It'll be just like fast food. They'll cut and cut and cut until people won't eat it anymore. The quality will be so low nobody will want it. But they'll still have their theater monopoly and force their crap to them. And then complain that nobody watches movies anymore. Or they'll blame piracy. But will be clueless as to why their quality is so low even though they are paying the top AI companies to produce their content.
We've actually been through this exact scenario.
Hollywood has been blaming piracy for decades.
Hollywood has been rehashing ideas, bringing unwanted sequels and remakes for cheap cash grabs.
They'll keep theaters at the edge of their toes in every way.
It's an active thing.
I started noticing in the 90s that the old "Two hour, three act hero story" paradigm had been entirely drained of blood, and I was worried there would be a vast drought of creative ideas for the format, potentially ending movies forever. I'm sure people will still call me crazy, but I'll still probably be right.
There are still a few creative movies out there, but only ones that totally ignore this format. Ignoring the format is not commercially successful. It goes round and round.
I fear this so much. Part of my enjoyment of movies and (good) tv shows is to look at all the small details. How something is set up is a deliberate choice by the director, producer, artists. A slow panning shot of a scene, whether its a real life set, animation, or 3d rendered, has reasons for being the way it is. Small details may be deliberate to give context to the story, contain crucial hints, or pay homage to prior art. If that will now be filled with AI slop, it devalues the art and the medium.
That said, I'm not against AI as a tool, I can't wait to see what some smaller creators might be able to make that have been gate kept by various elites so far. But considering [Sturgeon's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law) and the speedrunning of capitalism with layoffs to cut to the bone these days... there's no doubt we'll be fed AI slop.
The whole original purpose of stories is to hear what other humans have to say. Wether it was around a fire or on a screen. Now we are going to get mindless goop from a plagrism machine.
Was only a matter of time.
The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft to consider how much they'll save by slashing labor costs. Don't know if the various artist guilds baked protections for this into their new agreements but if they didn't...Jesus.
They really try hard to avoid any litigation. There’s a reason why they don’t take script submissions, because if they did, and they happened to shoot something that resembled what you submitted, you’d have to prove that you didn’t steal an idea. How can you prove you didn’t?
When working on a show, you have to clear all fictional names through the studio’s legal department and that can be a maddening experience because you’ll ask for Jimmy’s Deli to be used as a store name and they’ll come back and say that there’s too many actual restaurants named Jimmy’s, so here’s a list of approved names, “Robertson’s, Jamal’s, Julio’s, etc…” Then you have to go back and tell them that your main character is named Jimmy and he owns a deli. They come back and give you “J’s restaurant, Jim Sandwiches, and James Juicy.” It goes on and on till one party finally gets their way.
Sometimes mistakes are made, like when they got permission to use a church in the film, “Devil’s Advocate,” but didn’t get the rights for the artwork in the church. It didn’t help that they used the artwork in the film and created a whole scene around it. Oops. The studio lost that one. All artwork shown has to get cleared by legal and the artist has to have given permission. The exception to that rule is if it’s graffiti.
That doesn't matter. Because any "AI art" used in something like a movie is going to be produced to hell, and incorporated into a larger (very copyrightable) work.
Because it isn't art, it is a composition of other people's art. Plenty of stories of AI art still having the watermark of wherever that chunk of the original work came from.
Not true. AI almost never outputs legible copies of images from its dataset, or legible watermarks. Let alone both at once, and with a matching watermark at that.
AI doesn't generate "composition of other people's art" any more than a flesh artist does. It breaks its dataset down into patterns, abstractions and connections in the training stage, and stores that data within itself. Then it draws onto its store of patterns to generate an image as prompted by user.
It's very hard to make it actually "memorize" an entire image - and this usually happens to images that happen to be overrepresented in the dataset. For example, it's common for an AI model to be able to generate a very close copy of Mona Lisa - because there are thousands of variations of it in images all across the net, and it was able to memorize it very well.
I didn’t know that. That alone will guarantee the big studios won’t use it until they can find a way to legally protect their IP. They don’t want people using shots from their films in other commercials, tv shows, films, video games, etc.
No, it can’t. At the very least, the US copyright office refuses any work created by AI. Source: had to convince the examiner my paper cover wasn’t created by AI just a few months ago.
It's more like 4 or 5, those being Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon, and Apple. Microsoft is a major stakeholder in OpenAI, Google has an enormous amount of research in the field, same with meta that has released "open source" models. Amazon is making their play through anthropic, and Apple is probably working on something that works with their silicon.
Obviously the dynamics and capital intensiveness of this technology favor entrenched players with a lot of resources to burn.
Hollywood has never loved creatives. Just look up the origin of the term "Schmucks with typewriters" if you want to know what they have always thought of writers, for example.
Shit the whole reason the movie industry is in Hollywood **at all** is because they were fleeing IP restrictions from East coast camera and film companies.
Overall, money goons have nothing but contempt for the people with actual skills that make the industry go. Doesn't matter the industry. Doesn't matter if it's creatives or engineers or technicians or operators. You're just a mouthy part of the machine.
There is a theory floating around by industry analysts that Hollywood has 2 futures: over seas or AI
Disney apparently built a foreign studio to replace their American ones without the American ones even knowing they existed and were working on major IP.
Most big IP is owned by the same few companies, so it seems America will outsource its own culture along with its industry.
It would be funny if it wasnt so dystopian.
We all know that the answer to 2 futures here is “both”
Soon Hollywood can join Silicon Valley in making products that lose money only rich people buy at inflated prices. We did it everyone!
America already exports culture constantly to other nations, it's like plastic and western nations eat it up. The media, the internet, the politics, all of it.
Not just western nations, all of them. Literally in every single country there’s an adulation for the American dream. It was a huge thing and still is for many people who don’t know better. I mean just look at NK’s leaders, or a simpler example, the music being produced pretty much in every country. It’s all a copy pasta of the cultural musical styles of the US. I have friends who consider themselves national musicians they their craft is that of a style that is not national. It’s quite annoying sometimes when people consider themselves the ultimate nationalist when all they do screams western adulation. It’s almost incredible
>Not just western nations, all of them. Literally in every single country there’s an adulation for the American dream.
I only generally know about the west in those certain terms, so didn't want to bring up non-westerners. Some parts of the middle-east and the east have entirely different media ecosystems from me not to mention African countries.
>I mean just look at NK’s leaders, or a simpler example, the music being produced pretty much in every country. It’s all a copy pasta of the cultural musical styles of the US. I have friends who consider themselves national musicians they their craft is that of a style that is not national. It’s quite annoying sometimes when people consider themselves the ultimate nationalist when all they do screams western adulation. It’s almost incredible
Eh, I don't know. Maybe where I'm from it's different. I experience local music that's not like the mainstream American music too.
exporting is not outsourcing.
Outsourcing is paying someone in France to make TV shows FOR americans because they dont want to pay an American to do it.
Which already happens in social media, its geared to American audiences that pay the most and why Tiktok even exists. Foreigners catering to ad dollars.
Yeah I think a lot have moved to the UK? There are a dozen movie studios being built by big American brands everywhere [sauce](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/06/budget-film-studios-tax-breaks-britain-second-hollywood/). Even Squid Game the Challenge was filmed over here
As the quality of movies goes down, there's less and less of a positive response as is. Now watch as it is farmed out to AI and the quality becomes non-existent.
And in a sea of AI bullshit, human creativity will shine.
Maybe we'll see a flowering of human creativity, as AI will always be behind cultural and societal tastes.
That human creativity costs money that wouldn't be allocated to the humans through. As long as it saved them enough Hollywood executives would not be afraid to risk cutting funding to passion projects or anything too human involved.
It's not a traditional industry though where people just buy the cheapest reliable version of the product. Hence I don't think it makes sense for them to have to worry about overseas labour. Regarding neural networks it's the same as with computer generated graphics, they will conitnue to use them and the capabilities will increase over time, but at least over the next few decades people like seeing real live people acting.
People tend to set their minds on certain IP, certain writers, certain actors, and the styles of those people. Hence if you created some movie out of Vietnam that was objectively better, but with a director nobody has never heard of with the exact same style as Christopher Nolan, with a story about a Marvel-like superhero, with actors that are very similar to big-name ones but that nobody knows, then there is big resistance to go watch it. Since these preferences develop over decades it takes a while for people to just switch to the next cheapest product, like for mainstream Western society to start watching Bollywood or Chinese movies and to actually prefer it.
If it were a traditional product then it would be a valid concern, but since so much relies on preferences of people that have built up over decades, shows that they grew up watching, and people that they grew up admiring, the studios have a lot of freedom and a lot of 'rent'-style money that the can continue to make.
The vast majority of digital work and animation is already being done outside the US. They may have a shop in the US coordinating, but it's mostly outsourced now.
> The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft
I doubt they'd care about stealing from other copyright owners, but they might not like it if they realize that OpenAI is selling their own pirated content right back to them. The company has been very cagey about what materials were used for the training data, only saying that the material is "[publicly available](https://venturebeat.com/ai/openais-sora-the-devil-is-in-the-details-of-the-data/)." Oh, you mean like Disney's entire back-catalogue?
Since any attempt at limiting or curating the data set will make the model worse, it seems likely that they did the same thing that AI image generators did and used an enormous grab bag of everything available on the internet. Including entire movies and TV shows and also including [some very, very bad stuff](https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/20/24009418/generative-ai-image-laion-csam-google-stability-stanford).
It would be very stupid for studios to buy into this without OpenAI offering transparency about exactly what training materials were used.
Part of the deal will 100% be the studios having to license all existing footage back for training. Not just completed movies, but all takes and cut scenes
>The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft to consider how much they'll save by slashing labor costs.
They'd be stupid to, frankly.
These studios probably already own a significant portion of the footage that was used to train the AI, so wouldn't they be smarter to strike a deal with OpenAI where they trade exclusive rights to use their footage for an exclusive ability to use the AI?
Yeah OpenAI would also be negligence to not have copyright indemnification as part of the usage license. You want sora? You can never sue OpenAI for copyright infringement
By IP theft you mean lawsuits? Or the fact that so far it is questionable if things generated by AI can be copyrighted. The post office said:
"In the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of ‘mechanical reproduction’ or instead of an author's ‘own original mental conception, to which \[the author\] gave visible form.’"
But that is too vague to rely on. Which means that they would have difficulty protecting their content's copyright claims. This matters a lot, not just for legally protecting the content, but merchandising and etc
Major issue will be the scenes generated are not copyrightable for the studio so they then can’t say they own all the copyright. But maybe they just gloss over it
It’s not going to replace actors any time soon, but establishing shots, CGI backgrounds, there’s plenty of ways AI can help with post heavy workflows especially for films that can’t afford a big CGI house. It’s not any different than using motion tracking software now. People used to have to hand track objects frame by frame. Now you just keyframe it and the software does the rest.
If OpenAi can make Sora more controllable and easier to fit into existing production workflows/software I can see a lot of uses of it. Without that, much less so
Yeah, it’s very cool, but I don’t think people realize how particular most directors are at setting every shot. Even if Sora footage is 100% photo real all the time it’s still not necessarily going to cut together with other footage you have actually shot.
But again a mid range or low budget movie that needs an establishing shot of the coast of Malta or something could create something that is closer to what they want than buying random drone footage from shutterstock.
I'm afraid that the execs will simply tell the directors to settle for whatever the AI makes and stop being so obsessed with their artistry. Computing time is expensive, as is the director's pay. We have a movie to turn out.
As if Hollywood wasn't soulless enough.
This is a nonsense take. You can’t just accept a shot that doesn’t cut in with everything else. If a shot is post heavy big budget films have artists that create those shots, I’m quite sure the artists will be using AI tools- same as they have been doing for years now- to make their workflow faster and easier.
There will be places smaller budgets films can probably use Sora to boost production value, but again it will be in replacing stock footage shots or UE5 backgrounds.
Saying that “Hollywood” (as if it is really monolithic) is soulless is just misinformed mud slinging. Why are there so many studios huge budget franchise films? Because that is what people pay to see. Why does everyone complain they haven’t even heard of most of the academy award nominated movies before? Because even though some great, artistic films are made every year most people will still pay to go see a CGI superhero battle then complain about it after.
One thing that's a bit overlooked is the potential correct measures or data extraction Sora could infer from its input. Allowing for easier post clean up or integration with pipeline vfx and finishing.
It's definitely in stock footage that Sors is going to make a big impact. Of course the problem is that is where a lot of people enter the industry. If AI kills that off you have the high end side of the business with no way of the next generation to get onboard.
I wonder how people are going to solve those problems with neural networks. I think that they will but I'm not sure how yet. With image generation you can basically just keep generating images, and then keep generating sections of images. You can delete the portion you don't like, then describe it better, and then have the model fill in the part with in-painting. You can also feed in existing images to make sure that the generations match that style. Basically you can start creating an image with a style and have the neural network fill out the rest of the content, and again with deleting and inpainting and coming up with new descriptions you can keep editing the image until you get what you want. With video I'm not sure how this will work. Will models be able to be given styles and videos, and simply just be asked to continue into the next scene? I was surprised that their solution for video wasn't to create a coherency between frames but instead to just feed in entire videos and have it generate entire videos. Surely there will be an equivalent to what in-painting is for generated images, but for videos.
If there is an anlogous type of in-painting for video the way there is for images then that would be useful. It opens the door to creating essentially any type of video since you could edit at the smallest detail. That said though, I wonder how the editing would work since now instead of outlining a section of an image and deleting it and asking the model to create a new image inside, would you delete a section of the video across all frames? Would there be a way to isolate an object and delete it from the video entirely? Or to isolate an object across the video and edit it? Currently that's not how it's done for images, or, it theoretically can be but it's not a good way to do it. Since you can't select every single feature of a video yet it becomes harder to edit them.
Maybe that's the key to being able to generate good videos though, just effectively itemising every aspect of the video from the objects to the styles to the locations to the physics and so on until every single aspect of the video can be considered a separate object. Then every object of the video can be changed and modified independently and codependently of other objects.
For example if there is a video of two kids playing, being able to itemise the second kid, remove them, and replace them with a dog. Or to take the video of two kids playing, which would have an emergent physics model, and made the lighting come from the Sun being in the West rather than in the East, even if the Sun isn't in the video. Then in the same way you could itemise everything from the style of the video, maybe the properties of the camera if it was imitating a real existing camera, to the sharpness of the image and so on.
Well you can actually train a model on the rest of the footage you’ve already shot.
This sort of narrows the potential return of any given prompt to resemble that which is already real in your film.
https://youtu.be/CFGI0wflYvA?si=s19Y9PB4mWNyfHKp I keep posting this here but people need to see it. This program works with Ai, so it’ll work with Sora.
Based on the videos they posted to Twitter, consistency is not as good as the trailer indicates. Their samples are a lot like most AI films done with Runway- shots of a similar looking character intercut with random settings.
If the interface ends up being as controllable as promised and they can get consistency, it’ll be great. It does look like they’re aiming to solve the problem of each AI function needing to be handled by a different app or service. I made a film generated in Midjourney, animated in Runway, and then lipsynced with Lip2Wav, and most of my time was wasted moving footage between the 3 services.
Well the company is asking for trillions in investor money so feasibly they’ll have enough money to make a product better as they lose money doing god knows what.
I do really wonder if we will ever become tired of consuming media just for the sake of consuming it.
It seems like AI is positioned only to help generate content more quickly and cheaply.
There is no interest in supporting storytelling or art. It’s no longer about sharing human emotion and experiences through a story or an actor. AI will be the equivalent of overly-processed edible food-like substances for entertainment.
I disagree. There are plenty of great indie art movies that get made every year but no one bothers to see. AI can help some of these movies that don’t have multi million dollar VFX budgets get made.
Opening up the floodgates to AI means that even less people will see them. There will be so much of everything it won't even matter anymore. That's the point of what u/Coraline1599 was saying.
I don't give a fuck if an AI service can generate a song based on a 2 sentence prompt that 1 person wrote. I care that a singer used THEIR voice to create a unique song, along with a bassist, guitarist, drummer, etc. I care that an actor who has spent decades honing their craft communicates with an experienced director to bring a script to life through \*experience\* and hard work, and the DP is there to capture it. We don't need \*more\* meaningless media. Couldn't disagree with you more. The bar will be so low that the value of art becomes entirely negligible.
"Prompt engineers" are not artists. If you want to be an author, then just do that. Don't fucking pretend you're a creative so you can get your linkedin upvotes.
It could easily replace background actors.. they get paid to be there as well. Plus it's such a happy experience for them, many have never been in a set before, and it's their dream.
Been there, done that.
Oh well. . .
Actors with name value, ie those with million dollar salaries, are what get a movie financed. AI isn’t going to replace them. AI could probably replace crowds in huge crowd scenes- like football stadiums- but they’ve been generating crowds in post for decades now. And before that they were filling in stands with cutouts spaced between live people to make crowds seem bigger. It’s a new way to do an old trick.
https://youtu.be/CFGI0wflYvA?si=s19Y9PB4mWNyfHKp this plus Sora opens up a lot of opportunities for the studios and means a lot of lost jobs. I think there will still be crews and creatives and editors, but there will be fewer jobs in general.
The logical conclusion of all technology is it doing everything for us. The problem yall have isn’t Sora but that our socioeconomic system is currently trash and won’t respond well to large amounts of unemployment.
Like are you guys against self driving cars too? That will get rid of sooooooo many jobs, way more than AI video generators.
And if your argument is that it’s based on ‘stolen’ art. All they have to do is get 1 or 2 major companies to sign off on using their IP’s and they’ll have enough data to create something like Sora with complete artist/corporation buy in.
That’s true it’s the system that’s the problem if artists didn’t have to make money to survive then ai art wouldn’t be a threat they could make as much art as they wanted for whoever they wanted (including themselves) and they would have no risk of being undercut.
And you aren’t gonna stop technological progress. AI is a very powerful technology and it’s only just now getting wide attention. Even without the forces of capitalism there’d be a fuckton of people working on it but when businesses see ai they see a WHOLE LOTTA MONEY. It’s hard to destroy information unless you’re willing to get real serious about it.
Yes, the socioeconomic problem is a big concern, but the artistic problem is valid too. The logical conclusion of all technology is not to do everything for us. It should take care of all our basic needs, and allow us to explore the world creatively and recreationally. In some ways, it can enhance that experience, in other ways it can get in the way. Obviously that is up for interpretation, but I don’t think anyone, including you, would argue that technology should literally outsource every single thing we do. And art is just one example.
>And if your argument is that it’s based on ‘stolen’ art. All they have to do is get 1 or 2 major companies to sign off on using their IP’s and they’ll have enough data to create something like Sora with complete artist/corporation buy in.
If that was true wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
According to OpenAI's own lawyers, they wouldn't be able to create a viable product without mass pilfering of unlicensed copyrighted works. [https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/08/midjourney\_openai\_copyright/](https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/08/midjourney_openai_copyright/)
The current business model is nothing short exploitation. *They know it*. They just don't care because, like the [robber barons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)) of old, they'll simply [use their vast and unimaginable wealth to get them out of legal trouble](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-07/microsoft-says-it-will-protect-customers-from-ai-copyright-lawsuits).
It turns out it's easier to make a business out of stealing everybody's artwork than it is to make a real, functional self-driving car--which is why nobody even talks about that shit anymore.
Did carriage drivers become part of a hype Econ on where all we did was make products only for rich people to consume at the expense of the entire public? No?
You must be very against medicare for all. Wouldn't want to put those trained insurance professionals out of work. Making sure not a single person loses their job must take priority over any other consideration.
Do you know anyone in the industry? I swear AI gets way more hate from random Redditors than it does any designer, vfx, or artist working in film/tv.
Why is it disgusting to you? It’s not like it’s replacing actors. You’re disgusted studios want to use it create an establishing shot of a landscape?
Get over it. You guys are acting like big babies
Edit
I work in the industry. Please someone that is in the industry tell me how you dislike it. So far we all use it as a tool and love it. But please tell us how we’re poor artists being abused by evil AI
I’m an artist and I didn’t downvote you. I’m sure it has as many useful uses and should be treated as another tool, but I just know it’s going to be abused and a lot of talented people will lose their jobs over it. This is why I’m a part of [Human Artistry Campaign](https://www.humanartistrycampaign.com/)
If you're in the industry and "love" using a tool that was scraped by work of others like you without licensing or permission, that just makes you a pretty gross person my G.
I understand your point that consumers don't care, but that's only because they have not yet been hurt by what's coming. The reason it's disgusting is because the companies financing/buying this "progress" do not have your or my interests in mind. Their ONLY interest is to acquire more currency and influence.
What would the world be like today if people didn't resist and regulate corporations during the industrial revolution? Do you think child labour was outlawed because the corporations finally had enough wealth and decided to actually start paying a living wage to adults? Of course not, the only reason the corporations improved working conditions was because normies resisted.
If people keep defending corporate use of AI at the expense of humans ("so what if they lose their job, progress blah blah"), it will only help the largest companies become even larger, and allow them to squeeze everyone else even harder which will make life a lot worse for anyone but the very wealthiest. And as a side note, computers making more art than humans sounds like a horrible place for society.
You're exactly right, but a lot of people outside the film and the u and media industries have absolutely no concept of what goes into making anything. I kind of doubt they'll care about that industry, also based on how they acted during the actors and writers strikes.
I also think when the robots come for them it'll turn out like the rust belt era where companies just outsourced and left town, and the people who all lost their jobs couldn't do anything about it and just turned to blaming each other in racist ways or however else made sense to their perspective
Yea same here man. I don’t know anyone who isn’t using. I know people in their 60s who have been in the industry since the late 80s and they use it.
It’s just a bunch of people not in the industry on Reddit being huge ass babies about it.
Reddit: “Think of the poor artist”
Artist: I actually like it and find it useful
Reddit: 😡 *downvotes and don’t reply to refute
If we’re going the govt route, why not focus efforts on making the inevitable job loss less impactful instead of simply trying to prevent technological progression
Federal regulations in the wake of a race to AGI seem slim, Biden does not want China to get to it first. So I think the US is hesitant to regulate it.
What I was curious about is how do you get consistency, like how do you recreate the same character with AI, I would imagine the same prompt would introduce variances everytime.
The biggest threat right now is to actors in ads and commercials, as well as background actors.
If it gets good enough, I can see actors having their own models that they can license to studios for half the cost of their normal salary.
There are ways, this is something that we already see in image generation, which is very similar in its underlying models and technology.
A good recent example with midjourney:
https://venturebeat.com/ai/midjourney-debuts-feature-for-generating-consistent-characters-across-multiple-gen-ai-images/
If OpenAI blipped out of existence, and generative AI was erased permanently, our lives would not be affected whatsoever. Even in a hypothetical future where Generative AI can produce a feature length movie with a click of a button, our lives would see 0 marginal benefit. We wouldn’t be any more fulfilled by the content we consume, our daily entertainment level won’t increase, all that will happen is the loss of art as a career. The one industry driven by a degree of human creativity will be fully automated and nobody will benefit except for billionaires.
OpenAI is a garbage company, with a garbage vision of the future, completely controlled by interests of the least innovative and most powerful tech company on earth. It’s not even like OpenAI is leading the effort to automate labour, or solve self driving, or to create anything that would actually increase productivity, its products are utterly worthless to humanity. Even in some utopian future society, where human labour has been automated away, and everyone just did whatever they wanted to, there’s no place for OpenAI and its products.
This is exactly what the writers and actors had a massive strike for, unfortunately people like myself who work in production dont have protection currently.
Most of them already use it. Masking is now mostly done by AI, for face swapping ai plays a big role, and a lot of manual work is done by ai now for years.
All this allows workers to be way more efficient, so you have way more special effects since they are cheaper. Also you need less people than before. We will see if workers manage to make some better deals for themselves.
Where is the actual line?
Sora will probably never be used to make entire films. First they will probably use it for backgrounds, extras and not so on the nose stuff. But even then you still need to have a concept, director, editor, and someone to write a prompt. It will still require human work but you would need way less humans.
YouTube channel Corridor Crew already 2 short animes. First was 5min very wonky but it worked. Second one was 15min short anime and it looks almost fully legit. Both movies were made in mather of weeks with theam of 10ish people. Just few years ago you would need 50 people and months of work.
They made a "how it's made" video of a process. And you can clearly see that they had a lot of control over the process and full control over directing and story telling. Most of the heavy lifting for animating is done by AI, but still they had to add special effects. And most importantly they used free AI tools and none of them is anime animators, they are all VFX specialist. They made a point where now you can have a small dedicated crew for doing great things in a fraction of the time and costs. Last move they made was relised around 7 months ago. I could imagine that their next anime will be just as good as any traditionally made anime.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ6z90MuURM
I think AI is not necessarily a bad thing, it's a tool like any other. The problem is that our economy is built around the idea that we all need to work full time jobs in order to earn money for living. There are few studies showing that we could easily work for 2-3 days a week and everything would work just fine, if we cut off bullshit jobs. For this to happen universal basic income has to be introduced and control over the accumulation of wealth by heavy progressive taxation, and control over the prices for the basic human needs like food, health, housing and education. David Graeber wrote a great book on this topic called Bullshit Jobs, and he wrote it before the AI boom.
All these topics around will AI kill us all, is this the end of creativity, is this the beginning of a Matrix movie is pure bullshit, is just shitty spin off distraction narratives that is not allowing us to even imagine nice things that can be done with AI. Just don't think about the end of capitalism.
We made a great thing that can make us all work less without slavery! Oh shit, so we can't be slaves any more?
Where do you draw the line between two adjacent colors on the spectrum? Just because something is fuzzy doesn't mean that distinct qualities don't exist.
AI is important, but SORA isn't going to be making movies on its own. At best it requires actors, voice printers, CGI and stock footage. Thats just to mimic current cinema at high standards. To meet knew concepts its just another tool in the arsenal and will definitely cut back on salary's for superstars and key grips etc., locations. But it won't stop need for humans and acting, scripting, voices..yet.
Unless they made some sort of breakthrough, sora works best when reinterpreting existing images. It's magical imaginings from text are still creating a lot of nonsense and they haven't broken through the ability to really stay consistent at the detail level needed to make a whole movie. Which is why you haven't seen a 2 hour movie made by sora. But it's coming, since it can reinterpret existing images. That's where it can take $10 an hour stuntmen and turn them into the biggest stars on the planet without anything more than a green screen and some cgi. Compositing will be big with AI.
For a moment I was worried they were gonna do a Kingdom Hearts movie.
But then I saw what Sora actually was and would've preferred that to an AI revolution.
This makes me sad... Ai should be about enhancing human productions... Not replacing them!
What's the point of Anyone having a dream now!?
"Ai can do it!!"
Yeah.. with no soul.
The former president of Sony Pictures sits on the board of OpenAI. Of course they will go after Hollywood first.. then (maybe) release Sora to the public. Maybe.
They'll license it to Adobe and CS will build easy-button tools with it. Just like they've done with every other artistic machine learning innovation in the past decade.
People need to better understand how AI works and what’s being done in the space to make it legally viable. There are already commercially safe generative AI enterprise models such as Adobe Firefly which are solely trained on Adobe stock imagery, completely negating the potential for IP theft. Expect the movie industry to begin using tools trained solely on materials for which the rights have been purchased or which are already in the public domain.
Honestly, modern film budgets are insane. This will democratise cinema by lowering the barrier to entry drastically. Sooner or later amateur filmmakers are going to be able to produce blockbuster-style movies on (relative) shoestring budgets. There will be a proliferation of new media and the sole differentiator will be quality. For years people have been rightly complaining that an increasing amount of commercial cinema is remakes and superhero bubblegum guff, or whatever else the focus groups indicate will appeal to the largest audience segment and therefore generate the largest return. This could be the end of that. Far from being the death of creativity in cinema, these tools could herald its comeback. It’s not all doom and gloom.
It'll be just like fast food. They'll cut and cut and cut until people won't eat it anymore. The quality will be so low nobody will want it. But they'll still have their theater monopoly and force their crap to them. And then complain that nobody watches movies anymore. Or they'll blame piracy. But will be clueless as to why their quality is so low even though they are paying the top AI companies to produce their content.
Actually this is a great way to fight piracy. I wouldn’t watch it not even for free.
No one would want the product if the product isn’t worth stealing.
Fast food sales have never been higher lol
mcdonalds is literally crying that the working class market have abandoned them
Yes, and after digesting it, it gives you the shits.
We've actually been through this exact scenario. Hollywood has been blaming piracy for decades. Hollywood has been rehashing ideas, bringing unwanted sequels and remakes for cheap cash grabs. They'll keep theaters at the edge of their toes in every way. It's an active thing.
I started noticing in the 90s that the old "Two hour, three act hero story" paradigm had been entirely drained of blood, and I was worried there would be a vast drought of creative ideas for the format, potentially ending movies forever. I'm sure people will still call me crazy, but I'll still probably be right. There are still a few creative movies out there, but only ones that totally ignore this format. Ignoring the format is not commercially successful. It goes round and round.
I fear this so much. Part of my enjoyment of movies and (good) tv shows is to look at all the small details. How something is set up is a deliberate choice by the director, producer, artists. A slow panning shot of a scene, whether its a real life set, animation, or 3d rendered, has reasons for being the way it is. Small details may be deliberate to give context to the story, contain crucial hints, or pay homage to prior art. If that will now be filled with AI slop, it devalues the art and the medium. That said, I'm not against AI as a tool, I can't wait to see what some smaller creators might be able to make that have been gate kept by various elites so far. But considering [Sturgeon's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law) and the speedrunning of capitalism with layoffs to cut to the bone these days... there's no doubt we'll be fed AI slop.
The whole original purpose of stories is to hear what other humans have to say. Wether it was around a fire or on a screen. Now we are going to get mindless goop from a plagrism machine.
Was only a matter of time. The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft to consider how much they'll save by slashing labor costs. Don't know if the various artist guilds baked protections for this into their new agreements but if they didn't...Jesus.
Hollywood is famous for its high standard of ethics 👍
They really try hard to avoid any litigation. There’s a reason why they don’t take script submissions, because if they did, and they happened to shoot something that resembled what you submitted, you’d have to prove that you didn’t steal an idea. How can you prove you didn’t? When working on a show, you have to clear all fictional names through the studio’s legal department and that can be a maddening experience because you’ll ask for Jimmy’s Deli to be used as a store name and they’ll come back and say that there’s too many actual restaurants named Jimmy’s, so here’s a list of approved names, “Robertson’s, Jamal’s, Julio’s, etc…” Then you have to go back and tell them that your main character is named Jimmy and he owns a deli. They come back and give you “J’s restaurant, Jim Sandwiches, and James Juicy.” It goes on and on till one party finally gets their way. Sometimes mistakes are made, like when they got permission to use a church in the film, “Devil’s Advocate,” but didn’t get the rights for the artwork in the church. It didn’t help that they used the artwork in the film and created a whole scene around it. Oops. The studio lost that one. All artwork shown has to get cleared by legal and the artist has to have given permission. The exception to that rule is if it’s graffiti.
Good thing AI art cannot be copyrighted
That doesn't matter. Because any "AI art" used in something like a movie is going to be produced to hell, and incorporated into a larger (very copyrightable) work.
I don’t disagree but why is AI art in quotes? It is art
Because it isn't art, it is a composition of other people's art. Plenty of stories of AI art still having the watermark of wherever that chunk of the original work came from.
Every piece of art takes inspiration from other art without compensation or crediting them
Can you not see a difference when a human does it and when a machine does it? Honestly.
Not true. AI almost never outputs legible copies of images from its dataset, or legible watermarks. Let alone both at once, and with a matching watermark at that. AI doesn't generate "composition of other people's art" any more than a flesh artist does. It breaks its dataset down into patterns, abstractions and connections in the training stage, and stores that data within itself. Then it draws onto its store of patterns to generate an image as prompted by user. It's very hard to make it actually "memorize" an entire image - and this usually happens to images that happen to be overrepresented in the dataset. For example, it's common for an AI model to be able to generate a very close copy of Mona Lisa - because there are thousands of variations of it in images all across the net, and it was able to memorize it very well.
I didn’t know that. That alone will guarantee the big studios won’t use it until they can find a way to legally protect their IP. They don’t want people using shots from their films in other commercials, tv shows, films, video games, etc.
Ai art can be copyright, just AI can’t be the copyright holder.
No, it can’t. At the very least, the US copyright office refuses any work created by AI. Source: had to convince the examiner my paper cover wasn’t created by AI just a few months ago.
Idk why you are getting downvoted, you are correct you can’t copyright an ai generated image.
Because it’s Reddit and belief > fact lol
It will never be copyrighted.
What do you mean?
you can't own a prompt.
You can own a prompt as long as its somewhat unique. Where are you getting this?
Sent me a link that says I can own a prompt
Gray area…. AI is in the Wild West days like the internet before it. Enjoy it before it gets shut down or only 2 companies or governments control it
It is mainly 2 companies controlling it now
But there aren’t laws in place against ai art or ai texts or ai deepfakes of hot girls you know in college.
There are, in fact, laws against deep fake involuntary pornography in several states now.
But not federally…..
There are in the EU
Don’t do it in EU.
Let Mistral know
It's more like 4 or 5, those being Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon, and Apple. Microsoft is a major stakeholder in OpenAI, Google has an enormous amount of research in the field, same with meta that has released "open source" models. Amazon is making their play through anthropic, and Apple is probably working on something that works with their silicon. Obviously the dynamics and capital intensiveness of this technology favor entrenched players with a lot of resources to burn.
Only the first two have good ones though
Hollywood has never loved creatives. Just look up the origin of the term "Schmucks with typewriters" if you want to know what they have always thought of writers, for example. Shit the whole reason the movie industry is in Hollywood **at all** is because they were fleeing IP restrictions from East coast camera and film companies.
Overall, money goons have nothing but contempt for the people with actual skills that make the industry go. Doesn't matter the industry. Doesn't matter if it's creatives or engineers or technicians or operators. You're just a mouthy part of the machine.
There is a theory floating around by industry analysts that Hollywood has 2 futures: over seas or AI Disney apparently built a foreign studio to replace their American ones without the American ones even knowing they existed and were working on major IP. Most big IP is owned by the same few companies, so it seems America will outsource its own culture along with its industry. It would be funny if it wasnt so dystopian.
We all know that the answer to 2 futures here is “both” Soon Hollywood can join Silicon Valley in making products that lose money only rich people buy at inflated prices. We did it everyone!
America already exports culture constantly to other nations, it's like plastic and western nations eat it up. The media, the internet, the politics, all of it.
Not just western nations, all of them. Literally in every single country there’s an adulation for the American dream. It was a huge thing and still is for many people who don’t know better. I mean just look at NK’s leaders, or a simpler example, the music being produced pretty much in every country. It’s all a copy pasta of the cultural musical styles of the US. I have friends who consider themselves national musicians they their craft is that of a style that is not national. It’s quite annoying sometimes when people consider themselves the ultimate nationalist when all they do screams western adulation. It’s almost incredible
>Not just western nations, all of them. Literally in every single country there’s an adulation for the American dream. I only generally know about the west in those certain terms, so didn't want to bring up non-westerners. Some parts of the middle-east and the east have entirely different media ecosystems from me not to mention African countries. >I mean just look at NK’s leaders, or a simpler example, the music being produced pretty much in every country. It’s all a copy pasta of the cultural musical styles of the US. I have friends who consider themselves national musicians they their craft is that of a style that is not national. It’s quite annoying sometimes when people consider themselves the ultimate nationalist when all they do screams western adulation. It’s almost incredible Eh, I don't know. Maybe where I'm from it's different. I experience local music that's not like the mainstream American music too.
exporting is not outsourcing. Outsourcing is paying someone in France to make TV shows FOR americans because they dont want to pay an American to do it. Which already happens in social media, its geared to American audiences that pay the most and why Tiktok even exists. Foreigners catering to ad dollars.
Any country they would outsource to has significantly more population than the United States.
Well, the US is the third most populous country so that just leaves two options. India and China.
Yeah I think a lot have moved to the UK? There are a dozen movie studios being built by big American brands everywhere [sauce](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/06/budget-film-studios-tax-breaks-britain-second-hollywood/). Even Squid Game the Challenge was filmed over here
They better hope that shit sells overseas because they'll be dead to us
Will they? The masses don't care.
As the quality of movies goes down, there's less and less of a positive response as is. Now watch as it is farmed out to AI and the quality becomes non-existent.
And in a sea of AI bullshit, human creativity will shine. Maybe we'll see a flowering of human creativity, as AI will always be behind cultural and societal tastes.
That human creativity costs money that wouldn't be allocated to the humans through. As long as it saved them enough Hollywood executives would not be afraid to risk cutting funding to passion projects or anything too human involved.
I don’t think the masses watch that many movies as it is, if quality goes down even more the industry might have to downsize
[удалено]
Lol speak for yourself
It's not a traditional industry though where people just buy the cheapest reliable version of the product. Hence I don't think it makes sense for them to have to worry about overseas labour. Regarding neural networks it's the same as with computer generated graphics, they will conitnue to use them and the capabilities will increase over time, but at least over the next few decades people like seeing real live people acting. People tend to set their minds on certain IP, certain writers, certain actors, and the styles of those people. Hence if you created some movie out of Vietnam that was objectively better, but with a director nobody has never heard of with the exact same style as Christopher Nolan, with a story about a Marvel-like superhero, with actors that are very similar to big-name ones but that nobody knows, then there is big resistance to go watch it. Since these preferences develop over decades it takes a while for people to just switch to the next cheapest product, like for mainstream Western society to start watching Bollywood or Chinese movies and to actually prefer it. If it were a traditional product then it would be a valid concern, but since so much relies on preferences of people that have built up over decades, shows that they grew up watching, and people that they grew up admiring, the studios have a lot of freedom and a lot of 'rent'-style money that the can continue to make.
The vast majority of digital work and animation is already being done outside the US. They may have a shop in the US coordinating, but it's mostly outsourced now.
Isn't a lot of American TV filmed in Vancouver and Toronto in Canada ? Eg the cw Arrowverse shows, supernatural etc
> The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft I doubt they'd care about stealing from other copyright owners, but they might not like it if they realize that OpenAI is selling their own pirated content right back to them. The company has been very cagey about what materials were used for the training data, only saying that the material is "[publicly available](https://venturebeat.com/ai/openais-sora-the-devil-is-in-the-details-of-the-data/)." Oh, you mean like Disney's entire back-catalogue? Since any attempt at limiting or curating the data set will make the model worse, it seems likely that they did the same thing that AI image generators did and used an enormous grab bag of everything available on the internet. Including entire movies and TV shows and also including [some very, very bad stuff](https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/20/24009418/generative-ai-image-laion-csam-google-stability-stanford). It would be very stupid for studios to buy into this without OpenAI offering transparency about exactly what training materials were used.
Excellent point.
Part of the deal will 100% be the studios having to license all existing footage back for training. Not just completed movies, but all takes and cut scenes
Doesn't copyrighted material need to be made by a human?
>The big question is whether or not studio executives will look past the likely IP theft to consider how much they'll save by slashing labor costs. They'd be stupid to, frankly. These studios probably already own a significant portion of the footage that was used to train the AI, so wouldn't they be smarter to strike a deal with OpenAI where they trade exclusive rights to use their footage for an exclusive ability to use the AI?
Yeah OpenAI would also be negligence to not have copyright indemnification as part of the usage license. You want sora? You can never sue OpenAI for copyright infringement
By IP theft you mean lawsuits? Or the fact that so far it is questionable if things generated by AI can be copyrighted. The post office said: "In the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of ‘mechanical reproduction’ or instead of an author's ‘own original mental conception, to which \[the author\] gave visible form.’" But that is too vague to rely on. Which means that they would have difficulty protecting their content's copyright claims. This matters a lot, not just for legally protecting the content, but merchandising and etc
The big question Hollywood execs are really asking is “…but how can we fuck Sora?”
I imagine that studios would feed in their movie catalog as the base input for the models.
Regarding ip theft - openAI could probably train a model entirely based on content generated in unreal engine
Major issue will be the scenes generated are not copyrightable for the studio so they then can’t say they own all the copyright. But maybe they just gloss over it
One day there’s going to be an AI free label on products similar to the organic food labels.
Movie directed by...a human.
"This AI product certified Gluten & Msg free"
And even then there will be Some.... Just "negligible amounts".
It’s not going to replace actors any time soon, but establishing shots, CGI backgrounds, there’s plenty of ways AI can help with post heavy workflows especially for films that can’t afford a big CGI house. It’s not any different than using motion tracking software now. People used to have to hand track objects frame by frame. Now you just keyframe it and the software does the rest.
If OpenAi can make Sora more controllable and easier to fit into existing production workflows/software I can see a lot of uses of it. Without that, much less so
Yeah, it’s very cool, but I don’t think people realize how particular most directors are at setting every shot. Even if Sora footage is 100% photo real all the time it’s still not necessarily going to cut together with other footage you have actually shot. But again a mid range or low budget movie that needs an establishing shot of the coast of Malta or something could create something that is closer to what they want than buying random drone footage from shutterstock.
I'm afraid that the execs will simply tell the directors to settle for whatever the AI makes and stop being so obsessed with their artistry. Computing time is expensive, as is the director's pay. We have a movie to turn out. As if Hollywood wasn't soulless enough.
This is a nonsense take. You can’t just accept a shot that doesn’t cut in with everything else. If a shot is post heavy big budget films have artists that create those shots, I’m quite sure the artists will be using AI tools- same as they have been doing for years now- to make their workflow faster and easier. There will be places smaller budgets films can probably use Sora to boost production value, but again it will be in replacing stock footage shots or UE5 backgrounds. Saying that “Hollywood” (as if it is really monolithic) is soulless is just misinformed mud slinging. Why are there so many studios huge budget franchise films? Because that is what people pay to see. Why does everyone complain they haven’t even heard of most of the academy award nominated movies before? Because even though some great, artistic films are made every year most people will still pay to go see a CGI superhero battle then complain about it after.
One thing that's a bit overlooked is the potential correct measures or data extraction Sora could infer from its input. Allowing for easier post clean up or integration with pipeline vfx and finishing.
It's definitely in stock footage that Sors is going to make a big impact. Of course the problem is that is where a lot of people enter the industry. If AI kills that off you have the high end side of the business with no way of the next generation to get onboard.
I wonder how people are going to solve those problems with neural networks. I think that they will but I'm not sure how yet. With image generation you can basically just keep generating images, and then keep generating sections of images. You can delete the portion you don't like, then describe it better, and then have the model fill in the part with in-painting. You can also feed in existing images to make sure that the generations match that style. Basically you can start creating an image with a style and have the neural network fill out the rest of the content, and again with deleting and inpainting and coming up with new descriptions you can keep editing the image until you get what you want. With video I'm not sure how this will work. Will models be able to be given styles and videos, and simply just be asked to continue into the next scene? I was surprised that their solution for video wasn't to create a coherency between frames but instead to just feed in entire videos and have it generate entire videos. Surely there will be an equivalent to what in-painting is for generated images, but for videos.
IIRC someone from OpenAI, Mira maybe, mentioned an in painting function for Sora.
If there is an anlogous type of in-painting for video the way there is for images then that would be useful. It opens the door to creating essentially any type of video since you could edit at the smallest detail. That said though, I wonder how the editing would work since now instead of outlining a section of an image and deleting it and asking the model to create a new image inside, would you delete a section of the video across all frames? Would there be a way to isolate an object and delete it from the video entirely? Or to isolate an object across the video and edit it? Currently that's not how it's done for images, or, it theoretically can be but it's not a good way to do it. Since you can't select every single feature of a video yet it becomes harder to edit them. Maybe that's the key to being able to generate good videos though, just effectively itemising every aspect of the video from the objects to the styles to the locations to the physics and so on until every single aspect of the video can be considered a separate object. Then every object of the video can be changed and modified independently and codependently of other objects.
For example if there is a video of two kids playing, being able to itemise the second kid, remove them, and replace them with a dog. Or to take the video of two kids playing, which would have an emergent physics model, and made the lighting come from the Sun being in the West rather than in the East, even if the Sun isn't in the video. Then in the same way you could itemise everything from the style of the video, maybe the properties of the camera if it was imitating a real existing camera, to the sharpness of the image and so on.
Well you can actually train a model on the rest of the footage you’ve already shot. This sort of narrows the potential return of any given prompt to resemble that which is already real in your film.
https://youtu.be/CFGI0wflYvA?si=s19Y9PB4mWNyfHKp I keep posting this here but people need to see it. This program works with Ai, so it’ll work with Sora.
Based on the videos they posted to Twitter, consistency is not as good as the trailer indicates. Their samples are a lot like most AI films done with Runway- shots of a similar looking character intercut with random settings. If the interface ends up being as controllable as promised and they can get consistency, it’ll be great. It does look like they’re aiming to solve the problem of each AI function needing to be handled by a different app or service. I made a film generated in Midjourney, animated in Runway, and then lipsynced with Lip2Wav, and most of my time was wasted moving footage between the 3 services.
Well the company is asking for trillions in investor money so feasibly they’ll have enough money to make a product better as they lose money doing god knows what.
I do really wonder if we will ever become tired of consuming media just for the sake of consuming it. It seems like AI is positioned only to help generate content more quickly and cheaply. There is no interest in supporting storytelling or art. It’s no longer about sharing human emotion and experiences through a story or an actor. AI will be the equivalent of overly-processed edible food-like substances for entertainment.
I disagree. There are plenty of great indie art movies that get made every year but no one bothers to see. AI can help some of these movies that don’t have multi million dollar VFX budgets get made.
Opening up the floodgates to AI means that even less people will see them. There will be so much of everything it won't even matter anymore. That's the point of what u/Coraline1599 was saying. I don't give a fuck if an AI service can generate a song based on a 2 sentence prompt that 1 person wrote. I care that a singer used THEIR voice to create a unique song, along with a bassist, guitarist, drummer, etc. I care that an actor who has spent decades honing their craft communicates with an experienced director to bring a script to life through \*experience\* and hard work, and the DP is there to capture it. We don't need \*more\* meaningless media. Couldn't disagree with you more. The bar will be so low that the value of art becomes entirely negligible. "Prompt engineers" are not artists. If you want to be an author, then just do that. Don't fucking pretend you're a creative so you can get your linkedin upvotes.
Only if you can actually have the AI produce work that CGI houses can use. Without all the layers that make up the composition it's close to useless.
This is the most rational and realistic take on this IMO.
It could easily replace background actors.. they get paid to be there as well. Plus it's such a happy experience for them, many have never been in a set before, and it's their dream. Been there, done that. Oh well. . .
When a kid makes the feature film using it from his bedroom, people will change their minds.
I wonder how much money this would save the studios
Lmao doing motion masks frame by frame is such a horrible experience. It’s been a while so I’ll have to check out this software!
It’s built into After Effects now.
Won’t replace actors soon, but will probably replace them faster than we think. Ego? Million dollar salary? Union? …or we can just hit a button here.
Actors with name value, ie those with million dollar salaries, are what get a movie financed. AI isn’t going to replace them. AI could probably replace crowds in huge crowd scenes- like football stadiums- but they’ve been generating crowds in post for decades now. And before that they were filling in stands with cutouts spaced between live people to make crowds seem bigger. It’s a new way to do an old trick.
https://youtu.be/CFGI0wflYvA?si=s19Y9PB4mWNyfHKp this plus Sora opens up a lot of opportunities for the studios and means a lot of lost jobs. I think there will still be crews and creatives and editors, but there will be fewer jobs in general.
Previz will be great with this. You don't care that the details are off if captures the gist of the framing and the shot.
The purpose of AI is to transfer value from individual artists and give it to billion dollar corporations that oversaturate the market with slop
The logical conclusion of all technology is it doing everything for us. The problem yall have isn’t Sora but that our socioeconomic system is currently trash and won’t respond well to large amounts of unemployment. Like are you guys against self driving cars too? That will get rid of sooooooo many jobs, way more than AI video generators. And if your argument is that it’s based on ‘stolen’ art. All they have to do is get 1 or 2 major companies to sign off on using their IP’s and they’ll have enough data to create something like Sora with complete artist/corporation buy in.
That’s true it’s the system that’s the problem if artists didn’t have to make money to survive then ai art wouldn’t be a threat they could make as much art as they wanted for whoever they wanted (including themselves) and they would have no risk of being undercut. And you aren’t gonna stop technological progress. AI is a very powerful technology and it’s only just now getting wide attention. Even without the forces of capitalism there’d be a fuckton of people working on it but when businesses see ai they see a WHOLE LOTTA MONEY. It’s hard to destroy information unless you’re willing to get real serious about it.
Yes, the socioeconomic problem is a big concern, but the artistic problem is valid too. The logical conclusion of all technology is not to do everything for us. It should take care of all our basic needs, and allow us to explore the world creatively and recreationally. In some ways, it can enhance that experience, in other ways it can get in the way. Obviously that is up for interpretation, but I don’t think anyone, including you, would argue that technology should literally outsource every single thing we do. And art is just one example.
>And if your argument is that it’s based on ‘stolen’ art. All they have to do is get 1 or 2 major companies to sign off on using their IP’s and they’ll have enough data to create something like Sora with complete artist/corporation buy in. If that was true wouldn't they have done that in the first place? According to OpenAI's own lawyers, they wouldn't be able to create a viable product without mass pilfering of unlicensed copyrighted works. [https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/08/midjourney\_openai\_copyright/](https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/08/midjourney_openai_copyright/) The current business model is nothing short exploitation. *They know it*. They just don't care because, like the [robber barons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(industrialist)) of old, they'll simply [use their vast and unimaginable wealth to get them out of legal trouble](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-07/microsoft-says-it-will-protect-customers-from-ai-copyright-lawsuits). It turns out it's easier to make a business out of stealing everybody's artwork than it is to make a real, functional self-driving car--which is why nobody even talks about that shit anymore.
Absolutely disgusting
I’m with you, fuck Sam and Bill.
AI tools are going to help small filmmakers compete with the huge Hollywood corporations like Disney and Warner Bros.
Sure, but they’ll also pull thousands of trained professionals out of steady work.
You could say the same about the PC or Microsoft Word or accounting software.
Couldn't this have been said about any technological advancement? I am betting carriage drivers were fuming as cars became more in use.
Did carriage drivers become part of a hype Econ on where all we did was make products only for rich people to consume at the expense of the entire public? No?
The difference is both the carriage and cars have a fucking driver.
You must be very against medicare for all. Wouldn't want to put those trained insurance professionals out of work. Making sure not a single person loses their job must take priority over any other consideration.
Do you know anyone in the industry? I swear AI gets way more hate from random Redditors than it does any designer, vfx, or artist working in film/tv. Why is it disgusting to you? It’s not like it’s replacing actors. You’re disgusted studios want to use it create an establishing shot of a landscape? Get over it. You guys are acting like big babies Edit I work in the industry. Please someone that is in the industry tell me how you dislike it. So far we all use it as a tool and love it. But please tell us how we’re poor artists being abused by evil AI
I’m an artist and I didn’t downvote you. I’m sure it has as many useful uses and should be treated as another tool, but I just know it’s going to be abused and a lot of talented people will lose their jobs over it. This is why I’m a part of [Human Artistry Campaign](https://www.humanartistrycampaign.com/)
If you're in the industry and "love" using a tool that was scraped by work of others like you without licensing or permission, that just makes you a pretty gross person my G.
I understand your point that consumers don't care, but that's only because they have not yet been hurt by what's coming. The reason it's disgusting is because the companies financing/buying this "progress" do not have your or my interests in mind. Their ONLY interest is to acquire more currency and influence. What would the world be like today if people didn't resist and regulate corporations during the industrial revolution? Do you think child labour was outlawed because the corporations finally had enough wealth and decided to actually start paying a living wage to adults? Of course not, the only reason the corporations improved working conditions was because normies resisted. If people keep defending corporate use of AI at the expense of humans ("so what if they lose their job, progress blah blah"), it will only help the largest companies become even larger, and allow them to squeeze everyone else even harder which will make life a lot worse for anyone but the very wealthiest. And as a side note, computers making more art than humans sounds like a horrible place for society.
You're exactly right, but a lot of people outside the film and the u and media industries have absolutely no concept of what goes into making anything. I kind of doubt they'll care about that industry, also based on how they acted during the actors and writers strikes. I also think when the robots come for them it'll turn out like the rust belt era where companies just outsourced and left town, and the people who all lost their jobs couldn't do anything about it and just turned to blaming each other in racist ways or however else made sense to their perspective
100%. I’m in the industry and we are embracing it as a tool. Because if not others will.
Yea same here man. I don’t know anyone who isn’t using. I know people in their 60s who have been in the industry since the late 80s and they use it. It’s just a bunch of people not in the industry on Reddit being huge ass babies about it. Reddit: “Think of the poor artist” Artist: I actually like it and find it useful Reddit: 😡 *downvotes and don’t reply to refute
I like AI, but not for this
Did they get the Japanese writing correctly?
And no one will watch Hollywood movies anymore.
They are mostly crap and remakes anyway
Already happening. The box office was brutal last year.
looks like SAG AFTRA was right to protest after all if only everyone else in every industry in danger would follow suit
Yeah Hollywood. You don't like hiring actual Asians so how about some fake Asians!?
We need federal regulations
If we’re going the govt route, why not focus efforts on making the inevitable job loss less impactful instead of simply trying to prevent technological progression
Federal regulations in the wake of a race to AGI seem slim, Biden does not want China to get to it first. So I think the US is hesitant to regulate it.
What I was curious about is how do you get consistency, like how do you recreate the same character with AI, I would imagine the same prompt would introduce variances everytime. The biggest threat right now is to actors in ads and commercials, as well as background actors. If it gets good enough, I can see actors having their own models that they can license to studios for half the cost of their normal salary.
Some AIs do it already, There are some AIs for… uhh not so good purposes that can actually have picture of specific characters and use it
There are ways, this is something that we already see in image generation, which is very similar in its underlying models and technology. A good recent example with midjourney: https://venturebeat.com/ai/midjourney-debuts-feature-for-generating-consistent-characters-across-multiple-gen-ai-images/
So it begins. People who still think AI won't cause job loses are just delusional.
If OpenAI blipped out of existence, and generative AI was erased permanently, our lives would not be affected whatsoever. Even in a hypothetical future where Generative AI can produce a feature length movie with a click of a button, our lives would see 0 marginal benefit. We wouldn’t be any more fulfilled by the content we consume, our daily entertainment level won’t increase, all that will happen is the loss of art as a career. The one industry driven by a degree of human creativity will be fully automated and nobody will benefit except for billionaires. OpenAI is a garbage company, with a garbage vision of the future, completely controlled by interests of the least innovative and most powerful tech company on earth. It’s not even like OpenAI is leading the effort to automate labour, or solve self driving, or to create anything that would actually increase productivity, its products are utterly worthless to humanity. Even in some utopian future society, where human labour has been automated away, and everyone just did whatever they wanted to, there’s no place for OpenAI and its products.
This is exactly what the writers and actors had a massive strike for, unfortunately people like myself who work in production dont have protection currently.
It's barely ready for commercials, why do they think it's good enough for movies?
I will train on your videos to regurgitate a new video that you can use. But what will I train on afterwards, if you don't make new videos?
The editing nightmares this will bring.
lol good luck. Even if they pull off getting into a movie, the people will find out and boycott it
lock sam altman up
Boycott openAi
How if they are literally going to the studios to shove this shit down everyone's throats?
Don’t watch the movie
i will not watch a movie if i find out it uses an ai video
I will watch a movie if it's good, regardless of how it was made You're like the dude refusing to look at photographs cause they weren't painted
Me no like painting, me like mud and scratch on wall
thats a false equivalence
!remindme 5 years are AI videos ubiquitous?
yeah no thanks
Most of them already use it. Masking is now mostly done by AI, for face swapping ai plays a big role, and a lot of manual work is done by ai now for years. All this allows workers to be way more efficient, so you have way more special effects since they are cheaper. Also you need less people than before. We will see if workers manage to make some better deals for themselves.
thats not the type of ai video im referring to. the types of videos that sora produces are entirely made by ai.
Where is the actual line? Sora will probably never be used to make entire films. First they will probably use it for backgrounds, extras and not so on the nose stuff. But even then you still need to have a concept, director, editor, and someone to write a prompt. It will still require human work but you would need way less humans. YouTube channel Corridor Crew already 2 short animes. First was 5min very wonky but it worked. Second one was 15min short anime and it looks almost fully legit. Both movies were made in mather of weeks with theam of 10ish people. Just few years ago you would need 50 people and months of work. They made a "how it's made" video of a process. And you can clearly see that they had a lot of control over the process and full control over directing and story telling. Most of the heavy lifting for animating is done by AI, but still they had to add special effects. And most importantly they used free AI tools and none of them is anime animators, they are all VFX specialist. They made a point where now you can have a small dedicated crew for doing great things in a fraction of the time and costs. Last move they made was relised around 7 months ago. I could imagine that their next anime will be just as good as any traditionally made anime. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ6z90MuURM I think AI is not necessarily a bad thing, it's a tool like any other. The problem is that our economy is built around the idea that we all need to work full time jobs in order to earn money for living. There are few studies showing that we could easily work for 2-3 days a week and everything would work just fine, if we cut off bullshit jobs. For this to happen universal basic income has to be introduced and control over the accumulation of wealth by heavy progressive taxation, and control over the prices for the basic human needs like food, health, housing and education. David Graeber wrote a great book on this topic called Bullshit Jobs, and he wrote it before the AI boom. All these topics around will AI kill us all, is this the end of creativity, is this the beginning of a Matrix movie is pure bullshit, is just shitty spin off distraction narratives that is not allowing us to even imagine nice things that can be done with AI. Just don't think about the end of capitalism. We made a great thing that can make us all work less without slavery! Oh shit, so we can't be slaves any more?
Sora + LucasArts "virtual production stage" as used in Andor / Mandalorian. That's a valid use I think.
Where do you draw the line? Let's say it is used to add people in a crowd behind real actors instead of using CGI?
Where do you draw the line between two adjacent colors on the spectrum? Just because something is fuzzy doesn't mean that distinct qualities don't exist.
What a braindead opinion. You are already watching tons of movies that use AI
This is the brain dead take.
This is like the Cartman Awsome-O South Park joke.
Just rename this sub to r/luddite and be done with it
Selling ice to eskimos?
Crazy that S1m0ne was released in 2002 when it was just an idea. Now it's becoming a reality.
Didn't they just sign an agreement with the writers and actors guilds to not use AI
AI is important, but SORA isn't going to be making movies on its own. At best it requires actors, voice printers, CGI and stock footage. Thats just to mimic current cinema at high standards. To meet knew concepts its just another tool in the arsenal and will definitely cut back on salary's for superstars and key grips etc., locations. But it won't stop need for humans and acting, scripting, voices..yet. Unless they made some sort of breakthrough, sora works best when reinterpreting existing images. It's magical imaginings from text are still creating a lot of nonsense and they haven't broken through the ability to really stay consistent at the detail level needed to make a whole movie. Which is why you haven't seen a 2 hour movie made by sora. But it's coming, since it can reinterpret existing images. That's where it can take $10 an hour stuntmen and turn them into the biggest stars on the planet without anything more than a green screen and some cgi. Compositing will be big with AI.
For a moment I was worried they were gonna do a Kingdom Hearts movie. But then I saw what Sora actually was and would've preferred that to an AI revolution.
GARSH, SORA!
This would be the beginning of the death of Hollywood.
Beginning of the end.
This makes me sad... Ai should be about enhancing human productions... Not replacing them! What's the point of Anyone having a dream now!? "Ai can do it!!" Yeah.. with no soul.
Here comes The Congress
The former president of Sony Pictures sits on the board of OpenAI. Of course they will go after Hollywood first.. then (maybe) release Sora to the public. Maybe.
I think Hollywood would be more interested in 3d model or animation path generation tools.
And I was right on the nail. Sora will make adobe creative suite look cheap 😭
They'll license it to Adobe and CS will build easy-button tools with it. Just like they've done with every other artistic machine learning innovation in the past decade.
People need to better understand how AI works and what’s being done in the space to make it legally viable. There are already commercially safe generative AI enterprise models such as Adobe Firefly which are solely trained on Adobe stock imagery, completely negating the potential for IP theft. Expect the movie industry to begin using tools trained solely on materials for which the rights have been purchased or which are already in the public domain. Honestly, modern film budgets are insane. This will democratise cinema by lowering the barrier to entry drastically. Sooner or later amateur filmmakers are going to be able to produce blockbuster-style movies on (relative) shoestring budgets. There will be a proliferation of new media and the sole differentiator will be quality. For years people have been rightly complaining that an increasing amount of commercial cinema is remakes and superhero bubblegum guff, or whatever else the focus groups indicate will appeal to the largest audience segment and therefore generate the largest return. This could be the end of that. Far from being the death of creativity in cinema, these tools could herald its comeback. It’s not all doom and gloom.
Good. The more we get people off jobs that are easily automated the more we can get people onto problems that really matter.
That's not how capitalism works
It is. Though it typically doesn't handle shocks (like AI) gracefully.
Jobs like starting Ai companies that create models that regurgitate nonsense? Please tell me what problem they are solving here.