sometimes the changes are less subtle. Historicly<\/em>, Mystery Scoop<\/em>, and Randomly Digest <\/em>all use AI to add makeup to female-presenting subjects. These makeovers range from subtle eyelash extensions and lipstick to a dramatic smoky eye. Often, the content creators who post these images seem unaware or uncaring of the physical limitations of makeup: noses and faces are slimmed, cheekbones change location, eyes are enlarged, and \u2014 most problematically \u2014 skin is whitened.<\/p>\n One of the most insidious implications of this content is that in order to be \u201cmodern\u201d and \u201crelatable,\u201d historical figures must be proximate to Western ideals of beauty<\/a>. One prominent example of this comes from videos featuring the portrait of a once-known woman who is referred to as \u201cMestiza de Sangley,\u201d an antiquated term for someone of Chinese and Filipino descent. In their video<\/a>, Randomly Digest <\/em>posits: \u201cWhat if she lived today? Loose interpretations with modern make up and hairstyle.\u201d The AI generated image is barely recognizable. The woman\u2019s face shape, cheekbones, lips, hairline, and body positioning are all shifted, bringing her in closer proximity to gender normative and white supremacist ideals of beauty.<\/p>\n After \u201ccolourization\u201d and \u201cmodernization,\u201d the final stage of a \u201cbrought to life\u201d video is animated movement. Through AI tools like Deep Nostalgia<\/a>, these uncanny personages tilt their heads, look around, blink, and smile.<\/p>\n Unlike the other channels, RoyaltyNow<\/em> manually creates portraits and conducts research<\/a> to make their recreations as accurate as possible. In the example below, RoyaltyNow<\/em> recreated Mary Queen of Scots through studying her death mask, other portraits, and contemporary descriptions. However, after all that meticulous work, the image was fed into AI animation software \u2014 thus distorting the image.<\/p>\n These AIs homogenise, flatten, and contrast features based on the racialized and gendered norms established by their training data. Yet, because the YouTube algorithm rewards posting frequently,[1]<\/a>\u00a0content creators are pressured to speed up their workflows with AI automation<\/a> in order to remain algorithmically visible<\/a>. Staying on trend is also key to maintaining an audience, which likely influenced RoyaltyNow<\/em>\u2019s decision to use AI animation. After all, it\u2019s clear that audiences react to this content.<\/p>\n At the time of this writing, the four channels that I reviewed have a combined total of 186,939,185 views.[2]<\/a>\u00a0<\/sup>The comment sections are filled with emotional reactions \u2014 viewers report tearing up, feeling \u201cmoved\u201d or \u201cemotional,\u201d and having chills or goosebumps. As one comment <\/a>stated, \u201cWho else got chills and a tear in their eye when the Grand Duchess Romanova \u2018came to life\u2019? Honestly, when she began to smile and move her eyes around I just got so emotional.\u201d<\/p>\n In her book on queer archives, Ann Cvekovitch<\/a> describes \u201cthe quest for history as a psychic need.\u201d\u00a0 More and more, people are turning to the Internet to fulfil their thirst for learning about the past. There is a desire to create affective intimacy with these historical figures. However, these AI algorithms are creating this intimacy by contorting and distorting these images, creating the false impression that gender expression is immutable and positioning “modernity” and “relatability” alongside whiteness. Given the substantial impact of this content, this uncanny new practice in digital public history must be investigated further.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Probably; it\u2019s tricky to figure out how YouTube\u2019s algorithms work. However, because there\u2019s a lot of algorithmic gossip<\/a> that frequency is rewarded (see examples 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, and 3<\/a>), many creators will strive for frequent uploads.<\/p>\nGIF created by Cate Cleo Alexander<\/p>\n
\nScreenshots of an AI \u201ccolourized\u201d Alexandra Feodorovna from Historicly\u2019s video<\/a> \u201cRomanov Family – 10 Striking Photos From Romanov’s Last Ball – Brought to Life\u201d<\/div>\n\u201cModernization\u201d <\/strong><\/h2>\n
Screenshot of an AI-generated \u201cmodernized\u201d woman from Randomly Digest\u2019s <\/em>video<\/a> \u201cMestiza de Sangley, 1875, Brought To Life\u201d<\/p>\nAnimation\u00a0 <\/strong><\/h2>\n
Screenshot from RoyaltyNow<\/em> video<\/a> showing their original recreation of Mary, Queen of Scots<\/p>\n
\nScreenshot from RoyaltyNow <\/em>video<\/a> showing how the recreation has been distorted after being fed into the AI animation program<\/p>\nYouTube and Public History <\/strong><\/h2>\n
Endnotes <\/strong><\/h2>\n