This is awesome. Video production just takes so many hours for each second and I don't think people know how much work it takes until you help out on a shoot.
For example: NASA spends billions on research and development just to be able to push a rocket upwards into space? How much of that will be cut out when we just go straight to AI-generated plans and schematics?
It only makes “a lot of sense” if you’re willing to compromise your standards and eliminate labor no matter the consequences.
Also, no one is going to force actors and movie studios to go full AI and those who wish can stay with the old paradigm. It will be up to customers to decide where their money goes. However, if AI allows for the same or higher quality and more creative freedom at lower costs, I'm pretty sure the old ways will get outcompeted.
What an inefficient way. How much time will be saved when we go straight to computers watching that content for us and summarising it in 140 characters.
And art is a term that's quite ambiguous and often means different things to different people. I think you would agree that a lot of people consume movies simply as entertainment. From that perspective, it matters less where the data about pixels came from. This is coming from a person who loves movies, artsy, not artsy, and everything in between.
Unless that's satire. But I'm not sure it is.