To be more specific: "us" in this sentence means the creators of dumb, shallow, and derivative movies.
The cognitive error here is that people see generated video and are overwhelmed by how it looks good, but they don't know how much it differs from an original vision. Vision that human prompting it had in mind while creating it. And I'm sure this differs a lot. Whoever tried to generate video using generative models knows that what you get is basically random. But movies never had been about showing random things.
There is no way the movie industry collapses. But it will certainly transform more into computer work.
it is over, "it" bieng a dominant place in in popular media reserved for hollywood, done, non viable model now, competition is fierce for views, and no one is waiting to be discovered.
attention spans are too short, and billions are playing bit parts in games and creating videos.AI is blurring everything, and closeing off entry level spots to test new talent, meat aint cheap or fast enough, no matter how hard you push.
The comming space hotels, mars and moon missions will take the place of movie and tv,real live performance will maintain it's draw, AI slop for the dull.
When I was doing my graduate work about 20 years ago, I focused on algorithmic art and visualizations (from code perspective), and even then I was making stuff that was at par with the digital media artists in the program (meaning people couldn't tell or realize I was making this all with scripts).
I was then and still now strongly of the opinion that copying a trend or leaning on "style" is not really "art". You have to say something more than that, or be so unique in your style that you are the first to go down a path.
Not defending job losses by any means, more just that this has been going on a long time and folks need to be careful. Derivative style movies and animation are probably going to be largely automated (by the movie industry)
"Anakin Datacenters" meme video, created with Seedance 2.0: https://xcancel.com/charliebcurran/status/202246342982359899...
> It's over for us
To be more specific: "us" in this sentence means the creators of dumb, shallow, and derivative movies.
The cognitive error here is that people see generated video and are overwhelmed by how it looks good, but they don't know how much it differs from an original vision. Vision that human prompting it had in mind while creating it. And I'm sure this differs a lot. Whoever tried to generate video using generative models knows that what you get is basically random. But movies never had been about showing random things.
There is no way the movie industry collapses. But it will certainly transform more into computer work.
ya, but no
it is over, "it" bieng a dominant place in in popular media reserved for hollywood, done, non viable model now, competition is fierce for views, and no one is waiting to be discovered. attention spans are too short, and billions are playing bit parts in games and creating videos.AI is blurring everything, and closeing off entry level spots to test new talent, meat aint cheap or fast enough, no matter how hard you push. The comming space hotels, mars and moon missions will take the place of movie and tv,real live performance will maintain it's draw, AI slop for the dull.
When I was doing my graduate work about 20 years ago, I focused on algorithmic art and visualizations (from code perspective), and even then I was making stuff that was at par with the digital media artists in the program (meaning people couldn't tell or realize I was making this all with scripts).
I was then and still now strongly of the opinion that copying a trend or leaning on "style" is not really "art". You have to say something more than that, or be so unique in your style that you are the first to go down a path.
Not defending job losses by any means, more just that this has been going on a long time and folks need to be careful. Derivative style movies and animation are probably going to be largely automated (by the movie industry)
Typical AI bro post