Ty Harper

This strategy might've worked at the onset of the DSLR revolution when there was still a lot of room for cam improvement around essential features. But given where we're at with cam tech and needing for very little to tell a fantastic story - that is no longer the case. Right now, we actually seem to be arriving at a point where AI will disrupt our dependency - not just on using cameras to capture the world - but on the idea that we ALWAYS need cams/audio devices to tell visual/auditory stories that can 'authentically' capture our real world. That last part to me is one of the big things being blurred/contested. Either way, if you play it out, this particular type of subscription-based strategy will likely only work/make sense for large media companies, who for legal/tax reasons, do not buy gear from the used market. As someone who works for a large media corporation, what I am seeing/hearing first/second hand, is an increased interest in PTZ cams, along with AI apps that can cover multi-cam switching duties (a quick google search showed me one by CognitiveMill). In that case I can definitely see the subscription model working, bcuz PTZ's (from what I can tell) require no camera people per se - moreso tech support people who make sure these PTZ's are ready to go for any given multi-platform show, on any given day, and are on standby to troubleshoot any daily issues that come up. So in a case like that I definitely see the subscription model working - albeit at the expense of the loss/shrinking of jobs/shifts for camera people, etc.

As a hobbyist whose day job intersects with the film world, I can say that there is no way I would ever buy into a subscription system - and I can say that because the two R5Cs with their current features are literally all I need for any and all present and future projects. I'll maybe get an R7/R6 MKII/R5 to fly on my RS3 Pro (bcuz the R5C cannot be used wirelessly with that gimbal) - and maaaybe a C70. But honestly I'm at the end of the road for camera purchases. But also I think the current cam selection is so amazing nowadays that a move to a subscription-based model will likely push even more people to the used market - and aside from storage media, every piece of gear (cam, lights, etc) I've ever bought in my hobbyist career (10+ years at this point) has been from the used market.

If we are to believe that AI will potentially disrupt the way creators think about storytelling, then it seems clear that cameras will factor much less into the capture workflow. I'm sure these companies know this and are beginning to tighten their sh*t up, and that will mean strategies like this as and other approaches as the market continues to shrink.

Yes I see that, but I can also see these types of jobs only being viable long enough until AI makes another leap and renders them obsolete. Pretty much a race to the bottom where the jobs that are paying/viable have little to do with being creative.

Maybe none! https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/robots-run-the-show-as-swiss-radio-station-tests-ai-voices-for-a-day-1.6374928

I'm sure all of the above. Point is people in those realms of media were already on edge and then along comes Sora. But to be clear, many already felt AI had the power to do this - so Sora is just confirming it.

Feel free to take a gander below. Keep in mind I work as a producer on a talk program that directly intersects with terrestrial radio/tv, podcasts, pop journalism and film. There's also funding for several acclaimed/high end BIPOC tv shows/upcoming docs here in Canada that have either not been renewed or were not greenlit bcuz these cuts were on the horizon. Point is this was all happening BEFORE this Open AI/Sora news hit. https://apnews.com/article/canada-media-job-cuts-newscasts-bell-media-d02a5dbf200e86e333c227dbceecac68 https://www.cp24.com/news/bell-ends-some-ctv-newscasts-sells-radio-stations-in-media-shakeup-amid-layoffs-1.6761001 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbc-radio-canada-layoffs-budget-1.7048530 https://www.billboard.com/business/business-news/pitchfork-layoffs-restructuring-under-gq-1235583802/ https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/feb/21/buzzfeed-layoffs-complex-sale https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/television/acclaimed-cbc-bet-drama-the-porter-will-not-receive-a-second-season/article_748effd1-c40b-5c2b-b3c9-1a6eb132b1f1.html

You literally went out of your way to let us know you disagree with the way people are "obsessing" over these recent advances in AI. If that isn't a sign that you're bothered I'm not sure what is...

Yes, and part of all of that is people panicking, expressing fear, y'know, the stuff humans do in moments like this... so why are you acting like all of this isn't just normal behavior? Particularly on a forum, lol...

Is it ironic tho - or is it a sign of the sheer scale of changes coming to the labor market. But also, when you've got a mortgage and bills to pay at the end of the month - you tend to panic about tech advances like this. Some aren't experiencing this chewing the fat on a forum - I'm watching colleagues in the media world losing their jobs weekly.

Lol, this is a forum FILLED with people "obsessing" over much less important stuff - but also - we all respond to cultural shifts like this differently - so if this thread bothers you, feel free to move along. I do it all the time.

I def see anyone whose job revolves around script research/writing being impacted by this - so that includes producers in the news gathering field. So if you've got an EP, then a Senior Producer, then producers and then Associate Producers - I can see that being flattened out to maybe just a Senior and a host making up an entire team.

All of this! But also as I said in an earlier post - everyone has their own way of coping in a moment like this - so I'm trying my best to not judge or engage when that seems to be the case.

I hope you're right - but when I hear comments like this it makes me think alot of us are probably in for a big reality check on the impact this will have on mainstream content. I'd also say that we already have ample signs that there is indeed a huge appetite for content that isn't human. It's called cartoons, animation, CGI, etc. I'm not sure of the history of animation's rise but if there was a backlash to that tech - it obviously didn't last. Also I'll say it again: my 5 year-old will not have these moral attachments to human vs non-human content - and it is them and future kids that will be driving all of this. But again, I hope you're right.

No technological advancement will ever stop humans from the desire to make art. So what you're saying is 100% true but not really in dispute. This is about the filmmaking economy and who will be able to make a sustainable living off the art of filmmaking.