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

391–400 of 581 posts

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

#391

Post by camillomiller »

flir wrote: post #368
qnleigh wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

Take a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/@Gossip.Goblin He (they?) have a vision, and are trying to get it on the screen via AI tools. I don't think the tools are quite there yet, so I wouldn't call it "quality art", but I think it shows the direction of travel, and it shows somebody trying to use those tools to say something (ironically, the message is that the tools are kinda bad news). I'm reminded of the tipp…

It just does not feel original, or novel, or actually weird. I dunno it’s impressive but… so empty?

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

#392

Post by gilleain »

simianwords wrote: post #377
gilleain wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If I was feeling unfair I would say there is no difference! However, if a friend drew me an eye on A3 paper would I frame it? Probably yes...

Others have said this better, but art is an qualitative/emotional thing, not a simply measurable quantity of an object. We tend to use the effort put in as a proxy measure for quality, but when photocopiers and 3D printers and - yes - genAI get involved, that becomes harder or impossible.

Beating Guitar Hero is emotional, but not artistic. Photorealistic drawings could be emotional, and may or may not be artistic. Putting a text prompt into a generative model to make a (frankly terrible) music video for $100 is ... something else.

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

#393

Post by lelanthran »

johnvanommen wrote: post #329
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.

> AI is destroying the economics which allowed for a sizable middle class of artists. I was an art major and switched to CompSci purely for the money. AI "art" is often slop, but the ability to create something in seconds that used to take months shouldn't be taken lightly. There will undoubtedly be truly creative people who will use AI art as a force multiplier instead of a shortcut, and that is when things will get…

> There will undoubtedly be truly creative people who will use AI art as a force multiplier instead of a shortcut, and that is when things will get interesting.

No it won't :-/

What someone carefully prompted and refined over and over over a matter of months can be, the minute it is released, cloned in minutes.

Even being good with AI prompting still results in the product having no value to someone looking for the specific aesthetics.

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

#394

Post by pegasus »

johnvanommen wrote: post #329
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.

> AI is destroying the economics which allowed for a sizable middle class of artists. I was an art major and switched to CompSci purely for the money. AI "art" is often slop, but the ability to create something in seconds that used to take months shouldn't be taken lightly. There will undoubtedly be truly creative people who will use AI art as a force multiplier instead of a shortcut, and that is when things will get…

Not only is AI art often slop, it's also often theft. Or maybe even always theft. And it's both of these things that account for this newfound ability to create something normally time-intensive in seconds. Imagine I want to have a world-class painting on my wall: the fastest and cheapest way is to steal one from a museum, especially if I found a way to obscure the act. In the case of LLMs, its obscured by the fact that the model draws from many sources, blending them together in a way that's hard or even impossible to separate. Is stealing a small amount from many more excusable than a lot from just one? I don't see why that would be so. It's the total amount that measures the gravity of the transgression.

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

#395

Post by jstummbillig »

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.

> A talented creative with a vision could make something more interesting and enjoyable in an afternoon with a $0 budget.

Only if you are really sloppy with your book keeping.

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

#396

Post by qbit42 »

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 are not always the same but there is more overlap than you would think. One place that I know is being hit hard is Nashville (no comment on what this implies about the state of US country music). There are a lot of local musicians with their own (small) bands whose primary income came from (relatively low quality, compared to their own music) song-writing, playing back-up instrumentals/vocals for studios, stuff like that. This income stream is shrinking rapidly.

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

#397

Post by [deleted] »

f6v wrote: post #313
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…

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#398

Post by qbit42 »

flohofwoe wrote: post #292
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 if AI slop will make a bad situation much worse tbh. The pop stars of the 60's to 90's always depended on a distribution platform/network (record labels, radio stations, MTV, ...). Those distribution platforms either don't exist anymore, or changed their 'business model' to f*ck the artists at least two decades ago. To find the really good stuff you already have to look elsewhere, and popular music was a…

It was already bad, but I think there is still room for it to get a lot worse unfortunately.

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

#399

Post by onesandofgrain »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #369
bloqs wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Music videos aren't absurd and meaningless, as in many instances they are of fantastic artistic merit on their own accord and are simply scored in reverse

They're often a collection of meaningless visual cliches spliced together in an attempt to look meaningful, and always have been. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsgWUq0fdKk

Agreed

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

#400

Post by onesandofgrain »

flohofwoe wrote: post #352
onesandofgrain wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care about being in agreement with "any artist's interpretation". And stop appealing to the masses argument, it's cringe. No, a movie based upon a book is the same art just told in a different way, but I'm not buying that rappers driving luxury cars while rapping and having women in stripper heels tells the same musical artistic story in a different way. Or some random story.

> but I'm not buying that rappers driving luxury cars while rapping and having women in stripper heels tells the same musical artistic story in a different way Lol ok that's where you're coming from. Reducing music videos to gangster rap shite is basically the equivalent of "all movies suck because I've ever only seen Hollywood superhero movies".

you really love the distraction economy huh
Post reply on HN