|
I feel like “AI is inevitable” is a bullshit talking point that’s only serially being passed by people trying to make money off of it. No technology is inevitable, and plenty of tech makes a big splash only to die on the vine. Remember NFTs? Also, point of order, there’s a fairly significant difference between the stuff late night with the devil used for its title cards (and, it seems, set dressing) or the secret wars credits, which is generative AI based on plagiarized art, and the machine learning stuff used by Dune and Avatar and Spiderverse, which are closed-system machine learning tools for automating inbetweens and are, as far as I’m aware, trained on a very specific set of curated data within the project itself
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:24 |
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:I was gonna pass on Immaculate since I find Scary Nun and spooky Catholicism kinda of boring and overdone but every reviewer and person I’ve seen talking about it all say it’s actually a decent film Would you say it Catholic horror or nunsploitation? I cant decide whether I wanna see it or not. The former i Iove, the latter I avoid, hmmm 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
Definitely more of the former than the latter. It's certainly not The Devils or Benedetta.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 17:41
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:Would you say it Catholic horror or nunsploitation? I cant decide whether I wanna see it or not. The former i Iove, the latter I avoid, hmmm It's not super sexy, (light content spoilers) Sweeney gets more wet t shirt scenes in your average Euphoria ep and otherwise it's chaste.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 17:48
|
|
|
ty both, think ima go try and see it tomorrow!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 17:48
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:i still think this was the test case to see if an AI could write a movie top to bottom I guess you could say it was the pilot 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
It's exploitative in a sort of torture porn way but not (really) in a horny way. But even then I was more thinking of like late Evil Dead style brutality which I'm fine enough with
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 18:22
|
|
|
The owl graphic in LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL is immediately identifiable because the eye of the owl and tv dials look exactly the same, very lazy!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
A Fancy Hat posted:Late Night with the Devil is great. Nothing groundbreaking in plot but the execution is great be it the acting, the characters, or the 70s feel. The James Randi skeptic guy was my personal favorite but they pack a massive amount of character development into this without sacrificing tension and some great gore. OK so I don't want to doxx myself because I'm a pretty aggressive shitposter on here, so I'm going to be a little vague. I've worked as a graphic designer for at least two theatrically released movies that have come out this year, big enough scope that goons in this thread have seen at least one of them. Here's 100% what I would suspect happened: 1. Director went looking for an artist who could create retro-style graphics for the backdrops and interstitials. There's usually a pretty short rolodex of people who get these kind of jobs, but this was a scrappier picture, so I'm assuming they went with someone they knew, or someone they were recommended by a friend. 2. The designer got a request saying '1970s graphics for Halloween', did some research, and was immediately in over their head. 3. The "artist" promptly did some prompt exploring on an AI generator and came up with some stuff. Maybe the intent was to pass it off directly, maybe it was just a proof of concept, I don't know. 4. The director said, 'That's perfect, let's use it', and the artist is now in over their head, unable to change the lie art they provided, and the director doesn't know it was computer generated because why the hell would they be an expert on the subject. 5. The movie rolls out. 6. Someone who DOES have experience spotting it calls it out, the production team is now backpedaling with whatever the most sympathetic answer is, and that designer gets loving yelled at for being dumb and lazy and sloppy. Based on my personal experience working as a designer in the industry's system, I would be shocked if this wasn't the exact way the thing went down. Does it make it right? Absolutely not, it's loving annoying and it puts people like me at risk of not getting paychecks in the future for doing awesome stuff that I'm excited to see on the screen. Do I think there was some actual high-level decision to use AI for the graphics? Absolutely not -- the work was put in to get costumes, cameras, era-appropriate cameras, set design, and performances. It's a sloppy oversight, which means that it was made by someone on a deadline who thought they could get away with it, rather than as a statement on the nature of AI. The production team and studio are just jumping on the grenade because it's easier than saying 'Yeah we farmed it off to a lovely designer and didn't do any due diligence with it'. I could, of course, be completely wrong. But having been in the Zoom meetings and email chains for how this particular type of sausage gets made, I would put a helluva lot more stock in 'single designer does a dumb loving thing that's against their own self-interest' than 'malicious corporation hates artists'. Also, saw the movie this weekend, I thought it was loving great. Stupid AI art be damned. I'd be happy if they paid a real designer to fix it before the digital release but I know that's not going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 20:08
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:I feel like “AI is inevitable” is a bullshit talking point that’s only serially being passed by people trying to make money off of it. No technology is inevitable, and plenty of tech makes a big splash only to die on the vine. Remember NFTs? I wouldn't consider NFTs as a good example as that's a trainwreck of a different order, and you do have a point about what technology ends up around for the long haul. I loved having zipdrive storage since if you had it on before you booted up the computer it acted like an extra hard drive, but now if you walk into a tech store asking about it, everyone but the old guy in the back's going to look at you confused. I'm figuring the descriptor of 'inevitable' is more in the angle of 'it will always be around to some degree'. I don't see why someone couldn't have a custom AI build loaded with just their own work or writing to use as a tool for times of creativity block to help them along. Right now, there's a lot of abject terror going on with how much art theft has happened along with some existential crisis over 'oh GOD I can be replaced???' going on especially when you look at some AI work like the one that does the short movie clips (though when you know where to look, you see it's flaws too). It doesn't take much for the fear/hysteria to spread online. I did look at the backdrops people are claiming as AI also and I think that's more hysteria at play than anything. Any backdrop from back in the day if you looked close enough would have flaws because it was never meant to be seen close up. PKMN Trainer Red posted:Here's 100% what I would suspect happened: That makes so much sense I'd wager a paycheck on it being true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 21:07
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:I feel like “AI is inevitable” is a bullshit talking point that’s only serially being passed by people trying to make money off of it. No technology is inevitable, and plenty of tech makes a big splash only to die on the vine. Remember NFTs? People keep comparing AI generated art to NFTs but I think the comparison is overblown. One of the major bad things about NFTs was that it was selling a false bill of goods. It was promoted as if it were granting ownership over some extent (if hideous) IP of some theoretical value while in actuality peddling new cryptocurrencies that lack even the questionable legitimacy that bitcoin has. AI generated art is bad for almost the exact opposite reason: it may be laundering stolen art, it may produce garbage 99.9...% of the time, but for all that the technology fundamentally functions. It does what it says it does; it verifiably works. It has produced graphics which at this point have been used in films. It's good enough to be replacing real artists, and that's the whole problem. Not that both technologies weren't both promoted by hucksters and not that AI gen ain't a bubble that's likely to pop in a bad way sometime soon, but I worry comparing it with NFTs blurs more than it reveals. Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Mar 23, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 22:14
|
|
|
PKMN Trainer Red posted:Also, saw the movie this weekend, I thought it was loving great. Stupid AI art be damned. I'd be happy if they paid a real designer to fix it before the digital release but I know that's not going to happen. Whole post is my feelings on it, but especially this line
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 22:48
|
|
|
Immaculate rips loving hard. Just a real mean and nasty piece of work. Superbly done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 22:53
|
|
|
I'm still maintaining that final scene (not really a spoiler, but playing it safe just in case) should become as much of a touchstone as Pearl's did. Because good god (no pun intended) that final loving scene. More directors really have to cast Sydney for these big roles, she's such a great actor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 23:00
|
|
|
I could be wrong but doing a lot of reading on Reddit and other places I think adobes ai generative stuff pulls form it’s own library That’s the only ai poo poo I’ve used for for my work here and there to play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 23:28
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Can't find an official source on this but there's buzz going around Letterboxd that Late Night with the Devil features extensive use of AI-generated artwork. It's not extensive but everybody gets used to it. I have. I'm a graphic designer and illustrator by trade and can tell you first hand that this ship has sailed and my skills have (mostly) been rendered obsolete. It's been gradual but happening for a good while and dates back to clip art, online templates, stock photography and..well, name it. Now it's AI. There's nothing to be done about it and people may as well get used to it. I've found myself working in a poker room of late because it: - pays better - has better benefits - is actually far less work than designing and producing a full vehicle wrap, banner or even a yard sign - Reduces my commute and gas consumption by 3/4 - nobody gives a poo poo about good art or design (look around), let alone wants to pay for it The last few places I worked at that produced graphics treated it like fast food. 15 minutes "design time" and everything else was supposedly billable. Most of the poo poo I cranked out was done on someone's phone by their niece or nephew who dreams of being a graphic designer and all I did was make it printable. Art is not dead but the way it's produced and generated is. Like most things, it's left to automation and something resembling an assembly line; or something close at least. I'm not great all the time but I AM good and capable of working within the soulless confines of commercial art. I've done so most of my life and "sold out" a long time ago, so to speak, since I need to get paid at the one thing I'm good at but my particular ship has sailed. Now I get paid to watch people gamble and dry hump what's left of the American Dream. Thinking about starting an A/T thread about it because I actually learn a lot about human psychology and I think it gives me a certain lens into certain things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 00:19
|
|
|
What sucks too is AI art sucks. Were killing jobs to make entertainment shittier and people more miserable. In my industry we're seeing less and less embalming, but its also being replaced by new methods of disposition (such as alkaline hydrolisis). So tech is moving forward with job consideration in mind (embalmers just train on new methods of disposition and go on). Artists/creative people don't have anywhere to go, they just get REPLACED. And the AI people have no solution/forethought of dealing with a big displaced wave of people who are rightfully bitter and have no alternative. Meanwhile on the other end, the consumer is also losing bc were getting lovely AI. I agree LNWTD was probably that theory posted above about an accident/not intentionally bad. That doesnt mean we should support it. Even if LnWTD has to be a "sacrificial lamb", I encourage people to heavily push back on any AI in entertainment. I think the potential for AI in things like medicine is wonderful and mind blowing. It has no place in creative endeavors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 00:46
|
|
|
im going to support the movie because even if one person didn't potentially hired for the film it doesn't mean that the rest of the cast and crew should have their work buried because of the work of one or a few at most.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 00:59
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:im going to support the movie because even if one person didn't potentially hired for the film it doesn't mean that the rest of the cast and crew should have their work buried because of the work of one or a few at most. but people like the poster above who lost their job and have to work jobs they hate to survive do?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:01
|
|
|
But what about the other people who worked on the film that didn't use AI for 4 graphics. (even of one of those graphics ended up in the set design, someone still built that!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:02
|
|
|
nodding my head, yeah maybe i should start a A/T thread too i been playing a lot of balatro
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:05
|
|
|
Bigger boat actually brought up an interesting point. We treat so much work like fast food level poo poo. I'm a freelance editor and I do a bunch of stuff for big companies. And I put "work" into it, but it's never usually the most creatively engaging work. I have to go to the part of my mind thats not artistic but rather cynical to get the piece done. A lot of work is just regulated to "make me a logo thanks." It's weird and jank. It's mcdonalds art.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:05
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:But what about the other people who worked on the film that didn't use AI for 4 graphics. (even of one of those graphics ended up in the set design, someone still built that!) They already got paid? It's not like they work on royalties like actors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:05
|
|
|
Snooze Cruise posted:nodding my head, yeah maybe i should start a A/T thread too i been playing a lot of balatro there's a film production thread here now, I really want to see this discussed more from all sides honestly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:06
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:They already got paid? It's not like they work on royalties like actors. I don't know this crew but I'd wager an indie film crew probably cares a lot about people seeing their work on screen regardless of them getting paid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:07
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I don't know this crew but I'd wager an indie film crew probably cares a lot about people seeing their work on screen regardless of them getting paid. That sucks, but doesnt suck as much as other artists who aren't getting paid because they lost their jobs and have to resort to other jobs/careers just to pay bills. They also aren't gonna be seeing any of their work on screen for very much longer if/when they get replaced if/when nobody pushes back against AI.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:13
|
|
|
Not to sidetrack the conversation too much into the design area, but AI is just a part of a bigger conversation about how creative industries are being changed/killed by easier access to software. Very early in my career I worked as a photo touch-up artist, something that got blown out of the water once iPhones started creating apps that made touching up photos for all skill levels trivially easy. I still have to do photo touch-ups from time to time (things that a machine can't quite understand), but the proliferation of technology killed that off, as well as a bunch of jobs of people that I know. The same thing has happened to graphic design in the last handful of years -- the technology is now out there to make everyone a designer, and consequently everyone acts like a designer. BiggerBoat is correct that a lot of my side jobs have become babysitting people who THINK they're designers, and making their stuff print or production ready. I hate it, but speaking frankly, it is what it is. It's killing my job in the same way that a digital killed a lot of old-school designers or layout artists, because that's how the march of technology goes. The fact that it's encroaching in the creative arts is EXTREMELY unfortunate, and results in a lot of soulless stuff, but to a certain extent it was always going to happen. I stay employed because I'm lucky enough to have worked into a niche where I'm good at what I do, and the people I work for are willing to pay a premium for things made by an experienced creative who they can trust every step along the process. Things like the Late Night With The Devil thing would never happen under me, because that's not how my workflow or my processes work, and I've been lucky to be able to work that way. I guess what I'm saying is, automation is and has always been destined to kill a lot of our jobs. I hate it, and would like to push back against it, but it ultimately isn't going to matter. Every person I've talked to in the filmmaking process (including the last director I worked with, who is a moderately big name in terms of Hollywood directors but certainly isn't a 'star' director) doesn't want AI to replace the day to day of the creatives involved, because filmmaking is a creative process where everyone chips in to make something bigger. The people who are going to push for it are the studio heads and CEOs who think they're going to save a few bucks, and I don't think a boycott of any sort is going to work for them -- like the big WB debacle about canceling films, it doesn't matter what the optics or perception is, it's all about the money. I've taken the personal stance that it's more important for creatives to stick up for other creatives and insist that humans do the work on creative projects rather than computers. We can stall it, but no matter how well we do, it's coming eventually. It sucks, because I don't know what my job is going to look like in a decade, but the march of technology rolls on. It's outside the scope of me to control, even with my wallet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:13
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I don't know this crew but I'd wager an indie film crew probably cares a lot about people seeing their work on screen regardless of them getting paid. This is a bad argument because you could use it to excuse anything. "Yeah I know the movie was produced by the estate of Josef Mengele based on a script by William Calley, but think about everyone who worked on the movie who isn't responsible for war crimes!". There are an infinite number of perfectly valid reasons to not see a movie, and the fact that it takes multiple people to make a movie doesn't counter them out If you don't think using AI art is a compelling reason to not see a movie, that's fine. Everybody's got a line. But trying to spin seeing the movie as a moral act just suggests you are insecure about the placement of your line.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:14
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:But trying to spin seeing the movie as a moral act just suggests you are insecure about the placement of your line. I'm personally saying I disagree with spinning the movie as a moral act and hate the "if you see this you're starting a fire that will destroy everything". It's frustrating. I understand someone saying hell no to seeing this. That's fine. I actually hate that the filmmakers said they did it for fun or whatever, that also sucks. Because it's not out of desperation. I just find this whole conversation frustrating for a billion reasons. I think I'm just tired of hard lines drawn and everyone must abide kind of takes for so many things. I understand someone will use this sentence and throw it back at me which whatever man. It just gets exhausting. I think the message got heard, and we'll see what happens next.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:22
|
|
|
I am not seeing the movie because of my hard line of not supporting the devil. No siree, that isn't a nice fella.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:23
|
|
|
PKMN Trainer Red posted:Not to sidetrack the conversation too much into the design area, but AI is just a part of a bigger conversation about how creative industries are being changed/killed by easier access to software. Very early in my career I worked as a photo touch-up artist, something that got blown out of the water once iPhones started creating apps that made touching up photos for all skill levels trivially easy. I still have to do photo touch-ups from time to time (things that a machine can't quite understand), but the proliferation of technology killed that off, as well as a bunch of jobs of people that I know. The same thing has happened to graphic design in the last handful of years -- the technology is now out there to make everyone a designer, and consequently everyone acts like a designer. BiggerBoat is correct that a lot of my side jobs have become babysitting people who THINK they're designers, and making their stuff print or production ready. I hate it, but speaking frankly, it is what it is. It's killing my job in the same way that a digital killed a lot of old-school designers or layout artists, because that's how the march of technology goes. The fact that it's encroaching in the creative arts is EXTREMELY unfortunate, and results in a lot of soulless stuff, but to a certain extent it was always going to happen. I stay employed because I'm lucky enough to have worked into a niche where I'm good at what I do, and the people I work for are willing to pay a premium for things made by an experienced creative who they can trust every step along the process. Things like the Late Night With The Devil thing would never happen under me, because that's not how my workflow or my processes work, and I've been lucky to be able to work that way. this is a great post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:24
|
|
|
Snooze Cruise posted:I am not seeing the movie because of my hard line of not supporting the devil. No siree, that isn't a nice fella. Watching the movie but shaking my head every time the devil does something bad to show I disapprove.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:26
|
|
|
*taps date on the shoulder, whispering* that's Abaddon
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:51
|
|
|
The more I hear about this "The Devil"-fellow the less I like him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:52
|
|
|
The issue with “AI” art isn’t one of automation, it’s theft of labor. It’s algorithms trained on stolen work without consent and compensation for said labor. So there’s a particular perversity to it where a smaller indie production utilizes it alongside notions to support this small independent artist/production or a new original ideas outside the Hollywood production trappings or whatever, when ya know AI art is the complete antithesis of this. Also, is the Alien thread gone or am i just blind?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:52
|
|
|
Baron von Eevl posted:*taps date on the shoulder, whispering* that's Abaddon god I wish Abaddon showed in more movies 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 01:56
|
|
|
Immaculate was enjoyable enough, though I’m hoping The First Omen is a better sinister Catholic pregnancy conspiracy horror movie with a nun protagonist
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 02:49
|
|
|
I don’t want to get my hopes up for the First Omen
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 02:57
|
|
|
dorium posted:I don’t want to get my hopes up for the First Omen
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:24 |
|
|
Judging by the trailer alone, it's either going to be brilliant or a complete mess. Excited to find out though!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 03:09
|
|