this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
-2 points (37.5% liked)

Apple

19240 readers
25 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MichelleG@lemmy.world
RoyalEngineering@lemmy.world
thisisdee@lemmy.world
-2
If Apple TV+ starts using AI for its future series and movies, would you still watch it? (lemmy.zip)
submitted 1 week ago by IsaamoonKHGDT_6143@lemmy.zip to c/apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I asked this question after seeing the news that Netflix used AI in the Argentine series called "El Eternauta." It made me wonder if Apple will use AI for its future series and films in the future.

What would you think of this decision, and will you continue using the Apple TV+ service?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Aurich Director of Many Things24y38,890ARS STAFFJ4yDubs said:I'm against most AI being pushed on us right now, but I actually don't have a problem with AI being used to create a scene like that (building collapsing). It's a scripted fictional scene with a clear directed vision. If the director thinks the results look good and match his vision, why should I care if it was a model, drawn, ray-traced, AI, etc.?Yeah, it's going to replace some graphic artists, much in the same way they replaced model builders, but technology tends to do that.I do think we gotta be careful about letting buzzwords trigger our outrage response."We used a computer program to simulate a building crumbling instead of having to destroy a real building."Okay cool, that's actually pretty much normal these days. When I see that stuff in shows I realize it's fake."We fed a photo of the building into our simulator and it created a realistic collapse, with rubble and everything."Neat, was it like ... Houdini or something? I've seen Visual FX Artists React, I know what Houdini is! Particle sims or something?"The software is getting really good, a very small team can now do visual effects, allowing smaller budgets to take on high concept ideas."That's actually pretty awesome."Oh, the software was generative AI."WHHHATTTTT??? D:Not trying to minimize the real issues, but at the same time nobody gets upset when particle sims get better or something. It can feel like we're proxy mad at things because of other issues.ReportUpvote183 (198 / -15)Friday at 2:05 PM

But wait

To me the real tragedy is when the new software technique out-competes the old technique in a way that's detrimental to the art as a whole and everyone in it.Improving explosion simulations is great, and using AI to do it isn't necessarily bad. However, the scenario of, "Hey, create me an explosion in the style of the FX artist I fired last year," is terrible because the artist responsible for moving forward the state-of-the-art explosion FX technology has been taken out of the system. That's a net-loss for everyone.

Yep -

create me an explosion in the style of the FX artist I fired last year

Illuminating article and more good comments here - not black & white