I spotted this the other day and noted all the generated imagery, like AI meets CGI or something. It occurred to me that the title is a bit of a sales pitch.
We have a variety of AI pitches this week, covering a range of apps from writing assistants to ChefGPT. So far it doesn’t look like anyone has made an attempt at a hard-sell blackmail style pitch or a poison-pill deal, even though some are admittedly unfriendly to Aggressive Technologies. The main point of this exercise was to look over some of the tools that are out there to see what we might be able to use in the coming weeks. I was curious about AI video, so I played a bit with the Colossyan Text-to-Speech Video Generator.
I had a text generator output the script and used some basic settings in the Colossyan system. It said the video would take about 11 minutes to generate. I had to leave the office after 37 minutes, when it was still processing, but it finished within two hours when I returned. Could I have produced this with my phone and a couple helpers in 11 minutes? Probably. Except then I would have superior voices and more realistic movements.
This is not a comment on anyone’s sales pitch, but rather a reflection on AI generated “art.”
If we look at any aspect of the video – the setting, the character visualization, the animation, the voices, the editing, the background soundtrack – in my opinion, I think we would conclude that they are exceptionally lame. It’s free, so we would expect it to be closer to Blabberize than Ice Ice Matrix, but I’m not sure that the video offers anything more than the script does. On the other hand, one could take advantage of the bland, static nature of their video templates. I remember newspaper comic strips, like Red Meat, would often have static images of two people talking. Something like that could translate into short videos, with bland production contrasting with insane dialogue to humorous effect.
