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

101–110 of 581 posts

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

#101

Post by qwerpy »

xoxxala wrote: post #85

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.

For fun, I took that image and put it into a few models and asked it "what is wrong with this genAI image?"

Grok fast came up with a lot of minor quibbles and missed the issue.

Grok expert touched on it with a "Limbs/anatomy ambiguity / This creates a slight "how many legs does this cat actually have?" moment." but then moved on to complain about texturing . Later it summarized the issue as "classic "animal + held object" anatomy problem".

Chatgpt 5.6 instant didn't notice it

Chatgpt 5.6 medium didn't notice it and mainly complained about the background being blurry

Chatgpt 5.6 high (46s) "The biggest error is the cat appears to have six paws"

Google AI mode complained about whiskers and feet placement

Only chatgpt high and marginally grok expert had acceptable answers.

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

#102

Post by fragmede »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #83
qurren wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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??

Presumably they went to college for it, yeah. Film schools, eg https://cinema.usc.edu/ or https://tisch.nyu.edu/

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

#103

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#105

Post by galleywest200 »

pennomi wrote: post #93
claaams wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Survivorship bias. Not disagreeing with you that these are unwatchable, but it’s a little rose-tinted to think that (non-AI) slop didn’t exist a long time ago.

At least non-AI slop had a human behind it.

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

#106

Post by samspenc »

adenta wrote: post #69
tantalor wrote: post #62

Embarrassing! You can still delete this, there is time.

What's embarrassing?

The post itself was technically useful, I found, and they posted their entire project to GitHub https://github.com/hershalb/music-video-arena which I think makes it worthy of a HN post and discussion since it is technical and at least IMHO a very interesting post.

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

#108

Post by coldtea »

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.

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

The industry haven't matured except until a certain point. Then it declined. Modern visual effects are worse than practical effects in their heyday. They are also worse done than 3D effects in their tasteful early days (like Jurassic Park).

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

#109

Post by coldtea »

pennomi wrote: post #93
claaams wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Survivorship bias. Not disagreeing with you that these are unwatchable, but it’s a little rose-tinted to think that (non-AI) slop didn’t exist a long time ago.

It's logical for slop to exist. It's bad when slop production is automated.

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

#110

Post by s1artibartfast »

aenvoker wrote: post #47

As a clanker-apologist I gotta say this is the strawman of AI slop brought to life. Letting the machine do literally everything without even supervision and see how it turns out? No surprise at all the results are so bad. My fav AI video is still Post-Scarcity Blues from a year ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_t3h2AZ0KY There have been others I've enjoyed since then. But, that one stands out in memory. Work warn…

Pretty amazing stuff and evocative. Thanks for sharing to put things in perspective.
Post reply on HN