Entertainment
Sponsored by

Sora (AI words to video)

11,443 Views | 141 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by redline248
Capybara
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

ABATTBQ11 said:

TCTTS said:

Personally? I'm not too worried for my job, specifically. There will ALWAYS be a need for producers. Writers and actors are the ones who have the most to lose, potentially. But the industry will always need people who know/can read the market, conceive of the project on a macro scale, pitch it, provide "prompts," see that it holds to a certain artistic vision, see that it gets proper distribution, etc. IMO, producers and directors are "safe" in that regard. The jobs will certainly change, but they won't go away.


I wouldn't be so sure. In the not too distant future there will probably be an engine that creates an entire movie or show for you based on what you ask for. Audiences might not even need writers, actors, directors, or producers because there might not be movies or even shows made for wide release. Imagine a Netflix equivalent that creates custom content based on what you ask for, your perceived mood, and how you react to what's being created. Why invest in movies and shows hoping to reach a wide enough audience when you can just create individual movies and shows catered to specific viewers for the low cost of processing power? If people want to share with friends, they can just save their content to a library.

But just because you ask for it, and it's custom to some random preferences/prompts you give it, doesn't mean it's going to be good or compelling or have your sense of humor, a unique perspective, or anything meaningful to say.

I strongly believe that without the human element this stuff is ultimately going to feel soulless, and people will - eventually - start to reject it. Whether you know it or not, on a subconscious level, you're responding to the entertainment you like because other human beings made it. Because you inherently know that every single decision you're watching on screen was made by a person with wants, needs, desires, experiences, and a "soul" just like you.

I'm not saying AI won't be capable of making entertaining stories, or that there won't be people entertained by them. But big picture, what human beings ultimately crave are stories from our fellow man. It's how we bond, and how we find empathy in one another. And I promise you, no computer is going to completely take that away.
Why are you surprised conservative guys actively want this? They're largely used to having small (but tightly knit) circles, and don't really want to be surprised either. This stuff is a wet dream for them. Add in the fact that they could manufacture things with their own morality staring back at them and you can see why this has huge potential.

Lots of people never move beyond the narcissism of childhood. Wanting everything tailored just for "you". Me, me, me, me, me!

And I know the predictably snarky stuff is coming (which is so pass btw). I used the small c in conservative for a reason. Because it's a temperament, not a partisan identity. Being fundamentally risk averse. Wanting to swipe up a menu from a restaurant while walking by it on a sidewalk, because even risking a lackluster meal is unacceptable.
BadMoonRisin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiephoenix02 said:

Dude, this is a first. What you just posted is so freakin' weird I'm gonna self ban. I'm gonna from here on out ban myself from responding to your ridiculousness.

Do you realize how far gone you are!?!
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah, between aggiephoenix and Capybara (who might be AI himself) this thread got weird fast.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BadMoonRisin said:

I think it will be used to create consumable content. This is just your lazy "we made it so people watch it for a few hours on a night". It's not going to be good, but it will be good enough to entertain for an hour or two.

Hell I feel like that's already how poorly some of these kids shows are. Lookin' at you, PJ masks and Miraculous with Lady Bug and Cat Noir.

I think cinema and film will still rely on humans. Directors and DPs are always way too focused on lighting, angles, framing, shot-types, color motifs, themes, etc to give up control to a computer.

AI for entertainment, humans for art.


The problem is that cinematic art is expensive art. Art can be made for art's sake only to the point that the artist can pay for it or have a patron pay for it. If it isn't commercially viable, where does the budget to make it come from?

That said, I think this will only get much better with time. I'm the same way we went from punch cards to BASIC to higher languages to low code and no code, these algorithms will get easier to create and modify and refine. Just a few years ago I was learning trees, random forest, regressions, clustering, and basic neural networks and learning how and when to use different models and how to choose the best one. Not long after there were people releasing packages and software that would effectively throw the kitchen sink at your data and do all of that model analysis. Now we have LLM's and other generative models being brought to the forefront of commercial use. If I want analysis on a dataset, we're pretty close to the point where I can simply ask for it. I was at a conference about 10 years ago and heard some guys talking about a generative architecture program. I didn't think it would be possible then, but now I see it as a bit of an inevitability.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ABATTBQ11 said:

BadMoonRisin said:

I think it will be used to create consumable content. This is just your lazy "we made it so people watch it for a few hours on a night". It's not going to be good, but it will be good enough to entertain for an hour or two.

Hell I feel like that's already how poorly some of these kids shows are. Lookin' at you, PJ masks and Miraculous with Lady Bug and Cat Noir.

I think cinema and film will still rely on humans. Directors and DPs are always way too focused on lighting, angles, framing, shot-types, color motifs, themes, etc to give up control to a computer.

AI for entertainment, humans for art.


The problem is that cinematic art is expensive art. Art can be made for art's sake only to the point that the artist can pay for it or have a patron pay for it. If it isn't commercially viable, where does the budget to make it come from?

That said, I think this will only get much better with time. I'm the same way we went from punch cards to BASIC to higher languages to low code and no code, these algorithms will get easier to create and modify and refine. Just a few years ago I was learning trees, random forest, regressions, clustering, and basic neural networks and learning how and when to use different models and how to choose the best one. Not long after there were people releasing packages and software that would effectively throw the kitchen sink at your data and do all of that model analysis. Now we have LLM's and other generative models being brought to the forefront of commercial use. If I want analysis on a dataset, we're pretty close to the point where I can simply ask for it. I was at a conference about 10 years ago and heard some guys talking about a generative architecture program. I didn't think it would be possible then, but now I see it as a bit of an inevitability.


This is only true now, though. Making movies with real people will get much cheaper too, with the help of AI. And there will be a market for it because there will simply never not be a demand for art made by humans as well.
ABATTBQ11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

ABATTBQ11 said:

TCTTS said:

Personally? I'm not too worried for my job, specifically. There will ALWAYS be a need for producers. Writers and actors are the ones who have the most to lose, potentially. But the industry will always need people who know/can read the market, conceive of the project on a macro scale, pitch it, provide "prompts," see that it holds to a certain artistic vision, see that it gets proper distribution, etc. IMO, producers and directors are "safe" in that regard. The jobs will certainly change, but they won't go away.


I wouldn't be so sure. In the not too distant future there will probably be an engine that creates an entire movie or show for you based on what you ask for. Audiences might not even need writers, actors, directors, or producers because there might not be movies or even shows made for wide release. Imagine a Netflix equivalent that creates custom content based on what you ask for, your perceived mood, and how you react to what's being created. Why invest in movies and shows hoping to reach a wide enough audience when you can just create individual movies and shows catered to specific viewers for the low cost of processing power? If people want to share with friends, they can just save their content to a library.

But just because you ask for it, and it's custom to some random preferences/prompts you give it, doesn't mean it's going to be good or compelling or have your sense of humor, a unique perspective, or anything meaningful to say.

I strongly believe that without the human element this stuff is ultimately going to feel soulless, and people will - eventually - start to reject it. Whether you know it or not, on a subconscious level, you're responding to the entertainment you like because other human beings made it. Because you inherently know that every single decision you're watching on screen was made by a person with wants, needs, desires, experiences, and a "soul" just like you.

I'm not saying AI won't be capable of making entertaining stories, or that there won't be people entertained by them. But big picture, what human beings ultimately crave are stories from our fellow man. It's how we bond, and how we find empathy in one another. And I promise you, no computer is going to completely take that away.


I find this take incredibly ironic considering your completely opposite take on the Vision Pro. You laud it for what you think it could be, eventually, despite the fact that, by its very nature, it will always be physically isolating to the user and create a physical barrier for shared human experience. It strips the humanity from watching a movie together, but that's seemingly no big deal because one day it will provide an amazing and maybe even comfortable visual experience.

Yet here, you fail to acknowledge what this could be with your reasoning being that it strips the humanity from the movie and thus the movie watching experience. We are approaching the point where AI generated images are becoming harder and harder to distinguish from the real thing, so I don't see why it is so hard to believe that the same will happen with cinematography and storytelling. It certainly won't be tomorrow, but probably within our lifetime.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
First of all, you're twisting my words, re: the Vision Pro, and conveniently leaving out the part where I said virtual reality screenings will eventually bring people together, in an all new way, where we can watch movies and shows "with" people on the other side of the planet, I can watch "with" my family halfway across the country, etc. That was a big part of my excitement you're conveniently leaving out.

In all of this, though, I'm clearly talking about the individual connections we have with the artists/storytellers themselves, whether we consciously recognize them or not. And those connections have little to do with me watching something alongside a thousand people in a theater or alone on my couch with a headset on. Nothing I've said about the Vision Pro discounts that.

As for "AI generated images becoming harder and harder to distinguish from the real thing" in cinematography and storytelling, I never said I don't believe that will happen. You're completely missing my point, which is that WHEN it happens, what I'm saying is, there will eventually be a disconnect. Because, inherently, we'll know that the cinematography and storytelling won't be authored/performed by humans, and will thus feel "soulless" on a fundamental level. It may LOOK real, but it won't FEEL real. Our brains/hearts will know there's not another human being on the other end sharing something back. Again, whether you realize it or not, storytelling is a two-way street, one that I truly believe requires consciousness on both ends for it to have a genuine emotional effect. That doesn't mean people won't be entertained by AI. But in the end, that soulless entertainment simply won't be enough. That's all I'm saying.
aggiebird02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TCTTS said:

aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

I don't need to. Your tired schtick speaks for itself.
Let's take this off the board and go to PMs…

Nah, I'm good. The last time you did that you specifically PMed me to tell me you're essentially hamming it up in order to get a reaction out of people, and that you wanted me to go along with it, which is... weird, but whatever. It's when you kept playing that character, or whatever it is you think you're doing - with me - that I got kind of annoyed, and now I'm simply letting you know that I don't want to participate.
You're mistaking me for someone else. I understand, you probably get a lot of PMs asking you what your problem is, so you get confused. I never contacted you saying anything like you suggested.

If you didn't make this mistake, if you're saying these things on purpose, then that would be strange, to say the least…
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

BadMoonRisin said:

I think it will be used to create consumable content. This is just your lazy "we made it so people watch it for a few hours on a night". It's not going to be good, but it will be good enough to entertain for an hour or two.

Hell I feel like that's already how poorly some of these kids shows are. Lookin' at you, PJ masks and Miraculous with Lady Bug and Cat Noir.

I think cinema and film will still rely on humans. Directors and DPs are always way too focused on lighting, angles, framing, shot-types, color motifs, themes, etc to give up control to a computer.

AI for entertainment, humans for art.

The below fear kind of speaks to what you're talking about. I could see there being two "tiers" in both film and television. AI movies and shows made for the broadcast/Wal-Mart crowd, and then man-made movies and shows for the cinema/prestige TV/we-want-something-good/real crowd. Almost like it is now, but even further separated. That said, even then, after a few years, I still think people will ultimately check out on the 100% AI stuff that's not cartoons and the like...


99.9999% of what Hollywood puts out is already mediocre.
BowSowy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

I don't need to. Your tired schtick speaks for itself.
Let's take this off the board and go to PMs…

Nah, I'm good. The last time you did that you specifically PMed me to tell me you're essentially hamming it up in order to get a reaction out of people, and that you wanted me to go along with it, which is... weird, but whatever. It's when you kept playing that character, or whatever it is you think you're doing - with me - that I got kind of annoyed, and now I'm simply letting you know that I don't want to participate.
Wait, this dude does the same lame, try-hard shtick everywhere? I thought he was just a random try-hard on the sneaker thread. Hearing that he PM'd you to keep his weird gag going tracks so hard lmao. What a fkn weirdo
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:

TCTTS said:

BadMoonRisin said:

I think it will be used to create consumable content. This is just your lazy "we made it so people watch it for a few hours on a night". It's not going to be good, but it will be good enough to entertain for an hour or two.

Hell I feel like that's already how poorly some of these kids shows are. Lookin' at you, PJ masks and Miraculous with Lady Bug and Cat Noir.

I think cinema and film will still rely on humans. Directors and DPs are always way too focused on lighting, angles, framing, shot-types, color motifs, themes, etc to give up control to a computer.

AI for entertainment, humans for art.

The below fear kind of speaks to what you're talking about. I could see there being two "tiers" in both film and television. AI movies and shows made for the broadcast/Wal-Mart crowd, and then man-made movies and shows for the cinema/prestige TV/we-want-something-good/real crowd. Almost like it is now, but even further separated. That said, even then, after a few years, I still think people will ultimately check out on the 100% AI stuff that's not cartoons and the like...


99.9999% of what Hollywood puts out is already mediocre.


Yet you choose to spend inordinate amounts of time endlessly engaging with a board dedicated specifically to discussing, analyzing, and celebrating that apparent mediocrity.



The Collective
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I won't watch. AI can do it for me.
The Porkchop Express
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

I don't need to. Your tired schtick speaks for itself.
Let's take this off the board and go to PMs…

Nah, I'm good. The last time you did that you specifically PMed me to tell me you're essentially hamming it up in order to get a reaction out of people, and that you wanted me to go along with it, which is... weird, but whatever. It's when you kept playing that character, or whatever it is you think you're doing - with me - that I got kind of annoyed, and now I'm simply letting you know that I don't want to participate.
You're mistaking me for someone else. I understand, you probably get a lot of PMs asking you what your problem is, so you get confused. I never contacted you saying anything like you suggested.

If you didn't make this mistake, if you're saying these things on purpose, then that would be strange, to say the least…
The self ban apparently has a 5-1/2 hour limit.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BowSowy said:

TCTTS said:

aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

I don't need to. Your tired schtick speaks for itself.
Let's take this off the board and go to PMs…

Nah, I'm good. The last time you did that you specifically PMed me to tell me you're essentially hamming it up in order to get a reaction out of people, and that you wanted me to go along with it, which is... weird, but whatever. It's when you kept playing that character, or whatever it is you think you're doing - with me - that I got kind of annoyed, and now I'm simply letting you know that I don't want to participate.
Wait, this dude does the same lame, try-hard shtick everywhere? I thought he was just a random try-hard on the sneaker thread. Hearing that he PM'd you to keep his weird gag going tracks so hard lmao. What a fkn weirdo


Yeah, the he-doth-protest-too-much act is really giving it away. Then again, he sent me three more erratic PMs yesterday, so he's either gone full method or is in so deep even he forgot it's a schtick.
Sea Speed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I showed my wife the video of the dude on the salt flat with the spaceship and she said he was attractive so they've got the mid 30s housewife demographic nailed down
BowSowy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

BowSowy said:

TCTTS said:

aggiephoenix02 said:

TCTTS said:

I don't need to. Your tired schtick speaks for itself.
Let's take this off the board and go to PMs…

Nah, I'm good. The last time you did that you specifically PMed me to tell me you're essentially hamming it up in order to get a reaction out of people, and that you wanted me to go along with it, which is... weird, but whatever. It's when you kept playing that character, or whatever it is you think you're doing - with me - that I got kind of annoyed, and now I'm simply letting you know that I don't want to participate.
Wait, this dude does the same lame, try-hard shtick everywhere? I thought he was just a random try-hard on the sneaker thread. Hearing that he PM'd you to keep his weird gag going tracks so hard lmao. What a fkn weirdo


Yeah, the he-doth-protest-too-much act is really giving it away. Then again, he sent me three more erratic PMs yesterday, so he's either gone full method or is in so deep even he forgot it's a schtick.
Damn, what a loser
Malachi Constant
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


Marques Brownlee's take on this. Really good video talking about the implications of AI video. The point he makes on stock video is really good.
KidDoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Malachi Constant said:



Marques Brownlee's take on this. Really good video talking about the implications of AI video. The point he makes on stock video is really good.
Good video thanks for sharing.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
BoxingAg84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://instagr.am/p/C3bToQiggQe
kyledr04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TCTTS said:

BadMoonRisin said:

I think it will be used to create consumable content. This is just your lazy "we made it so people watch it for a few hours on a night". It's not going to be good, but it will be good enough to entertain for an hour or two.

Hell I feel like that's already how poorly some of these kids shows are. Lookin' at you, PJ masks and Miraculous with Lady Bug and Cat Noir.

I think cinema and film will still rely on humans. Directors and DPs are always way too focused on lighting, angles, framing, shot-types, color motifs, themes, etc to give up control to a computer.

AI for entertainment, humans for art.

The below fear kind of speaks to what you're talking about. I could see there being two "tiers" in both film and television. AI movies and shows made for the broadcast/Wal-Mart crowd, and then man-made movies and shows for the cinema/prestige TV/we-want-something-good/real crowd. Almost like it is now, but even further separated. That said, even then, after a few years, I still think people will ultimately check out on the 100% AI stuff that's not cartoons and the like...




One step closer to Idiocracy. I'm convinced Mike Judge is some sort of modern day prophet.
Urban Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This thread is depressing.

I want my entertainment written by real humans. I want it directed by real humans. I want the actors to be real humans (although something like bringing back Tarkin in R1 was cool).

I have no interest in Skynet taking over. I have butted heads with TCCTS many times but I want people like him to stress out in meetings and stay up all night at their desk pouring over what to make and how to make it and then I want them to find cool, beautiful, unusual, even disturbing, actors to bring it to the screen, big and small.

And if it sucks it sucks and if its great its great. But their is no passion in program making it for us. I'd rather recycle sh** I've seen 20 times.

Tech is going to be the end of us.
BadMoonRisin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

maroon barchetta
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Urban Ag said:

This thread is depressing.

I want my entertainment written by real humans. I want it directed by real humans. I want the actors to be real humans (although something like bringing back Tarkin in R1 was cool).

I have no interest in Skynet taking over. I have butted heads with TCCTS many times but I want people like him to stress out in meetings and stay up all night at their desk pouring over what to make and how to make it and then I want them to find cool, beautiful, unusual, even disturbing, actors to bring it to the screen, big and small.

And if it sucks it sucks and if its great its great. But their is no passion in program making it for us. I'd rather recycle sh** I've seen 20 times.

Tech is going to be the end of us.


Hollywood has some good news for you.
Mongolian Christmas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With the exception of a few iconoclastic writers, anything and everything is just a retread of Greek and Shakespearean themes. Easily replaceable. The average American wants a few things in their entertainment: sex, violence, love, conflict and resolution. AI can easily replicate this. Plus with AI, we don't have to put up with their histrionics.

But still there will be some that appreciate the human element. Just like people enjoy artisanal sausages over Oscar Mayer. But, that means the acting industry is going to die to a large extent. They did it to themselves my producing easily replicated crap.
Mega Lops
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lots of assumptions being made that the general movie- going public is intelligent, and therefore will reject the subtle nuances of AI.

That is simply not the case. On some subconscious level the brain will still revolt against the uncanny valley but as AI-driven content becomes normalized, people will accept it.

Just as most people have been conditioned to accept the narratives, repackaged garbage of modern cinema, and never-ending "universe" storylines, they will eventually come to accept hyper realistic visuals devoid of humanity.

I do agree there will be some man in the middle coordination for a very, very long time for what passes for AI cinema.

Best course is to reject the fairytales of others who are motivated purely by money and instead seek your own experiences.
maroon barchetta
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is your username name AL Bula or A.I. Bula?
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

you're worried about AI generated video?

when the first AVATAR came out there was a lot of talk about how it was the future of movies. entirely CGI blockbusters. filmmakers can imagine worlds and characters that we've never seen before with infinite possibilities.

AVATAR was 15 years ago and Avatar 2 is the only thing that's ever come close to that magic, and now most of the discourse here is about how CGI is ruining movies (it's not).

you still need a mind to think this stuff up, piece it together, and market it to an audience.

everyone can make movies with AI just as well as they can make a movie with their iPhone.

most people lack the creativity, and more importantly lack the will to try. It's the same as cameras - every tool is only as valuable as the person using it.

some folks will benefit greatly from this next tech wave, the majority of humanity will make scenes of people drinking coffee at golden hour for 20 likes.
redline248
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think that opinion is selling people short. The difference between AI and a camera, iPhone, or whatever, is that your don't have to actually go outside, or to a location or ask a friend to stand in a scene. You just have to come up with a prompt.

Yes, there will still be a bunch of dogs running through fields for 30 sec. But more people will also create Homeward Bound or All Dogs Go to Heaven and never worry about any costs (financial or otherwise) that traditionally restrict novice movie makers.

That doesn't mean the Hollywood blockbuster is dead, but other markets will change or emerge. Something like PBS will be interesting to watch adapt, for instance. No more need for those 8 minute ads on how you can make the program possible
Mr President Elect
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

BudFox7
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AI vid gen will replace a bunch of actors, writers, and traditional producers. Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of ppl.
Mr President Elect
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We'll see. AI can look really good, but it's often missing that last 1-2% to get it to do exactly what's needed. You can project out how good it will become at the current pace, but it's not uncommon for them to hit local maximum's that need a complete overhaul to get over the hump. Sora looks great, but most of the videos still have small irregularities.
Definitely Not A Cop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I can't imagine having to go through HS with this tech. How long until kids start bullying each other by releasing AI nudity of each other around school? Sure they will get in trouble, but the damage will be done and the pics/videos will be out there forever.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wake me up when an actual auteur or someone who isn't such a cheap, penny pinching hack starts freaking out.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I have no doubt it will eventually get there, but yeah, the precise level of control, consistency, and realism needed to truly replace actors, locations, VFX, etc, across a two-hour feature film, with hundreds of shots and thousands of edits, is still a long ways off.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Surely there will be some kind of restrictions on the software itself that regulates using the imagery/likeness of real people. And yes, there will obviously be work-arounds, but that's where super strict laws need to come in.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.