Ty Harper
-
Posts
396 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Ty Harper
-
-
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.
-
5 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:
For what it's worth, I think there will still be plenty of stuff for people to develop expertise in, it's just going to be quite a different load of stuff.
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.
-
4 hours ago, IronFilm said:
I can see the "team" being even further reduced. You don't need a Senior and a Host. One of them is enough!
Maybe none!
-
22 minutes ago, kye said:
What was the reasoning, if it was before AI?
Aftereffects of COVID? or the changing media landscape with streaming etc? Something else?
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.
-
3 hours ago, IronFilm said:
Weekly?? What are they losing their jobs because of
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://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbc-radio-canada-layoffs-budget-1.7048530
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/feb/21/buzzfeed-layoffs-complex-sale
-
14 minutes ago, Ty Harper said:
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean it bothers me lol,
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...
-
1 hour ago, ghostwind said:
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean it bothers me lol, and yes, it IS ironic r.e. my second point. As for lots of folks losing jobs, that's how it's always been with technological advancement. Adapt, be relevant, or die. Lots of useless jobs out there...
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...
-
2 hours ago, ghostwind said:
As an example, I read some folks talking about leaving this field and going into IT, and I found that a bit ironic, as a lot of those jobs will be automated pretty fast. To me that's panic, not rational thinking.
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.
-
2 hours ago, ghostwind said:
There's a difference between ignoring it and obsessing about it like in this thread and in the news in general. Too much obsessing about the unknown is a waste of time. Be open about it, changes, educate yourself, but no need to panic and put things "on hold" because the "AI" monster is coming.
As an example, I read some folks talking about leaving this field and going into IT, and I found that a bit ironic, as a lot of those jobs will be automated pretty fast. To me that's panic, not rational thinking.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Mmmbeats said:
Aside from some very obvious things, like news gathering, I don't see anything that machine learning could not potentially impact within the foreseeable future.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Mmmbeats said:
Of the course the nature of unpredictability is that just as equally, none of this might happen. But I think the main point to make is that the scale of the threat (to professional livelihoods) is so profound, that anybody just blithely ignoring it has their head in the sand to my reckoning.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Tim Sewell said:
I don't think anyone is going to pay a Netflix subscription to watch a steady diet of derivative AI-generated content.
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.
-
6 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:
And, oh yeah, forgot to say; a talented teenager with a handycam and a few good-looking pals will be able to create art infinitely more compelling than any AI can for far longer than any of us will still live on this planet.
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.
-
THR did an interview with Tyler Perry about all of this. Tyler is in the interesting position of being a director but also the owner of his own production company.
Great read!
====
The actor, filmmaker and studio owner is raising the alarm about the impact of the tech, saying, "I feel like everybody in the industry is running a hundred miles an hour to try and catch up, to try and put in guardrails."
BY KATIE KILKENNY
Over the past four years, Tyler Perry had been planning an $800 million expansion of his studio in Atlanta, which would have added 12 soundstages to the 330-acre property. Now, however, those ambitions are on hold — thanks to the rapid developments he’s seeing in the realm of artificial intelligence, including OpenAI’s text-to-video model Sora, which debuted Feb. 15 and stunned observers with its cinematic video outputs.
“Being told that it can do all of these things is one thing, but actually seeing the capabilities, it was mind-blowing,” he said in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday, noting that his productions might not have to travel to locations or build sets with the assistance of the technology.
Is Hollywood Sleepwalking Toward Strike Three?
As a business owner, Perry sees the opportunity in these developments, but as an employer, fellow actor and filmmaker, he also wants to raise the alarm. In an interview between shoots Thursday, Perry explained his concerns about the technology’s impact on labor and why he wants the industry to come together to tackle AI: “There’s got to be some sort of regulations in order to protect us. If not, I just don’t see how we survive."
After seeing Sora, what are your current feelings about how fast AI technology is moving and how it might affect entertainment in the near term?
I have been watching AI very closely and watching the advancements very closely. I was in the middle of, and have been planning for the last four years, about an $800 million expansion at the studio, which would’ve increased the backlot a tremendous size — we were adding 12 more soundstages. All of that is currently and indefinitely on hold because of Sora and what I’m seeing. I had gotten word over the last year or so that this was coming, but I had no idea until I saw recently the demonstrations of what it’s able to do. It’s shocking to me.
What in particular was shocking to you about its capabilities?
I no longer would have to travel to locations. If I wanted to be in the snow in Colorado, it’s text. If I wanted to write a scene on the moon, it’s text, and this AI can generate it like nothing. If I wanted to have two people in the living room in the mountains, I don’t have to build a set in the mountains, I don’t have to put a set on my lot. I can sit in an office and do this with a computer, which is shocking to me.
It makes me worry so much about all of the people in the business. Because as I was looking at it, I immediately started thinking of everyone in the industry who would be affected by this, including actors and grip and electric and transportation and sound and editors, and looking at this, I’m thinking this will touch every corner of our industry.
Are you currently implementing AI in any of your productions and/or do you plan to do so in the near future?
I just used AI in two films that are going to be announced soon. That kept me out of makeup for hours. In post and on set, I was able to use this AI technology to avoid ever having to sit through hours of aging makeup.
How are you thinking about approaching the threat that AI poses to certain job categories at your studio and on your productions?
Everything right now is so up in the air. It’s so malleable. The technology’s moving so quickly. I feel like everybody in the industry is running a hundred miles an hour to try and catch up, to try and put in guardrails and to try and put in safety belts to keep livelihoods afloat. But me, just like every other studio in town, we’re all trying to figure it all out. I think we’re all trying to find the answers as we go, and it’s changing every day — and it’s not just our industry, but it’s every industry that AI will be affecting, from accountants to architects. If you look at it across the world, how it’s changing so quickly, I’m hoping that there’s a whole government approach to help everyone be able to sustain.
How would you like the entertainment industry as a whole to confront this rapidly developing technology?
I absolutely think that it has to be an all hands on [deck], whole industry approach. It can’t be one union fighting every contract every two or three years. I think that it has to be everybody, all involved in how do we protect the future of our industry because it is changing rapidly, right before our eyes. I think of all of the construction workers and contractors who are not going to be employed because I’m not doing this next phase of the studio because there is no need to do it.
What’s your message for the industry at this point, as we’re watching this unfold?
I know each union is individual, and I know that unions have stood with each other in times of negotiation, but I think that this is a time for galvanizing one voice in motion to help save, protect the individuals of our industry.
As a studio owner, are you feeling any pressure to use AI at this point?
No. I’m absolutely not feeling any pressure to use it, but I’m definitely looking at the advantages and what it brings to the table. However, I can focus on the bottom line of my studio continuing to do extremely well and avoid the conversation, or we can jump in and have the conversation head-on to make sure that we’re protecting all the people that are coming up. So I’ve got two sides here to this thing. For me, I’m looking at my business and the bottom line, but I’m also very concerned about all the people that I have trained and bought up in this industry. I’m concerned about what will happen to them.
How do you think this convergence of the rapid development of AI and the current contraction in the industry is going to play out?
I think it’s going to be a major game-changer, because if you could spend a fraction of the cost to do a pilot that would’ve cost $15 [million], $20 million or even $35 million if you’re looking at HBO, of course the bottom line of those companies would be to go the route of lesser costs. So I am very, very concerned that in the near future, a lot of jobs are going to be lost. I really, really feel that very strongly.
Who needs to act? You’re speaking up about this, but who else should be speaking up and working on this?
I just hope that as people are embracing this technology and as companies are moving to reduce costs and save the bottom line, that there’ll be some sort of thought and some sort of compassion for humanity and the people that have worked in this industry and built careers and lives, that there’s some sort of thought for them. And I think the only way to move forward in this is to galvanize it as one voice, not only in Hollywood and in this industry, but also in Congress.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/tyler-perry-ai-alarm-1235833276/
-
-
5 minutes ago, JulioD said:
How is this different to the introduction of Mini DV?
it allowed filmmakers to make a digital movie where it used to cost many tens of thousands of dollars.
This feels like the same leap but with animation.
What it does is impressive. But it’s still a tool operated by a human. The I stands for intelligence, but it’s not independently thinking or creating.
While reality tv is contrived it’s still the work of independently performing humans (actors?) with their own flaws and traits. Even if they followed a script what they bring and how they perform it is unique in that moment. I’m not sure AI will replicate that human agency any time soon. It may be able to fake it and maybe that will be good enough but I suspect that the audience won’t see it that way.
Julio do you work professionally in the media/film production industry? Not meant with any condescension or malice - just want to get a sense of where you're coming from?
-
2 hours ago, KnightsFan said:13 hours ago, JulioD said:
It won't always look shitty.
Sorry but anyone who's saying this looks sh*tty must not have seen the original Will Smith spaghetti one they had a year ago. THAT was sh*tty - this new one is no where near perfect, but sh*tty is just a ridiculous descriptor of something that is still developing. It is imo good enough for us to understand the implications for the art-based labor industry.
-
-
Also forgot to mention that I think journalism/reporting/news gathering, where the facts of an event are a priority, are spaces where traditional cams/audio, etc will still matter. At least in publicly funded broadcast vs private broadcasting companies. But both realms will be tested by advertisers and waning streams of investment to support those journalistic standards and practices.
-
6 hours ago, kye said:
I agree, but I think there is a distinction here between videos that contain people I know/care-about/etc and people I don't.
If a movie people see has Brad Pitt in it, people probably don't care if it was the real Brad Pitt or an AI version of him, and if they go see a movie they probably don't care if the actors are even real people or AI generated fictional characters.
However, if I watch a video that has anyone I know in it, and it's a depiction of a real-life event then it matters if it was real footage or not.
This might seem to be irrelevant detail, but I think that this means that the following parts of the industry may not be completely gutted:- Documentaries
- Sports videography
- Engagement/Wedding videography (although some might want a more 'enhanced' version than reality)
- Event videography (birthdays, bar/bat-mitzvah and other religious occasions, etc)
- Corporate videos
- All live-streamed event videography
- News and current affairs TV
- perhaps others?
These are pretty significant percentages of the entire professional moving images industry. It's easy to start thinking that no-one will pick up a camera professionally any more, but that's just not likely to be the case.
Even if you're right that people born from now onwards don't have any special relationship with reality (which I don't think will happen for a very long time), the people who are 10 years old now might live for another 100 years and they probably want to continue to want to see real life content, so that will be phased out pretty slowly.
I don't think any style or medium or approach is ever rendered completely obsolete. I think the ones you can't monetize just become much less sensible to use for that particular purpose. Whether we're talking reel to reel tape for audio production (which I started with!), OG film cameras, vinyl, cassettes, etc. These become super niche things that creators pull out to return to a "warmer", "more analog" feel. So one day using digital cameras and capturing actual human beings will very likely fall into that category in the media economy - particularly Hollywood.
As far as what you're saying about documentaries. Well that is a world I have been thinking about the most, as a hobbyist and sometimes professional. I think it will be a mix of what you're saying. For example, I'm doing a family doc about my parents. How they met, fell in love, moved to Canada from the Caribbean, etc. I've already filmed the main interviews with them. But it is clear that there isn't alot of historic video footage of them as kids or as a young couple. So this is totally where AI will transform the possibilities for this project. Because I could take archival photos of them from those periods and use AI to create video representations of those photos in tandem with what they are describing from their past in the video interviews I've already captured. Even create AI video scene of dialogue between them as a young couple based on their accounts. Will it seem strange to them. Maybe? But I'm more inclined to think it will be surreal and fascinating. For me personally, I have no video footage of myself as a kid - and I can tell you I would really appreciate using tech like this for that purpose.
All that said, I agree that weddings and realtime captures of life and current history will likely still depend on some tyoe of traditional raw video capture. But even in that instance I think there's a scenario where you now use something compact like a phone (with much less interest in thinks like the highest resolution, dynamic range, etc - bcuz AI won't need that kind of stuff) just to give AI the raw data to work with, and then AI reproduces that raw capture perfectly and with even more 'detail' AND gives you infinite angle options to build what we now call a 'multicam' doc of an event.
I would even think that you could get alot of that done with photos of the event and the people there as well.
If anything audio might be the thing we still need to continue to capture the way we do it now - but again, you prob wouldn't need to worry about having the ultimate quality either - just some raw data for AI to work with.
So yeah, there are ways that traditional tech will likely still be used - but it will prob be vastly minimized and also very obvious that AI tech will be driving the bulk of the creative process.
-
2 hours ago, JulioD said:
it just makes shitty images available to anyone.
This is vastly underestimating the quality of AI based video in the near future. You must see that the tech we're seeing/talking about right now will be capable of reproducing imagery that is stunningly life like. The only thing being removed from the equation moving forward is our role in the capture process. But even that is not true - because this AI tech stands on the sum total legacy of everything humans have captured of the world to date. One thing that is humbling about AI-based video/audio etc, is that it is telling us that even our physical existence can be reduced to 1s and 0s.
There were/are human economic systems within which something like AI would/can be used in non-exploitative ways towards human beings. We unfortunately do not exist within one of those system at the moment.
-
59 minutes ago, kye said:
I feel completely safe in doing my own home videos of family and friends.
I don't care how photorealistic the AI will get (and it will get to be perfect), there will still be a fundamental difference between what something actually did look like vs what something might have looked like.
This difference will remain as long as people are attached to a physical reality at all.
There are parallels in other mediums as well. Art forgeries are still forgeries, even if they're perfect. If you think that no-one will care, just google "art providence" and see how much people really do care.
Agreed. As you say, if people want to use cams and other traditional forms of real life capture for home/family use, no one will stop them. But it's unlikely that media/film production companies in the future will be hiring/paying people who offer camera capture, set design, lighting, etc, etc, as a sole and primary service - which is really what we're talking about. Also, the AI approach won't be seen as a 'forgery' to mass consumers in most circumstances. The ones intended for insidious deep-fake purposes? Yes, of course. But most AI-based video will be seen/consumed as a valid representation of real life ala a painting. It will also be impossible to tell the difference in the future. That's just based on how far a company like Open AI has come in a year. Also, these distinctions we're making around real vs fake will be irrelevant to the vast majority of humans born into it from here on out. All realms of commerce have experienced crushing human labor disruptions in the past and present times (car manufacturing being the most obvious example). What makes this stunning and unique is that it is happening to the realm of commerce (i.e art-based commerce) that we instinctively know humans will continue to do whether they are paid for it or not. You can't say the same for alot of other realms of the human labor economy. So it will be, imo, one of the most poignant blows in the history of human labor to date.
-
Firmware updates could become subscription model?
In: Cameras
Posted
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.