Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

tryai.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 581 posts

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#83

Post by beepbooptheory »

qurren wrote: post #13
nzoschke wrote: post #7

> None of the music videos were great Glad they acknowledge this. Curious how much time in addition to tokens this costs. If you have to spend $25 and wait 45 minutes to get a basically unwatchable video, I'm not worried about indie film makers being replaced just yet...

I'm classically trained and I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all look kinda the same to me.

Classically trained in music videos??

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#85

Post by xoxxala »

Interesting article, but those videos aren’t. Not even pre-MTV quality.

While checking out the gallery, came across this image:

https://www.tryai.dev/gallery/d3725e9b-1df9-4c10-8a23-2fc705...

There’s something wrong with it, but I just can’t put my paw on the problem.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#86

Post by squidsoup »

thewanderer1983 wrote: post #51
saaaaaam wrote: post #41

These are awful. It’s like Suno music. Seems convincing if you half listen. As soon as you pay attention you notice all the cracks.

Visual effects went through this same development issues as the industry matured. What took this industry decades to advance it taking months in AI. Think the spaghetti Will Smith and now this. Another one people don't mention here but is specific to video is higgsfield ai.

Nonsense. Ray Harryhausen's work today is still incredible, by any standard.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#87

Post by KronisLV »

claaams wrote: post #55
thewanderer1983 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visual effects went through this same development issues as the industry matured. What took this industry decades to advance it taking months in AI. Think the spaghetti Will Smith and now this. Another one people don't mention here but is specific to video is higgsfield ai.

Those old movies with old visual effects are watchable and still enjoyable. This is never good, interesting or enjoyable.

> Those old movies with old visual effects are watchable and still enjoyable.

Id say it’s definitely possible to get spoiled by high production quality - if I went back to the old Star Trek or even the first seasons of the Doctor Who reboot, I’d mostly have to try to enjoy it for the story (then again, Doctor Who has never been overly concerned with presentation, the most fearsome aliens in the galaxy being metal boxes with plungers sticking out of them is quite silly). Same with most CGI in the older movies or even the style of older anime, it can all be a bit hard to watch.

I guess I also experience the same with video games, though to a lesser degree - some like Hidden & Dangerous 2 can still be enjoyed whereas something like Operation Flashpoint would be quite frustrating, though more often due to controls rather than graphics.

Ehh, they did what they could at the time.

Re: $100 AI Music Video: Claude Fable 5 vs. GPT-5.6 Sol

#88

Post by thrance »

thewanderer1983 wrote: post #51
saaaaaam wrote: post #41

These are awful. It’s like Suno music. Seems convincing if you half listen. As soon as you pay attention you notice all the cracks.

Visual effects went through this same development issues as the industry matured. What took this industry decades to advance it taking months in AI. Think the spaghetti Will Smith and now this. Another one people don't mention here but is specific to video is higgsfield ai.

Spaghetti Will Smith was funny, this only inspires disgust in me: a clear downgrade. We're just getting deeper in the uncanny valley, with no end in sight.

> Visual effects went through this same development issues as the industry matured.

The difference is intent. Watching an old movie, the effects are obviously janky and far from seamless, but the authors had intent and the imperfections are understandable. When an AI jumbles a basic walk animation, it's just weird and soulless. The prompter just didn't want to spend any time doing actual work, so used this slop as a stand-in, when better techniques exists.

Post reply on HN