Ai – Analogy Incorrect

I was laying in bed this morning listening to a podcast where the presenter likened the use of Ai tools in the making of a film to the use on synthesisers. Actually he went further than that ..

“The coming of Ai is just like the coming of synthesisers. Its happening we have to accept it”

(that may be paraphrased but that was the gist).

The statement was enough to make me want to throw my Ai based “smart” listening device out of the window!

First let me clear up my issue – I have NO doubt Ai is coming and we do have to accept that. The issue I have is with people thinking Ai is analogous to the synthesiser. True – we did think in the ‘80s that synths would replace orchestras and in the end they did not, however that is where the analogy ends.

Let’s expand.

In the 1980’s I hand a box of tricks to a bass player and tell him, here you go, you no longer have to carry that heavy instrument around, this little box can sound exactly like your double bass. In fact, if you press this button you could mimic your guitarist and this button adds your drummer…

Today I hand the box of tricks to the bass player and ask him to hold it. I tell the box “create a song about trains in the style of a UK skiffle band” …

The difference? In the 1980’s the song still needed a writer, it still needed (at least one) musician to interpret and put their emotions into it to create the final piece.

In the film industry, the synth is analogous to the digital camera. The skill set changes slightly but it still needs the camera operator, the Director of Photography, the Editor, the composer, the whole crew (some working differently) to create the final piece. With Ai moving at the pace it’s moving we will just end up with a director in a dark room giving commands to a computer that will render the images and compose the music (it could even have written the script at the directors discretion), so no, the analogy is not correct.

Digital as a tool gives us different tool , expanded possibilities and reduced costs but it does not replace the creator as Ai does.

Should we put a hold on this technology? I am 100% sure there are areas where the advancements will be hugely positive for us, maybe in medicine, hopefully in how we can resolve our impact on the planet but let us not confuse this with “art”.

There must be reasons why orchestras continue, why many of us are returning to analogue playback (records, or “vinyl”), why we are supporting filmmakers like Christopher Nolan for his continuing to shoot and present on film, why many still photographers are back experimenting with film.

Digital might of “democratised” photography (to use a well worn phrase) but it’s only the start of the process.

I am truly of the belief that “true” great art does not come from ease, it comes from the commitment, the learning, interpretation, emotion, the struggle to create the final piece.

Technology might advance the human race but our humanity is measured in the art we create.