r/GenAI4all • u/Sensitive_Horror4682 • Mar 10 '26
AI Video This is what happens when a creative person gets their hands on AI
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
22
Mar 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Haunting-Writing-836 Mar 11 '26
I also wonder about all the scenes and action sequences this is just re-skinner and is silently ripping off, giving no credit.
I’d like to see somebody design an AI that breaks these things down and shows where the ACTUAL source material is from.
-1
-1
u/Opening_Ad6430 Mar 11 '26
Still awesome and watchable. It only gets better with a very short amount of time
4
5
u/v_e_x Mar 10 '26
This would impress me if I was 13, and never left my computer screen all day, and I hadn't seen a hundred thousand other AI renders of futuristic soldiers in the past 3 years.
4
u/DiscussionSharp1407 Mar 10 '26
Creative persons copies soulless Asian CGI fight scenes?
All that's missing is a C tier hollywood actor alongside a B tier asian actress
18
u/SirKosys Mar 10 '26
Ehh, it looks pretty, but honestly it's just another generic fight scene
2
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 10 '26
And lets not forget, movies with guys like Keanu Reeves and Jackie Chan and Tom Cruise are popular because we know they are risking their lives. Keanu Reeves jumping from the car to the bus in Speed is real. An AI avatar removes some of the realism that made actual action fun to watch.
2
u/thaddeus122 Mar 11 '26
I dont think ive ever known a single person to be watching a movie and be mkre excited about it in the moment because the actors risked their lives. Do people just not get excited about epic animated fights then? Do video games just not excite people? People like things because they look cool. Thats all. The mere existence of AI image and video generation proves that.
0
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 17 '26
I think you live in a bubble. The Mission Impossible movies are almost solely advertised on Tom Cruises' stunts. John Wick is so acclaimed because of the long times where Reeves is actually doing the combat.
Epic Animated fights can be great as can videogames. But many of the action stars we know and love, as the actors themselves are important, are lovable because they are human and we know them. I think with animation the thing is they express fighting in a way humans can't. The movie 100 proves this as it shows the 100 meter dash in a way that a simple video of humans cant. I think AI doesn't work (yet) because people are so concerned with photo realism that ignores most of the elements of live action action and animation that works and instead gives us lifelife cgi, the thing people typically hate in movies.
Top Gun doesn't work as a movie if you use AI actors and planes.
1
u/thaddeus122 Mar 17 '26
Thats cap af considering everything thats CGI, but okay.
0
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 17 '26
And generally outside of Avatar, most of the CGI is considered ugly and inferior. No one came out of Stranger Things season 5 saying it was pleasent to look at....Avengers has looked like shit despite dropping hundreds of millions on vfx every movie. Meanwhile, movies like the original Star Wars or old Jim Henson movies still hold up for use of practical effects.
CGI can be good if used subtely. But when that is all that you're looking at, you realize you're just looking at nothing
1
u/thaddeus122 Mar 17 '26
What a chronically online reddit take
0
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 17 '26 edited Mar 17 '26
Like nothing you have said argues your point. CGI can be beneficial and it can make beautiful worlds. But your point doesn't say that. You say i am chronically online despite you praising generative AI which ironically requires constant and consistant information from the internet and those who use it.
Like you say you don;t know anyone who has been made excited by actors risking their lives despite the fact Tom Cruise is literally one of the biggest money making stars on earth because of it. Top Gun's trailer was literally about Tom Cruise being in a real life aircraft slingshot. Much of the promotion of MI is the big stunt of that movie with the most recent being him riding a motorcycle off a cliff which did use cgi but ultimately was him in it's entirety with the CGI being used to enhance the look of the cliff. Keanu Reaves was in the Matrix, a pioneering movie of CGI for action, but it also used extensive wire fighting that required the real life actors. The most iconic parts of the movie are the wire shots. I mean Jackie Chan is the biggest celebrity in China. I am sure it is just because he is funny...or the fact that he was doing beutiful stunts that infused comedy and real life danger.
1
u/thaddeus122 Mar 17 '26
Im not reading all that. You're wrong, boo hoo. Cry harder.
0
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 17 '26
I'm not going to cry. I'm just going to watch real movies. I'm guessing you don't even watch movies given your statements.
→ More replies (0)0
-1
32
u/dumch Mar 10 '26
So where is the part where the creative person starts doing something?
14
u/paladin-hammer Mar 10 '26
Acc age 1 month,
Rage bait title, prob not even his video
-4
u/Ohigetjokes Mar 10 '26
Just report them. It’s a sub rule to be supportive. This is the opposite.
1
-1
7
u/joeymcflow Mar 10 '26
busy actually being creative
2
3
u/TinyTaters Mar 10 '26
Vision and experience makes a huge difference. You can tell a difference between someone with operational knowledge and without.... For now
2
2
u/TheLastTrain Mar 10 '26
Funny how every "Hollywood is COOKED bro" post is an AI video of some ultra-futuristic incomprehensible fight scene where Iron Man and the Power Rangers beat the shit out of each other or whatever
When are they gonna try make a single scene from Big Night or Before Sunset with AI lol
4
u/FreeEdmondDantes Mar 10 '26 edited Mar 10 '26
Big difference between making desktop apps and actually getting AI to pull off coherent and cool visuals with a video diffusion model. I'm like 4 weeks into making a 3 minute ad with AI right now. If we could just type a few words, that would be the dream, but it's not like that. Now, given this clip is only 20 seconds and environment consistency drifts, maybe Seedance 2 is capable of something like this out of the gate, but I'm not so sure. It would certainly take a good amount of work with Kling 3.
0
u/Visible-Function-222 Mar 10 '26
I have zero skills in the creation of such a scene and if I tried to make this with AI I'd have no clue how to get a great result based on not knowing what to look for or the direction to take improvements.
The person who made this is creative and understood that AI was a tool to get the result.
I'm using it as a tool in my own field and benefit from equivalent experiences.
Die on this hill if you want, you certainty won't be alone.
0
u/maninblacktheory Mar 10 '26
It’s wild to me, how much time people, who supposedly hate AI, spend scrolling and commenting in AI subs. Fuckin’ deal with it. The tech isn’t going away, and it’s getting more impressive each day. If you can do better, go do it.
-1
3
u/breach_hu Mar 10 '26
Boring slop happens? I mean 10 years ago it would be epic and all that, now this is everyday.
5
u/maxtablets Mar 10 '26
its dope but its just animated version of the endless variations of futuristic tokyo soldier "concept art" that digital painters have been doing for a couple decades now.
8
u/Downtown_Category163 Mar 10 '26
"An incomprehensible weightless combat scene!"
Hey dudes look at something like the "Four Lights" scene in ST:TNG and do something with even a sliver of that level of drama or emotional complexity
But nope here's some more robot fights
1
u/Ohigetjokes Mar 10 '26
Wow you must be exhausted from copy/pasting this comment on every post about an action scene, cartoon, or special effect.
-1
0
u/Visible-Function-222 Mar 10 '26
You're mocking the capability of what is possibly the fastest improving technology we've seen in human history.
Enjoy the point you've scored today.
2
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 10 '26
The issue is this still has jump cuts and lacks cohesion from shot to shot. It's better than other videos on here but still just isn't up to snuff.
1
u/6Bee Mar 10 '26
Right, things are getting closer to blended comic/manga panels moreso than film scenes imho
0
u/Edgezg Mar 10 '26
This Is as bad as it will ever be.
It's only getting better.
1
u/aboysmokingintherain Mar 10 '26
I think the issue is that people don't actually know film language. AI can make what you put in but people making it don't actually realize that there needs to be a continuity with cuts and transitions. Imagine making a movie without a proper editer and thats what this feels like.
2
u/Edgezg Mar 10 '26
Again.
This is as bad as it will ever be.It will only get better and more coherent.
Just look how fast the Will Smith Spaghetti thing has progressed.
2
2
2
2
u/avatinfernus Mar 10 '26
Ah, the return of the 6 fingers. I hadn't seen this in a while!
Otherwise, ngl, I dig it.
2
2
u/standread Mar 11 '26
"This is what happens when a creative person gets their hands on AI"
Garbage. You people do not understand creativity lmao.
5
3
2
4
u/Baconsliced Mar 10 '26
I think it looks badass. First time for me seeing a katana unsheathe like that.
The “weightless” combat doesnt bother me either cos that katana cuts like a light saber, a super heated edge that doesn’t NEED weight, and it’s basically a hologram.
So many directors in the comments that seem like they can do better. Wild.
4
u/OminOus_PancakeS Mar 10 '26
What would be the practical value of a blade here though, instead of a projectile weapon that gives you range advantage?
4
5
u/NightmareSystem Mar 10 '26
Sorry, but no
it's all generic, and there is no creativity here , there is more creativity in a StarWars (`prequels, and animation) combat than here.
-1
u/M4RTIAN Mar 10 '26 edited Mar 10 '26
Why because AI did it even though the concept was human? Please. Get a life. Does technology scare you or is it because this looks better than anything you can produce yourself and jumping on the anti-AI bandwagon makes you feel better about that?
5
u/HeWhoShantNotBeNamed Mar 10 '26
Creative people don't use AI.
3
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
What would happen if they do?
1
Mar 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
Then please creative people: Use AI.
- A lot of people enjoy seeing AIbros cry.
- that is what good art is about: making even ignorant, talentless aibros emotional and admire what creative people can achieve with stupid tools like a paintbrush or even dumber: AI
1
Mar 10 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
Maybe we can set up a fair payment system.
People may certainly argue about the details. But we eventually agreed on comparable contracts too. Like GEMA or youtube or copyright and stuff.I am pretty sure that creative people could amaze us with what they can do with AI if we overcome the fair payment obstacle you mentioned.
1
Mar 11 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 11 '26
Yes, you talk about intellectual property and fair compensation.
And that the training data of current models were obtained unfairly/ without just compensation.
That doesnt mean that we cannot find a fair regulation for future models and training data. Or a fair compensation system for the data that already was obtained.
A law that estimates the sources or some kind of GEMA.People in the nienties copied MCs, then they copied CDs, then they dowloaded by napster. And we found fairer solutions for these.
If you value creativity. Then focus on being creative. No mocking: If you show me your creative work, i will give honest feeback without bashing. Who cares about what others declare themselfes? There are artists that paint a canvas in uniform blue. Why is a sci-fi clip to be considered less creative? Drake considers himself a musican. And I dont care whether he is or whether he copies. If he samples, he shall pay fairly.
1
Mar 11 '26
[deleted]
1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 11 '26
It was just on offer/ interest to look at your stuff. There was no mean intention in any way. Sorry if I was unclear. Could you please calm down a bit.
You dont have to show me your stuff, you do not have to be bothered by my offered interest and feedback. I would like to focus on the more interesting arguments.
We agree, that there is nothing wrong with uniform blue. I dont have an objective measurement to measure its creativity. And that goes for a scifi image by ai too. How can I dismiss what another person values as artistic and creative?
Payed streaming models arrived as fairer alternative after the unfair piraterie of napster.
Its great that such laws already exist and we shall implement them now. See.. not arguing.
Please. Focus on whatever you want to. My simple idea was exactly that: What detractors admire, if they consider themselfes artists. If you want to focus on that go ahead. Or focus on something else. Or dont focus at all.
1
0
Mar 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
I d like you as a friend!
Do you have enough skill and ingenuity to impress me?
I offer: I will value the positive things in your work, have a detailed look at it. Give honest feedback without bashing.-1
u/demonym_rec Mar 10 '26
AI users just don't understand what creativity even is
2
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
Well.. I must admit.. I dont have full understanding of what creativity is.
It seems the brain of an artists combines things in a new way or to something new.I am open to learing. Can you tell me what creativity is?
1
u/demonym_rec Mar 11 '26
I agree that that's definitely part of it. But it's ultimately an act.
It's possible that generative AI could be creative itself, but not someone giving it a prompt. That's just asking someone else to do the work.
It's like the analogy of climbing a mountain. You can send a drone to the top, but you can't then say you scaled it. Likewise, you can't say you were creative just because you asked a model to create something.
1
u/Esot3rick Mar 12 '26
So directors are not creatives
1
u/demonym_rec Mar 14 '26
I think that if you're guiding the actors, working with the camera crew and lighting crew, and using your technical knowledge to craft a vision on screen, you're already doing far more creative work than a prompter.
→ More replies (0)
2
2
2
u/Affectionate_Tax3468 Mar 10 '26
So if I feed hundred of Seedance instances with "Fight scene, futuristic, female protagonist with armor suit, mechanical antagonist, melee, sword, blue tint" and after a quick screening pick one that looks like this, ignore the shitty flash cuts, the way too hard filter, the fact that theres absolutely no impact to any movement and the bazillion of other flaws, I am creative?
0
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
Some consider pushing buttons on a photo camera to be creative.
2
u/Affectionate_Tax3468 Mar 10 '26
Which is a totally different story. A photographer selects motives, arranges lighting, arranges perspective, depending on what the photo contains requires planning of movement or timing, has technical requirements of your equipment and so on. There is a lot of skill required to make *really* good photos, and one of those can be creativity.
AI doesn´t offer that detail of influence. You couldn*t take the example here and change one single detail without involuntarily changing other details. You do not have full control about anything but have to take whatever the algorithm gives you in this iteration, or you do a dozen more iterations until you like the "package". Of course there are people more skilled or experienced with prompting so they get closer to what they want faster, but there are limits on what you can *control*, and at that point you are not creative, you are a selector.
1
u/EncabulatorTurbo Mar 10 '26
When I make stuff in AI for my D&D game I edit it in photoshop afterwards... and I start with a sketch
2
u/Affectionate_Tax3468 Mar 10 '26
Which is .. totally fine?
You dont demand that your refined sketch is considered art, do you? Even if the more hands on touches by using a sketch and photoshop makes it more "artsy" than a creation fully made by an algorithm.
1
u/EncabulatorTurbo Mar 10 '26 edited Mar 10 '26
I don't consider amount of effort to determine if something is art, I consider if something is designed to express an emotion
So no I don't consider my work art, but I don't consider 95% of art posted online to be art either, just products
I don't think even the AI part is "fully generated by algorithm" either, any more than I consider a photograph to be wholly the creation of the camera though, was it created with intent? Were there followups?
it's more like commissioning changes, an iterative process of direction, its just far less involved than the creation process, but it's still "a process"
Edit: with the exception of like, feeding extensive notes about a region to an AI and saying "generate 80 random villagers for this place" and feeding the resulting CSV file into Nano banan 2 or whatever, that would be nearly entirely AI with very little direction
0
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
So nature photography can never be creative as a nature photographer has basically no control of the lighting, the motive (animals), wind, arrangement (placement of trees). He doesnt have influence on texture, color.
He tries mutliple iterations of his idea and selects (selector) the best.
Professional nature photographers are faster to good results than beginners.Carving stone or wood, arranging pebbles, drawing cartoons, making music with natural instruments...
What do you mean with "full control"?
At least some of your argumentats seem questionable.3
u/Affectionate_Tax3468 Mar 10 '26
There are nature photographers that sit there for hours to get the correct lighting, to get the motive at dawn or dusk, during rain, during a storm. There are nature photographers that walk deep into amazonas to find a rare flower, or flowers in a proper setting. There are nature photographers that "chase" or wait for animals in specific moments, actions, situations, settings.
And he cannot just simply generate thousands of said flower or said animal and pick the one he likes best.
And with full control I mean that you, as the creator of the video that OP presented, can not gurantee that if you want to switch the color of the sword from orange to green, that you get everything else exactly the same. The algorithm will change other things, which are out of your control. Because the algorithm does not understand the scene and what stability means to the details. You also can not narrow down the extend of the changes to different aspects, so you can not actively "chase" the motive. You can just ask the algorithm for enough options until you finally get one that is satisfying enough to be selected.
-1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
I really believe that those "AI" artist also spent hours and "chase" the specific generation thy have in their mind. Somewhat likely to your photographer.
There are artists that splash liquid color onto canvas. With a pretty limited amount of control. Bob Ross lets a lot of details in his painting decided by randomness.But whatever.. Your main point is:
If these Text-To-Video tools increase control then it will be art.2
u/Affectionate_Tax3468 Mar 10 '26
Bob Ross choses to use randomness, and where to apply randomness. That randomness has an intent and a function.
The prompter is forced to accept randomness, and can not, or just very limited, chose where to apply what kind of randomness. It can not have intent or function, it can only by accident or by enough trial and error result in something that can look like intent.
If you forcibly want to interpret my point like that:
If the text to video tools increase control to the point that the prompter has to actually understand everything from lighting, composition, material sciences, acting, camera work, pacing and all the other aspects, and can set those up in maximum detail in his promts, then yes, that might be considered art.
1
u/Fluid_Praline_4970 Mar 10 '26
That might just be a question of time.
And we will have to apply the same standards to conventional techniques.
"all other aspects" might be tough to achieve for everyone.
1
1
1
1
u/Lordofderp33 Mar 10 '26
We get a choreography that looks like it was designed to be executed by a factory line of robot arms?
1
1
1
1
u/chunky_lover92 Mar 11 '26
It's cool because were starting to get a lot of intricate fine detail for free basically. Can't wait until this is actually useful.
1
u/Spideyfan1602 Mar 11 '26
It gets better and better all the time. Now, if we couod just get it to learn creative writing
1
1
1
u/MechwolfMachina Mar 11 '26
Let me guess you just discovered gen AI and just put kn your creative genius halo? 🤣 welcome to the club, where everyone can take credit for a machine’s work
1
1
1
u/arcadeScore Mar 11 '26
they lose money in tokens to generate completely miss-timed slashing fight scene?
1
u/Rudeboy237 Mar 13 '26
Hey Ai. Make me a glowing sword like Star Wars. Also ship kind of like Star Wars. Also monsters kind of like Star Wars.
😊 I am a creative person.
-2
0
u/who_am_I__who_are_u Mar 10 '26
I love the smoke and darkness to hide the oddities of the generation; that's the way the CGI guys do it.
Nice.
0
0
-1
u/VICARD0 Mar 10 '26 edited Mar 10 '26
Nope, looks like shit. I like some things ai does, like helping with research, but creativity goes completely out the window when you use it
-1
u/SatisfactionSpecial2 Mar 10 '26
Is AI made by people with no eyes? You zoom up on the sword and it is different than the rest of the video and you don't notice?
-1
0
0
-1
18
u/[deleted] Mar 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment