The Prequel Radical Redux Ideas Thread — Page 379

BedeHistory731 said:

Ok, name them. Tell me where you’re seeing this and not just fanservice junk. Otherwise, this “user error” is pretty universal.

I watched the video you sent. The channels that he’s picking on I would agree don’t have much passion. It’s clear that this is a money-making venture for them. But it was a boring video in general because he’s just pointing out oddities with the technology that will inevitably be solved as it continues to evolve.

I recommend these channels:
Star Wars Chronicles
Latent Diffusion

The difference with those is that even if they borrow extensively from source material, it’s clear that they’re putting their own spin on things. Real artists do this all the time. John Williams’ score for the original Star Wars is extremely derivative of Gustav Holst. Please watch this video.

Then learn how to write, how to draw, how to create things without AI. It’s that simple.

I was fortunate enough to be born with the ability to write well. Articulating my thoughts in a clear and concise way comes naturally to me. I know plenty of people that, try as they might, are simply not skilled in this way. Some even have disabilities like dyslexia. It really isn’t “that simple”. Drawing, for instance, was something I’ve tried to get good at as a young person. But even if I kept practicing, that didn’t mean I would ever turn out to be the next Leonardo da Vinci. Lots of these things are just genetic. These things might come naturally to you, and you’re blessed to be able to say that. But you have to understand that this makes you sound like a very ignorant person. I’m not calling you that, I just wanted you to be aware.

It makes garbage and that’s all the users will ever get from it. Trying to couch it in the language of financial privilege is a filthy tactic, given how AI has destroyed so many financial privileges for many.

Once again, this technology is still in its infancy. Trying to punch it while its at its lowest point feels like a filthy tactic to me. All I meant by the financial side of things is that, for the longest time, Hollywood has had a stranglehold on the types of stories that can be developed because the barrier to entry to make a movie is so incredibly high. You need to have connections to a corporation in order to make a huge project like that. Or, if you want to use military equipment, suddenly the US government gets to say what does or doesn’t go in your movie. As a result, there are plenty of folks that feel the kinds of narratives they want to see are not being developed. And I don’t mean that in a political sense necessarily, moreso that they’d like to see storytelling prioritized over any particular agenda. It’s the same issue that George ran into when trying to develop his movies, and it’s why he hated Hollywood (and they hated him in return). It’s why it’s exciting to see new directors like Curry Barker somehow able to make it mainstream despite the odds.

This isn’t mythmaking, it’s fanwank. But unlike the best Rule 34 you’ll find online, it was made without any real skills or passion. You can try to dress it up all you want or try to add nuance, but it’s all deflection. You so deep in this hole that I know I’m wasting my time, but I just want to get my points out there.

I don’t feel like I’m in a hole. This is authentically what I believe. I too realize that this is a waste of time but I want to get my points out there so people don’t truly believe that I’m out here mindlessly shilling for AI corporations. I’m simply pointing out that, since this technology will inevitably consume our daily lives in the future, there is a way that this could all go good for us if we started embracing it in the way I’m describing now. But people don’t want to wake up to reality at all, I guess. Whatever. Your loss.

Jar Jar Bricks said:

BedeHistory731 said:

Ok, name them. Tell me where you’re seeing this and not just fanservice junk. Otherwise, this “user error” is pretty universal.

I recommend these channels:
Star Wars Chronicles
Latent Diffusion

Genuinely vomit-inducing, even from the thumbnails. I can’t understand how you see any appeal in this.

The difference with those is that even if they borrow extensively from source material, it’s clear that they’re putting their own spin on things. Real artists do this all the time. John Williams’ score for the original Star Wars is extremely derivative of Gustav Holst. Please watch this video.

Williams still had to physically write the music down, check to see if it was how he wanted it, have humans who were paid money to play it and mix it, etc.

Then learn how to write, how to draw, how to create things without AI. It’s that simple.

I was fortunate enough to be born with the ability to write well. Articulating my thoughts in a clear and concise way comes naturally to me. I know plenty of people that, try as they might, are simply not skilled in this way. Some even have disabilities like dyslexia. It really isn’t “that simple”. Drawing, for instance, was something I’ve tried to get good at as a young person. But even if I kept practicing, that didn’t mean I would ever turn out to be the next Leonardo da Vinci. Lots of these things are just genetic. These things might come naturally to you, and you’re blessed to be able to say that. But you have to understand that this makes you sound like a very ignorant person. I’m not calling you that, I just wanted you to be aware.

No, I don’t sound ignorant at all. Even the most incompetent of human-made art is better than anything AI could dream of creating. I’d rather see crayon scribbles or awkwardly-written trash than something a few prompts drew up.

It makes garbage and that’s all the users will ever get from it. Trying to couch it in the language of financial privilege is a filthy tactic, given how AI has destroyed so many financial privileges for many.

Once again, this technology is still in its infancy. Trying to punch it while its at its lowest point feels like a filthy tactic to me.

Infancy shminfancy. This is tech producing what it will always produce.

All I meant by the financial side of things is that, for the longest time, Hollywood has had a stranglehold on the types of stories that can be developed because the barrier to entry to make a movie is so incredibly high. You need to have connections to a corporation in order to make a huge project like that. Or, if you want to use military equipment, suddenly the US government gets to say what does or doesn’t go in your movie. As a result, there are plenty of folks that feel the kinds of narratives they want to see are not being developed. And I don’t mean that in a political sense necessarily, moreso that they’d like to see storytelling prioritized over any particular agenda. It’s the same issue that George ran into when trying to develop his movies, and it’s why he hated Hollywood (and they hated him in return). It’s why it’s exciting to see new directors like Curry Barker somehow able to make it mainstream despite the odds.

Curry is an exception and I’m sure he never would’ve never developed as a creator with AI just letting him lazily dump fanwank online. You also assume that we have to turn to Hollywood to make the stories we want, when we can always just write them down ourselves or illustrate them and put them online. Fucking Ready Player One of all things has more merit than the slop, because at least its creator wrote stuff for real.

This isn’t mythmaking, it’s fanwank. But unlike the best Rule 34 you’ll find online, it was made without any real skills or passion. You can try to dress it up all you want or try to add nuance, but it’s all deflection. You so deep in this hole that I know I’m wasting my time, but I just want to get my points out there.

I don’t feel like I’m in a hole. This is authentically what I believe. I too realize that this is a waste of time but I want to get my points out there so people don’t truly believe that I’m out here mindlessly shilling for AI corporations.

I firmly believe it’s your opinion too and we reserve the right to disagree with you.

But people don’t want to wake up to reality at all, I guess. Whatever. Your loss.

We know the reality and we don’t tolerate it. That’s the nature of it and if people don’t like you for shoving AI in their faces, read the room and follow accordingly. Having fewer slop merchants among us is our gain.

I’ve come to understand the fundamental divide between those hating on AI and those willing to use it: the former believes that you need to practice enough to earn the ability to express yourself in a sophisticated medium. Often at the cost of some suffering, and such that the majority of people are excluded. And the latter believes that everybody, almost as a human right, has a message that is worth sharing with everyone no matter the means, but within reason. I’m firmly in that camp. It makes sense that most artists would be in the first, because they’ve already invested so much of their time, effort, and resources into their craft. It would hurt for all of that to eventually be for naught (though you would never admit that). So I can’t really fault you for having an anti-AI position. I empathize with you in that way. The only thing I can fault you for is when you take out that pain on others for simply expressing themselves in a way that you find abhorrent for personal reasons. So, likewise, I would kindly ask that you keep that hatred to yourself. And if you don’t, I would take it back, and consider you an ignorant person.

And that’s the last I’d like to say on this matter. I’d rather focus my efforts elsewhere.

Jar Jar Bricks said:

I’ve come to understand the fundamental divide between those hating on AI and those willing to use it: the former believes that you need to practice enough to earn the ability to express yourself in a sophisticated medium. Often at the cost of some suffering, and such that the majority of people are excluded.

Suffering isn’t a part of it at all. It can be, but it’s no more suffering than learning can be.

And the latter believes that everybody, almost as a human right, has a message that is worth sharing with everyone no matter the means, but within reason.

I think you mean “creatives who actually worked and deserve to earn a living from it can be screwed,” but you’ll couch it in the language of accessibility. The means do matter, because in a capitalistic society, our learned abilities generally are the way we make money and live.

I’m firmly in that camp. It makes sense that most artists would be in the first, because they’ve already invested so much of their time, effort, and resources into their craft. It would hurt for all of that to eventually be for naught (though you would never admit that).

It would hurt and hurt others who want to learn and want to intellectually engage. Just having some slop machine make what you want is legitimately anti-intellectual. Anti-intellectualism, need I remind you, is one of the plagues that has created so much suffering in the world.

So I can’t really fault you for having an anti-AI position. I empathize with you in that way. The only thing I can fault you for is when you take out that pain on others for simply expressing themselves in a way that you find abhorrent for personal reasons.

I’ll tell anybody “expressing themselves” in an offensive manner to go pound sand.

So, likewise, I would kindly ask that you keep that hatred to yourself. And if you don’t, I would take it back, and consider you an ignorant person.

I’m not taking that hatred back. The world would be a much better place if we treated AI with disdain. Besides, it’s not real hatred on the level of racism or transphobia or ableism. Trying to equate anti-AI sentiment with ableism is dishonest and disregards how disabled people will make efforts without AI to see their ideas manifest.

Though to concede one point, I’m ok with less generative stuff like sound isolation and some upscaling. The upscaling often looks terrible though, having ruined the last few Doctor Who Collection boxsets (we would be better off if companies beyond discotek did SD-blu ray).

That’s my final bit. I don’t much care for generative AI and I certainly don’t want it in fanedits.

I would like to see AI fixing some of the more cringe worthy fx in the saga like stunt actors doing weird acrobatics with dodgy face swaps. Or Tarkin in ROTS and Rogue One or Leia. That sort of thing.

FYI this is precisely why I made the other thread. They don’t have to engage with us and we don’t have to engage with them. It’s a waste of time.

Unless of course you add a rule to your thread via the description, BingoWings.

AI has undeniable ethical considerations. I think it’s acceptable to voice those but if it’s just voicing the genuine issues it could be pointless after a while. Every fan editor is manipulating trademarked and copyright intellectual and artistic content. Using aftereffects or Photoshop can avoid data centre use but it’s still using energy that is ultimately contributing to climate change. Suggesting alternative methods of achieving the same goals would be more creative and in the spirit of these forums.

I think it’s usable as a tool in some areas, but you have to keep in mind that it fundamentally has less artistic merit and it’s not the real thing. It can never have the same intentionality or creative process as a real person with skill. It does help people who don’t otherwise have any talent or skill to produce something functional, but functional is not the same thing as good or valuable. It can be a fun toy to play around with, but should not be taken seriously as a medium.

No one says that they’re a chef because they can microwave food, even though the food is edible and cooked. Pressing play on a music player doesn’t make you a musician, even though music is coming out. “Oh but I had to come up with the prompts.” Okay, you handed a robot some very detailed instructions. The robot still did it, not you.

In the case of fanedits, it’s probably useful for generating voice lines or deepfakes for actors that we wouldn’t be able to get otherwise. But that’s purely functional, it’s not the real actor and never can be. That’s why it’s best used for small adjustments to tweak exposition dialogue, and so far that’s mostly how it’s been used here, as far as I can tell.

The prequel CGI argument is just lame and hangs on the “the prequels were underrated” meme culture of the last decade. Even if there were a lot of real models and sets, the green screening and CG quality were still glaring problems, especially in parts of episodes 1 and 2. Most of the practical effects in the original trilogy still hold up better. No disrespect to the visual effects artists who worked on the CG. And at the very least, they were artists who had to actually do the work and adapt real concept art.

Vladius said:

The prequel CGI argument is just lame and hangs on the “the prequels were underrated” meme culture of the last decade. Even if there were a lot of real models and sets, the green screening and CG quality were still glaring problems, especially in parts of episodes 1 and 2. Most of the practical effects in the original trilogy still hold up better. No disrespect to the visual effects artists who worked on the CG. And at the very least, they were artists who had to actually do the work and adapt real concept art.

The CGI artists were also subject to horrific crunch conditions for at least AOTC. I guess it was a pioneering movie in other, more depressing ways.

Could we not do personal attacks? It’s a Star Wars fan edit thread. Everyone commenting is a human being. Please focus on that regardless of your opinions.