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

371–380 of 581 posts

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

#371

Post by gilleain »

simianwords wrote: post #355
spaqin wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art isn't just the screenplay, or a prompt; it's the clash between reality and the intent (whether a location or practical set constraints), the individual skill of everyone involved, costume and prop department. And it may change during production. And effort. If it's easy, it's easily reproducible and not worth that much. And novelty, that's something current models aren't capable of. That's why Jarimoquai's Virtua…

I think you are making the same mistake as everyone else with respect to art. Art has nothing to do with _mechanical_ difficulty. I see this misconception all the time. Examples - Kumail Nanjiani roided up for his next movie. This has mechanical difficulty, sure. But what does it add to the artistic element? - Dream Theatre guitarists play olympics with their guitar and play solo's that are mechanically impossible fo…

I partly agree with you - I used to think of mechanical difficulty as a kind of 'proof of work' for art. Nowadays I am less interested in the idea of what counts as art or not.

However, consider works like photorealistic drawings of eyes (usually at a very large scale). A lot of people like these, and consider them to be fine art, while others (art critics?) consider them bland. Contrast that with a Picasso flamingo drawn with a single line.

There is artistic value in high-effort, low concept works as well as low-'effort', high-concept works and other combinations. Perhaps what we are all looking for is effort of some kind (I prefer human effort) whether that is conceptual effort or practice in drawing lines on paper.

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

#372

Post by basisword »

hbn wrote: post #257

Like most of this stuff, it's obviously impressive technology compared to what existed a few years ago. But the end product has zero artistic value. It's a grey goo of the average of every concept picked up from the concept of the song. A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

You can find someone on Fiverr that’ll do a better job than this for $100. The concept will be completely different but it’ll be much better.

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

#373

Post by neuralhawke »

qnleigh wrote: post #322
scrollop wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I don't want jobs taken away by AI, a creative person with a vision that would usually required $1 million budget, could create such a video using AI by being very specific in what they require which would not be a " grey goo of the average of every concept " eg. "scene 32, same 2 characters from the previous scene, now dressed in the garb of Egyption middle kingdom high priests, though with cat faces, dan…

I would really love to see examples of creatives using modern AI/LLMs to make quality art, and it feels like this should be happening, but I can't think of any examples yet. Maybe there's so much low-effort slop that the good works are lost in the noise. Or maybe most artists don't use AI on principle. I would love to see examples if anyone has any. I saw a few things on r/AIVideos that I sort of liked, but I wouldn'…

Look up a Kenneth Anger or Maya Deren film.

You probably won't be impressed and these are legendary figures in experimental film making either.

There is no audience or market for what these tools would be good for.

These videos in the examples are laughable uncreative trash to me but so are big budget super hero human slop.

The main constraint with AI art is that I think the models have been overfit to a very narrow range of visual expression. Midjourney in 2023 could produce the absolute most fucked up images I have ever seen and I have seen a lot of fucked up visual art. That has all been washed out of the model at this point towards a statistical average of what people think is "beautiful".

Also no nudity allowed. What we have is nothing like a model trained to output the sensibility of Hieronymus Bosch or Francis Bacon with nudity. We have literally the opposite of that.

It is the difference between an artist and a "creative". These models are for "creatives", the conformist corporate bullshit version of the artist.

Instead of Hieronymus Bosch we have the statistical average infinite pretty portraits of the virgin mary because we are good people and good corporate citizens.

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

#374

Post by easyThrowaway »

qnleigh wrote: post #322
scrollop wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I don't want jobs taken away by AI, a creative person with a vision that would usually required $1 million budget, could create such a video using AI by being very specific in what they require which would not be a " grey goo of the average of every concept " eg. "scene 32, same 2 characters from the previous scene, now dressed in the garb of Egyption middle kingdom high priests, though with cat faces, dan…

I would really love to see examples of creatives using modern AI/LLMs to make quality art, and it feels like this should be happening, but I can't think of any examples yet. Maybe there's so much low-effort slop that the good works are lost in the noise. Or maybe most artists don't use AI on principle. I would love to see examples if anyone has any. I saw a few things on r/AIVideos that I sort of liked, but I wouldn'…

It won't happen for the intrisc nature of (current-gen, at least) AI of being forced within the limits of their training, which deprives the artist of intent - that is, specifically the ability of questioning in some way what came before him.

The point of art isn't "I made it pretty so it has value now", it's "This is how I see the world, am I the only one who feels this way?".

And yes, this is valid even for absolute jerks who couldn't care less about that the other people were thinking at the time, Like Lou Reed for example. The questions in his music were rhetorical and directed at himself in that case. Unfortunately, as Pablo Picasso said, for this computers (or AIs, in this case) are useless. They can only give you answers.

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

#376

Post by toivo »

simianwords wrote: post #355
spaqin wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art isn't just the screenplay, or a prompt; it's the clash between reality and the intent (whether a location or practical set constraints), the individual skill of everyone involved, costume and prop department. And it may change during production. And effort. If it's easy, it's easily reproducible and not worth that much. And novelty, that's something current models aren't capable of. That's why Jarimoquai's Virtua…

I think you are making the same mistake as everyone else with respect to art. Art has nothing to do with _mechanical_ difficulty. I see this misconception all the time. Examples - Kumail Nanjiani roided up for his next movie. This has mechanical difficulty, sure. But what does it add to the artistic element? - Dream Theatre guitarists play olympics with their guitar and play solo's that are mechanically impossible fo…

[dead]

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

#377

Post by simianwords »

gilleain wrote: post #371
simianwords wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are making the same mistake as everyone else with respect to art. Art has nothing to do with _mechanical_ difficulty. I see this misconception all the time. Examples - Kumail Nanjiani roided up for his next movie. This has mechanical difficulty, sure. But what does it add to the artistic element? - Dream Theatre guitarists play olympics with their guitar and play solo's that are mechanically impossible fo…

I partly agree with you - I used to think of mechanical difficulty as a kind of 'proof of work' for art. Nowadays I am less interested in the idea of what counts as art or not. However, consider works like photorealistic drawings of eyes (usually at a very large scale). A lot of people like these, and consider them to be fine art, while others (art critics?) consider them bland. Contrast that with a Picasso flamingo…

I’m curious to understand why you think drawing photorealistic eyes is different from a person beating a Guitar Hero time record.

Both are pushing boundaries in mechanical dexterity. Yet one is considered art and another is not.

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

#378

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

vintermann wrote: post #309
qbit42 wrote: post #272

AI is destroying the economics which allowed for a sizable middle class of artists. The issue is that many are paid for their art mostly for its aesthetic rather than artistic value. This isn’t the most creatively fulfilling, but it previously allowed many artists to make a living while refining their skills, often enabling them to pursue their real creative ambitions on the side.

I'm not sure it's the same people being paid for aesthetics as for the art. In streaming, for instance, background music is extremely profitable, and a good example of "just aesthetics". But you rarely see artistic artists crank out a few tracks for the "music for studying" playlists just to pay the bills.

They're not going to put their name on it if they do.

Until fairly recently "jingles" - ad music - were a huge source of income for many musicians with full time careers. Likewise library music, which was prerecorded with a specific mood so music editors could drop into their projects without having to commission it, and then the composers would be paid for performance royalties/residuals.

Writers - not such a thing now, but in the 60s and 70s a surprising number of "serious" writers in the UK began their careers writing ad copy.

Famous movie directors - many started in the ad slop trenches.

Music videos are literally ads, and it's not a surprise they use many of the same techniques and are directed by ad industry people.

And then in tech there's ad tech...

AI is just the newest arrival to the party.

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

#379

Post by sanitycheck »

simianwords wrote: post #364
spuz wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this discussion is we are conflating artistic value with economic value. A music video can be valuable as art, but it can also be valuable as a tool for promotion or for generating revenue. If the goal is pure economic efficiency then an AI has the potential to create a music video more efficiently than a human. If the goal is to produce something that makes people feel some kind of emotion then AI w…

[flagged]

Given that all serious artists seem to be extremely anti-AI, I strongly suspect that you may be wrong.

I've been trying Fable for coding in the past week and while it's incrementally better than Opus sometimes, what it's churning out is still far from art - and I do think it's possible for code to be art.

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

#380

Post by gilleain »

simianwords wrote: post #364
spuz wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this discussion is we are conflating artistic value with economic value. A music video can be valuable as art, but it can also be valuable as a tool for promotion or for generating revenue. If the goal is pure economic efficiency then an AI has the potential to create a music video more efficiently than a human. If the goal is to produce something that makes people feel some kind of emotion then AI w…

[flagged]

Interesting, so the 'pure vision' of the director can remain unsullied by the inept crew, huh? :)

More seriously, it reminds me of a video I was watching yesterday about a tabletop roleplay DM who was great at _telling_ stories but the players felt they were not included in the story. That is, the 'art' (if it is) of roleplay is collaborative between the storyteller and the players.

Are movies not usually a collaboration among a group of people (director, crew, etc) to produce a single work? Rather than liberating the vision, this process forces the visionary to engage with the constraints and limitations of the real world. Mabe why movies made on massive budgets by directors who have a string of recent successes can sometimes turn out terrible, as their ego outgrows the project?

Post reply on HN