5 ms·

Mark my words. In a few years people will be writing filters and trying to figure out how to recreate the look of early AI animation.

raincole 3y ago
...why? Do you expect GitHub and HuggingFace to go under in a few years?
- mdp2021 3y ago
  The poster is just saying that "the "glitch" of today will be the nostalgic style of tomorrow".
  - andybak 3y ago
    Exactly. I have no idea what the other commenters thought I meant.
    - theobromananda 3y ago
      They are saying that there is no need to figure out how to recreate "the "glitch" of today that will be the nostalgic style of tomorrow" as the "old"/current models are all available on GitHub and huggingface, and will be in the future. There is no need to figure out how to recreate this style as you will be able to find it on these platforms in the future. The commenter understood you, but you did not understand the commenter.
      - andybak 3y ago
        Yes. Because of the way reply notifications come in I thought it was a reply to a different comment. But I still think that's missing the point of my (not entirely serious) comment. People still have access to analogue amplifiers but digital simulations of them are still developed. As models and workflows improve, if people want a flickery old-school look then they may well simulate it rather than go through the hassle of running old tools that might not mesh well with newer workflows.
        staunton 3y ago
        > People still have access to analogue amplifiers but digital simulations of them are still developed. That's because analog stuff requires hardware. There's "something to simulate". You don't simulate digital computers, perhaps you "emulate" them. More generally, analog stuff is really different from digital stuff. Some "audiophiles" argue about which lossless compression algorithm applied to .wav files gives the best sound, but we know it's just bits. Bits are fungible. By contrast, you can never make a perfect copy of something analog (you can often make a copy that's indistinguishable for all purposes that matter, but there's still a difference). People still make and buy LPs, the sales are increasing. I don't expect that to ever happen for CDs, unless perhaps combined with scratching or otherwise damaging them on purpose. Of course, nostalgia goes beyond such mundane distinctions, which gives rise to thingsike pixel art. But there's still nothing to simulate there.
- deelly 3y ago
  We don't know actually. Could be Cease and Disease letters from creators of AI-networks, could be change in copyright laws, could be simply not profitable enough to continue operations or continue to store old data.
cfn 3y ago
Yes, just look at the amount of reviews of old cameras on YouTube! Of course, this is software so it will be easier to find than an old camera or lens but I am also sure it will also be celebrated as a timeless genre.
- DrSiemer 3y ago
  For that to happen this flickering animation style has to become popular first. I don't think it will be. It can only be applied to very niche situations. It will never be a mainstream thing like old cameras were.
downWidOutaFite 3y ago
Nah, nobody is going to be figuring anything out, you'll be able to generate it with little effort with a prompt, just like everything else. But we will be so inundated by high quality digital art in every imaginable style that it will be boring, everything will be boring.
dmingod666 3y ago
Or they could just use the models we are using right now and get the same effect, not like the models are going away anywhere
- j45 3y ago
  Computationally the early models might be easier/cheaper to run in a few years as well.

raincole 3y ago

...why? Do you expect GitHub and HuggingFace to go under in a few years?

mdp2021 3y ago
The poster is just saying that "the "glitch" of today will be the nostalgic style of tomorrow".
- andybak 3y ago
  Exactly. I have no idea what the other commenters thought I meant.
  - theobromananda 3y ago
    They are saying that there is no need to figure out how to recreate "the "glitch" of today that will be the nostalgic style of tomorrow" as the "old"/current models are all available on GitHub and huggingface, and will be in the future. There is no need to figure out how to recreate this style as you will be able to find it on these platforms in the future. The commenter understood you, but you did not understand the commenter.
    - andybak 3y ago
      Yes. Because of the way reply notifications come in I thought it was a reply to a different comment. But I still think that's missing the point of my (not entirely serious) comment. People still have access to analogue amplifiers but digital simulations of them are still developed. As models and workflows improve, if people want a flickery old-school look then they may well simulate it rather than go through the hassle of running old tools that might not mesh well with newer workflows.
      - staunton 3y ago
        > People still have access to analogue amplifiers but digital simulations of them are still developed. That's because analog stuff requires hardware. There's "something to simulate". You don't simulate digital computers, perhaps you "emulate" them. More generally, analog stuff is really different from digital stuff. Some "audiophiles" argue about which lossless compression algorithm applied to .wav files gives the best sound, but we know it's just bits. Bits are fungible. By contrast, you can never make a perfect copy of something analog (you can often make a copy that's indistinguishable for all purposes that matter, but there's still a difference). People still make and buy LPs, the sales are increasing. I don't expect that to ever happen for CDs, unless perhaps combined with scratching or otherwise damaging them on purpose. Of course, nostalgia goes beyond such mundane distinctions, which gives rise to thingsike pixel art. But there's still nothing to simulate there.
deelly 3y ago
We don't know actually. Could be Cease and Disease letters from creators of AI-networks, could be change in copyright laws, could be simply not profitable enough to continue operations or continue to store old data.

cfn 3y ago

Yes, just look at the amount of reviews of old cameras on YouTube! Of course, this is software so it will be easier to find than an old camera or lens but I am also sure it will also be celebrated as a timeless genre.

DrSiemer 3y ago
For that to happen this flickering animation style has to become popular first. I don't think it will be. It can only be applied to very niche situations. It will never be a mainstream thing like old cameras were.

downWidOutaFite 3y ago

Nah, nobody is going to be figuring anything out, you'll be able to generate it with little effort with a prompt, just like everything else. But we will be so inundated by high quality digital art in every imaginable style that it will be boring, everything will be boring.

dmingod666 3y ago

Or they could just use the models we are using right now and get the same effect, not like the models are going away anywhere

j45 3y ago
Computationally the early models might be easier/cheaper to run in a few years as well.