[xbmcuser]

A talented creative with a vision can now direct AI to build things that would have otherwise cost millions or been entirely impossible. I don’t understand the myopic view people have when it comes to this technology. Just three or four years ago, we saw the exact same skepticism with programming. People insisted it can't do this and it can't do that, but many of those things are possible today.

[arrrg]

This tech isn’t steerable enough when it comes to creative output.

Maybe there are some nooks and crannies where this tech can be employed and actually save time/budget. Maybe. But what does not work is to just take the output and use it. There is nowhere near enough precision there.

[isqueiros]

This is exactly my vision. I can barely get AI to output my code how I want it to after hours of planning and refining.

If you think you can be "specific" enough for AI to match your "creative vision", then maybe you're not really creative.

[xbmcuser]

Yes today but the statements coming out of people are like as if the tech is static and not changing everyday. It was the same for programming it can't do this it can't do that till it is able to now.

[geraldmcboing]

You are describing false equivalency. There is a fundamental flaw to LLMs. The data is not weighted. Thats why it cant be reliably directed.

[geraldmcboing]

But there is no evidence of this - its is your hypothetical reckons. If a "talented creative" wanted realism, they can already access it and in a reliable, repeatable, direct-able way using all of their lived experience. Your idea of 'directing AI' just shows you haver never directed a human actor, or collaborated with a talented DOP etc. All you describe is an unreliable shortcut to shiny blandness and call anyone who points out your massive blindspot 'myopic'. It would appear it is you who is profoundly myopic about the reality of producing creative work of worth.

[defrost]

"can" but generally doesn't .. and the rare gold is buried in a mountain of bland crap and outright propaganda, state level and crank level.

I have no objection to the potential vision you espouse, I have zero love for the actual ground level reality of the tsunami of AI slop videos being pumped out ATM - many are skewed toward trust building in a probable long con game of deceit or nation swaying, others are just ick.

[zeofig]

It remains godawful slop in every instance I've seen, no matter how expensive it would be to produce without AI.

[starshadowx2]

I think this new one made with Seedance 2.5 is actually not too bad.

https://x.com/BytePlusGlobal/status/2077321849806234080

[lotsofpulp]

Needs more cuts.

[marknutter]

I saw nothing wrong with the number of cuts, seems very in line with other commercials like this. I would not have been able to tell this was made by ai had I not known it going into it.

[lotsofpulp]

I don’t watch commercials to know what is typical, but I just have experience that video media with lots of cuts is generally low quality and a sign to turn it off.

[geraldmcboing]

its out of sync such that it would fail a basic QC by any reputable post house. And it looks like digital slop.

[qnleigh]

Art is kind of unique though, because it inherits a lot of it's value from scarcity, both of the art itself and of the rare talent that can make quality art. If an artistic style or product becomes too common, it tends to lose its luster.

An app is still useful even when it's cheap for anyone to make it. But art that anyone can make for cheap becomes, by definition, slop.