Like what if any artist could make a whole movie by themself without needing millions of dollars or hundreds of people
Similar to how you used to need a huge studio full of equipment to record music and now someone in their bedroom with a DAW can do it
The entire industry is already turning out terrible shit, but doing it by wasting hundreds of thousands of actors, production teams, and studio dollars in order to churn out that nonsense.
Meanwhile, there are millions of latent storytellers, who, for whatever reason (but primarily: not born into extreme wealth and nepotistic connections) could never express their ideas in motion/cinema at such ambitious scales.
By putting this power in the hands of actually talented writers and storytellers, you create a completely new market of potentially incredible works of art.
the pursuit of mastery is at the essence of any craft.
Another thing to think about is what the AI is designed to do. Without knowing the details, I would expect it to be trained to produce the 'most likely' output given the prompt. Consequently, I would think being inventive is against its design, and 'most likely' is effectively that same as 'average'.
The same will be for the FX artist and 3D artists etc. The level of their work will grow, they will spend less time on dull work and more on tinkering with tiny but more important things like ideas, emotions, art overall etc.
If you have a team of X people producing Y pieces, and now X people can produce 10Y pieces, everything is fine as long as the demand for pieces keeps up. But if your company really only needs Y pieces or really any amount less than 10Y then the easiest thing for a company to do is go, "We don't really need X people, let's fire some"
Getting fired, in America at least, means loss of healthcare, income, and if it persists long enough housing. Most people are terrified of being homeless, broke, and without access to medicine.
So the problem not in the AI but in demand...
It's cold comfort to someone getting fired to tell them "If demand had also increased 10 fold you wouldn't have to sleep on the street."
The actual living human being who has had their livelihood destroyed probably isn't any less scared of their fate because you cleverly tut at them and go, "In actuality the AI didn't do anything bad to you, it just created a glut of supply and the market demand didn't keep up."
This aren't compatible at scale. If productivity grows, there will be less people doing the job.