4 ms·

An indie film with poor production values, even bad acting can grip you, make you laugh and make you cry. The consistency of quality is key - even if it is poor

An indie film with poor production values, even bad acting can grip you, make you laugh and make you cry. The consistency of quality is key - even if it is poor. The directing is the red thread throughout the scenes. Anything with different quality levels interrupts your flow and breaks your experience. The problem with AI video content at this stage is that the clips are very good 'in themselves', just as LLM results are, but putting them together to let you engage beyond an individual clip will not be possible for a long time. It will work where the red thread is in the audio (e.g. a title sequence) and you put some clips together to support the thread. But Hollywood has nothing to fear at this stage. In addition, remember that visual artists are control freaks of the purest kind. Film is still used because of the grain, not despite it. 24p prevails.

doctorpangloss 1y ago
There’s already more good content than anyone can watch. It’s impossible to disentangle strength of the art from strength of distribution. Google, the world’s biggest distributor of culture, is focusing on this problem they do not need to solve, instead of the one everyone in art actually suffers from, because: they’re bad at this. It’s that simple.
sandspar 1y ago
AI video may be to Hollywood as photography was to painting. Photography wasn't "painting, but better" - it was a different thing. AI-native video may not resemble typical Hollywood 3-act structure. But if it takes enough eyeballs away from Hollywood then Hollywood will die all the same.
- pedalpete 1y ago
  I think you're contradicting your own argument. Painting didn't die from photography. Photography increased the abstract and more creative aspects of painting and created a new style because photography removed much of the need to capture realism. Though, I am still entranced by realist painting style myself, it is serving different purpose than capturing a moment.
  - sandspar 1y ago
    I'm not an expert so I may be wrong about all this. But my impression is that Pictorialist photography aped painting for 50 years. Photography only came into its own as a "photography native" art form with Stieglitz and people like that around ~1905. By that time, non-representational painting styles like Cubism had already sucked the remaining juice out of painting, with Duchamp's 1917 urinal perhaps deserving credit for the coup de grace. Today painting is a shadow of what it once was - and public interest and auction prices reflect that. Museums occasionally have abstract painting exhibits but they're poorly attended because the public dislikes them. Ask a person on the street what their favorite painting movements are and likely every name will be more than 100 years old, possibly hundreds of years old. Compare auction prices between pre-1917 paintings and post-1917 paintings. Besides a few middlebrow pop artists like Dali or Warhol, meme painters like Pollock, or trendy political painters like Basquiat or Johns, the older paintings will be orders of magnitude more in demand. Painting used to move the conversation forward, now nobody cares.
    - sigmaisaletter 1y ago
      > Ask a person on the street who their favorite painting movements are and likely every name will be more than 100 years old I think you overestimate the publics art appreciation. The average answer will be a blank stare.
      - satvikpendem 1y ago
        Well if you want to really be pedantic, they said every name, not average answer, so if most people reply with a blank state, that is still not in the set of every name, because they're not names. So the ones who actually do reply with a name are, as I agree with them, likely to be older than 100 years.
        sigmaisaletter 1y ago
        Have my upvote for pedantic overkill.
    - 1y ago
rcarr 1y ago
You might want to look up NeuralViz on YouTube. 180k subscribers. They've been building out an entire cinematic universe using AI video tools. And it's by far the funniest show I've watched in years. So the claim that "let you engage beyond an individual clip will not be possible for a long time" isn't true. People are already doing it. https://www.youtube.com/@NeuralViz https://www.youtube.com/@NeuralViz
- alixanderwang 1y ago
  This is the first time I've wanted more AI video content. Thanks for sharing.
- goosejuice 1y ago
  This is news is hilarious.
- stevenhuang 1y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XkrhhsV6zg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XkrhhsV6zg > You're not the monolith of me! These other universe memes are too good.
- wickedsight 1y ago
  Since the first GenAI started popping up, many people have glossed over the fact that they are just tools. All the anger from artists and keyboard warriors completely ignored the fact that you still need skill and time to make something good with these tools. Artists aren't going to be replaced by AI tools being used by me on my iPhone, those artists were already replaced by bulk art from IKEA et al. Artists who reject new tools for being new will be replace by artists who don't. Just like many painters were replaced by photographers.
  - jplusequalt 1y ago
    >Artists aren't going to be replaced by AI tools being used by me on my iPhone Except they already are. https://societyofauthors.org/2024/04/11/soa-survey-reveals-a-third-of-translators-and-quarter-of-illustrators-losing-work-to-ai/ https://societyofauthors.org/2024/04/11/soa-survey-reveals-a...
Cthulhu_ 1y ago
Hollywood and other "real" films is like the 1% of video content though, as is youtube which has a top 1% of good content and a lot of shit. AI tools used for any content will / are being used to add to the pile of shit.
dlisboa 1y ago
You don't need to make an entire movie out of this. One or two scenes that are difficult or impossible to film on a certain budget is enough to lift the production value of a movie. One can use this as CGI replacement, for example to produce a couple seconds scene of an ancient city and stretch that out with fake panning. You can also use it as a communication tool such as making a "live" storyboard to prep location, blocking, maybe even as notes for actors.
- anton-c 1y ago
  That storyboard idea is pretty huge. Imagine dailies go in the other direction - "here's how I want it to look"
  - dlisboa 1y ago
    Yeah, I did an amateur short once as part of a college assignment and doing the storyboard was the most difficult part for me as I'm not a good drawer at all. Getting the idea for a certain shot from my head to the paper was a struggle. Being able to express visual ideas with words is one of the most powerful things of this AI craze. Text/code is whatever.
DoesntMatter22 1y ago
Most Hollywood and indie films aren't that good. I feel the complete opposite of this comment. Id much rather start seeing individuals creating AI movies where you aren't bogged down by the need to hire actors and what bot
precompute 1y ago
Sorry, but AI generated video is unwatchable. Even now, when it's really great. It just doesn't seem authentic.

doctorpangloss 1y ago

There’s already more good content than anyone can watch. It’s impossible to disentangle strength of the art from strength of distribution. Google, the world’s biggest distributor of culture, is focusing on this problem they do not need to solve, instead of the one everyone in art actually suffers from, because: they’re bad at this. It’s that simple.

sandspar 1y ago

AI video may be to Hollywood as photography was to painting. Photography wasn't "painting, but better" - it was a different thing. AI-native video may not resemble typical Hollywood 3-act structure. But if it takes enough eyeballs away from Hollywood then Hollywood will die all the same.

pedalpete 1y ago
I think you're contradicting your own argument. Painting didn't die from photography. Photography increased the abstract and more creative aspects of painting and created a new style because photography removed much of the need to capture realism. Though, I am still entranced by realist painting style myself, it is serving different purpose than capturing a moment.
- sandspar 1y ago
  I'm not an expert so I may be wrong about all this. But my impression is that Pictorialist photography aped painting for 50 years. Photography only came into its own as a "photography native" art form with Stieglitz and people like that around ~1905. By that time, non-representational painting styles like Cubism had already sucked the remaining juice out of painting, with Duchamp's 1917 urinal perhaps deserving credit for the coup de grace. Today painting is a shadow of what it once was - and public interest and auction prices reflect that. Museums occasionally have abstract painting exhibits but they're poorly attended because the public dislikes them. Ask a person on the street what their favorite painting movements are and likely every name will be more than 100 years old, possibly hundreds of years old. Compare auction prices between pre-1917 paintings and post-1917 paintings. Besides a few middlebrow pop artists like Dali or Warhol, meme painters like Pollock, or trendy political painters like Basquiat or Johns, the older paintings will be orders of magnitude more in demand. Painting used to move the conversation forward, now nobody cares.
  - sigmaisaletter 1y ago
    > Ask a person on the street who their favorite painting movements are and likely every name will be more than 100 years old I think you overestimate the publics art appreciation. The average answer will be a blank stare.
    - satvikpendem 1y ago
      Well if you want to really be pedantic, they said every name, not average answer, so if most people reply with a blank state, that is still not in the set of every name, because they're not names. So the ones who actually do reply with a name are, as I agree with them, likely to be older than 100 years.
      - sigmaisaletter 1y ago
        Have my upvote for pedantic overkill.
  - 1y ago

rcarr 1y ago

You might want to look up NeuralViz on YouTube. 180k subscribers. They've been building out an entire cinematic universe using AI video tools. And it's by far the funniest show I've watched in years. So the claim that "let you engage beyond an individual clip will not be possible for a long time" isn't true. People are already doing it. https://www.youtube.com/@NeuralViz https://www.youtube.com/@NeuralViz

alixanderwang 1y ago
This is the first time I've wanted more AI video content. Thanks for sharing.
goosejuice 1y ago
This is news is hilarious.
stevenhuang 1y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XkrhhsV6zg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XkrhhsV6zg > You're not the monolith of me! These other universe memes are too good.
wickedsight 1y ago
Since the first GenAI started popping up, many people have glossed over the fact that they are just tools. All the anger from artists and keyboard warriors completely ignored the fact that you still need skill and time to make something good with these tools. Artists aren't going to be replaced by AI tools being used by me on my iPhone, those artists were already replaced by bulk art from IKEA et al. Artists who reject new tools for being new will be replace by artists who don't. Just like many painters were replaced by photographers.
- jplusequalt 1y ago
  >Artists aren't going to be replaced by AI tools being used by me on my iPhone Except they already are. https://societyofauthors.org/2024/04/11/soa-survey-reveals-a-third-of-translators-and-quarter-of-illustrators-losing-work-to-ai/ https://societyofauthors.org/2024/04/11/soa-survey-reveals-a...

Cthulhu_ 1y ago

Hollywood and other "real" films is like the 1% of video content though, as is youtube which has a top 1% of good content and a lot of shit. AI tools used for any content will / are being used to add to the pile of shit.

dlisboa 1y ago

You don't need to make an entire movie out of this. One or two scenes that are difficult or impossible to film on a certain budget is enough to lift the production value of a movie. One can use this as CGI replacement, for example to produce a couple seconds scene of an ancient city and stretch that out with fake panning. You can also use it as a communication tool such as making a "live" storyboard to prep location, blocking, maybe even as notes for actors.

anton-c 1y ago
That storyboard idea is pretty huge. Imagine dailies go in the other direction - "here's how I want it to look"
- dlisboa 1y ago
  Yeah, I did an amateur short once as part of a college assignment and doing the storyboard was the most difficult part for me as I'm not a good drawer at all. Getting the idea for a certain shot from my head to the paper was a struggle. Being able to express visual ideas with words is one of the most powerful things of this AI craze. Text/code is whatever.

DoesntMatter22 1y ago

Most Hollywood and indie films aren't that good. I feel the complete opposite of this comment. Id much rather start seeing individuals creating AI movies where you aren't bogged down by the need to hire actors and what bot

precompute 1y ago

Sorry, but AI generated video is unwatchable. Even now, when it's really great. It just doesn't seem authentic.