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

541–550 of 581 posts

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

#541

Post by 4chandaily »

slopinthebag wrote: post #514
4chandaily wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. As with any new tool, there will be an adjustment period before the Overton Window catches up. This is the current era's version of these hit classics: - "If you use autotune,you aren't a real singer!" - "Programming a drum machine isn't really writing percussion!" - "If you use Photoshop, you can't be a real artist." - "No real artist would use duct tape as a medium." - "Video games can't be art." - "Samplin…

But at the same time, we've had people commissioning art for centuries and we still don't consider the commissioner to be an artist. Using AI as part of your workflow? Possibly art. Using it as your entire workflow? Slop, not art.

I think that is generally fair. My thought is if you are using AI like a metaphorical slot machine to generate things whole cloth...there is a very good chance what you are creating will be seen as slop by most. I think I would carve an exception here for those that are incredibly elaborate and detailed with their prompting to the point that the AI is essentially deterministic.

It really all comes down to the effort and intent of the artist. I use AI tools in the creation of my art, but it would never occur to me to pass off something entirely generated as "my art". The AI tool is just another brush, instrument, or typeface in an assortment of tools I reach for when creating. The AI by itself has no intent. You need a human for that (at least currently). without the human? Yeah, slop like the videos in the OP.

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

#542

Post by beepbooptheory »

zahlman wrote: post #523
latexr wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine the blogpost was on AI generated classical music. Everyone, including the authors, agrees the result is shit. You, being classically trained, can understand more than most why the results are bad. Then someone comes along and says “I honestly can't really tell how these are worse than the human produced ones. They all sound kinda the same to me” and “I honestly can’t tell a good piece of music from a bad one.…

I think takes like GP's are perfectly reasonable to express and it aggravates me that HN seems not to like that. The competition for the AI work here is explicitly not aiming at a niche audience. If that human work is nevertheless higher quality, readily distinguishable by the general audience of people who like music videos (?), then that audience really ought to be able to articulate why and how . Like: > Everyone,…

If you really really like the $100 AI video, no one can take that away from you, but its just weird to be so principled about this in the negative: like no one actually wants to say they're good, its just some people don't want to admit they're worse than anything else.

Acting like some Roman legionary, saying "This slop is good enough for the piggies. not that I, classically trained, could discriminate between the slops either way" is certainly not contradictory, but if it needs to be the kind of discourse defended on here, then please, go right ahead!

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

#543

Post by nekooooo »

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.

remembering that line from the Portlandia sketch where the PTA is discussing the music their kids are listening to with the subtext that it's not indie enough :

"It is pap. It is pabulum." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdEPgB2yizw

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

#544

Post by DrewADesign »

kev009 wrote: post #49
DrewADesign wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> need auteurs to curate vignettes or effects and cut or mask them in etc The problem is that reliable, repeatable professional-grade commercial art and design sensibilities happen in full-time careers. It’s entirely different than fine art, where intense self-exploration and experimentation are a very viable option. These tools are exacerbating an already difficult creative job market so there’s no reasonable path t…

The same thing is happening in software, I see the ladder pulled up and don't feel vulnerable as senior staff. If anything, we face a massive and increasing competency crisis in computing because there is a cult dumb enough to believe acceleration and doomer cases for LLMs.

I got out of the software business after a couple decades and the market for newly graduated designers in my field collapsed in my senior year of 2024 so now I work in machining.

The last of the core industrial skilled trade workforce that came up in the 70s and 80s, before offshoring, is retiring. Offshoring left the industry with all the skilled workers they needed for decades, so a vanishingly small number of apprentices were trained. Since the seniors transferred very little knowledge, very few people still have that knowledge, and they’re scrambling to transfer all of that knowledge into a new batch of apprentices.

I think the software business is closer to a trade than an engineering profession than people care to admit, and is looking at something like that down the road a few years. In the interim, we can look to the rust belt to see how the America industry treats workers that are no longer needed. I don’t even think we need autonomous, agentic virtual developers to make that happen — a double-digit productivity boost will likely result in a double-digit job market contraction.

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

#545

Post by Karrot_Kream »

lp4v4n wrote: post #402
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 understand what you mean but speakers and recording equipment destroyed the economics of paying people to play music a long time ago. It's another way of looking at the problem. Smartphone cameras and easy-to-use professional equipment were thought to destroy the photography profession, yet photographers still exist, although we have to admit not as many as in the past. If I had a company with a budget, I wouldn't…

FWIW smartphones did massively change the economics of being a photographer. The family photographer used to be a reliable profession and now it's just a side thing that event and wedding photographers do.

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

#546

Post by mannanj »

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 appears to be doing this Software Engineering too, so seems it applies to other industries too.

Maybe the net effect so far has been more extractive and a transfer of wealth to a select few people? Is this how past technological revolutions were, or is this the first so far?

I think the elephant is the room is we hope things will change later - will they really?

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

#547

Post by 59percentmore »

ryandrake wrote: post #507
59percentmore wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've ever tried to get around Gemini or ChatGPT's guardrails, stock footage poisoning, and just general tendency to produce the most frustratingly banal version of your prompt possible, then you would understand that prompting AI images and video absolutely already involves a clash between reality and intent (in the sense that this is Google and OpenAI's world, we're just living in it). I would love to get aroun…

> If you've ever tried to get around Gemini or ChatGPT's guardrails, stock footage poisoning Art is (often) provocative, uncomfortable, taboo, explicit, subversive, or challenging of norms. You're never going to get that out of increasingly locked-down and Disney-fied BigTech hosted LLMs obsessed with "AI safety."

So, would you agree that working creatively around the Disney-fied locking-down of those tools in order to produce something "provocative, uncomfortable, taboo, explicit, subversive, or challenging of norms" would at least begin to approach being a process that involved at least a semblance of artistic merit?

Because I can assure you that much of what I've gen'd checks those boxes (unless Sorry To Bother You's third-act twist no longer unsettles).

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

#549

Post by abc42 »

toasty228 wrote: post #423
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…

> I'm amazed how easily people dismiss this. Why? What's its value? I personally wouldn't watch a video/movie/show that's entirely clanker generated, I see no point in it. All AI fanatics can talk about is cost, productivity, money, efficiency, ... no wonder they can't understand art or even basic human emotions

>All AI fanatics can talk about is cost, productivity, money, efficiency, ... no wonder they can't understand art or even basic human emotions

That's an incredibly myopic way of thinking about other people. Sort of ironic when you imply that you're better at "basic human emotions".

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

#550

Post by abc42 »

natebc wrote: post #435
abc42 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think that soulless slop is the only thing this technology can make?

... because of the evidence all around us? But really, nobody said "only" it's just that the gems are drowning alongside us in a sea of bullshit and the tide is still on the way up I'm afraid.

Where exactly do you think this evidence is? Don't tell me you're basing this on demos like the one in the article?
Post reply on HN