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

441–450 of 581 posts

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

#441

Post by Forgeties79 »

echelon wrote: post #236
sph wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, now film studios, for months now. Give it a rest, this is unhealthy.

> Dude you have been salivating at the thought of seeing developers fired, I don't think you understand my arguments at all. I don't want people to lose jobs. I don't want the advantages to accrue to a few hyperscalers. I want there to be more work, more money, more societal progress. For everyone. AI currently enables experts in their domains (code, film, game design, music) to get the work of small teams done. It i…

Like your other comment this is so general I’m not entirely sure what you’re describing.

AI in production has allowed us to salvage bad audio and fix mistakes/not go back for re-shoots or ADR when it’s acceptable. It’s currently a repair/salvage and corner cutting tool. As for video, generative AI is not creating particularly usable stuff and it’s at best useful for short bursts.

If you’re in the commercial game it’s a little more useful - a few seconds of a generic looking kitchen sink and faucet running isn’t a big ask. But also getting quality B-roll isn’t particularly laborious as it is.

It’s great for transcriptions/captioning first passes but we already had great tools for that prior to the ChatGPT era.

It’s not cutting for us, it’s not generating useful shots most of the time and only for a few seconds, it’s not cutting out middlemen. I don’t see what you’re seeing.

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

#442

Post by Marha01 »

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'…

> I would really love to see examples of creatives using modern AI/LLMs to make quality art

Look up "The Chronicles of Bone". It's pretty good.

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

#443

Post by altcognito »

senderista wrote: post #209
altcognito wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm seeing these type of comments a lot more. A type of comment where it seems like the "user" (commentor) makes a categorically wrong comment about the linked article that would be sort of right if it were a different medium. Clearly whatever was used here triggered on the "music" part, but didn't understand what the article was really about. Typically it goes beyond just not reading the article (as in this case) I'…

“Classically trained” in the musical context usually means “I took a year of piano lessons.”

It's just categorically a wrong statement. Just because someone knows how to play a musical instrument, I'm not sure why it would make any sense that they would understand what makes a good music video - they are a completely different medium.

You might be able to discuss asthetics from a music theory standpoint because you are "classically trained", again, it is just a weird mismatch that stood out for me recently, but I think everyone is a little more paranoid lately.

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

#444

Post by tejohnso »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #358
abc42 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm amazed how easily people dismiss this. They used less that an hour of wall clock time and max $50 to do this. How much would it take for me to create videos like this? I'm guessing 1-4 years calendar time practicing half an hour every day just to break my lack of talent. Immeasurable cost given how there's no way in hell I'm going to invest that kind of time for a skill I don't actually want to acquire. Somebody…

That depends on your own standards to be honest. Here's a video from Meshuggah which is a camcorder recording of them emoting in a camper van - that's half an hour of work, a few hours of editing tops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4A_tSyJBsRQ My point is, anyone can make a music video on any budget or level of talent. And camcorder silliness is more artistic and entertaining than AI generated stuff any day of the…

I found the OP AI videos much more entertaining than this camcorder silliness. It was interesting to see how literal the AI interpreted the lyrics, but then sometimes took the liberty to add clips of synchronized dance moves which actually seemed like a good match for the tempo. And each shot was different and engaging in some way. I tired of watching a bunch of grown men thrash around like idiots in a cramped van after about 5 seconds. How you consider that artistic is beyond me.

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

#445

Post by bubblegumcrisis »

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…

"I was an art major and switched to CompSci purely for the money." Translation: Not an artist.

I worked for 30 years as a pianist. The number of programmers who have told me they too are a musician... No- you aren't. And you never were. That's the thing, if you were a musician, you would be playing music. That would be your job.

I mean as a hobbyist, yes, sure, enjoy splashing paint and calling it art, but spending the tens of thousands of hours to learn what music actually is, no, no, no. You aren't. Would you call yourself an architect if you can draw a picture of a building? No, you aren't.

No artist wants to "create things which were beyond their capabilities" with an AI, they want to develop their capabilities to create things beyond who they are now. Art is about discovering the world, yourself, the strange magic of an ethereal plane, some how reached through vibrations.

I don't know. Reading programmers talk about art, as if they are not dilettantes, is always depressing for me.

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

#446

Post by CapsAdmin »

floam wrote: post #252
CapsAdmin wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also somewhat considered lame and cliche to ask an artist where their idea came from, and what their intention was. However people will claim that the artist had an intention, it was just not obvious to the artist at the time. The art was also shaped by their experiences, etc. So in contrast, AI does not have this intention.

Maybe people will find deep meaning in “AI is us, any intention was shaped by the written down intentions of every human that ever put pen to paper”. maybe masters of art will train their own tortured models in digital dungeons and a rich man’s home won’t be complete without a cyber collective of pathological artist models actively that you guests CAN interrogate about why they chose what on the basement homelab.

I'm of the opinion that AI represents the average creativity, which can be interesting (especially base models) but on the other hand, too many cooks can ruin a dish.

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

#447

Post by beepbooptheory »

altcognito wrote: post #443
senderista wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Classically trained” in the musical context usually means “I took a year of piano lessons.”

It's just categorically a wrong statement. Just because someone knows how to play a musical instrument, I'm not sure why it would make any sense that they would understand what makes a good music video - they are a completely different medium. You might be able to discuss asthetics from a music theory standpoint because you are "classically trained", again, it is just a weird mismatch that stood out for me recently,…

Its like misunderstanding the concept of "music video" as one form music can take, presumably alongside "music audio," and the being "classically trained" is meant to speak to a strength in "music" in general.

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

#448

Post by ndriscoll »

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'…

https://youtube.com/watch?v=PlfOoKTFcAE seems pretty good to me?

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

#449

Post by tejohnso »

Spacecosmonaut wrote: post #436
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.

I wonder how much of the sloppy feeling is created by the knowledge that its AI generated.

Same. I think there's a lot of AI prejudice influencing people's opinions on AI output.

I wonder what would happen in a study where some art is critiqued by one group that is informed that the art was created by AI and another group that is uninformed.

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

#450

Post by tejohnso »

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

I should hope that a "talented" creative "with a vision" could, do better, yes. But now a talentless hack devoid of vision can do something half decent too. And if you don't think this is half decent, just replace "now" with "soon".

Post reply on HN