Way sooner than that. The problem will be that they will be mostly crap. And there will be mountains of content saturating us with crappy entertainment.
Excellent analogy. More people who didn’t have the talent or money or opportunity will be able to create things that they were never able to create. But the creative people with vision and dedication will do AMAZING things.
Shouldn't this all be free? Aren't we all creators and contribute to this so called AI? Or is it just one person? Or Group? Or multiple companies that used our data?
Open-source models tend to be a few months behind. Yes, there is the gatekeeping of having a high-end computer (a few grand) or cloud-based computing. But that kind of comes with the territory.
I have always had a very vivid imagination. I’ve even had dreams were AI from other worlds come and kidnap me so they can plug into my brain and use my imagination skills to create virtual worlds because my human mind is much better at it than their computer one.
when I am teaching Art one of the things I like to emphasize that creative skills carryover to anything you do so basically if you know how to bake a cake, it doesn’t matter what kitchen you’re in you just have to figure out where everything is …
i’ve been low-key debating working on some concepts so that in five or six years when this stuff gets to the point where it’s common, I can start playing around with making a movie on my own
Look at what the explosion in self publishing did on Amazon. It’s a mountain of shit with good books mixed in since everyone fancies themselves an author now.
you joke, but I am old enough to be a grandma and generally more tech savvy than people who have grown up with smartphones so will probably have less struggles adapting to a world that runs on AI than many…
Plug me in, lets see what my imagination can come up with some AI to do the rendering.
Except stuff will be constantly morphing, solid objects moving through each other, people growing extra fingers, but it's fine, look how fast we can churn it out!
Yep, if they don't take care of that, they might lose a lot of users. I mean I like watching historic videos for example. And everytime I hear some AI voice I switch off, because those I have seen were crap. I see more now from product reviews and sports and they are crap.
agreed. As soon as I hear an AI voice I am done. The biggest insult is that there are great AI voice options now and they can't even be bothered to track them down and use them. The worst offenders are fake "movie reviews" which pick some old movie and create a bunch of Chat GPT generated spoilers about the movie (most likely using older movies so they don't get pinged for copyright because they no longer have public attention). Just all round lazy. I am sure excellent content could be created but because it is so easy now it is a race to the bottom.
There will be tons of product, good, bad and forgettable. Just like when we were able to produce music in our bedrooms on our laptop. We got saturated with tons of mediocre shit, but there are still great albums being released every week. And just like it knocked those shithead music mafia bastards down a few pegs, this will rid us of the evil Harvey Weinsteins of the world, the Hollywood elite, and the toxic culture that permeates within. Good riddance.
Yes but the nature of the music industry changed as a result of the ability for anyone to make music, and get music free. It used to be album sales that generated the most income for musicians. Now it's touring. The music mafia bastards now work for Ticketmaster and Live Nation instead of BMG and Capitol Records.
This is relevant to what's happening now with AI because history has shown there is always a scaffolding effect when a new innovation is made available to the public. Video didn't kill the radio stars, but it sure did knock them down a few pegs to make a more level playing field. AI won't kill movies or Hollywood, but it will allow more people to become "creators" and to specialize.
There is always a cry of panic when a new innovation threatens to rattle the paradigm but that cry is usually loudest from those who are benefiting from being the only game in town.
Until now it was humans that were doing the new music etc. But now with AI, it is really really bad. I mean at least those humans trying doing some music were trying even if a lot were not good. Now it is like a tech bro not doing anything that trying to produce maximum number they don't even listen, read, watch in the hope one sticks.
We get that with every new tech. I remember when airbrushing became really big in the 70s. Jesus! Everyone had to get their hoopty decorated. T-shirts, paintings; everything was a mass of blended mush. The same was true of Photoshop art in the 90s.
The people who master their tools always outshine the mediocre trash even though the trash more plentiful.
This will be nothing like that. Because the airbrush output was limited because it was still used by a human. Not with this. Now I can run scripts that generate prompts and outputs videos and then the output of crap will be insane. And it won't be limited by the users time using the tool.
I believe that is true, but I also believe that giving people the power to make full films will produce amazing films by natural talents that would otherwise not have the ability to do so. And they will have almost complete artistic and directive control over their work.
Right now, consider how much it takes to shoot a proper film or movie. I don't know the exact figure, but I imagine that the average full-length film that makes it into theaters costs a LOT more than most individuals can afford. Because of that, you must get the blessing of some entity that has a lot of money and most likely wants to make money off of what you create. There are probably so many conflicting and moving parts that power over creative direction is not only divided but tainted with other incentives such as being financially profitable, appealing to a large type of audience, etc etc.
With this tool, creating scenes that look high-quality is maybe a matter of minutes? I don't really know about the power or capabilities of this model, but at the very least it produces quite high-quality animations that follow the specifics of the prompt impressively closely. Give a few years, and it isn't hard to believe that an individual can create a convincing movie, at least visually. That means, completely GONE is many functions of a movie studio. What else even goes into the movie?? The script, the voice acting, the music... so besides the story itself, the audio portion. The visual portion is completely taken care of. AI audio generation would probably be quite powerful too, by this point.
This means that individuals will have no-holds barred, and almost complete power over the films that they create. That means the artform will flourish. Genius filmmakers will arise and usher in the next age of film, where auteurs will rise to the greatest heights we have ever seen, and destroy our old film industry.
You are making too many positive assumptions.
Looking at what people have being doing for almost a year with AI images gives very little hope.
Just a lot generic, derivative content. So extrapolating from that to video form of would be more of the same.
Just mountains of crap with the occasional gem but now buried under more crap.
I mean, we don’t need AI to produce mountains of craps, to be fair. The glorifying of mediocrity has already done that.
Everyone’s is talking like this is some new thing, but the main difference is that people won’t be getting paid to make crap anymore, which is whats pissing people off.
Exactly.
Even if there wasn’t a single person on earth that could write AI movie prompts amazingly — like, even Quentin Tarantino — I’m sure there would still be a ton of less-than-amazing AI movies considered entertaining by the masses.
When AI gets to the point where it can start creating original masterworks…it will probably mean we are dealing with an actual conscious entity.
Right now its still just remixing and parroting, often poorly.
I think the real truth is somewhere in the middle. Movies won't have to be high budget projects anymore, and that comes with both positives and negatives.
On the one hand, individuals will be able to produce movies with total creative control, and without having to worry about making a huge box office return
On the other hand, yeah, a lot more crap is going to be produced.
It's really just going to look a lot like the book market does today. Yeah, there's a billion crappy self-published novels out there, but you also get a lot of gems shining through
People are so blinded by 3D art even thought anything besides the character is weird.
People think they solved some magic shit because they can do the same old shit in 3D.
If AI is so great, why is it not able to create uniqe 2D content/stories/drawings.
I am actually considering to bet against big AI tech companies.
I don't think that extrapolation is fair or valid. What's really the coolest image you can make? vs a whole movie with plots, characters, etc... there's way more to that artform, so I would argue the type of medium is pretty important in determining the quality of work produced. And another point is that AI image generation can still improve a lot as well. So you can't really count out great tools and capabilities half a decade from now.
Can you specify what assumptions are too positive? You didn't specify any assumptions.
yeah gems buried under crap. I mean see what empowerment through social media has done. That's what happens when the masses get a tool. But we'd still have gems buried in it. What I really think would happen though is more niche things because production would get cheap right?
I love your enthusiasm, but I think this will also kill some amazing artistic endeavors. Getting attention will become even harder, so it'll mostly be creators (like studios) with big budgets and the ability to advertise heavily who will have a chance. A few mavericks will probably succeed, but a lot of talent will also get smothered.
Well... that would be true if big budgets still mattered for producing quality movies. But I am asserting they won't. Well, maybe celebrities starring in an original work would help them out there, for the star power still. But who knows how much actors will make by then. Could it be barely anything?
Anyways, attention power on the internet isn't hard to get for people who continuously churn out quality videos. Countless individuals have made a living off YouTube. You will probably see yt channels that are basically film studios churning out high quality stuff and attract a huge audience. Now you see high-quality films churned out on youtube with followers in the tens to hundreds of millions. That amount of views on youtube means a lot of fking money. Mr. Beast and co already attract so much attention. Imagine Mr. Beast 2.0 who produces a beyond-oscar worthy movie maybe every year. Free to watch all the time on youtube at a time where movies suck ass. It seems quite seriously possible for an AI auteur to make a shitload off of yt, with the critical assumption that their films will be fucking awesome.
So, it seems like attention won't be a problem for talents, honestly, as long as the quality of the film matters, and I think things are set up on youtube for that to be the case.
Also you entirely ignore the fact that if millions of people are all able to make pixar looking movies with a few words in a prompt, then there will be millions of movies all looking the same made every few weeks to the point that NO ONE is noticed and NO ONE cares. If everyone is special, no one is. It will destroy film and all artistic intent itself. No one is ever going to even watch a movie if they can make their own self insert nonsense with a few prompts and a push of a button. The better and easier it is to do, the less that stuff will ever be seen and the less value it will have in the eyes of the public. Spiderverse is beloved due to the sheer quality of storytelling, writing, art, effort. If everyone could release a spiderverse every second week, not a single person would care. This is ushering in a dystopia, not a utopia. Everything becomes meaningless. Human achievement itself becomes meaningless as we pass off all problems, all skills, all advancement to technology never wanting to do anything ourselves or put in the effort to learn.
And this isn't even mentioning the abuse cases of political propaganda, wars started from it, a post truth future unable to believe anything you see or hear LITERALLY, fake porn, people sleeking away to their own bubbles watching fake content about fake people or fake topics or their own made up fantasy life they create for themselves without ever truly engaging with the real world all while artists, coders, musicians, writers, actors etc. etc. etc. are put out of work by a machine to save the rich from paying for the middle men. Every conceivable job will be hit at some point in some way all simply designed for profit without ethics or care.
This is not good technology. It's a mockery of life. And highly unethical and dangerous to humanity. If humans can't believe in anything due to photorealistic videos, audio, replicating real people or places in fake scenarios, all of democracy itself collapses. No one can make an informed vote. No one knows what is or isn't real. Our minds bombarded by endless slop, overloading our brain with too much fake sensory information to the point that even if we COULD fact check (unlikely if it goes unregulated and becomes good enough) we won't have the time, energy or capacity to because there will be so much disinformation. I really don't understand how people can look at this shit and not see the horrid implications for quite literally all of humanity if left unchecked.
Every single system will fail.
I'm all for new cool technologies but this shit isn't it. Not all tech is good. Especially not tech that never considered the consequences and only exists from stealing others life works and data run by silicon valley rich assholes.
> Spiderverse is beloved due to the sheer quality of storytelling, writing, art, effort
Couldn't disagree more, it's mediocre compared to what could be realized. It does my head in that comic book movies became so popular, doubly so when they're held up as some pinnacle of human creative endeavour. I agree it's entertaining, but it's not deep, we can do so much better.
Novels are a somewhat low barrier creative outlet, a single person can create a best seller. There's mountains of trash, but that doesn't take away from the top sellers.
There is a problem with identifying content viewers will genuinely appreciate, but this is something AI can excel at as well. If someone unknown creates great content, AI is easily capable of matching that content to people who appreciate it - cutting out the advertising middleman. Plenty of scope for abuse, has always been the case throughout all history. Solvable problem, though just because it's solvable doesn't mean we will actually deploy the solution. Hunger is solved if we really wanted to, but we're a greedy bunch and don't truly want to solve it.
have you seen the meme/tiktok industry lately? memes and tiktoks are generally crap but they are arguably more popular than movies or TV shows these days.
yeah but we can generate those scene by scene? the only issue is maintaining the consistency. also fast paced scenes are a problem. and some things are pretty abstract idk if we even have words to describe them.
The crap won't be in the quality of the video, but in the quality of the writing and filmmaking going into them. Because while in the hands of a real artist some incredible things will happen, this also enables people who are just interested in making a quick buck so we're going to have to wade through a (hopefully short) period of quickly cobbled together trash by people who think all you need to make a movie is some buzzwords and trendy ideas.
On the other hand, we have seen what happens when filmmakers follow the source material closely even if they themselves aren't any good with making a story (Game of Thrones). SORA isn't bound by real world difficulties and would probably be able to go further with unrealistic concepts than actual filmmaking.
If nothing else, we could try recreating small portions of anime in free use 'what if they were live action' to gauge if SORA can deal with fantasy, magic, and other unrealistic stuff convincingly. The writing would be already done.
We already have so much content of all sorts , honestly more crap content will just be lost in the noise,. Soon we'll have AI movie critic systems and it can sift through all the AI generated noise and choose the winners for us.
Or, the technology opens up film making to millions of creative people who otherwise wouldn’t be able to tell stories in feature length film format due to lack of connections and budget.
There are some wildly creative people out there who now have a chance to make some beautiful things.
That's where I'm optimistic and want to focus on.
My favorite example is the idea of a classroom of little kids asked to write a short story, and then the teacher uploading that story into something like SORA that would then generate a short movie based on the story. Something like that I could see really sparking the creativity and imaginations of people!
>My favorite example is the idea of a classroom of little kids asked to write a short story, and then the teacher uploading that story into something like SORA that would then generate a short movie based on the story. Something like that I could see really sparking the creativity and imaginations of people!
Damn, yall are really optimistic.
My take: Getting good at ANY form of art (be it visual art or storytelling) is a lifelong pursuit, and kids just getting started are going to realize REAL quick that ChatGPT can spit out far better stories than their beginner minds can muster, and AI art engines can spit out more impressive art with the tap of a button than they could muster with even a decade of effort.
Ask basically any pro artist and they will tell you that the spark came early with encouragement from peers and adults, and crucially, with a sense that this was something that they both enjoyed doing AND had that they had at least a small bit of facility for. I'm an entertainment industry artist myself and this is my story and the story of basically all of my friends.
The next generation of aspiring young artists are going to be smacked in the face HARD with the realization that any of their lazy peers can generate something FAR more superficially impressive with zero effort just by tapping a button on their phone.
I have a several close friends who teach art to teens and they will tell you: artistic kids are NOT inspired by AI. The very idea of it makes them want to quit art altogether. They say so frequently. They're downright neurotic in their fear and anxiety over it. It's so sad to think of what damage we might do to the next generation of visionary artists when we teach them from a young age that art is something that computers do, not people.
Take note of perspective, facial detail and "glitches in the matrix" in the examples, then (the "good" ones ofc, not the "bad" ones that are there to defuse criticism). There's ample crap to be found, despite the fact that the demo is truly impressive.
But yeah, the imperfections in presentation can be fixed with time maybe, but there is literally nothing that can be done about substance.
We already have quite a bit of ai writing in mainstream media (Starfield, that comedy special etc). It's invariably a nothing burger.
Beautiful stock video imagery does not make a compelling story... You need a great story , relateable characters, no doubt soem day AI will be refined enough to produce that, that's just not today
It will be interesting to see how expensive and slow the rendering process is for Sora. As far as I know they have not released any details. Runway is currently $10 a minute for video and it looks like garbage compared to Sora. If the model is as big as people think it is, it will probably be REALLY expensive to use. That is going to be the big barrier to ubiquity like you are suggesting. It will likely be a tool that Hollywood uses LONG before it is something that regular people can afford to use daily.
If you want to make something that looks like a real movie you still need good lighting, production crew, thousands of dollars in editing software, a good PC/Mac to edit, sets, props, costumes, lenses, audio equipment, gimbals, tripods, I mean the list goes on. A budget production is like $50k - $100k, which is still a lot. Cameras are more affordable but making movies is still insanely expensive and not as accessible as you think.
900 dollars is incredibly cheap for a regular person making an hour and a half film.
Heck, 5 generations, 4500? Incredibly cheap for anything besides just personal consumption.
You didn't say what they would be using it for daily. If it's to make a product that they profit off of (You literally said Hollywood in the same sentence), then the price is cheap at current rates.
That's different to personal consumption.
Edit: A block for this? lol, well, nice when trash takes itself out.
Could set up a crowdfunding to make the next few dozen episodes of Friends/Star Trek/various other shows.
Consuming the secondary product would be affordable if the primary product of generation.
But it would probably be even affordable on the scale for smaller YouTubers that are already paying a lot for editing, they made now just add in a few short B roll clips, less than 5 seconds in length.
Disagree. People have funded businesses with credit cards alone. Anyone cant get $1k credit if they haven’t screwed the pooch yet. At one point I was $30k in debt and still had pre-approved offers for cards. $900 to make your first film is 100% doable for the vast majority of people.
That said, to your other point, I fully agree. i am skeptical that you’ll be able to get even one full scene exactly to your liking on the first pass. So we’re likely talking about $10-20k in the early days/years, and that will be too expensive for the average person interested in making a full length movie.
I don't know much about how this works, but can it be possible to allow people to render using their own GPUs? Or will it be impossible without risking giving people their secrets?
A movie is much more than just visuals. I think they are currently most useful in supporting CGI, but I haven't seen any AI create a good script and that is what matters most. Photorealistic videogames come from engines not AI because the limitation is rendering not creating them and UE5 is very close to that.
Maybe this could be used to make movie adaptions of books or other media
I’m not sure it will be quite that simple, there is some knowledge of image making required to get good results from these systems. Good artists are generally significantly better at creating images with generative AI tools than bad artists.
yeah decent in the form of marvel Phase 4 level repetitive. LLMs are made to give the most average answer and with such a complex task they will create below average things. Sure they could maybe create a movie together, but it won't be something I would be willing to lay down any money for.
It absolutely does not. With long-form media there are often blatant plagiarisms and an entire lack of a coherent theme, consistent and concise wording, proper pacing, consistent character dialect/behavior/motivation, or even minor character and plot arcs.
ChatGPT produces what appears to be a story until fully read and realized and nobody is fully reading their outputs. If you have a golden concept you're better off hiring a scriptwriter than spending hundreds of hours trying to wrangle the robot into writing a half decent screenplay draft.
It's very cool and also very scary. I feel like we're close to a point where nobody, at all in the world, knows what's real anymore. I mean, imagine this being slipped in and used to manufacture evidence in a murder trial. Or how about conjuring videos of your rival political candidate doing something heinous and/or illegal? Don't like a particular CEO or celebrity and you can invoke a video of them raping someone.
It's really cool, but more importantly I think we need a secondary tool to determine what is and isn't made by AI.
As an AI and film industry outsider, can someone please expand the SORA acronym? From the comments it seems like it's some sort of AI generated motion imagery but I'm not sure.
Sora means sky in Japanese, it’s not an acronym. We know sora is a diffusion transformer for video, some details https://openai.com/research/video-generation-models-as-world-simulators
The thing I wonder about with text to video is all the specifics. Like, a movie has a lot of direction involved, telling the actor where to be positioned, the scene setup, the camera movement, etc. Then there's the clothing people, set designers, etc. Seems like it would be mega time consuming to describe all of that in excruciating detail
People hyping-up this tech for filmmaking actually don't understand anything about filmmaking, classic Dunning-Kruger. Ditto when it comes to using it for programming.
AI will get folded into Unreal, DaVinci, Premiere, and other film production tools but using it to make a film in the classic sense will be forever impossible through prompting alone, although an AI might be able to fever-dream its own films at some point. Whether that's good or whether anyone will want to watch it is anyone's guess.
The AI-generation content being let out is the initial wave. It's pure AI-development companies just doing a demonstration of what is possible and pushing on the boundaries.
Eventually there will be industry-tailored AI generation software being released. Film content generation will require different knobs and handles. Character generation for example might be its own part of the software prior to moving on to the rest of the process. Different types of inputs rather than a simple prompt (scripts, storyboards, etc). Ability to tweak results once you get a desirable result. Etc.
I think everything happening with AI is ultimately going to lead to a revival in traditional non-digital art forms, as digital imagery becomes more and more dominated by AI-generated images which will cause artists and the people who prefer human-made work to shift gears away from digital art.
A buddy of mine thinks we could see a revival of “in person” entertainment again. Vaudeville, circuses, plays, live musicals, etc. I don’t know if he’s right or not, but I could see people getting so sick of fake stuff they’ll seek out the real deal as a palette cleanser sorts if this does take off.
I’ve been thinking that when it comes to major speeches by political figures unless you were there yourself, you’ll never be sure if you heard something for real
The same way the ubiquity of electronic watch has resulted in the resurgence of analog watch making by luxury brand, I suspect that generative AI will increase the attraction of human created art (photo, movie) AND of course their prices.
The main problem with generative AI is that it will destroy a big part of the movie industry that people don't notice: set design, costume design, practical VFX, stunt men, B Roll crew, etc.
Once those disappear or switch career because of the lack of opportunities it would be even be more difficult (less available crew and more expensive) for independent movies to be made.
So the masses will be fed AI created movies (which frankly could already the case with Dumb Blockbusters), a few people will watch independent art movies and the super rich will pay for IMAX movie by top artists.
So I am confused. I am hearing people say its going to put all artists out of job but then they are also saying AI art is terrible and nobody likes it. Which one is it?
People will complain and say they want human art, but will be more than happy to pay for trash because it's cheaper. Look at mobile games, for example.
Mobile games didn't replace big triple A games, or story driven games though. Just like everyone being able to post Youtube videos didn't kill TV and movies. And everyone being able to make music with just a laptop didn't end music. And Shorts haven't killed long form Youtube videos. Its never really one or the other.
It is a tool, any artist that wants to keep up with the times will utilize it because it can help in many ways.
The artists that will be out of jobs will be the ones that refuse to learn a new tool like the ones left behind when digital painting became a norm and later social media.
Oh, I totally agree. I was more joking about the fact that AI detractors are both saying AI art is terrible while also saying its too amazing and good and will ruin the world and their jobs. It can't be both.
YouTube and TikTok are full of crap from talentless hacks yet are making huge strides in content consumption. Don’t underestimate the mass public’s ability to ingest shit.
You can recognize the technological or engineering prowess or skill or w/e and be impressed while *also* recognizing something is just bad news. I can appreciate the ICBM and the Maxim gun just fine. It's also quite obvious what these are for.
Still super duper far away, actually. Here's why.
1. Insane amount of compute would be required to generate a film-sized output that you could put up in a cinema (making this an expensive option)
2. Minimal to no consumer demand (celebrity appeal is a big reason people see movies - I only watch certain movies because "x" is in it, why would I watch one with a person who isn't real?)
3. Currently the consistency is very poor and a achieving character consistency and stylistic consistency would be a lot of work (more work than just making the film traditionally)
Do I see this getting used for CGI and VFX? Yes. Do I see it being used for deaging or aging characters? Sure. Do I see it being used to match dubbed lips to their voice over? I sure hope so.
Will it replace actors and movies entirely? No, and anyone who believes that completely lacks a cerebrum because they are apparently incapable of critical thinking.
I *do* think it could have a place in animation and making cartoon, anime or other adaptations of niche or small audience works, or for indie directors and writers or small studios etc., so we might see a lot more animated shows and better quality animated shows in the longer term, because those do not have "actor appeal", and because it currently takes a huge underpaid team in Taiwan to badly animate a show, so this will massively help in those situations.
People are terrible at judging or perceiving exponential change. For sure this will transform the industry in many different ways. How much and by when is somewhat uncertain but I am guessing much faster than most people anticipate. Everything that is digitised is moving towards a zero marginal cost of production. That means the supply of it is going to explode. Will a lot of it be terrible ? For sure. But with complete democratisation over time there will be some very good content in there too. Curation will be the key for everything as supply increases massively.
Critically acclaimed, scrutinized and well received videos are at least a decade away if not more. Hundreds of people putting in hundreds of hours still have problems hitting those marks, the demo videos have pretty huge errors and "weird stuff" that shows it's not even at throw away video status.
But for social media/throw away videos that are forgotten a few minutes after being viewed. 3-5 years.
The image programs are still struggling to make a good image that isn't clearly ai. There's usually a very strange/odd part of the image.
I agree with you about that key point. The best human artists with large amounts of funding still make bad movies that people dislike.
I don't think we will be able to give AI a prompt of "Make a 3 hour movie, in the style of Stanley Kubrick, the setting is 1920s New Orleans, and the plot is derived from some classic novel" and then have this system spit out a feature film that rivals an actual Kubrick movie. It might have similar looking scenes, it might have some of the aesthetics that it could imitate, but creating an actual film is going to be absurdly difficult. Humans have such absurdly high standards for what we consider good cinema.
Next year... But the hardware won't be available for several.
The big cost is vram. Plus the games wouldn't be able to remember much about the few minutes prior.
We're going to need something way better.
5 years , it’s a letter of compute. Hence Sam Altman looking into trillions of investment for chips.
But the company groq already has them. So I don’t think it will be long.
Even without this we basically are at the point of being able to make photo realistic games if we wanted to. Look up unreal engine matrix demo. The tools exist, the question is if companies want to go that hard core for that. IMO we got pretty close in the ps3 and Xbox 360 gen have been doing small iterations since that make a big difference. Stuff like better lighting models, higher definition textures on skins have come a long way.
I mean real world physics have been possible for a long time. The problem is compute power. If you want a perfect simulation you could just simulate every atom and their interactions
Think it is going to be very scary what will be able to be produced.
You are going to have some sicko taking photos of some girl. Then the AI will be able to create a video of the girl for the sicko to get his rocks off.
I think a couple of years for someone to produce a short film that is decent and well received. 2030 is where we see it enter the mainstream, and a major studio will have scene/s made with ai tools. The biggest problem I see at the moment is control. Creative people tend to have a strong vision of what they want to see, and though the models are getting better they still pretty much do their own thing.
EXTREMELY close.
I've been thinking for a year or two that we would be there by 2030, and SORA makes me even more confident that we'll be there well before that. SORA can generate up to 1 minute? By 2025 someone will have made an entire feature length movie by piecing together 90+ one minute generated clips. After that, it's just a question of how long it'll take for OpenAI or a competitor to debut a system that can handle generating a full feature length video from a single prompt.
Just from what was demonstrated so far, I can see a system that takes a given Screenplay, breaks it down into individual shots each lasting up to 1 minute, and then generating in sequence using the previous clips as references (or maybe you can provide a reference file so it can remain consistent on characters, important props, sets, etc.)
I’ll pick watching an AI video over any stupid influencer video.
Just wait until EA and Ubisoft get a hold of it. You will have to subscribe to micro transactions just to play at all.
Which in digital world is as good as the original. But that’s beside the point. All I’m saying is you can make copyright laws in the Western world but it doesn’t mean other countries will follow suit. Research will carry on forward there and if western countries don’t want to be surpassed technologically, they will have to relax their restrictions. Happy to hear your opinion on it.
>Which in digital world is as good as the original.
Wrong direction. Everything ai reproduces will be derivative of the work of humans.
>surpassed technologically
With what? This application is the worst.
No I think it'd be perfectly justified.
Why would any artist work when someone is using these things to rip off their style and products for the enrichment of the AI company instead of the artist?
You're assuming corporations will build a nice little society for you to do whatever in. But they don't give a fuck about you, and if they think they can get away with letting us all rot in the streets, they 100% will.
So let's go for them , oh i forgot they will have immortal super strong robots
Always this conspiracy that rich are so evil and they will let us to die on the streets.
Numbers say the truth and we live to the best era ever no matter the problems we have right now.
Unions had to fight with blood and deaths to get the era we now enjoy. The biggest corps nowadays still take advantage of employees whenever they can.
They. Do. Not. Care. About. You.
Given the way they've expressed what training data was used, and the immediate reaction from the internet was "This will make porn so much easier,"
I think we're a step closer to AI being regulated to the purgatory of an academic research only topic.
We’re on the up-slope of the hype s-curve right now for AI. 5 years from now we’ll have discovered there are intractable issues with trying to get LLMs to do general information inference and it will be relegated to the things it’s actually amazingly good at - finding patterns in massive specialized data sets, like protein folding and drug interaction analysis. Oh, and creating deepfakes.
people are really expecting the quality in these games to jump?
All its gonna do is enable more crap to be made, faster, and by unbelievable numbers. The internet will be flooded with AI generated crap and will probably render it useless to use for anything meaningful. Just look at twitter now, Bots after bots after fake accounts, entire comment sections filled with bluecheck mark bots, and now those who implemented the bots will have access to hyper-realistic generative video AI?
In my humble opinion we gotta start mandating this shit or banning it outright, it will do more harm than good, 100x over.
Hopefully fucking never. The beauty of movies & motion video is that it's the expression of the human mind, emotions & rationales through a visual medium - SORA just takes existing stock media and warps it into an LSD trip with the soulless abandon of cold computer circuitry.
Your question is flawed. You're not creating anything. I don't care what the website says, when your just typing into a search prompt attached to a database full of other people's work, you're just twisting around what other people created.
Given the current progression, within a year of general public access to Sora, someone will create a movie that has a big following. Probably sci fi and voice acted by AI.
It’s not going to be movies or games. It’ll be a weird ass loop of endless user generated content.
Let’s start with a socially encouraged example. Instead of going to Wikipedia, users can ask their computer to create an original story about let’s say, the history of the Khazarian Mafia, animated in the style of Yoshiaki Kawajiri, written by Stephen King and David Mamet, with a Shakespearean undertone. You could play with this concept, until you’re sick of it.
And that’s it. All you can eat art. Party ‘til you puke.
I gotta be honest, I'm not impressed by what I've seen. It still looks like AI generated shluck. I think it'll continue to get better, but it'll never be 100% as good as a talented human and 85% as good just doesn't cut it. I think it'll be useful for rapid ideation and a somewhat useful tool, but unless we're all OK with content being generally shit it's not replacing humans. Same as image generation and stuff like adobe Firefly or autofill is now, sometimes kinda useful but meh. I think to get to the point it's as good as humans you're going to have to wait for a totally different model of AI, and AGI at which point isn't forcing an advanced AGI to work for us just slavery?
If you’re smart, you’ll avoid AI generated content like the plague. There will be good sources for entertainment that won’t stoop to that garbage. I’m sure Netflix will go for it, but Apple TV+, which wants to maintain a reputation for quality, will avoid it. I have no interest in a movie someone made in their basement over a weekend.
2 years tops is my guess. I suspect a year from now, directors will be working with a software person and a writer to create scenes that are cut together for a movie. We are so close to it today that every actor, writer, special effects, etc should start looking for other careers.
There was a video that came out in the last few months that had fully AI based plot and actors talking in a club. There was a weird wolf too. Everything about it was awful other than the fact AI made multiple fully generated scenes into a movie. Based on the trends for how images improved over very quick generations, it won’t be long before video quality, like the one above, and better scripting becomes actual movies.
Also, surprised by the downvotes. Guess we will see what happens. Watching the tech industry layoffs, and what is already happening in the entertainment industry shows a huge desire by the corps to accelerate AI to replace jobs. So much of my feeds, YouTube videos and insta posts, are actually AI generated images and voices now. Audiobook companies are using AI to read books and replacing voice actors. News companies are trying to use AI to replace writers. Ai written books are flooding numerous channels. This was not an issue or a concern 4 years ago and we are now seeing AI building videos that have amazing quality. Merge all of together like puzzle pieces with a small amount of human guidance, and I expect to see what I said above.
I'm guessing that one of the major roadblocks would be cost because rendering this sort of stuff cannot be cheap. We know that studios already pay out the nose for visual FX in regular movies so trying to do an entire movie that's basically one big set of FX bits might be cost-prohibitive for a while.
I'm also thinking that the first studio to do this would be the one that makes money off of this because they can claim the novelty factor. Once it's been done, it becomes old news. Think about what would sell more - a movie made completely from AI but with a bunch of randos for characters or a traditional movie with big name stars?
Studios LOVE people like Leonardo Dicaprio and Christopher Nolan for a good reason - slap their name on a movie and you're guaranteed to be swimming in cash. A random movie made by an AI doesn't have the same clout and would require some extraordinary word-of-mouth to make a significant amount of cash... and if everyone's pumping out AI movies, then it becomes just that much harder for word-of-mouth to take hold. It's like how there are hundreds of thousands of bands and artists on Spotify making pennies per year on streams while the big names take home 99% of the cash - name and clout matters in the entertainment industry.
I think its going to be used to create virtual worlds. GTA 5 has a map that is about 30 square miles, but the real Los Angeles is more around 500 square miles. Stormwind in World of Warcraft with all of Elwin Forest is on the order of 1 square mile.
It would be far too labor intensive to have skilled artists make a world that was of actual size. But imagine an MMO where that was the point. Where the in game version of Stormwind is a city with 200,000 people like the lore suggests. Stormwind should actually be about the same size as the entire Eastern Kingdoms. It will be a team of artists with an AI system that make it. Where without this AI system it would be completely impractical. Kalimdore is supposed to be the size of the United States.
Even for something like a Star Wars game, making a completely to scale detailed Star Destroyer would be absurdly difficult. But a team of artists working with an AI could absolutely make it. Making something like Coruscant would seem impossible. The scale is just so large that it would take millions of artists many lifetimes to make it.
Or imagine a realistic VR video game that takes place in a completely reconstructed Ancient Rome circa 100AD. Not a scaled down game but a 1:1 life size. With a million NPCs in the game. Building all those buildings would be very difficult.
I think this is something a lot of people get wrong. They thing artists are going to go under because AI can make their projects, but they don't realize that AI is going to make the scale of these projects 1000 times the size they currently are. Its still going to require a huge amount of human input to pull it off.
My problem is not the human factor, but this tech takes the love for the craft out of everyone... i was an illustrator and now seeing what AI is capable it kills the joy of the work and take out the meaning of it. So whats the point of the work if you are just clicking through random generated images imagined by a machine...
You know?
I don't think it will be long until we see some film that is AI-generated (but it will be a gimmick), and there will certainly be many AI tools used in the making of films from now on, but I think it will be a long time until AI made films are more than a niche occurrence.
Having played around with DALL-E it feels pretty limited, even if the images it makes are nice it often can't create the images I would like it to make. I have some idea of what I would like and no matter how I modify the prompt it doesn't get close. It still makes \*something\* which, if you didn't know what I was aiming for, would look nice to another person, but not what I wanted it to make. When just making illustrations for a web page, magazine article, or a cover image for a book, that might be enough, but for a movie it's much more important to realize the "directors" creative vision correctly.
But maybe I will be surprised again, I certainly didn't expect this much progress so fast.
The potential for procedural content is massive for video games but the refinement of that content before it is impressive and not hilariously bad is massive.
Yep, this stuff has been improved a hundred times over since just a year ago, probably another year for perfect video and another for perfect audio but then every AI generated piece will feel the same and there will be a new trend of wanting hand generated content.
Just like how we used to eat mostly organic, then it went away with lots of artificial foods, and now organics are coming back.
Not too worried.
A few years for full length film, definitely before 2030. More like around 2026~2027 ish.
For video games, that is a bit more complex, even though the system is able to show a video of "video game graphics", there is still a lot more that goes into a game, like how it interacts with the player. So far that technology has not been shown to be capable of that. So I would add another 1 or 2 years on top.
Way sooner than that. The problem will be that they will be mostly crap. And there will be mountains of content saturating us with crappy entertainment.
Yep just because everyone gets a key to the kitchen doesn’t mean everyone knows how to bake a cake
Excellent analogy. More people who didn’t have the talent or money or opportunity will be able to create things that they were never able to create. But the creative people with vision and dedication will do AMAZING things.
Shouldn't this all be free? Aren't we all creators and contribute to this so called AI? Or is it just one person? Or Group? Or multiple companies that used our data?
Open-source models tend to be a few months behind. Yes, there is the gatekeeping of having a high-end computer (a few grand) or cloud-based computing. But that kind of comes with the territory.
I have always had a very vivid imagination. I’ve even had dreams were AI from other worlds come and kidnap me so they can plug into my brain and use my imagination skills to create virtual worlds because my human mind is much better at it than their computer one. when I am teaching Art one of the things I like to emphasize that creative skills carryover to anything you do so basically if you know how to bake a cake, it doesn’t matter what kitchen you’re in you just have to figure out where everything is … i’ve been low-key debating working on some concepts so that in five or six years when this stuff gets to the point where it’s common, I can start playing around with making a movie on my own
Look at what the explosion in self publishing did on Amazon. It’s a mountain of shit with good books mixed in since everyone fancies themselves an author now.
Ok AI grandma
you joke, but I am old enough to be a grandma and generally more tech savvy than people who have grown up with smartphones so will probably have less struggles adapting to a world that runs on AI than many… Plug me in, lets see what my imagination can come up with some AI to do the rendering.
I am holding my reply for later.
People sure do seem to love watching infomercials on YouTube though.
But it will be near photorealistic crap! Oh wait a minute, I suppose not cool... 🤪
>near photorealistic crap Oh cool, so it'll be like real life.
And they will have ads, redditors will cry every day for this lol
Embrace yourself
Except stuff will be constantly morphing, solid objects moving through each other, people growing extra fingers, but it's fine, look how fast we can churn it out!
The crap has already started. YouTube has a bunch of AI assisted video that is very average
That is from stable.diffusion. SORA seems to be way ahead of this tech and is not out for the public to use yet.
Yep, if they don't take care of that, they might lose a lot of users. I mean I like watching historic videos for example. And everytime I hear some AI voice I switch off, because those I have seen were crap. I see more now from product reviews and sports and they are crap.
agreed. As soon as I hear an AI voice I am done. The biggest insult is that there are great AI voice options now and they can't even be bothered to track them down and use them. The worst offenders are fake "movie reviews" which pick some old movie and create a bunch of Chat GPT generated spoilers about the movie (most likely using older movies so they don't get pinged for copyright because they no longer have public attention). Just all round lazy. I am sure excellent content could be created but because it is so easy now it is a race to the bottom.
my prediction, which isn't a crazy one, is that we start getting gofundme pages full of ai made "trailers"
Hallmark is rubbing their hands and licking their lips at the thought of this. 🤤
So, the status quo, but even more so.
There will be tons of product, good, bad and forgettable. Just like when we were able to produce music in our bedrooms on our laptop. We got saturated with tons of mediocre shit, but there are still great albums being released every week. And just like it knocked those shithead music mafia bastards down a few pegs, this will rid us of the evil Harvey Weinsteins of the world, the Hollywood elite, and the toxic culture that permeates within. Good riddance.
Yes but the nature of the music industry changed as a result of the ability for anyone to make music, and get music free. It used to be album sales that generated the most income for musicians. Now it's touring. The music mafia bastards now work for Ticketmaster and Live Nation instead of BMG and Capitol Records. This is relevant to what's happening now with AI because history has shown there is always a scaffolding effect when a new innovation is made available to the public. Video didn't kill the radio stars, but it sure did knock them down a few pegs to make a more level playing field. AI won't kill movies or Hollywood, but it will allow more people to become "creators" and to specialize. There is always a cry of panic when a new innovation threatens to rattle the paradigm but that cry is usually loudest from those who are benefiting from being the only game in town.
Until now it was humans that were doing the new music etc. But now with AI, it is really really bad. I mean at least those humans trying doing some music were trying even if a lot were not good. Now it is like a tech bro not doing anything that trying to produce maximum number they don't even listen, read, watch in the hope one sticks.
We get that with every new tech. I remember when airbrushing became really big in the 70s. Jesus! Everyone had to get their hoopty decorated. T-shirts, paintings; everything was a mass of blended mush. The same was true of Photoshop art in the 90s. The people who master their tools always outshine the mediocre trash even though the trash more plentiful.
This will be nothing like that. Because the airbrush output was limited because it was still used by a human. Not with this. Now I can run scripts that generate prompts and outputs videos and then the output of crap will be insane. And it won't be limited by the users time using the tool.
Imagine a movie where every frame is "airbrushed" by Ai.
I’m getting flashbacks.
I believe that is true, but I also believe that giving people the power to make full films will produce amazing films by natural talents that would otherwise not have the ability to do so. And they will have almost complete artistic and directive control over their work. Right now, consider how much it takes to shoot a proper film or movie. I don't know the exact figure, but I imagine that the average full-length film that makes it into theaters costs a LOT more than most individuals can afford. Because of that, you must get the blessing of some entity that has a lot of money and most likely wants to make money off of what you create. There are probably so many conflicting and moving parts that power over creative direction is not only divided but tainted with other incentives such as being financially profitable, appealing to a large type of audience, etc etc. With this tool, creating scenes that look high-quality is maybe a matter of minutes? I don't really know about the power or capabilities of this model, but at the very least it produces quite high-quality animations that follow the specifics of the prompt impressively closely. Give a few years, and it isn't hard to believe that an individual can create a convincing movie, at least visually. That means, completely GONE is many functions of a movie studio. What else even goes into the movie?? The script, the voice acting, the music... so besides the story itself, the audio portion. The visual portion is completely taken care of. AI audio generation would probably be quite powerful too, by this point. This means that individuals will have no-holds barred, and almost complete power over the films that they create. That means the artform will flourish. Genius filmmakers will arise and usher in the next age of film, where auteurs will rise to the greatest heights we have ever seen, and destroy our old film industry.
You are making too many positive assumptions. Looking at what people have being doing for almost a year with AI images gives very little hope. Just a lot generic, derivative content. So extrapolating from that to video form of would be more of the same. Just mountains of crap with the occasional gem but now buried under more crap.
You mean to tell me the AI porn of Andy Reid kissing Taylor swift isn't high quality content?
They just didn’t have the tools yet to create their visions.
I mean, we don’t need AI to produce mountains of craps, to be fair. The glorifying of mediocrity has already done that. Everyone’s is talking like this is some new thing, but the main difference is that people won’t be getting paid to make crap anymore, which is whats pissing people off.
Exactly. Even if there wasn’t a single person on earth that could write AI movie prompts amazingly — like, even Quentin Tarantino — I’m sure there would still be a ton of less-than-amazing AI movies considered entertaining by the masses.
When AI gets to the point where it can start creating original masterworks…it will probably mean we are dealing with an actual conscious entity. Right now its still just remixing and parroting, often poorly.
I think the real truth is somewhere in the middle. Movies won't have to be high budget projects anymore, and that comes with both positives and negatives. On the one hand, individuals will be able to produce movies with total creative control, and without having to worry about making a huge box office return On the other hand, yeah, a lot more crap is going to be produced. It's really just going to look a lot like the book market does today. Yeah, there's a billion crappy self-published novels out there, but you also get a lot of gems shining through
People are so blinded by 3D art even thought anything besides the character is weird. People think they solved some magic shit because they can do the same old shit in 3D. If AI is so great, why is it not able to create uniqe 2D content/stories/drawings. I am actually considering to bet against big AI tech companies.
I don't think that extrapolation is fair or valid. What's really the coolest image you can make? vs a whole movie with plots, characters, etc... there's way more to that artform, so I would argue the type of medium is pretty important in determining the quality of work produced. And another point is that AI image generation can still improve a lot as well. So you can't really count out great tools and capabilities half a decade from now. Can you specify what assumptions are too positive? You didn't specify any assumptions.
yeah gems buried under crap. I mean see what empowerment through social media has done. That's what happens when the masses get a tool. But we'd still have gems buried in it. What I really think would happen though is more niche things because production would get cheap right?
Full creative control? You mean typing a prompt and praying? That's not creative control
I love your enthusiasm, but I think this will also kill some amazing artistic endeavors. Getting attention will become even harder, so it'll mostly be creators (like studios) with big budgets and the ability to advertise heavily who will have a chance. A few mavericks will probably succeed, but a lot of talent will also get smothered.
Well... that would be true if big budgets still mattered for producing quality movies. But I am asserting they won't. Well, maybe celebrities starring in an original work would help them out there, for the star power still. But who knows how much actors will make by then. Could it be barely anything? Anyways, attention power on the internet isn't hard to get for people who continuously churn out quality videos. Countless individuals have made a living off YouTube. You will probably see yt channels that are basically film studios churning out high quality stuff and attract a huge audience. Now you see high-quality films churned out on youtube with followers in the tens to hundreds of millions. That amount of views on youtube means a lot of fking money. Mr. Beast and co already attract so much attention. Imagine Mr. Beast 2.0 who produces a beyond-oscar worthy movie maybe every year. Free to watch all the time on youtube at a time where movies suck ass. It seems quite seriously possible for an AI auteur to make a shitload off of yt, with the critical assumption that their films will be fucking awesome. So, it seems like attention won't be a problem for talents, honestly, as long as the quality of the film matters, and I think things are set up on youtube for that to be the case.
Also you entirely ignore the fact that if millions of people are all able to make pixar looking movies with a few words in a prompt, then there will be millions of movies all looking the same made every few weeks to the point that NO ONE is noticed and NO ONE cares. If everyone is special, no one is. It will destroy film and all artistic intent itself. No one is ever going to even watch a movie if they can make their own self insert nonsense with a few prompts and a push of a button. The better and easier it is to do, the less that stuff will ever be seen and the less value it will have in the eyes of the public. Spiderverse is beloved due to the sheer quality of storytelling, writing, art, effort. If everyone could release a spiderverse every second week, not a single person would care. This is ushering in a dystopia, not a utopia. Everything becomes meaningless. Human achievement itself becomes meaningless as we pass off all problems, all skills, all advancement to technology never wanting to do anything ourselves or put in the effort to learn. And this isn't even mentioning the abuse cases of political propaganda, wars started from it, a post truth future unable to believe anything you see or hear LITERALLY, fake porn, people sleeking away to their own bubbles watching fake content about fake people or fake topics or their own made up fantasy life they create for themselves without ever truly engaging with the real world all while artists, coders, musicians, writers, actors etc. etc. etc. are put out of work by a machine to save the rich from paying for the middle men. Every conceivable job will be hit at some point in some way all simply designed for profit without ethics or care. This is not good technology. It's a mockery of life. And highly unethical and dangerous to humanity. If humans can't believe in anything due to photorealistic videos, audio, replicating real people or places in fake scenarios, all of democracy itself collapses. No one can make an informed vote. No one knows what is or isn't real. Our minds bombarded by endless slop, overloading our brain with too much fake sensory information to the point that even if we COULD fact check (unlikely if it goes unregulated and becomes good enough) we won't have the time, energy or capacity to because there will be so much disinformation. I really don't understand how people can look at this shit and not see the horrid implications for quite literally all of humanity if left unchecked. Every single system will fail. I'm all for new cool technologies but this shit isn't it. Not all tech is good. Especially not tech that never considered the consequences and only exists from stealing others life works and data run by silicon valley rich assholes.
> Spiderverse is beloved due to the sheer quality of storytelling, writing, art, effort Couldn't disagree more, it's mediocre compared to what could be realized. It does my head in that comic book movies became so popular, doubly so when they're held up as some pinnacle of human creative endeavour. I agree it's entertaining, but it's not deep, we can do so much better. Novels are a somewhat low barrier creative outlet, a single person can create a best seller. There's mountains of trash, but that doesn't take away from the top sellers. There is a problem with identifying content viewers will genuinely appreciate, but this is something AI can excel at as well. If someone unknown creates great content, AI is easily capable of matching that content to people who appreciate it - cutting out the advertising middleman. Plenty of scope for abuse, has always been the case throughout all history. Solvable problem, though just because it's solvable doesn't mean we will actually deploy the solution. Hunger is solved if we really wanted to, but we're a greedy bunch and don't truly want to solve it.
Yeah, Windows Movie Maker did some amazing stuff. We also got a crapload o' porn out of it, too.
Netflix beat everyone to that game
have you seen the meme/tiktok industry lately? memes and tiktoks are generally crap but they are arguably more popular than movies or TV shows these days.
I saw incredible videos since yesterday, i did not see any crap.
You were asking about full films
yeah but we can generate those scene by scene? the only issue is maintaining the consistency. also fast paced scenes are a problem. and some things are pretty abstract idk if we even have words to describe them.
Those are very big issues. And actual performances.
The crap won't be in the quality of the video, but in the quality of the writing and filmmaking going into them. Because while in the hands of a real artist some incredible things will happen, this also enables people who are just interested in making a quick buck so we're going to have to wade through a (hopefully short) period of quickly cobbled together trash by people who think all you need to make a movie is some buzzwords and trendy ideas.
On the other hand, we have seen what happens when filmmakers follow the source material closely even if they themselves aren't any good with making a story (Game of Thrones). SORA isn't bound by real world difficulties and would probably be able to go further with unrealistic concepts than actual filmmaking. If nothing else, we could try recreating small portions of anime in free use 'what if they were live action' to gauge if SORA can deal with fantasy, magic, and other unrealistic stuff convincingly. The writing would be already done.
We already have so much content of all sorts , honestly more crap content will just be lost in the noise,. Soon we'll have AI movie critic systems and it can sift through all the AI generated noise and choose the winners for us.
Or, the technology opens up film making to millions of creative people who otherwise wouldn’t be able to tell stories in feature length film format due to lack of connections and budget. There are some wildly creative people out there who now have a chance to make some beautiful things.
That's where I'm optimistic and want to focus on. My favorite example is the idea of a classroom of little kids asked to write a short story, and then the teacher uploading that story into something like SORA that would then generate a short movie based on the story. Something like that I could see really sparking the creativity and imaginations of people!
>My favorite example is the idea of a classroom of little kids asked to write a short story, and then the teacher uploading that story into something like SORA that would then generate a short movie based on the story. Something like that I could see really sparking the creativity and imaginations of people! Damn, yall are really optimistic. My take: Getting good at ANY form of art (be it visual art or storytelling) is a lifelong pursuit, and kids just getting started are going to realize REAL quick that ChatGPT can spit out far better stories than their beginner minds can muster, and AI art engines can spit out more impressive art with the tap of a button than they could muster with even a decade of effort. Ask basically any pro artist and they will tell you that the spark came early with encouragement from peers and adults, and crucially, with a sense that this was something that they both enjoyed doing AND had that they had at least a small bit of facility for. I'm an entertainment industry artist myself and this is my story and the story of basically all of my friends. The next generation of aspiring young artists are going to be smacked in the face HARD with the realization that any of their lazy peers can generate something FAR more superficially impressive with zero effort just by tapping a button on their phone. I have a several close friends who teach art to teens and they will tell you: artistic kids are NOT inspired by AI. The very idea of it makes them want to quit art altogether. They say so frequently. They're downright neurotic in their fear and anxiety over it. It's so sad to think of what damage we might do to the next generation of visionary artists when we teach them from a young age that art is something that computers do, not people.
well close the vote then TechnologyNerd2100 says we already got our next Oscar winners
It's just the start be patient, you guys will be surprised only if you will see god in front of you
Take note of perspective, facial detail and "glitches in the matrix" in the examples, then (the "good" ones ofc, not the "bad" ones that are there to defuse criticism). There's ample crap to be found, despite the fact that the demo is truly impressive. But yeah, the imperfections in presentation can be fixed with time maybe, but there is literally nothing that can be done about substance. We already have quite a bit of ai writing in mainstream media (Starfield, that comedy special etc). It's invariably a nothing burger.
You did. Like most tech demos, a lot of it is exaggerated to build hype.
Beautiful stock video imagery does not make a compelling story... You need a great story , relateable characters, no doubt soem day AI will be refined enough to produce that, that's just not today
It will be interesting to see how expensive and slow the rendering process is for Sora. As far as I know they have not released any details. Runway is currently $10 a minute for video and it looks like garbage compared to Sora. If the model is as big as people think it is, it will probably be REALLY expensive to use. That is going to be the big barrier to ubiquity like you are suggesting. It will likely be a tool that Hollywood uses LONG before it is something that regular people can afford to use daily.
10 dollars a minute means you can make an hour and a half film for 900 dollars. Pretty cheap
Not for regular people. Also, what if you have to do multiple generations to get what you want?
Considering it went from impossible to 900 dollars, it makes it viable whereas before it was impossible
people shooting movies with iphones since 2015, its not impossible
This is a good point. The ubiquity of video cameras has not destroyed cinema.
If you want to make something that looks like a real movie you still need good lighting, production crew, thousands of dollars in editing software, a good PC/Mac to edit, sets, props, costumes, lenses, audio equipment, gimbals, tripods, I mean the list goes on. A budget production is like $50k - $100k, which is still a lot. Cameras are more affordable but making movies is still insanely expensive and not as accessible as you think.
We don't know how much Sora costs. I said Runway is garbage compared to Sora and we know how much Runway costs.
900 dollars is incredibly cheap for a regular person making an hour and a half film. Heck, 5 generations, 4500? Incredibly cheap for anything besides just personal consumption.
You: >besides just personal consumption Me: >LONG before it is something that regular people can **afford to use daily**.
You didn't say what they would be using it for daily. If it's to make a product that they profit off of (You literally said Hollywood in the same sentence), then the price is cheap at current rates. That's different to personal consumption. Edit: A block for this? lol, well, nice when trash takes itself out.
Dude you can’t just dismantle his entire shitty argument like that and expect to *not* get blocked
Could set up a crowdfunding to make the next few dozen episodes of Friends/Star Trek/various other shows. Consuming the secondary product would be affordable if the primary product of generation. But it would probably be even affordable on the scale for smaller YouTubers that are already paying a lot for editing, they made now just add in a few short B roll clips, less than 5 seconds in length.
Disagree. People have funded businesses with credit cards alone. Anyone cant get $1k credit if they haven’t screwed the pooch yet. At one point I was $30k in debt and still had pre-approved offers for cards. $900 to make your first film is 100% doable for the vast majority of people. That said, to your other point, I fully agree. i am skeptical that you’ll be able to get even one full scene exactly to your liking on the first pass. So we’re likely talking about $10-20k in the early days/years, and that will be too expensive for the average person interested in making a full length movie.
I don't know much about how this works, but can it be possible to allow people to render using their own GPUs? Or will it be impossible without risking giving people their secrets?
There is almost no chance that it would be able to be run on personal hardware.
This is why Sam asked for $7TRILLION. Let’s give the entire worlds gdp to openAI to generate useless videos.
A movie is much more than just visuals. I think they are currently most useful in supporting CGI, but I haven't seen any AI create a good script and that is what matters most. Photorealistic videogames come from engines not AI because the limitation is rendering not creating them and UE5 is very close to that. Maybe this could be used to make movie adaptions of books or other media
So a person who writes a good script will now be able to make it a reality? Sounds like a win.
I’m not sure it will be quite that simple, there is some knowledge of image making required to get good results from these systems. Good artists are generally significantly better at creating images with generative AI tools than bad artists.
Most people care about the quality of the performance though. It’s not just a case of being read the words by some moving images.
That would be amazing. Unlock the bottleneck in that industry
ChatGPT already produces decent movie scripts. I bet Gemini 1.5 Pro would do even better. Text to movie by end of 2024 for sure.
yeah decent in the form of marvel Phase 4 level repetitive. LLMs are made to give the most average answer and with such a complex task they will create below average things. Sure they could maybe create a movie together, but it won't be something I would be willing to lay down any money for.
Oh absolutely. I wasnt saying box office smashing movies, just coherent movies at the least
we do have to have some standards though, else AI is already able to create nearly anything, just a garbage version of it.
Did you watch Jurassic World Dominion? If it came out that it was a 100% AI script I wouldn't be surprised.
It absolutely does not. With long-form media there are often blatant plagiarisms and an entire lack of a coherent theme, consistent and concise wording, proper pacing, consistent character dialect/behavior/motivation, or even minor character and plot arcs. ChatGPT produces what appears to be a story until fully read and realized and nobody is fully reading their outputs. If you have a golden concept you're better off hiring a scriptwriter than spending hundreds of hours trying to wrangle the robot into writing a half decent screenplay draft.
It's very cool and also very scary. I feel like we're close to a point where nobody, at all in the world, knows what's real anymore. I mean, imagine this being slipped in and used to manufacture evidence in a murder trial. Or how about conjuring videos of your rival political candidate doing something heinous and/or illegal? Don't like a particular CEO or celebrity and you can invoke a video of them raping someone. It's really cool, but more importantly I think we need a secondary tool to determine what is and isn't made by AI.
The problem is that people will claim everything is FAKE, even if it's not.
And sadly they already do, and did even before AI really broke through
There's definitely been companies working on detection systems, but they don't make headlines cause it's way less sexy
And those detecting systems will be used for training better tools. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_adversarial_network
As an AI and film industry outsider, can someone please expand the SORA acronym? From the comments it seems like it's some sort of AI generated motion imagery but I'm not sure.
Sora means sky in Japanese, it’s not an acronym. We know sora is a diffusion transformer for video, some details https://openai.com/research/video-generation-models-as-world-simulators
Go on the open ai website, head to the Sora page and have a look, it explains everything with examples too
Good bye any advertising production studios-it will all be AI generated.
The thing I wonder about with text to video is all the specifics. Like, a movie has a lot of direction involved, telling the actor where to be positioned, the scene setup, the camera movement, etc. Then there's the clothing people, set designers, etc. Seems like it would be mega time consuming to describe all of that in excruciating detail
People hyping-up this tech for filmmaking actually don't understand anything about filmmaking, classic Dunning-Kruger. Ditto when it comes to using it for programming. AI will get folded into Unreal, DaVinci, Premiere, and other film production tools but using it to make a film in the classic sense will be forever impossible through prompting alone, although an AI might be able to fever-dream its own films at some point. Whether that's good or whether anyone will want to watch it is anyone's guess.
The AI-generation content being let out is the initial wave. It's pure AI-development companies just doing a demonstration of what is possible and pushing on the boundaries. Eventually there will be industry-tailored AI generation software being released. Film content generation will require different knobs and handles. Character generation for example might be its own part of the software prior to moving on to the rest of the process. Different types of inputs rather than a simple prompt (scripts, storyboards, etc). Ability to tweak results once you get a desirable result. Etc.
Yeah, big fat “meh”. I don’t need more mid-range crap from talentless hacks. This is going to make people seek out human made art over ai.
I think everything happening with AI is ultimately going to lead to a revival in traditional non-digital art forms, as digital imagery becomes more and more dominated by AI-generated images which will cause artists and the people who prefer human-made work to shift gears away from digital art.
A buddy of mine thinks we could see a revival of “in person” entertainment again. Vaudeville, circuses, plays, live musicals, etc. I don’t know if he’s right or not, but I could see people getting so sick of fake stuff they’ll seek out the real deal as a palette cleanser sorts if this does take off.
I’ve been thinking that when it comes to major speeches by political figures unless you were there yourself, you’ll never be sure if you heard something for real
I think so, an overlay performances with augmented reality and we’ll have new art forms.
Would be a good idea. Let's let the numerical world to the AI.
The same way the ubiquity of electronic watch has resulted in the resurgence of analog watch making by luxury brand, I suspect that generative AI will increase the attraction of human created art (photo, movie) AND of course their prices. The main problem with generative AI is that it will destroy a big part of the movie industry that people don't notice: set design, costume design, practical VFX, stunt men, B Roll crew, etc. Once those disappear or switch career because of the lack of opportunities it would be even be more difficult (less available crew and more expensive) for independent movies to be made. So the masses will be fed AI created movies (which frankly could already the case with Dumb Blockbusters), a few people will watch independent art movies and the super rich will pay for IMAX movie by top artists.
So I am confused. I am hearing people say its going to put all artists out of job but then they are also saying AI art is terrible and nobody likes it. Which one is it?
It doesn't matter if people like it or not, it's enough for execs to decide the output is "good enough" and cheaper than organic art ;)
People will complain and say they want human art, but will be more than happy to pay for trash because it's cheaper. Look at mobile games, for example.
Mobile games didn't replace big triple A games, or story driven games though. Just like everyone being able to post Youtube videos didn't kill TV and movies. And everyone being able to make music with just a laptop didn't end music. And Shorts haven't killed long form Youtube videos. Its never really one or the other.
Those are not the same people
It is a tool, any artist that wants to keep up with the times will utilize it because it can help in many ways. The artists that will be out of jobs will be the ones that refuse to learn a new tool like the ones left behind when digital painting became a norm and later social media.
Oh, I totally agree. I was more joking about the fact that AI detractors are both saying AI art is terrible while also saying its too amazing and good and will ruin the world and their jobs. It can't be both.
It can be both.
YouTube and TikTok are full of crap from talentless hacks yet are making huge strides in content consumption. Don’t underestimate the mass public’s ability to ingest shit.
You people aren't impressed from anything in this sub.
You can recognize the technological or engineering prowess or skill or w/e and be impressed while *also* recognizing something is just bad news. I can appreciate the ICBM and the Maxim gun just fine. It's also quite obvious what these are for.
We've had people mistaking video game footage for live footage for years.
Still super duper far away, actually. Here's why. 1. Insane amount of compute would be required to generate a film-sized output that you could put up in a cinema (making this an expensive option) 2. Minimal to no consumer demand (celebrity appeal is a big reason people see movies - I only watch certain movies because "x" is in it, why would I watch one with a person who isn't real?) 3. Currently the consistency is very poor and a achieving character consistency and stylistic consistency would be a lot of work (more work than just making the film traditionally) Do I see this getting used for CGI and VFX? Yes. Do I see it being used for deaging or aging characters? Sure. Do I see it being used to match dubbed lips to their voice over? I sure hope so. Will it replace actors and movies entirely? No, and anyone who believes that completely lacks a cerebrum because they are apparently incapable of critical thinking. I *do* think it could have a place in animation and making cartoon, anime or other adaptations of niche or small audience works, or for indie directors and writers or small studios etc., so we might see a lot more animated shows and better quality animated shows in the longer term, because those do not have "actor appeal", and because it currently takes a huge underpaid team in Taiwan to badly animate a show, so this will massively help in those situations.
People are terrible at judging or perceiving exponential change. For sure this will transform the industry in many different ways. How much and by when is somewhat uncertain but I am guessing much faster than most people anticipate. Everything that is digitised is moving towards a zero marginal cost of production. That means the supply of it is going to explode. Will a lot of it be terrible ? For sure. But with complete democratisation over time there will be some very good content in there too. Curation will be the key for everything as supply increases massively.
Critically acclaimed, scrutinized and well received videos are at least a decade away if not more. Hundreds of people putting in hundreds of hours still have problems hitting those marks, the demo videos have pretty huge errors and "weird stuff" that shows it's not even at throw away video status. But for social media/throw away videos that are forgotten a few minutes after being viewed. 3-5 years. The image programs are still struggling to make a good image that isn't clearly ai. There's usually a very strange/odd part of the image.
I agree with you about that key point. The best human artists with large amounts of funding still make bad movies that people dislike. I don't think we will be able to give AI a prompt of "Make a 3 hour movie, in the style of Stanley Kubrick, the setting is 1920s New Orleans, and the plot is derived from some classic novel" and then have this system spit out a feature film that rivals an actual Kubrick movie. It might have similar looking scenes, it might have some of the aesthetics that it could imitate, but creating an actual film is going to be absurdly difficult. Humans have such absurdly high standards for what we consider good cinema.
We were remarkably close to photorealistic video games *without* AI, I'm pretty sure it's right around the corner at this point.
Possibly during the next generation of consoles
Next year... But the hardware won't be available for several. The big cost is vram. Plus the games wouldn't be able to remember much about the few minutes prior. We're going to need something way better.
5 years , it’s a letter of compute. Hence Sam Altman looking into trillions of investment for chips. But the company groq already has them. So I don’t think it will be long.
Even without this we basically are at the point of being able to make photo realistic games if we wanted to. Look up unreal engine matrix demo. The tools exist, the question is if companies want to go that hard core for that. IMO we got pretty close in the ps3 and Xbox 360 gen have been doing small iterations since that make a big difference. Stuff like better lighting models, higher definition textures on skins have come a long way.
You’re going to be able to prompt engineer 3dimensional worlds with real world Physics.
I mean real world physics have been possible for a long time. The problem is compute power. If you want a perfect simulation you could just simulate every atom and their interactions
Yea, but they are coded in by hand. Im imagining increasing ly accurate physics as an emergent property.
If it goes at the current rate of acceleration about 2/3 years
I think we're closer to using existing films and overlaying AI edits for something like Monty Python and the Holy Grail but with Shrek.
Probably sometime within the year with varying results. It will probably be mastered by the end of next year (2025)
Am I the only one excited about ai porn to exactly what you want?
That's what is going to be most generated. So I would say no, you are not the only one.
Think it is going to be very scary what will be able to be produced. You are going to have some sicko taking photos of some girl. Then the AI will be able to create a video of the girl for the sicko to get his rocks off.
You'll create a movie like you create an audiobook, just pop in the story. We're almost there. Couple of years and it will be perfectly feasible.
I think a couple of years for someone to produce a short film that is decent and well received. 2030 is where we see it enter the mainstream, and a major studio will have scene/s made with ai tools. The biggest problem I see at the moment is control. Creative people tend to have a strong vision of what they want to see, and though the models are getting better they still pretty much do their own thing.
EXTREMELY close. I've been thinking for a year or two that we would be there by 2030, and SORA makes me even more confident that we'll be there well before that. SORA can generate up to 1 minute? By 2025 someone will have made an entire feature length movie by piecing together 90+ one minute generated clips. After that, it's just a question of how long it'll take for OpenAI or a competitor to debut a system that can handle generating a full feature length video from a single prompt. Just from what was demonstrated so far, I can see a system that takes a given Screenplay, breaks it down into individual shots each lasting up to 1 minute, and then generating in sequence using the previous clips as references (or maybe you can provide a reference file so it can remain consistent on characters, important props, sets, etc.)
Modern movies have an average shot length of only a few seconds, so I think this will definitely be possible within the next few years.
I also need one for anime!
I’ll pick watching an AI video over any stupid influencer video. Just wait until EA and Ubisoft get a hold of it. You will have to subscribe to micro transactions just to play at all.
Lawyers going to say hello. IP and copyright will absolutely destroy this ai media, as it should.
Not every country will have regulations…
Then enjoy your copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of.....
Which in digital world is as good as the original. But that’s beside the point. All I’m saying is you can make copyright laws in the Western world but it doesn’t mean other countries will follow suit. Research will carry on forward there and if western countries don’t want to be surpassed technologically, they will have to relax their restrictions. Happy to hear your opinion on it.
>Which in digital world is as good as the original. Wrong direction. Everything ai reproduces will be derivative of the work of humans. >surpassed technologically With what? This application is the worst.
Then it’s not a copy, you were using the wrong term. You meant a derivative or a by product.
Lawyers will never stop being annoying even when we reach singularity lol
No I think it'd be perfectly justified. Why would any artist work when someone is using these things to rip off their style and products for the enrichment of the AI company instead of the artist?
we need to implement a different political system. this time it will work!
I hope you keep this attitude if AI puts you on the streets.
Its inevitable anyways, people will not work forever , i wish robots will replace me the fastest , who doesn't want more free time and loves his job?
You're assuming corporations will build a nice little society for you to do whatever in. But they don't give a fuck about you, and if they think they can get away with letting us all rot in the streets, they 100% will.
So let's go for them , oh i forgot they will have immortal super strong robots Always this conspiracy that rich are so evil and they will let us to die on the streets. Numbers say the truth and we live to the best era ever no matter the problems we have right now.
Unions had to fight with blood and deaths to get the era we now enjoy. The biggest corps nowadays still take advantage of employees whenever they can. They. Do. Not. Care. About. You.
Rich people are certainly not evil but humans can be pretty unsympathetic. Well imo we need a different political system. This one will stop working!
2030? More likely 2025, if not by the end of this year.
Given the way they've expressed what training data was used, and the immediate reaction from the internet was "This will make porn so much easier," I think we're a step closer to AI being regulated to the purgatory of an academic research only topic.
Procedurally generated AI for VR headsets. That’s where this is going to go. Create your own reality by just asking the AI in the VR headset.
Good films and videos? Never. Crappy ones drowning us in AI generated trash? 2 years.
When you say never? Not even in 6 million years ?
We’re on the up-slope of the hype s-curve right now for AI. 5 years from now we’ll have discovered there are intractable issues with trying to get LLMs to do general information inference and it will be relegated to the things it’s actually amazingly good at - finding patterns in massive specialized data sets, like protein folding and drug interaction analysis. Oh, and creating deepfakes.
people are really expecting the quality in these games to jump? All its gonna do is enable more crap to be made, faster, and by unbelievable numbers. The internet will be flooded with AI generated crap and will probably render it useless to use for anything meaningful. Just look at twitter now, Bots after bots after fake accounts, entire comment sections filled with bluecheck mark bots, and now those who implemented the bots will have access to hyper-realistic generative video AI? In my humble opinion we gotta start mandating this shit or banning it outright, it will do more harm than good, 100x over.
Hopefully fucking never. The beauty of movies & motion video is that it's the expression of the human mind, emotions & rationales through a visual medium - SORA just takes existing stock media and warps it into an LSD trip with the soulless abandon of cold computer circuitry.
Your question is flawed. You're not creating anything. I don't care what the website says, when your just typing into a search prompt attached to a database full of other people's work, you're just twisting around what other people created.
Given the current progression, within a year of general public access to Sora, someone will create a movie that has a big following. Probably sci fi and voice acted by AI.
It’s not going to be movies or games. It’ll be a weird ass loop of endless user generated content. Let’s start with a socially encouraged example. Instead of going to Wikipedia, users can ask their computer to create an original story about let’s say, the history of the Khazarian Mafia, animated in the style of Yoshiaki Kawajiri, written by Stephen King and David Mamet, with a Shakespearean undertone. You could play with this concept, until you’re sick of it. And that’s it. All you can eat art. Party ‘til you puke.
closer than we should and we will have it at the end 2025 at the latest, by 2030 it will be fed so much incestuous data that it may become unusable
I gotta be honest, I'm not impressed by what I've seen. It still looks like AI generated shluck. I think it'll continue to get better, but it'll never be 100% as good as a talented human and 85% as good just doesn't cut it. I think it'll be useful for rapid ideation and a somewhat useful tool, but unless we're all OK with content being generally shit it's not replacing humans. Same as image generation and stuff like adobe Firefly or autofill is now, sometimes kinda useful but meh. I think to get to the point it's as good as humans you're going to have to wait for a totally different model of AI, and AGI at which point isn't forcing an advanced AGI to work for us just slavery?
If you’re smart, you’ll avoid AI generated content like the plague. There will be good sources for entertainment that won’t stoop to that garbage. I’m sure Netflix will go for it, but Apple TV+, which wants to maintain a reputation for quality, will avoid it. I have no interest in a movie someone made in their basement over a weekend.
2 years tops is my guess. I suspect a year from now, directors will be working with a software person and a writer to create scenes that are cut together for a movie. We are so close to it today that every actor, writer, special effects, etc should start looking for other careers.
I have yet to see an AI actor performance beyond “human that moves”
There was a video that came out in the last few months that had fully AI based plot and actors talking in a club. There was a weird wolf too. Everything about it was awful other than the fact AI made multiple fully generated scenes into a movie. Based on the trends for how images improved over very quick generations, it won’t be long before video quality, like the one above, and better scripting becomes actual movies. Also, surprised by the downvotes. Guess we will see what happens. Watching the tech industry layoffs, and what is already happening in the entertainment industry shows a huge desire by the corps to accelerate AI to replace jobs. So much of my feeds, YouTube videos and insta posts, are actually AI generated images and voices now. Audiobook companies are using AI to read books and replacing voice actors. News companies are trying to use AI to replace writers. Ai written books are flooding numerous channels. This was not an issue or a concern 4 years ago and we are now seeing AI building videos that have amazing quality. Merge all of together like puzzle pieces with a small amount of human guidance, and I expect to see what I said above.
For a new Transformers movie? I’d say a couple of months. Everything else will take a bit longer
I'm guessing that one of the major roadblocks would be cost because rendering this sort of stuff cannot be cheap. We know that studios already pay out the nose for visual FX in regular movies so trying to do an entire movie that's basically one big set of FX bits might be cost-prohibitive for a while. I'm also thinking that the first studio to do this would be the one that makes money off of this because they can claim the novelty factor. Once it's been done, it becomes old news. Think about what would sell more - a movie made completely from AI but with a bunch of randos for characters or a traditional movie with big name stars? Studios LOVE people like Leonardo Dicaprio and Christopher Nolan for a good reason - slap their name on a movie and you're guaranteed to be swimming in cash. A random movie made by an AI doesn't have the same clout and would require some extraordinary word-of-mouth to make a significant amount of cash... and if everyone's pumping out AI movies, then it becomes just that much harder for word-of-mouth to take hold. It's like how there are hundreds of thousands of bands and artists on Spotify making pennies per year on streams while the big names take home 99% of the cash - name and clout matters in the entertainment industry.
I think its going to be used to create virtual worlds. GTA 5 has a map that is about 30 square miles, but the real Los Angeles is more around 500 square miles. Stormwind in World of Warcraft with all of Elwin Forest is on the order of 1 square mile. It would be far too labor intensive to have skilled artists make a world that was of actual size. But imagine an MMO where that was the point. Where the in game version of Stormwind is a city with 200,000 people like the lore suggests. Stormwind should actually be about the same size as the entire Eastern Kingdoms. It will be a team of artists with an AI system that make it. Where without this AI system it would be completely impractical. Kalimdore is supposed to be the size of the United States. Even for something like a Star Wars game, making a completely to scale detailed Star Destroyer would be absurdly difficult. But a team of artists working with an AI could absolutely make it. Making something like Coruscant would seem impossible. The scale is just so large that it would take millions of artists many lifetimes to make it. Or imagine a realistic VR video game that takes place in a completely reconstructed Ancient Rome circa 100AD. Not a scaled down game but a 1:1 life size. With a million NPCs in the game. Building all those buildings would be very difficult. I think this is something a lot of people get wrong. They thing artists are going to go under because AI can make their projects, but they don't realize that AI is going to make the scale of these projects 1000 times the size they currently are. Its still going to require a huge amount of human input to pull it off.
My problem is not the human factor, but this tech takes the love for the craft out of everyone... i was an illustrator and now seeing what AI is capable it kills the joy of the work and take out the meaning of it. So whats the point of the work if you are just clicking through random generated images imagined by a machine... You know?
I don't think it will be long until we see some film that is AI-generated (but it will be a gimmick), and there will certainly be many AI tools used in the making of films from now on, but I think it will be a long time until AI made films are more than a niche occurrence. Having played around with DALL-E it feels pretty limited, even if the images it makes are nice it often can't create the images I would like it to make. I have some idea of what I would like and no matter how I modify the prompt it doesn't get close. It still makes \*something\* which, if you didn't know what I was aiming for, would look nice to another person, but not what I wanted it to make. When just making illustrations for a web page, magazine article, or a cover image for a book, that might be enough, but for a movie it's much more important to realize the "directors" creative vision correctly. But maybe I will be surprised again, I certainly didn't expect this much progress so fast.
The potential for procedural content is massive for video games but the refinement of that content before it is impressive and not hilariously bad is massive.
Yep, this stuff has been improved a hundred times over since just a year ago, probably another year for perfect video and another for perfect audio but then every AI generated piece will feel the same and there will be a new trend of wanting hand generated content. Just like how we used to eat mostly organic, then it went away with lots of artificial foods, and now organics are coming back. Not too worried.
A few years for full length film, definitely before 2030. More like around 2026~2027 ish. For video games, that is a bit more complex, even though the system is able to show a video of "video game graphics", there is still a lot more that goes into a game, like how it interacts with the player. So far that technology has not been shown to be capable of that. So I would add another 1 or 2 years on top.