There is a notion among many that AI creators just type prompts and something appears, and that's it. But before any of this, I spent many years writing my stories, characters, and trying to build a new world. Learning digital tools for 3D and drawing, in addition to writing. Mostly trying to learn at night, after work, despite being tired, not sure if it would lead anywhere, and really, for me, that wasn't the point. I just wanted to create what was in my head.
None of that effort disappeared just because the tools changed. The tools have always changed and evolved. No matter what though, I'm always the one making the creative decisions about what these worlds, characters, and stories look like and deciding how the story moves.
This is some of that process. I'm the same person that's been building my stories for a long time, and I'm just a bit further down the road now thanks to evolving technologies.
The crash out over Martin Scorsese using AI for storyboards is ridiculous.
You would think he kicked a puppy.
He is not using AI to replace cinema. He is not asking you to use it. He is using it to visualize ideas faster in pre-production, which is exactly where this kind of tool makes sense.
That is not the death of art.
That is a director trying to communicate what is in his head before time and money start burning.
A lot of people yelling about this have never stepped foot on a film set, never dealt with pre-production, and never had to explain a shot to a crew while the clock is running.
Filmmaking has always changed with technology.
The tool is not the issue.
The issue is whether it replaces human creativity or helps artists make the thing they already see.
Scorsese using AI does not make him less of a filmmaker.
It means he is still curious.
And I trust Martin Scorsese with a new tool more than I trust the internet with a manufactured panic attack.
The two most interesting things in Hollywood right now are low-budget horror and AI filmmaking.
That sounds weird, but it makes sense.
Both are showing audiences what happens when creators get around the usual studio machinery.
BACKROOMS opened huge on a $10M budget. OBSESSION cost under $1M and turned into one of the biggest horror stories of the year.
Neither one feels like a studio committee trying to reverse-engineer what young audiences want.
They feel specific.
That is the same reason AI filmmaking is exploding online.
Not because every AI short is great. A lot of it is not.
But people are responding to the idea that someone can make something big, strange, cinematic, or emotionally weird without waiting for permission from a studio.
That is the real shift.
The gatekeepers are still there. A24, Blumhouse, James Wan, Shawn Levy โ these systems still matter.
But the audience is clearly open to work that feels like it came from an actual person with a real obsession, not a content strategy deck.
Hollywood is going to chase this. Of course it is.
They will buy YouTube horror channels. They will chase creepypastas. They will scout AI filmmakers. They will try to turn authenticity into a slate.
That is where it gets dangerous.
Because the lesson is not โmake everything cheaper.โ
The lesson is that audiences are hungry for voices that do not feel pre-approved.
Low-budget horror has that.
The best AI filmmaking might have that too.
Not artificial intelligence replacing artists.
Authentic intelligence using new tools to get around the people who keep saying no.
๐Using a slot machine GIF is very telling, exposing your own inconsistency. You said yourself that it "can't guarantee good results," which means results track the skill of whoever's driving. That's the opposite of a slot machine. But you've swapped arguments three times and landed on a GIF, so I think we're done here. I'll let the work do the talking. ๐
Saying "AI is not a tool, it's a service" is making a distinction without much difference. Photoshop and Logic are subscription services too, and that doesn't make their output not-art. As for skill, you're assuming creating AI art is just typing a word and accepting what pops out. Many of the people doing it well bring story, composition, art direction, shot design, editing, and taste, in addition to digital skills. All transferable skills the tool doesn't supply. Also, your argument about using skills outside of PS/Logic cuts both ways. Plenty of digital artists can build a 3D model or paint in Photoshop but can't pick up a brush and paint/draw traditionally, those skills don't always transfer either. Nobody says their digital work isn't "real art" because of it. Skill being specific to a medium has never disqualified the medium. You said it yourself that AI "can't guarantee good results." That is exactly right! Because the results still depend on the person with the skills driving it. If there were no skill involved, everyone's output would be identical. Yet it isn't.
@Ruan3D_@DougTenNapel Okay, dodging the question, fine. I'll reiterate. Photoshop, Cintiq, render farms, even brushes and paint, all cost money. Is what's produced with them still art? Jumping to an entirely different argument isn't an answer.
This is Beltazar the Lion Man, one of my characters from Super Galactic Fantastic Dimension: Alphatron Adventures.
Top left is where he started, a 3D concept I built in Daz3D many years ago. I used that as reference for the artists on my first comic, which led to the panel next to it. He kept evolving from there.
The bottom is where he is now, and the clip is him actually moving.
Same character I've been carrying around for years. Took a while to get him here.
A milestone I've been quietly waiting to share: Martin Scorsese has joined @bfl_ai as an advisor.
We filmed a storyboarding session with him using FLUX and watching him use it not to replace his eye, but to get what's in his head in front of his crew faster. He called it creatively freeing. His words for it: cinematic intelligence.
Proud of everyone at BFL who made it real and of what we are building
Ever since I was a kid I wanted to make animated worlds, and on any given day you would find me drawing something. Once I hit college, life had other plans for me as I started a family young. So, family, jobs, and bills, took precedence. I never stopped working toward my dream though, just a lot slower than I wanted. I even self-published a comic along the way. As time went on, the digital tools became more accessible so I began my journey to master them to make what I wanted, which was challenging to say the least. Now the tools have finally caught up to what's been in my head all this time.
This is an intro WIP from Alphatron Adventures, one of the stories from Super Galactic Fantastic Dimension.
I've got some clips up already and more coming.
Yo! that is kind of brilliant. It would be a win, win, win situation for everyone. Even if zero people voted for your movie, you still got to make your movie. With the mass feedback created, you can then, very affordably, go back and edit/modify your movie as needed. Or just start fresh.
I mean, if you really want to push it, and I discovered this in my own learning process, you can try doing multiples of panels, 8 to 16 max, and Seadance 2 will try to render the whole sequence at 2 to 3 times speed...lol It is a pretty funny outcome, BUT, you can take that footage and just slow it down in your editor and it looks fine. Then overlay your audio. It takes a bit of trial and error with the speed settings but it does work.