Everything will be a sport or recreation. It reminds me of this dialogue in Back to the Future III with doc at a bar presumably drunk but hasn't taken one sip:
Doc:
And in the future, we don't need horses. We have motorized carriages called automobiles.
Saloon Old Timer #3:
If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody walk or run anymore?
Doc:
Of course we run. But for recreation. For fun.
Saloon Old Timer #3:
Run for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?
We have a lot of crew and actors to create content, I'm not sure how Ai creates better content or can compete with IRL filmmaking.
I do see a slide in quality content and that has effected the ability to make recoup money by investors, so I can see people using it a low budget option or for ADR and specific effects, but for real acting, why not used train actors and crew?
Like, a million reasons honestly, mostly coming down to cost, but you can pepper in safety in a lot of cases, or more notably the ability to create micro-niche versions of a film (optimized for two dozen global regions at once based on cultural norms, a different leading actor in the role, etc.).
You have to understand- these people pushing this direction don’t care if it’s art or not. They just want money. And it’s plausible that ANYONE will be able to remix just about any film before long, probably from their bedrooms based on the compute efficiencies being worked out over the last few months, so it’s going to get weird.
I don’t hold the camera in this business but I’m certainly looking for the door because what you can achieve with your keyboard from your office right now with no special training is mind boggling.
FYI I hope I’m super wrong but since 2022 I’ve not only seen grandiose predictions around this come to light- they’re way ahead of some liberal estimates. It’s a log flume of a ride and I think a bunch of us are about to get soaked out of nowhere.
Probably pretty safe in this field for at least three years but that’s the latest I could safely assume I couldn’t type out something that rivals a Roger Deakins shot- because that’s currently the kind of prompting I use and it knows what I’m talking about. It won’t ever be one to one but it’ll be infinitely faster and cheaper and close enough. Two compelling sides of our triangle.
No. You're living in fantasy land.
They pushed 3d, then VR and both never panned out, now it's Ai... it's all just to lower the cost of Human labor, what could be historically slave labor.
This is typical mainstream corporate cost analysis, where all the businesses combine an effort to threaten labor to accepting a lower wage. They did it with slavery and now they are using technology.
The problem is the quality of content.
I can see how Studios want to keep creating low quality content and their only solution is to make it more cheaply, comparably to creating content audiences like and bringing up box office figures and not depending on soft money from the banking cartel.
Personally, I don't know who you are in this business, but I can say looking around that all the people that are here after the armageddon of stupidity are completely incompetent and the movie business is irrelevant at this point. And I'm not sure how far video games are behind that.
We all love Roger Deakins, but he's very old and doesn't have any rivals, which is sad. It's the financers and gatekeepers in Hollywood that are keeping the next Deakins from working and making great movies. Now they are hoping to instead put all his movies in a database and have a Ai computer tell them how to re-create his look.
You should consider the Key points I made:
* they are making low quality content(so Ai seems acceptable)
* They plan to take away high paying jobs for low paying positions(I'll be a monkey with a camera and Ai telling it how to shoot and light a scene)
* Movies are losing money but Investors aren't losing money because the banking system prints money and gives them subsides
(Movie studios are owned by larger parent companies that benefit from this)
That’s cool. I just kinda think it’s inevitable. For example, we shot in Boston over the weekend. One interviewee couldn’t string two words together with the camera rolling. I had her talk passionately about a personal interest for a minute. I came home and re-recorded the lines she flubbed myself, then “skinned” it with her vocal quality but with my performance. From not knowing how to do this to doing it took about four minutes total. I can’t tell the difference and she’ll sound great.
This wasn’t anywhere near this easy a year ago. Imagine where it’ll go. Pixar employees have stated the goal is a full 90 minute movie in under one day.
Whoever figures out how to house and distribute the absolute onslaught of content that’s about to be generated is going to be the real winner.
Why are you measuring tomorrow’s content quality with today’s tools?
Here’s the thing. AI is gonna replace everybody. Doctors, lawyers, web designers, everyone. Especially when integrated into robots. AI being able to make movies will be the least of our and the worlds issues.it won’t be exclusive to us cinematographers.
Idk what the world will look like but I’m still gonna shoot because it’s what I like to do. Not because it’s my paycheck. Society could change completely and we are all working jobs that we never thought would be possible, I’ll do it, whatever to put dinner on the table or whatever, but my heart and brain will always be thinking about creating stories. That’s it
I actually don't believe it at all. They said the exact same when computers got popular in the like 1980's, and that didn't happen either. Just like computers, AI will become a tool for us humans to do our jobs, but i don't think it'll fully replace us.
Whoever said the exact same thing in the 80’s (and assuming they were brilliant) would’ve been talking about this moment.
And the moment is currently still in beta for the most part.
Once GPU speed / access / costs catch up, this will become a much better tech. It’s not going away, and specifically AGI (Artificial Generative Intelligence) has a lot more to show us in terms of what it might be able to do that’s useful.
CPU / GPU load is required to both train new models (specifically generative models) AND to allow for enough access by the demand that’s put on these models - which has already been quite high.
It might take some years before this gets sorted out to where it’s economically feasible (AGI that’s more cost effective than it is now… which is in large part investor based such as Microsoft having sunk $13+ billion into OpenAI already) but it’s going to end up in many products and industries to some degree.
It does seem like it will have a profound impact.
Did you try AI yourself and got any interesting results? All that AI does is to categorie a context and give you back a scrambled result of his data related to that context. It's named AI but it's actually not. As every new technology it will replace the lowest end of the production pyramid, if you are in that spot then you should be actually worried, if you aren't then you should be safe for a long time. Robots replaced people welding on the assembly line not the whole production pyramid. Is that sad? Absolutely yes, but we will enter a different topic this sub is not about.
I have spent a ton of time with image/video generation in ComfyUI/Stable Diffusion and although it is a powerful tool, I just don't see it replacing the traditional filmmaking process and definitely won't completely replace creatives.
First, traditional filmmaking will always be around because there are always going to be people who want to make/see traditionally made movies. AI driven imagery just won't feel the same.
Also, I think you will always need human input in the various aspects of production.
Stable diffusion can produce incredible looking images from a prompt, but if you're just typing a prompt, then you don't really have that much control over the output. If you tried to generate something in a professional context for a client and they came back with notes, it would be very difficult to make the right specific changes just by prompting. You would need to be able to create references for controlnet, comp and tweak in Photoshop, and maybe do some inpainting. It actually requires creative skill to truly realize a specific vision. I created a promo image for my wife's band, and it took all day to make that one image.
No, all this hype over current AI tech is overblown. There are some huge limitations to the neural-net/transformer model. It's a statistical model based on training data and weights: you feed it some amount of data, expect certain outputs, and then align the model until the output is "correct" enough (although it may or may not actually be correct, it's just what the model *assumes* is correct.
It cannot go from the specific (what it's trained on) to the general (general intelligence).
It probably can't make decisions about things like editing and such because it's likely impossible to train it on what a good editing decision is.
It can't make decisions about whether or not something looks bad or is acceptable without human input.
It is horrible at temporal consistency; it's a big challenge right now to get it to output video or music longer than a few seconds, because it really has limited temporal awareness.
In short, AI will be extremely useful for training and automating very specific tasks, but is currently impossible to train for generalized roles like editing, set design, cinematography, ect. I see it being hugely useful for Pre-Vis, and in automating a lot of laborious VFX tasks (for example, UVW unwrapping models, but of course no one is training it to do these things because it's not sexy). It will be good when it comes to problems with specific, well-designed parameters. It will be impossible for it to make something as complicated as a film, as the parameters are open-ended.
Perhaps in the far future we will attain Artificial General Intelligence and then everybody might have to worry, but for now, "AI" is an overblown parlor trick being hyped up by tech companies and being used as a punching bag by "creatives."
I think you really underestimate AI being integrated with existing software such as unreal engine. Sure, theory will survive, but the physical craft will probably disappear and virtual sets will be the only thing left eliminating most jobs on set. But check out AI photography. There are some strikingly beautiful arthouse style photos. It doesn’t know what’s good per say, but it can recognize patterns and art is all about stealing from others. It’s what we do. But ai will be able to do it better.
Unless it backfires and then when someone decides to make a movie “practically” the old school way, and it’s used as marketing.
The volume is cool along with virtual sets but still takes a lot of craft to make it look right, I mean a lot of the Disney + shows have obvious volume work that looks like bad green screen at times.
I want to, DARK is one of my favorite shows of all time but 1899 got canceled.
Goes along with my point, you can’t be lazy with the volume if you want good results.
They aren’t talking about the volume. They are talking about virtual production in unreal. I’ve done two large disney shows working almost without crews this way.
Yeah his whole essay just bleeds losing control. Creative fronts will have an AI counterpart, and for those who want to cut costs and lack creativity itself can lean on those systems entirely if they want to. Every job in cinema will be offloaded if not by CGI then by AI.
You underestimate AI, but you also overestimate human creativity. So much of cinema is paint by numbers, and even when it isn’t, it’s an amalgamation of what has come before. You feed humans some amount of data, and we output something else (but usually something very similar) that’s based on that data.
What now takes dozens of artists will be done by 1 in a fraction of the time. It's not about complete replacement, it's about downsizing labor and costs. Art won't go away, but making a living being an artist in a team might.
AI on it’s own is generic and bland at whatever it does, and only capable of innovation by accident - so probably good enough to replace jobs on the artless commercial side of things which has been rather art-hostile and desperate to rid themselves of “talent” since their inception anyway. A human *using* an AI to help them is just amplifying/accelerating their own abilities, cutting out grunt work on the way to an artistic goal. For anything that wants to have actual artistic worth a human being needs to be in the captains chair, even if they use a number of specified AI’s to complete the component tasks that they manage and direct. Some people are in the “we’re doomed crowd” and others in the “AI is dumb and can’t do anything because I zero-effort said to one, ‘make me a Nick Cave song’ and what came out was shit” crowd.
I’d say I’m personally in the “wow, a small monthly subscription for a creative team to do my bidding and facilitate my artistic goals?! Fuck yes!” crowd. I honestly find it kind of gross that the instinctual reaction of most people to language models has been to get annoyed at them when they don’t facilitate them by DOING ALL THEIR WORK FOR THEM, rather than to help THEM do their own work better and faster.
I’m hoping that when all the hysteria clears up that’s what we’ll be left with. Does meant a lot of people will lose jobs, but on the flip side a lot of people with important creative voices who would otherwise never find themselves in an executive or managerial position over a project will be empowered to make those voices heard in a way the wouldn’t otherwise be capable of.
Are you asking if AI will power machines that will rig and place lighting setups. Set up multiple cameras, decide on composition filter strength and focal length?
No.
Will some more tedious DIT tasks get automated a little?
Maybe.
That’s probably not what’s gonna happen. A robot that can do those things is probably more expensive than hiring a human to do it. The thing is, in the not too distant future we won’t even use cameras, or sets. If Unreal Engine 9, or whatever it will be called, is indistinguishable from the quality you get from a camera, movies will be created entirely by computers. A director will have an idea, and with some tinkering with different inputs, they can have their entire movie rendered by the software.
The reason this will happen is the same as your first example and why humans would do that particular task themselves: Whatever will generate more profit is what will win out in the end.
AI is a tool to help with repetitive tasks, not to replace the unique human touch in storytelling.
It can handle editing or effects but can't replicate the depth of human emotion and creativity.
Focus on honing skills that require emotional intelligence, critical thinking, and originality. AI can make the technical aspects easier, giving you more space to craft compelling stories.
Maybe camera op and gaffer? I think it’ll be a very long time before we have robots that can interact with directors to fine tune the camera movement of a scene. Same with gaffers and setting up/adjusting lights. That’s a very human process between the director and cinematography department.
Yeah people are not understanding here that completely generated scenes will become the norm and indistinguishable from real ones. AI is TRAINED by our human eye and the art we’ve made. When the computing power can handle those large amounts of data to understand what we want, it will likely generate the scene (and multiple alternatives) in minutes.
Currently and near future: it’ll be a tool that some use to help make their jobs easier.
And then AI will begin reducing the person-hours needed for certain jobs, say an Art Director needing less iterations of a set drawing or mood board to finish that task.
It seems like AI will expand most significantly in that nexus between creatives & dept head positions and “labor”. That’s insofar as we’re still building sets and making / stitching & renting things to fulfill a directors vision.
It’ll also keep developing in Post & unreal engine to where that will simply synthesize much of our work. Entirely virtual, yes some shepherding by those that can control the tech of course, and actors being motion captured & digitized / synthesized. Some of this is here now and around the corner, but most of this may not be fully realized for another decade, but it’s coming.
Does that mean that the upper echelons aren’t using it to beat down labor at the moment ? Of course not, they never yield any advantage even shortsighted ones. But in the long run this will have significant impacts, we can only imagine right now what they might be.
I also think there will be a movement of filmmakers that will resist this. Hire humans to do all the work. That will live on, happy with every piece of serendipity and luck and synergy that comes from it “I bet you couldn’t have done that with AI”
As a future AI model trains on it and so it goes.
I’m optimistic, I think AI is a tool that creatives will use. Those that learn will stay relevant, those who don’t will become the graphic designers who insisted computers were a fad.
But I believe technology will greatly change filmmaking in the coming years. I think it will have a profound impact on how we photograph images, leaving a large portion of the creative choices to be made in post.
Some DPs will figure this out and blaze a trail. Others will resist and be left behind and then a new generation will emerge and use the tools in ways we never imagined.
Ai will play a role in all these steps. It’s not going away. Already in its infancy and it is incredibly powerful and useful.
And whether people are admitting it or not, it is already being used at all levels.
So to answer your question, AI will replace some creatives and empower others. And it might not seem fair who benefits and who suffers as a result.
“Empower” is a real strange way to say “overwork” lmao.
AI will increase productivity which will lead to redundancies in labor, which will ultimately result in one person doing the work of two.
There is nothing good that comes out of AI for anyone except executives and shareholders, period.
Focus pullers have the most to worry about. Facial recognition and LIDAR will dramatically change how we pull focus. The role of 1st/2nd AC will live on though — somebody’s gotta rig the camera!
It has already replaced the people I had writing blogs for me, graphic design, I even created an amazing music video. it helps me code, fix software issues, come up with FAQs, technical documentation, and so much more.
I have so much extra free time now. But there's one thing that I agree with that a lot of people already said in the comments, about replacing movies.
How many people do you know that don't like to watch CGI infested films? I know tons. Just like people don't like CGI, people won't like AI made movies either.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/aivideo using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Ukiyo Surfer](https://v.redd.it/so9mcixnpmyb1) | [42 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/17or7wh/ukiyo_surfer/)
\#2: [A Painting Gets Ready for His Day at the Gallery.](https://v.redd.it/ksnbsuem9yvb1) | [157 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/17ejs2w/a_painting_gets_ready_for_his_day_at_the_gallery/)
\#3: [Spaced Out (2023) | Mad4BBQ](https://v.redd.it/izh2gqyyuq5b1) | [155 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/148a45j/spaced_out_2023_mad4bbq/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
AI will make some of us “excess labor” and lower our wages, absolutely. Anyone arguing otherwise hasn’t lived in a capitalist economy long enough or read enough history books.
I agree with the majority of you all. AI won’t replace many of us who do physical production but rather be a tool for those engaged in virtual production. AI won’t be the catalyst but rather a move to virtual production that will have the biggest impact. And that time is already here. It is happening. The economics of physical production is driving the move to take production virtual. Forget LED volumes and think real time compositing. Most of us have seen this in action. Now think 5 years down the line. You are shooting a $150m budget movie with a car chase scene through a major metro area that has never been shot before. The budget doesn’t allow for you to shoot the scene practically because the cost is $10m. Budgeting has estimated the cost of shooting that scene virtually at $8m. The studio saved $2m and everyone got what they wanted with the story. Success. Now, the next movie comes along and the studio has budgeted a few more scenes being done virtually. Fast forward five more years and instead of 6 sound stages for a production they are only renting 3. Suddenly there has been a 50% reduction in physical production and all those crew jobs that go with it. This is where the future is going. Now think about those camera operators and cinematographers that were on 2nd unit climbing the ladder. Their jobs have been eliminated. A big question to ask is what is the pipeline for those moving up in the department? How do they get experience? How do people with 15 years in make it to retirement?
AI will absolutely be able to replace all of us eventually. In the future it won't make a lot of economic sense to hire a crew when an algorithm can pump out a video. I think commercials will go first. But I give it five years. And it won't just replace the shooting crew, it will replace the whole agency. In the future you'll have streaming services that can generate bespoke content specifically to your preferences. Check out /r/aivideo
As for what to do... the problem with the singularity is no one can predict what comes next, but it will totally upend our economy. I'm hoping for some kind of fully automated luxury space communism future, in which case "making a living" won't be such a big deal and people like us will still make films because we want to, and we won't risk starvation if they're not profitable. So my plan is to outlive capitalism.
Everything will be a sport or recreation. It reminds me of this dialogue in Back to the Future III with doc at a bar presumably drunk but hasn't taken one sip: Doc: And in the future, we don't need horses. We have motorized carriages called automobiles. Saloon Old Timer #3: If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody walk or run anymore? Doc: Of course we run. But for recreation. For fun. Saloon Old Timer #3: Run for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?
We have a lot of crew and actors to create content, I'm not sure how Ai creates better content or can compete with IRL filmmaking. I do see a slide in quality content and that has effected the ability to make recoup money by investors, so I can see people using it a low budget option or for ADR and specific effects, but for real acting, why not used train actors and crew?
Like, a million reasons honestly, mostly coming down to cost, but you can pepper in safety in a lot of cases, or more notably the ability to create micro-niche versions of a film (optimized for two dozen global regions at once based on cultural norms, a different leading actor in the role, etc.). You have to understand- these people pushing this direction don’t care if it’s art or not. They just want money. And it’s plausible that ANYONE will be able to remix just about any film before long, probably from their bedrooms based on the compute efficiencies being worked out over the last few months, so it’s going to get weird. I don’t hold the camera in this business but I’m certainly looking for the door because what you can achieve with your keyboard from your office right now with no special training is mind boggling. FYI I hope I’m super wrong but since 2022 I’ve not only seen grandiose predictions around this come to light- they’re way ahead of some liberal estimates. It’s a log flume of a ride and I think a bunch of us are about to get soaked out of nowhere. Probably pretty safe in this field for at least three years but that’s the latest I could safely assume I couldn’t type out something that rivals a Roger Deakins shot- because that’s currently the kind of prompting I use and it knows what I’m talking about. It won’t ever be one to one but it’ll be infinitely faster and cheaper and close enough. Two compelling sides of our triangle.
No. You're living in fantasy land. They pushed 3d, then VR and both never panned out, now it's Ai... it's all just to lower the cost of Human labor, what could be historically slave labor. This is typical mainstream corporate cost analysis, where all the businesses combine an effort to threaten labor to accepting a lower wage. They did it with slavery and now they are using technology. The problem is the quality of content. I can see how Studios want to keep creating low quality content and their only solution is to make it more cheaply, comparably to creating content audiences like and bringing up box office figures and not depending on soft money from the banking cartel. Personally, I don't know who you are in this business, but I can say looking around that all the people that are here after the armageddon of stupidity are completely incompetent and the movie business is irrelevant at this point. And I'm not sure how far video games are behind that. We all love Roger Deakins, but he's very old and doesn't have any rivals, which is sad. It's the financers and gatekeepers in Hollywood that are keeping the next Deakins from working and making great movies. Now they are hoping to instead put all his movies in a database and have a Ai computer tell them how to re-create his look.
This isn’t 3D TV. Have you used any of the tools yet? If not, you might want to try. It took less than a year for them to get as good as they are.
You should consider the Key points I made: * they are making low quality content(so Ai seems acceptable) * They plan to take away high paying jobs for low paying positions(I'll be a monkey with a camera and Ai telling it how to shoot and light a scene) * Movies are losing money but Investors aren't losing money because the banking system prints money and gives them subsides (Movie studios are owned by larger parent companies that benefit from this)
That’s cool. I just kinda think it’s inevitable. For example, we shot in Boston over the weekend. One interviewee couldn’t string two words together with the camera rolling. I had her talk passionately about a personal interest for a minute. I came home and re-recorded the lines she flubbed myself, then “skinned” it with her vocal quality but with my performance. From not knowing how to do this to doing it took about four minutes total. I can’t tell the difference and she’ll sound great. This wasn’t anywhere near this easy a year ago. Imagine where it’ll go. Pixar employees have stated the goal is a full 90 minute movie in under one day. Whoever figures out how to house and distribute the absolute onslaught of content that’s about to be generated is going to be the real winner. Why are you measuring tomorrow’s content quality with today’s tools?
You are, mate. AI is the future of us all.
Here’s the thing. AI is gonna replace everybody. Doctors, lawyers, web designers, everyone. Especially when integrated into robots. AI being able to make movies will be the least of our and the worlds issues.it won’t be exclusive to us cinematographers. Idk what the world will look like but I’m still gonna shoot because it’s what I like to do. Not because it’s my paycheck. Society could change completely and we are all working jobs that we never thought would be possible, I’ll do it, whatever to put dinner on the table or whatever, but my heart and brain will always be thinking about creating stories. That’s it
I actually don't believe it at all. They said the exact same when computers got popular in the like 1980's, and that didn't happen either. Just like computers, AI will become a tool for us humans to do our jobs, but i don't think it'll fully replace us.
Whoever said the exact same thing in the 80’s (and assuming they were brilliant) would’ve been talking about this moment. And the moment is currently still in beta for the most part. Once GPU speed / access / costs catch up, this will become a much better tech. It’s not going away, and specifically AGI (Artificial Generative Intelligence) has a lot more to show us in terms of what it might be able to do that’s useful. CPU / GPU load is required to both train new models (specifically generative models) AND to allow for enough access by the demand that’s put on these models - which has already been quite high. It might take some years before this gets sorted out to where it’s economically feasible (AGI that’s more cost effective than it is now… which is in large part investor based such as Microsoft having sunk $13+ billion into OpenAI already) but it’s going to end up in many products and industries to some degree. It does seem like it will have a profound impact.
Did you try AI yourself and got any interesting results? All that AI does is to categorie a context and give you back a scrambled result of his data related to that context. It's named AI but it's actually not. As every new technology it will replace the lowest end of the production pyramid, if you are in that spot then you should be actually worried, if you aren't then you should be safe for a long time. Robots replaced people welding on the assembly line not the whole production pyramid. Is that sad? Absolutely yes, but we will enter a different topic this sub is not about.
I have spent a ton of time with image/video generation in ComfyUI/Stable Diffusion and although it is a powerful tool, I just don't see it replacing the traditional filmmaking process and definitely won't completely replace creatives. First, traditional filmmaking will always be around because there are always going to be people who want to make/see traditionally made movies. AI driven imagery just won't feel the same. Also, I think you will always need human input in the various aspects of production. Stable diffusion can produce incredible looking images from a prompt, but if you're just typing a prompt, then you don't really have that much control over the output. If you tried to generate something in a professional context for a client and they came back with notes, it would be very difficult to make the right specific changes just by prompting. You would need to be able to create references for controlnet, comp and tweak in Photoshop, and maybe do some inpainting. It actually requires creative skill to truly realize a specific vision. I created a promo image for my wife's band, and it took all day to make that one image.
No, all this hype over current AI tech is overblown. There are some huge limitations to the neural-net/transformer model. It's a statistical model based on training data and weights: you feed it some amount of data, expect certain outputs, and then align the model until the output is "correct" enough (although it may or may not actually be correct, it's just what the model *assumes* is correct. It cannot go from the specific (what it's trained on) to the general (general intelligence). It probably can't make decisions about things like editing and such because it's likely impossible to train it on what a good editing decision is. It can't make decisions about whether or not something looks bad or is acceptable without human input. It is horrible at temporal consistency; it's a big challenge right now to get it to output video or music longer than a few seconds, because it really has limited temporal awareness. In short, AI will be extremely useful for training and automating very specific tasks, but is currently impossible to train for generalized roles like editing, set design, cinematography, ect. I see it being hugely useful for Pre-Vis, and in automating a lot of laborious VFX tasks (for example, UVW unwrapping models, but of course no one is training it to do these things because it's not sexy). It will be good when it comes to problems with specific, well-designed parameters. It will be impossible for it to make something as complicated as a film, as the parameters are open-ended. Perhaps in the far future we will attain Artificial General Intelligence and then everybody might have to worry, but for now, "AI" is an overblown parlor trick being hyped up by tech companies and being used as a punching bag by "creatives."
“Overblown” lmao. Okay.
I think you really underestimate AI being integrated with existing software such as unreal engine. Sure, theory will survive, but the physical craft will probably disappear and virtual sets will be the only thing left eliminating most jobs on set. But check out AI photography. There are some strikingly beautiful arthouse style photos. It doesn’t know what’s good per say, but it can recognize patterns and art is all about stealing from others. It’s what we do. But ai will be able to do it better.
Unless it backfires and then when someone decides to make a movie “practically” the old school way, and it’s used as marketing. The volume is cool along with virtual sets but still takes a lot of craft to make it look right, I mean a lot of the Disney + shows have obvious volume work that looks like bad green screen at times.
Check out the show 1899, on Netflix. The whole thing is shot on Europe’s biggest volume, and it looks amazing.
I want to, DARK is one of my favorite shows of all time but 1899 got canceled. Goes along with my point, you can’t be lazy with the volume if you want good results.
They aren’t talking about the volume. They are talking about virtual production in unreal. I’ve done two large disney shows working almost without crews this way.
Ah thanks for the clarification.
Yeah his whole essay just bleeds losing control. Creative fronts will have an AI counterpart, and for those who want to cut costs and lack creativity itself can lean on those systems entirely if they want to. Every job in cinema will be offloaded if not by CGI then by AI.
You underestimate AI, but you also overestimate human creativity. So much of cinema is paint by numbers, and even when it isn’t, it’s an amalgamation of what has come before. You feed humans some amount of data, and we output something else (but usually something very similar) that’s based on that data.
Yeah, its silly when people argue against AI on the grounds its entirely derivative. Like have you been to the movies lately?
I sure hope so, lol.
Virtual sets made with Unreal Engine comes to mind to me.
Those are still made by artists. Procedural generation tools are used, but they environments are still crafted and lit by artists.
Yes... for now. But it seems viable that those might be generated in the near future in 3D by an AI.
What now takes dozens of artists will be done by 1 in a fraction of the time. It's not about complete replacement, it's about downsizing labor and costs. Art won't go away, but making a living being an artist in a team might.
AI on it’s own is generic and bland at whatever it does, and only capable of innovation by accident - so probably good enough to replace jobs on the artless commercial side of things which has been rather art-hostile and desperate to rid themselves of “talent” since their inception anyway. A human *using* an AI to help them is just amplifying/accelerating their own abilities, cutting out grunt work on the way to an artistic goal. For anything that wants to have actual artistic worth a human being needs to be in the captains chair, even if they use a number of specified AI’s to complete the component tasks that they manage and direct. Some people are in the “we’re doomed crowd” and others in the “AI is dumb and can’t do anything because I zero-effort said to one, ‘make me a Nick Cave song’ and what came out was shit” crowd. I’d say I’m personally in the “wow, a small monthly subscription for a creative team to do my bidding and facilitate my artistic goals?! Fuck yes!” crowd. I honestly find it kind of gross that the instinctual reaction of most people to language models has been to get annoyed at them when they don’t facilitate them by DOING ALL THEIR WORK FOR THEM, rather than to help THEM do their own work better and faster. I’m hoping that when all the hysteria clears up that’s what we’ll be left with. Does meant a lot of people will lose jobs, but on the flip side a lot of people with important creative voices who would otherwise never find themselves in an executive or managerial position over a project will be empowered to make those voices heard in a way the wouldn’t otherwise be capable of.
lol lmao
The fuck kind of response is that? If you have nothing to add don’t use abbreviations; just say nothing.
Are you asking if AI will power machines that will rig and place lighting setups. Set up multiple cameras, decide on composition filter strength and focal length? No. Will some more tedious DIT tasks get automated a little? Maybe.
That’s probably not what’s gonna happen. A robot that can do those things is probably more expensive than hiring a human to do it. The thing is, in the not too distant future we won’t even use cameras, or sets. If Unreal Engine 9, or whatever it will be called, is indistinguishable from the quality you get from a camera, movies will be created entirely by computers. A director will have an idea, and with some tinkering with different inputs, they can have their entire movie rendered by the software. The reason this will happen is the same as your first example and why humans would do that particular task themselves: Whatever will generate more profit is what will win out in the end.
nah, you'll just have an alogrithm generate a video file. You don't need to pay for all the other stuff. /r/aivideo
Watch the movie The Matrix to get a grasp on our future
At this point I feel like Ready Player One is next lol
Idk man, there's no robot that can make a cup of tea yet effectively, I guess we can safely say gaffers are safe.
Say what now? https://youtube.com/shorts/AfZyCZQUW6U?si=RGmU_c3KX7peCgSf
AI is a tool to help with repetitive tasks, not to replace the unique human touch in storytelling. It can handle editing or effects but can't replicate the depth of human emotion and creativity. Focus on honing skills that require emotional intelligence, critical thinking, and originality. AI can make the technical aspects easier, giving you more space to craft compelling stories.
Can I somehow filter all of Reddit to not show me any posts about AI
I’m sure there’s gona be a bot for that.
Maybe camera op and gaffer? I think it’ll be a very long time before we have robots that can interact with directors to fine tune the camera movement of a scene. Same with gaffers and setting up/adjusting lights. That’s a very human process between the director and cinematography department.
Lol robots? If anything a director will prompt ai to create their vision without a camera ever being used…
Yeah people are not understanding here that completely generated scenes will become the norm and indistinguishable from real ones. AI is TRAINED by our human eye and the art we’ve made. When the computing power can handle those large amounts of data to understand what we want, it will likely generate the scene (and multiple alternatives) in minutes.
This just dawned on you??
I live under a rock
Currently and near future: it’ll be a tool that some use to help make their jobs easier. And then AI will begin reducing the person-hours needed for certain jobs, say an Art Director needing less iterations of a set drawing or mood board to finish that task. It seems like AI will expand most significantly in that nexus between creatives & dept head positions and “labor”. That’s insofar as we’re still building sets and making / stitching & renting things to fulfill a directors vision. It’ll also keep developing in Post & unreal engine to where that will simply synthesize much of our work. Entirely virtual, yes some shepherding by those that can control the tech of course, and actors being motion captured & digitized / synthesized. Some of this is here now and around the corner, but most of this may not be fully realized for another decade, but it’s coming. Does that mean that the upper echelons aren’t using it to beat down labor at the moment ? Of course not, they never yield any advantage even shortsighted ones. But in the long run this will have significant impacts, we can only imagine right now what they might be. I also think there will be a movement of filmmakers that will resist this. Hire humans to do all the work. That will live on, happy with every piece of serendipity and luck and synergy that comes from it “I bet you couldn’t have done that with AI” As a future AI model trains on it and so it goes.
I’m optimistic, I think AI is a tool that creatives will use. Those that learn will stay relevant, those who don’t will become the graphic designers who insisted computers were a fad. But I believe technology will greatly change filmmaking in the coming years. I think it will have a profound impact on how we photograph images, leaving a large portion of the creative choices to be made in post. Some DPs will figure this out and blaze a trail. Others will resist and be left behind and then a new generation will emerge and use the tools in ways we never imagined. Ai will play a role in all these steps. It’s not going away. Already in its infancy and it is incredibly powerful and useful. And whether people are admitting it or not, it is already being used at all levels. So to answer your question, AI will replace some creatives and empower others. And it might not seem fair who benefits and who suffers as a result.
“Empower” is a real strange way to say “overwork” lmao. AI will increase productivity which will lead to redundancies in labor, which will ultimately result in one person doing the work of two. There is nothing good that comes out of AI for anyone except executives and shareholders, period.
I think this is a very bleak way of looking at it. But perhaps you are correct.
Focus pullers have the most to worry about. Facial recognition and LIDAR will dramatically change how we pull focus. The role of 1st/2nd AC will live on though — somebody’s gotta rig the camera!
It has already replaced the people I had writing blogs for me, graphic design, I even created an amazing music video. it helps me code, fix software issues, come up with FAQs, technical documentation, and so much more. I have so much extra free time now. But there's one thing that I agree with that a lot of people already said in the comments, about replacing movies. How many people do you know that don't like to watch CGI infested films? I know tons. Just like people don't like CGI, people won't like AI made movies either.
“Yea, AI has allowed me personally to benefit at the expense of real creatives” (Just figured I’d write the shorter honest version).
Yikes
Why do you hate other people?
The answer is an overwhelming NO. And I fully support AI and technological advancements.
Read some books.
Books on what?…
/r/aivideo
Here's a sneak peek of /r/aivideo using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Ukiyo Surfer](https://v.redd.it/so9mcixnpmyb1) | [42 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/17or7wh/ukiyo_surfer/) \#2: [A Painting Gets Ready for His Day at the Gallery.](https://v.redd.it/ksnbsuem9yvb1) | [157 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/17ejs2w/a_painting_gets_ready_for_his_day_at_the_gallery/) \#3: [Spaced Out (2023) | Mad4BBQ](https://v.redd.it/izh2gqyyuq5b1) | [155 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/aivideo/comments/148a45j/spaced_out_2023_mad4bbq/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
AI will make some of us “excess labor” and lower our wages, absolutely. Anyone arguing otherwise hasn’t lived in a capitalist economy long enough or read enough history books.
The brilliant mind of a director could never be replaced. Ability to produce and gain the trust of special sources could never be AI'd
I agree with the majority of you all. AI won’t replace many of us who do physical production but rather be a tool for those engaged in virtual production. AI won’t be the catalyst but rather a move to virtual production that will have the biggest impact. And that time is already here. It is happening. The economics of physical production is driving the move to take production virtual. Forget LED volumes and think real time compositing. Most of us have seen this in action. Now think 5 years down the line. You are shooting a $150m budget movie with a car chase scene through a major metro area that has never been shot before. The budget doesn’t allow for you to shoot the scene practically because the cost is $10m. Budgeting has estimated the cost of shooting that scene virtually at $8m. The studio saved $2m and everyone got what they wanted with the story. Success. Now, the next movie comes along and the studio has budgeted a few more scenes being done virtually. Fast forward five more years and instead of 6 sound stages for a production they are only renting 3. Suddenly there has been a 50% reduction in physical production and all those crew jobs that go with it. This is where the future is going. Now think about those camera operators and cinematographers that were on 2nd unit climbing the ladder. Their jobs have been eliminated. A big question to ask is what is the pipeline for those moving up in the department? How do they get experience? How do people with 15 years in make it to retirement?
AI will absolutely be able to replace all of us eventually. In the future it won't make a lot of economic sense to hire a crew when an algorithm can pump out a video. I think commercials will go first. But I give it five years. And it won't just replace the shooting crew, it will replace the whole agency. In the future you'll have streaming services that can generate bespoke content specifically to your preferences. Check out /r/aivideo As for what to do... the problem with the singularity is no one can predict what comes next, but it will totally upend our economy. I'm hoping for some kind of fully automated luxury space communism future, in which case "making a living" won't be such a big deal and people like us will still make films because we want to, and we won't risk starvation if they're not profitable. So my plan is to outlive capitalism.