Category: AI

In my last post about AI image generation, I mentioned that I would also write about AI video generation tools.

As someone who built his first successful AI Chabot 25 years ago, and as a videographer with my own multiple green screen studios since about the same time, it’s an area that I have a lot of interest in.

In mid-February I wrote about OpenAI’s Sora which seemingly came out of nowhere to show a quantum leap in AI-generated video.

Prior to Sora, the leaders in AI text-to-video generation, or image-to-video generation, were tools like RunwayML Gen 2, Pika Labs, Haiper, MoonValley, Timension AI Studios, Stable Video Diffusion, and others.

But their video output was pretty rough, to put it mildly, and they could only generate a few seconds before crumbling into unusable territory.

They were not really usable for professional work, but many people used them to create interesting new video art forms.

And then suddenly there was Sora, producing 60 second clips of a cinematic quality level that we had not expected to see for some years. So much so that Tyler Perry put work on his $800 million studio expansion on hold.

BUT, after teasing us with some extraordinary videos, OpenAI announced that they didn’t really know when they would be releasing it.

Then in late April came Vidu from China, in mid-May, Veo from Google, in early June, Kling, also from China (and which originally required you to have a Chinese phone number – since made available in the US). All of these were hailed as “Sora killers” with YouTubers talking about how people were SHOCKED, STUNNED etc. (yes, they usually put these words in caps), but to me they really didn’t match Sora’s quality at all.

Then in July RunWayML announced Gen 3, which I feel is finally a true Sora competitor. The image is a still from one of their videos, and they claim that it will be released “very soon”. So it’s looking like now Sora is really going to have to pull a rabbit out of the hat to compete. Also in July came Luma, and in August, came Flux, both of which are very good.

Tony Rockliff

AI Consultant with 25 years of AI experience

https://personalcustomgpts.com

Book a free no-obligation AI Consultation with Tony at https://lnkd.in/ehaRThue to find the best ways to use AI for your specific needs.

#AI, #ArtificialIntelligence, #Consultant, #ChatGPT, #Ideogram, #MidJourney, #video

The invention of the printing press in 1436 caused consternation and fears, especially in the Church, which back then wanted a monopoly on knowledge, but it had a major positive impact on the Renaissance as it facilitated the creation and dissemination of new ideas.

When photography was invented in 1822, painters rose up in arms because people and images could now be captured in an instant, instead of weeks or months.

“From today, painting is dead!” exclaimed French painter Paul Delaroche. But it resulted in a whole new breed of artists and many more opportunities for artistic expression. And as far as I know, we still have living painters.

And when Photoshop came out in 1990, some photographers were horrified, until they tried it and they saw what it could do for them and their work, and then they embraced it.

Gramophone records and radio threatened the Musicians Union which had a hold on the economics of live performances. Television sets threatened movie theaters, Cable TV threatened Broadcast TV, Streaming threatened Cable TV, and the Internet threatened information dispersal, ownership and control. And steam engines and cars threatened the horse and buggy. Yes, jobs were lost, but all of these also created enormous numbers of new jobs.

Disruptive technologies usually work democratically; they allow increasing numbers of people to have access to those things which were previously very rare, expensive, or difficult to produce. A disruptive technology challenges the status quo, forcing change

AI is a disruptive technology, arguably the most disruptive technology of the 21st century.

Yes, it will replace a lot of jobs, but it is predicted to create more new jobs than it replaces, just like the many disruptive technologies before it.

It’s important to differentiate between different kinds of AI – AI that tries to replace artists is clearly not good, but AI that helps artists market themselves is good, in my opinion.

It’s up to you whether you embrace it, or try to avoid it. I embraced it back in 1998 and I’m very happy that I did.

Tony Rockliff

AI Consultant and builder with 25 years of AI experience
https://personalcustomgpts.com