3 ms·

> None of the music videos were great Glad they acknowledge this. Curious how much time in addition to tokens this costs. If you have to spend $25 and wait 45

> None of the music videos were great Glad they acknowledge this. Curious how much time in addition to tokens this costs. If you have to spend $25 and wait 45 minutes to get a basically unwatchable video, I'm not worried about indie film makers being replaced just yet...

qurren 3mo ago
I'm classically trained and I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all look kinda the same to me.
- beepbooptheory 3mo ago
  Classically trained in music videos??
  - fragmede 3mo ago
    Presumably they went to college for it, yeah. Film schools, eg https://cinema.usc.edu/ https://cinema.usc.edu/ or https://tisch.nyu.edu/ https://tisch.nyu.edu/
  - qurren 3mo ago
    No, as in classical music. The analog kind.
    - altcognito 3mo ago
      So, how is that relevant to the part that is generated by AI?
      - qurren 3mo ago
        I honestly can't tell a good music video from a bad one. I don't know what makes a music video "good". These AI generated ones seemed pretty good to me, of the same caliber as those Michael Jackson or "Beez in the trap" things. It's all just butt shaking and sunglasses in Philips Hue lights chanting some meaningless words.
        latexr 3mo ago
        Imagine the blogpost was on AI generated classical music. Everyone, including the authors, agrees the result is shit. You, being classically trained, can understand more than most why the results are bad. Then someone comes along and says “I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all sound kinda the same to me” and “I honestly can’t tell a good piece of music from a bad one. I don’t know what makes a piece of music “good”. These AI generated ones seemed pretty good to me, on the same caliber as those Mozart or Beethoven things”. That’s what you’re doing, and that’s why you’re being downvoted. It’s fine that you can’t tell, but it’s supremely obvious to everyone else.
        zahlman 3mo ago
        I think takes like GP's are perfectly reasonable to express and it aggravates me that HN seems not to like that. The competition for the AI work here is explicitly not aiming at a niche audience. If that human work is nevertheless higher quality, readily distinguishable by the general audience of people who like music videos (?), then that audience really ought to be able to articulate why and how. Like: > Everyone, including the authors, agrees the result is shit. > I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all [seem] kinda the same to me There is not actually a contradiction here.
        beepbooptheory 3mo ago
        If you really really like the $100 AI video, no one can take that away from you, but its just weird to be so principled about this in the negative: like no one actually wants to say they're good, its just some people don't want to admit they're worse than anything else. Acting like some Roman legionary, saying "This slop is good enough for the piggies. not that I, classically trained, could discriminate between the slops either way" is certainly not contradictory, but if it needs to be the kind of discourse defended on here, then please, go right ahead!
    - beepbooptheory 3mo ago
      As opposed to the non-analog kind??
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - altcognito 3mo ago
    I'm seeing these type of comments a lot more. A type of comment where it seems like the "user" (commentor) makes a categorically wrong comment about the linked article that would be sort of right if it were a different medium. Clearly whatever was used here triggered on the "music" part, but didn't understand what the article was really about. Typically it goes beyond just not reading the article (as in this case) I'd assume that it was a bad LLM take, but it looks like the rest of the comments are normal.
    - senderista 3mo ago
      “Classically trained” in the musical context usually means “I took a year of piano lessons.”
      - altcognito 3mo ago
        It's just categorically a wrong statement. Just because someone knows how to play a musical instrument, I'm not sure why it would make any sense that they would understand what makes a good music video - they are a completely different medium. You might be able to discuss asthetics from a music theory standpoint because you are "classically trained", again, it is just a weird mismatch that stood out for me recently, but I think everyone is a little more paranoid lately.
        beepbooptheory 3mo ago
        Its like misunderstanding the concept of "music video" as one form music can take, presumably alongside "music audio," and the being "classically trained" is meant to speak to a strength in "music" in general.
- dwb 3mo ago
  Your dislike of music videos in general has meant that you haven’t had the interest to discern the good from the bad. There are plenty of high quality music videos. It’s like someone saying “I’m not really into classical music, it sounds all the same to me”. If they had an interest they’d know that it doesn’t sound all the same. So what’s the point in saying so?
echelon 3mo ago
Directors and editors using Seedance can fire the film studio. This is a fundamental shift in how storytelling is funded and made, not in who does the driving. Same as is happening with code.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- Forgeties79 3mo ago
  >funded and made I’m curious (admittedly skeptical) what you mean by this. Are you talking about a world where director’s just like…don’t actually make movies and create AI media?
  - NuclearPM 3mo ago
    Same thing.
- sph 3mo ago
  Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, now film studios, for months now. Give it a rest, this is unhealthy.
  - echelon 3mo ago
    > Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, I don't think you understand my arguments at all. I don't want people to lose jobs. I don't want the advantages to accrue to a few hyperscalers. I want there to be more work, more money, more societal progress. For everyone. AI currently enables experts in their domains (code, film, game design, music) to get the work of small teams done. It is now possible for dedicated, hard-working ICs in several domains to produce extremely good products in a short amount of time without external capital and without studio meddling. This is a good thing.
    - Forgeties79 3mo ago
      Like your other comment this is so general I’m not entirely sure what you’re describing. AI in production has allowed us to salvage bad audio and fix mistakes/not go back for re-shoots or ADR when it’s acceptable. It’s currently a repair/salvage and corner cutting tool. As for video, generative AI is not creating particularly usable stuff and it’s at best useful for short bursts. If you’re in the commercial game it’s a little more useful - a few seconds of a generic looking kitchen sink and faucet running isn’t a big ask. But also getting quality B-roll isn’t particularly laborious as it is. It’s great for transcriptions/captioning first passes but we already had great tools for that prior to the ChatGPT era. It’s not cutting for us, it’s not generating useful shots most of the time and only for a few seconds, it’s not cutting out middlemen. I don’t see what you’re seeing.
mensetmanusman 3mo ago
This wasn’t possible even a year ago, with the speed of things changing and how much money is spent on movies is there really a doubt that someone will be able to make $100 million movie for less than $1 million in token spend?
- vkou 3mo ago
  Do you... Have a lot of professional experience with making $100 million-budget movies?
  - fragmede 3mo ago
    Even small budget indie flicks, when filmed in LA, have a ridiculous amount of paperwork and dealing with unions. Which isn't surprising, since it's an established industry there. Spending $1 million for each day of filming is totally achievable. I don't have personal experience with this but I know some people in the industry and have had conversations with them. Was background/extra in a movie. An AI director/producer doesn't have to deal with the human aspect, actor and other people's egos and clashing behavior. There are moments of film gold that are the result of human actor's human personalities, so we'd lose out on that though.
- mcphage 3mo ago
  > This wasn’t possible even a year ago Just because it’s possible now, doesn’t mean it’s worth doing.
mohamedkoubaa 3mo ago
"not great" is a huge understatement
- hackmack10 3mo ago
  It's sickening we're running out of compute for this shit lol. I don't blame the author though, it is what it is.
  - mohamedkoubaa 3mo ago
    If it wasn't this it'd be for mining shitcoins.

qurren 3mo ago

I'm classically trained and I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all look kinda the same to me.

beepbooptheory 3mo ago
Classically trained in music videos??
- fragmede 3mo ago
  Presumably they went to college for it, yeah. Film schools, eg https://cinema.usc.edu/ https://cinema.usc.edu/ or https://tisch.nyu.edu/ https://tisch.nyu.edu/
- qurren 3mo ago
  No, as in classical music. The analog kind.
  - altcognito 3mo ago
    So, how is that relevant to the part that is generated by AI?
    - qurren 3mo ago
      I honestly can't tell a good music video from a bad one. I don't know what makes a music video "good". These AI generated ones seemed pretty good to me, of the same caliber as those Michael Jackson or "Beez in the trap" things. It's all just butt shaking and sunglasses in Philips Hue lights chanting some meaningless words.
      - latexr 3mo ago
        Imagine the blogpost was on AI generated classical music. Everyone, including the authors, agrees the result is shit. You, being classically trained, can understand more than most why the results are bad. Then someone comes along and says “I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all sound kinda the same to me” and “I honestly can’t tell a good piece of music from a bad one. I don’t know what makes a piece of music “good”. These AI generated ones seemed pretty good to me, on the same caliber as those Mozart or Beethoven things”. That’s what you’re doing, and that’s why you’re being downvoted. It’s fine that you can’t tell, but it’s supremely obvious to everyone else.
        zahlman 3mo ago
        I think takes like GP's are perfectly reasonable to express and it aggravates me that HN seems not to like that. The competition for the AI work here is explicitly not aiming at a niche audience. If that human work is nevertheless higher quality, readily distinguishable by the general audience of people who like music videos (?), then that audience really ought to be able to articulate why and how. Like: > Everyone, including the authors, agrees the result is shit. > I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all [seem] kinda the same to me There is not actually a contradiction here.
        beepbooptheory 3mo ago
        If you really really like the $100 AI video, no one can take that away from you, but its just weird to be so principled about this in the negative: like no one actually wants to say they're good, its just some people don't want to admit they're worse than anything else. Acting like some Roman legionary, saying "This slop is good enough for the piggies. not that I, classically trained, could discriminate between the slops either way" is certainly not contradictory, but if it needs to be the kind of discourse defended on here, then please, go right ahead!
  - beepbooptheory 3mo ago
    As opposed to the non-analog kind??
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- altcognito 3mo ago
  I'm seeing these type of comments a lot more. A type of comment where it seems like the "user" (commentor) makes a categorically wrong comment about the linked article that would be sort of right if it were a different medium. Clearly whatever was used here triggered on the "music" part, but didn't understand what the article was really about. Typically it goes beyond just not reading the article (as in this case) I'd assume that it was a bad LLM take, but it looks like the rest of the comments are normal.
  - senderista 3mo ago
    “Classically trained” in the musical context usually means “I took a year of piano lessons.”
    - altcognito 3mo ago
      It's just categorically a wrong statement. Just because someone knows how to play a musical instrument, I'm not sure why it would make any sense that they would understand what makes a good music video - they are a completely different medium. You might be able to discuss asthetics from a music theory standpoint because you are "classically trained", again, it is just a weird mismatch that stood out for me recently, but I think everyone is a little more paranoid lately.
      - beepbooptheory 3mo ago
        Its like misunderstanding the concept of "music video" as one form music can take, presumably alongside "music audio," and the being "classically trained" is meant to speak to a strength in "music" in general.
dwb 3mo ago
Your dislike of music videos in general has meant that you haven’t had the interest to discern the good from the bad. There are plenty of high quality music videos. It’s like someone saying “I’m not really into classical music, it sounds all the same to me”. If they had an interest they’d know that it doesn’t sound all the same. So what’s the point in saying so?

echelon 3mo ago

Directors and editors using Seedance can fire the film studio. This is a fundamental shift in how storytelling is funded and made, not in who does the driving. Same as is happening with code.

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
Forgeties79 3mo ago
>funded and made I’m curious (admittedly skeptical) what you mean by this. Are you talking about a world where director’s just like…don’t actually make movies and create AI media?
- NuclearPM 3mo ago
  Same thing.
sph 3mo ago
Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, now film studios, for months now. Give it a rest, this is unhealthy.
- echelon 3mo ago
  > Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, I don't think you understand my arguments at all. I don't want people to lose jobs. I don't want the advantages to accrue to a few hyperscalers. I want there to be more work, more money, more societal progress. For everyone. AI currently enables experts in their domains (code, film, game design, music) to get the work of small teams done. It is now possible for dedicated, hard-working ICs in several domains to produce extremely good products in a short amount of time without external capital and without studio meddling. This is a good thing.
  - Forgeties79 3mo ago
    Like your other comment this is so general I’m not entirely sure what you’re describing. AI in production has allowed us to salvage bad audio and fix mistakes/not go back for re-shoots or ADR when it’s acceptable. It’s currently a repair/salvage and corner cutting tool. As for video, generative AI is not creating particularly usable stuff and it’s at best useful for short bursts. If you’re in the commercial game it’s a little more useful - a few seconds of a generic looking kitchen sink and faucet running isn’t a big ask. But also getting quality B-roll isn’t particularly laborious as it is. It’s great for transcriptions/captioning first passes but we already had great tools for that prior to the ChatGPT era. It’s not cutting for us, it’s not generating useful shots most of the time and only for a few seconds, it’s not cutting out middlemen. I don’t see what you’re seeing.

mensetmanusman 3mo ago

This wasn’t possible even a year ago, with the speed of things changing and how much money is spent on movies is there really a doubt that someone will be able to make $100 million movie for less than $1 million in token spend?

vkou 3mo ago
Do you... Have a lot of professional experience with making $100 million-budget movies?
- fragmede 3mo ago
  Even small budget indie flicks, when filmed in LA, have a ridiculous amount of paperwork and dealing with unions. Which isn't surprising, since it's an established industry there. Spending $1 million for each day of filming is totally achievable. I don't have personal experience with this but I know some people in the industry and have had conversations with them. Was background/extra in a movie. An AI director/producer doesn't have to deal with the human aspect, actor and other people's egos and clashing behavior. There are moments of film gold that are the result of human actor's human personalities, so we'd lose out on that though.
mcphage 3mo ago
> This wasn’t possible even a year ago Just because it’s possible now, doesn’t mean it’s worth doing.

mohamedkoubaa 3mo ago

"not great" is a huge understatement

hackmack10 3mo ago
It's sickening we're running out of compute for this shit lol. I don't blame the author though, it is what it is.
- mohamedkoubaa 3mo ago
  If it wasn't this it'd be for mining shitcoins.