AI won't replace human artistry, says actor, but it will wildly drive down costs.
See full article...
See full article...
Ben Affleck warns that visual effects industry faces AI disruption
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
I'd like to see the numbers on how AI might reduce production costs to the point of allowing two seasons in the same period it now takes to make one.
In the meantime, just sell me the DVDs please. Where the heck are region 1 DVDs of "Agents of SHIELD" seasons 3+?
In the meantime, just sell me the DVDs please. Where the heck are region 1 DVDs of "Agents of SHIELD" seasons 3+?
Upvote
6
(10
/
-4)
Upvote
6
(13
/
-7)
What we'll possibly see, as AI tools mature, is a narrowing of the difference in visual quality between "user content" on video sharing platforms and professional film and television productions.
When production companies are using AI as a cost-saving measure, and users have access to most of the same tools, there's going to be a narrowing between what can be achieved by amateurs in their backyard and what is churned out by cost-conscious professional production companies.
It will be interesting to see how this pans out. When everyone is using AI, does the industry end up becoming more restrained in its use of the technology to differentiate itself from the flood of amateur AI slop that will invariably be produced on video sharing platforms, or does it go all-in on the technology in a vain hope it can cut costs sufficiently to offset any loss in revenue?
One thing is for sure, it's a bad time for the "quantity over quality" trend that seems to have become popular with streaming services. When the floodgates are about to open on AI-enhanced user content, the only hope to differentiate yourself is to double-down on quality. Churning out cheap content to fill streaming libraries is a lost battle when users are about to open a floodgate that makes those attempts look like a veritable drop in the bucket.
When production companies are using AI as a cost-saving measure, and users have access to most of the same tools, there's going to be a narrowing between what can be achieved by amateurs in their backyard and what is churned out by cost-conscious professional production companies.
It will be interesting to see how this pans out. When everyone is using AI, does the industry end up becoming more restrained in its use of the technology to differentiate itself from the flood of amateur AI slop that will invariably be produced on video sharing platforms, or does it go all-in on the technology in a vain hope it can cut costs sufficiently to offset any loss in revenue?
One thing is for sure, it's a bad time for the "quantity over quality" trend that seems to have become popular with streaming services. When the floodgates are about to open on AI-enhanced user content, the only hope to differentiate yourself is to double-down on quality. Churning out cheap content to fill streaming libraries is a lost battle when users are about to open a floodgate that makes those attempts look like a veritable drop in the bucket.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
We could go in that direction, but I think we'll get object consistency through more video training. There's so insane amounts of training data where you see the same people / animals / objects / landscapes from many different positions / angles / poses for the computer to work out the underlying 3D model (as in, our physical body) while there's only a very limited number of ground truth 3D models which requires using special capture equipment or synthetic data. Though I'm sure we'll create that kind of pipeline for the objects we need the most, like animated humans.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
libraries have a ton of movies and TV series to borrow. and a lot of libraries you can submit requests for specific ones.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
I miss Netflix's old recommendation engine. The 5 star system that looked for stuff that was liked by people that rated movies the same way I did. It was pretty reliable.
Upvote
25
(25
/
0)
Yes, new releases on streaming are $20 - $30, but this is akin to "On demand" on cable back in the day, and those films were often just released in theaters as little as a few weeks ago.
The prices do drop eventually, but they're not going to be as prominent.
You can use a service like JustWatch to bookmark films you're interested in watching.
https://www.justwatch.com/
Then keep an eye out for deals.
A few sites show deals for buying a movie or TV show on AppleTV:
https://www.cheapcharts.info/us/itunes/movies/on-salehttps://www.blu-ray.com/deals/?category=ituneshd
Also, ones you can rent cheap:
https://www.blu-ray.com/deals/?sortby=popularity&category=ituneshd_rental
This site has deals on movie/TV purchases. Some are only good for particular services, but the ones marked "Movies Anywhere" can be connected to your Apple account.
https://fanflix.co/
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
Exactly right. Similar situation in a lot of professions. Often gotta do the shit work in order to build muscle memory for the bigger and better (“artistic”?) things.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
Another way to decrease the cost of moviemaking would be to stop well-known film actors charging $20m for 6 weeks work?
Upvote
21
(25
/
-4)
When LLMs emerged I had that crazy idea that you can feed them books and ask them to visualize the worlds created there, to get a glimpse of the many wonderful works that will never become movies or series. I thought that being a model fed on data, considering and incorporating every minor detail mentioned somewhere in a book when generating content should be the default and filling gaps with corresponding knowledge from the real world period that inspired it should be automatically combined to create something convincing.
However, I soon realized how useless this is, as it just modified something visually existing and attributed it to the book I was asking about. For example, instead of a map of a city, considering how complex should it be to be fully functioning, what were the technologies at the time, etc., it creates things that make Age of Empires and Anno series like a realistic economic simulations. If the author described a fully functioning society that can produce an army of 500 knights, LLMs with show 20 houses and a blacksmith behind some kind of walls, if you are lucky.
However, I soon realized how useless this is, as it just modified something visually existing and attributed it to the book I was asking about. For example, instead of a map of a city, considering how complex should it be to be fully functioning, what were the technologies at the time, etc., it creates things that make Age of Empires and Anno series like a realistic economic simulations. If the author described a fully functioning society that can produce an army of 500 knights, LLMs with show 20 houses and a blacksmith behind some kind of walls, if you are lucky.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
I don't really agree with his take, but yeah I'll concede this is very balanced compared to a lot of the current discourse.
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
I know you mean this as humor but personally I would love to be able to more easily buy physical copies of the shows I love. Considering how online digital ownership is basically a joke, owning physical media feels more secure.
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
I don't think he said that. He seems to think that special effects are closest in line to be replicated by AI, which I don't think he's wrong about.
Upvote
-1
(6
/
-7)
This is exactly how I feel. It sounds like a very lonely and isolating experience, on a personal and societal level. A large part of what makes me enjoy movies is the appreciation I have for the creativity, passion, and skills that went into its creation. The novelty of being shown an idea, story, or visual that I wouldn't have come up with on my own. There's also the social aspect that you alluded to. I want to experience a shared cultural phenomenon with other people! I want to see iconic scenes and quotes that become immortalized in pop culture. I like the buzz of a hit blockbuster that everyone talks about. Algorithmic filter bubbles have already done enough damage by atomizing our culture and this would be like pouring jet fuel on that fire.
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
Oh, you precious mid-summer little scamp, as the phrase goes.Ben Affleck said:
This sort of argument has been used since the beginning of industrialisation.
"Surely our loyal clients can tell the obvious difference between our handcrafted goods and the tawdry mass-produced clothing/pasta sauce/Ars Technica jokes/etc. and will choose the higher quality bespoke version."
This may be true of a certain segment of the audience but the vast majority are not looking for Shakespeare and even if they appreciate or enjoy Shakespeare, some will consume something as rubbish as reality television in its stead.
The problem is not a quality issue. It's a quantity issue.
Streaming video exacerbated the problem. Back when you had to drive all the way to the rental shop to select a disc/video tape/film reel, most people would give them a fair shake but now, if a viewer isn't hooked in the first few minutes, vanishingly few are willing to see where it goes. Press a button and you're onto something else entirely.
As time marches on, the people who can identify the difference between maple syrup and maple-flavoured corn syrup dwindle and those raised on maple-flavoured corn syrup only know that as the one true maple syrup and demand more of it.
A "sticky" situation indeed.
Yes, we're doomed. I mean, the future of entertainment is clearly individual made-on-demand stories/films/etc.
A: I just watched the most amazing film custom-tailored to my individual desires. Would you care to see it?
B: No, I'll just watch one that fits my exact likes instead.
Upvote
7
(10
/
-3)
In line with this, I feel like there is great potential for AI tools to automate a lot of 2d animation as well. The big use case that I can see is generating and coloring tween frames. It will probably be imperfect, but it has the potential of only needing moderate touching up by an animator, vastly reducing a lot of the tedium of 2d animation. Making this analogous to how a lot of software devs use AI to churn out code that's 40% ok, and then modify that to boost productivity.
IMO, this generation of generative AI is most productive when it's viewed and used as a tool to aid rather than to replace human effort.
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
The article link for drop in DVD revenue is interesting. It shows revenue from different types of distribution from 1996 to 2018.
From the graph alone we can only see correlation and correlation is not necessarily causation. DVD revenue shows rapid growth up to 2004 then remains flat until 2007. After that it falls. None of the other revenue streams show any distinct activity around 2004 but as they are so small something could be happening that does not show on the graph.
What does show is the drop in DVD revenue correlates with an increase in Blu-ray revenue. The new Blu-ray revenue was nothing like enough to make up for the lost DVD revenue. If that was causation then the correct response should have been to cancel Blu-ray and consider switching to lower resolution VCD.
There is another kink in the graph in 2011. DVD revenue continues to fall but not as precipitously as it did before - probably because there was less revenue to lose. That kink does correlate with the rise of subscription streaming and Blu-ray revenue going flat.
COVID does not even start to become popular until the end of 2019 so does not show up in the linked article published at around the same time. I thought the reduction in DVD revenue was because they stopped releasing on DVD but it is clear that DVD revenue crashed long before this very modern practice. What is not clear at all is why.
From the graph alone we can only see correlation and correlation is not necessarily causation. DVD revenue shows rapid growth up to 2004 then remains flat until 2007. After that it falls. None of the other revenue streams show any distinct activity around 2004 but as they are so small something could be happening that does not show on the graph.
What does show is the drop in DVD revenue correlates with an increase in Blu-ray revenue. The new Blu-ray revenue was nothing like enough to make up for the lost DVD revenue. If that was causation then the correct response should have been to cancel Blu-ray and consider switching to lower resolution VCD.
There is another kink in the graph in 2011. DVD revenue continues to fall but not as precipitously as it did before - probably because there was less revenue to lose. That kink does correlate with the rise of subscription streaming and Blu-ray revenue going flat.
COVID does not even start to become popular until the end of 2019 so does not show up in the linked article published at around the same time. I thought the reduction in DVD revenue was because they stopped releasing on DVD but it is clear that DVD revenue crashed long before this very modern practice. What is not clear at all is why.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
or it could be a revenue hole, considering how costly it is to run AI models, and how quickly people can come up with weird and wacky prompts.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
I call shenanigans on making films cheaper. There have been too many productivity tech advances in so many areas that have promised the same thing, and the result is always that people just work more (usually without a corresponding increase in the value of their work). The digital revolution started in the 90s was supposed to make FX and filmmaking in general cheaper. You can sculpt a model with a computer as fast as you can with clay, with no material costs and no waste when the paint doesn't cure or the kiln breaks down, and you can revise it and rescale it and relight it and reshoot it as much as you want without having to start over. You can shoot everything on the same stage and make it look like you went to 20 locations. You can save buckets of insurance costs by pasting your star's face over the stunt person and hanging the stunt person by half a dozen wires you'll paint out later. And studios no longer have to spend the fortune they used to spend on developing literal tons of film and printing and shipping thousands of physical reels per movie across the entire world. And this is all just scratching the surface! Digital technology even just to this point has already saved Hollywood absolutely massive sums of money. And yet.... movies are more expensive than ever. Because the ability to do more sets the expectation to do more. And lower consequences for waste breeds more waste.
There is no reason for AI to change any of this. It's just an extension of these trends. The next productivity tool to further devalue talent and make it harder for the next generation of artists to learn the skills and discipline they need to excel.
There is no reason for AI to change any of this. It's just an extension of these trends. The next productivity tool to further devalue talent and make it harder for the next generation of artists to learn the skills and discipline they need to excel.
Last edited:
Upvote
42
(42
/
0)
I started buying Blu Rays again last year for the first time in over a decade. At first it was supposed to be a few favorite movies to flex my new home theater setup, since I knew 4K BD has superior audio and visual quality over streaming, but it's evolved into a full blown hobby, like how many people collect vinyl. In addition to fortifying myself from the lurking threats of streaming enshittification and licensing disputes, it's just really enjoyable to have a physical collection of favorite and historically significant films put on display.
Upvote
9
(10
/
-1)
I am not interested in majority of movies, not seeing point of watching AI roll dice trash.
I rather enjoy watching someone playing game than this.
I can see porn getting this utilised well though.
I rather enjoy watching someone playing game than this.
I can see porn getting this utilised well though.
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
I feel you, and there's something about the ritual of looking through a collection, selecting a movie, and popping it into the player that makes watching media more meaningful to me. Maybe it's because I can't just jump to a different show or movie at the drop of a hat, or maybe it's going through the motions of setting it up that psychologically preps my mind to settle in and enjoy.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
we don't have any streaming services. the used bookstore across town has a great collection of DVDs, $5 each. same cost as renting, and we get to keep it and watch it again (Steve Martin, Leslie Nielsen, Peter Sellers!!) or loan them around. plus, the thrill of the chase - looking through the stacks, finding the unexpected...
we have a running list of classics that we'd like to get to someday, but haven't found yet. yes, could order from Spamazon or ePay, but that is just not sporting...
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
Special effects is all algorithms and math. Problem is, quite a few movies tried go hands off approach and it looked like trash (Flash for example). It is a tool, not replacement.
Also it is not gonna make terrible idea suddenly great.
So I feel he might not fully get how complicated it actually all is. I know he directed some descent movies and I think he is alright. Just not agreeing with him here.
Upvote
0
(3
/
-3)
I have Netflix sub (I left it because I love to rewatch some shows when I am depressed). I barely have time watch all new things - and there's lot of them I like on surface level.
However I feel this is battle watchable media gonna lose. Attention spans are artificially decreased due of social media and people also figuring out they don't care about movies that much, and that they rather do something else.
It is easy to forget that once movies were king of entertainment. Now picture is much more complex.
So I don't think making movies trash cheaper gonna help it. Make a movie once three years and I will watch it maybe.
However I feel this is battle watchable media gonna lose. Attention spans are artificially decreased due of social media and people also figuring out they don't care about movies that much, and that they rather do something else.
It is easy to forget that once movies were king of entertainment. Now picture is much more complex.
So I don't think making movies trash cheaper gonna help it. Make a movie once three years and I will watch it maybe.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
This actually tracks - all my recent movie watching experiences (Deadpool 3, Flow) are tied to people I love and care about. I enjoyed sharing and buzzing about details and compare different experiences we had.
Anyone trying to position that this somehow will become more personalized and that is where AI is needed is deluding themselves.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
This whole article and a lot of the discussion seems to be based on the premise that these AI tools will actually be able to replace anything. I find that highly questionable and of the same type of false hype that these LLMs are getting everywhere right now.
Since when are these AI tools ever better than a highly skilled writer or artist or programmer or chat support specialists or lawyer? Not ever! So why is anybody pretending that in a few years these AI programs will be able to convincingly write or animate or produce an entire show or season or movie? It seems totally absurd!
Since when are these AI tools ever better than a highly skilled writer or artist or programmer or chat support specialists or lawyer? Not ever! So why is anybody pretending that in a few years these AI programs will be able to convincingly write or animate or produce an entire show or season or movie? It seems totally absurd!
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
This is a very important point. It also applies to every other vocation and skill. How do directors get to be start directors, how do journalists get to be senior editors? They all (used to) start with the jobs like making commercials and writing up the boring stories, stuff we are now boiling the oceans and paving over the farmland to do with AI data centers. The most famous actors got where they are now by starting with bit parts that will now be played by AI models. No one needs a junior or assistant to do their computer work for them. No one needs grad students to do the busy work in the lab, so how do we grow professors? The old-fashioned way, by corruption and nepotism. That won’t turn out well.
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
No. Stochastic Parrot machine can't replace even junk joke productions on Vine.
I'm totally down for DVDs again, if they'd release the good stuff instead of hoard it on streaming.
This is an artificial scarcity problem, and line must go up for the people that do nothing for the arts except steal profits.
I'm totally down for DVDs again, if they'd release the good stuff instead of hoard it on streaming.
This is an artificial scarcity problem, and line must go up for the people that do nothing for the arts except steal profits.
Upvote
7
(8
/
-1)
Not absurd when you understand that lot of people gambled their money on this premise. This is what always happens.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Respect to both of you making this point. Yes, everyone in creative industry start with something junky. Removing this step will make such progression impossible.
I am sure people already grow cold on generated content, I am for sure can't stand how visibly fake all those pictures are. But damage will be already done. When real costs will be factored in, market will be owned by generators with no humans in sight.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
South Park hasn't used stop-motion animation since the very first episode, and their usual turnaround time, start to finish, on an episode, is somewhere around five days.
They just don't churn out a ton of episodes anymore because Parker and Stone have all the money in the world and are perfectly happy to make a couple of Paramount+ specials every year until the end of time.
Edit: Seriously, all the money in the world. The pair signed a six-year deal back in 2021 that paid them nine hundred million dollars.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
There's that incredible short-sighted selfishness for which Americans are so well known -- never seeing any further than what's right in front of them. Who, other than the willfully ignorant, would possibly think that it would end with 'everyone else' being eliminated except the 'creatives'? Because you can be sure that the studio execs definitely see it ending with the elimination of 'everyone else.' Everyone except themselves. Which would be the whole damn industry.
But I guess, that's another thing that Americans are also infamous for -- not caring if they kick the ladder over once they've already climbed up. Way to ride the stereotype there, Ben. I'm sure the unions that made your career and lifestyle possible really appreciate your 'support.'
Upvote
8
(9
/
-1)
Amongst the many uncertainties, there's at least ONE total given: a boatload of crap is coming at us.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Though it's so much the norm to me, I'm periodically reminded of what an outlier I am with a collection of 6,000+ Blu-rays.¹
A friend sent me this clip earlier and I'm in agreement on its "balance", but it nudges at the same things that make me nervous about all of the mediums that art of any kind have been burbling up into: an increasing likelihood of nothing but "good enough to churn out as acceptable product."
Art has, in general, been devalued and treated as an interchangeable product: eBay and Amazon both like to tell me they "found something that (I) might be interested in", and show me some random movie on sale on Blu-ray that generally has little or nothing to do with my tastes (which are hardly narrow: I've got 6k releases, remember?).
And, to some extent—and I really want to emphasize, this is truly non-judgmental, no one is required to like anything at all—this is driven by what most audiences find enjoyable "enough", which is enough to be a distraction, sometimes even just on a second, half-ignored display.
It's what Affleck's friend Damon referred to in discussing that same loss of DVD revenue: the pushing of budgets further and further into only the "reliable": the franchises and sequels and remakes that have built-in audiences.
It isn't that everyone's taste "sucks" or anything, or that everyone should share a notion of the value of these things with me that worries me: it's that I think even those who feel no particular need to be discerning are going to get bored and the bottoms won't exactly fall out of any of these models so much as they'll rot.
I didn't really have much optimism for things as it was, but the steady intrusion of LLMs and similar "genAI" makes me fear we're heading for an engine of even greater homogenization and stagnation in the arts, where you slowly pare down the "disposable" artists who only do "small things" and flatten out into their "perfectly acceptable" genAI medians, then do so further and further—with plenty of people fine with this for a long time, because of what it is they actually want from it: an enjoyable distraction or escape.
But eventually all those skills will atrophy across the culture to some extent, and recovery will be strange and difficult—or simply may never happen, with art having to find whole other avenues when so many can't make livings in it anymore because of how much is accepted in those digital hands.
I'm not ridiculous enough to believe anyone can or will stop any of this: everyone wants an inordinate amount of art at their neck and call for as little as possible because that's what its value actually is to most people: wallpaper and background noise. Which is fine—it's just that fear of that becoming the dominant driver in a much less recoverable way once it truly settles.
Feel free to substitute most of this musing with "Capitalism plus the arts: Sigh."
¹And a few other forms of media, but let's leave this where it's directly relevant.
A friend sent me this clip earlier and I'm in agreement on its "balance", but it nudges at the same things that make me nervous about all of the mediums that art of any kind have been burbling up into: an increasing likelihood of nothing but "good enough to churn out as acceptable product."
Art has, in general, been devalued and treated as an interchangeable product: eBay and Amazon both like to tell me they "found something that (I) might be interested in", and show me some random movie on sale on Blu-ray that generally has little or nothing to do with my tastes (which are hardly narrow: I've got 6k releases, remember?).
And, to some extent—and I really want to emphasize, this is truly non-judgmental, no one is required to like anything at all—this is driven by what most audiences find enjoyable "enough", which is enough to be a distraction, sometimes even just on a second, half-ignored display.
It's what Affleck's friend Damon referred to in discussing that same loss of DVD revenue: the pushing of budgets further and further into only the "reliable": the franchises and sequels and remakes that have built-in audiences.
It isn't that everyone's taste "sucks" or anything, or that everyone should share a notion of the value of these things with me that worries me: it's that I think even those who feel no particular need to be discerning are going to get bored and the bottoms won't exactly fall out of any of these models so much as they'll rot.
I didn't really have much optimism for things as it was, but the steady intrusion of LLMs and similar "genAI" makes me fear we're heading for an engine of even greater homogenization and stagnation in the arts, where you slowly pare down the "disposable" artists who only do "small things" and flatten out into their "perfectly acceptable" genAI medians, then do so further and further—with plenty of people fine with this for a long time, because of what it is they actually want from it: an enjoyable distraction or escape.
But eventually all those skills will atrophy across the culture to some extent, and recovery will be strange and difficult—or simply may never happen, with art having to find whole other avenues when so many can't make livings in it anymore because of how much is accepted in those digital hands.
I'm not ridiculous enough to believe anyone can or will stop any of this: everyone wants an inordinate amount of art at their neck and call for as little as possible because that's what its value actually is to most people: wallpaper and background noise. Which is fine—it's just that fear of that becoming the dominant driver in a much less recoverable way once it truly settles.
Feel free to substitute most of this musing with "Capitalism plus the arts: Sigh."
¹And a few other forms of media, but let's leave this where it's directly relevant.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Will be fun when everyone has his or her own siloed private culture.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Not only that: the tsunami of cheap derivative immitation will burn out any interesting "style" or "theme" that appears , in record time. One "David" by Michelangelo is awesome. Fiftythousand Davids in all imaginable different poses with the push of a button later, you've lost all ability to savour the qualities of the originzl, even if it's the best one of them all. Because the tastebuds have been oversaturated.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)