by youssefarizk on 5/20/25, 5:46 PM with 531 comments
by vunderba on 5/20/25, 6:22 PM
by oliwary on 5/21/25, 10:32 AM
Created by Ari Kuschnir
by jjcm on 5/20/25, 6:52 PM
These larger companies are clearly going after the agency/hollywood use cases. It'll be fascinating to see when they become the default rather than a niche option - that time seems to be drawing closer faster than anticipated. The results here are great, but they're still one or two generations off.
by julianpye on 5/20/25, 7:48 PM
by Daub on 5/21/25, 7:47 AM
I like how Veo supports camera moves, though I wonder if it clearly recognizes the difference between 'in-camera motion' and 'camera motion' and also things like 'global motion' (e.g. the motion of rain, snow etc).
Obligatory link to Every Frame a Painting, where he talks about motion in Kurosawa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doaQC-S8de8
The abiding issue is that artists (animators, filmmakers etc) have not done an effective job at formalising these attributes or even naming them consistently. Every Frame a Painting does a good job but even he has a tendency to hand wave these attributes.
by Workaccount2 on 5/20/25, 6:41 PM
Its something that is only obvious when it is obvious. And the more obvious examples you see, the more non-obvious examples slip by.
by carlosdp on 5/20/25, 6:22 PM
by aaroninsf on 5/21/25, 4:09 PM
in the owl/badger video, the owl should fly silently.
This is an interesting non-trivial problem of generalization and world-knowledge etc., but also?
There's something somewhat sad about that slipping through; it makes me think, *no one involve in the production of this video, its selection, it passing review... etc., seemed to realize that it is one of the characteristic things about owls that you don't hear their wings.
We have owls on our hill right now and see them almost every day and regularly seem them fly. It's magic, especially in an urban environment.
by cynicalpeace on 5/21/25, 12:42 AM
1. People like to be entertained.
2. NeuralViz demonstrates AI videos (with a lot of human massaging) can be entertaining
To me the fundamental question is- "will AI make videos that are entertaining without human massaging?"
This is similar to the idea of "will AI make apps that are useful without human massaging"
Or "will AI create ideas that are influential without human massaging"
By "no human massaging", I mean completely autonomous. The only prompt being "Create".
I am unaware of any idea, app or video to date that has been influential, useful or entertaining without human massaging.
That doesn't mean it can't happen. It's fundamentally a technical question.
Right now AI is trained on human collected data. So, technically, It's hard for me to imagine it can diverge significantly from what's already been done.
I'm willing to be proven wrong.
The Christian in me tells me that Humans are able to diverge significantly from what's already been done because each of us are imbibed with a divine spirit that AI does not have.
But maybe AI could have some other property that allows it to diverge from its training data.
by nrjames on 5/20/25, 6:55 PM
It makes me sad, though. I wish we were pushing AI more to automate non-creative work and not burying the creatives among us in a pile of AI generated content.
by kapildev on 5/20/25, 10:08 PM
by anilgulecha on 5/21/25, 8:03 AM
The pace is so crazy that was an over estimation! I'll probably get done in 2. Wild times.
0: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7317975...
by jonplackett on 5/20/25, 6:48 PM
The demo videos for Sora look amazing but using it is substantially more frustrating and hit and miss.
by wingspar on 5/21/25, 2:00 PM
My last recollection is recent case said AI generated didn’t have copyright?
by ssijak on 5/21/25, 7:54 AM
by elzbardico on 5/20/25, 5:58 PM
by TheAceOfHearts on 5/21/25, 11:14 AM
My main issue when trying out Veo 2 was that it felt very static. A couple elements or details were animated, but it felt unnatural that most elements remained static. The Veo 3 demos lack any examples where various elements are animated into doing different things in the same shot, which suggests that it's not possible. Some of the example videos that I've seen are neat, but a tech demo isn't a product.
It would be really cool if Google contracted a bunch of artists / directors to spend like a week trying to make a couple videos or short movies to really showcase the product's functionality. I imagine that they don't do that because it would make the seams and limitations of their models a bit too apparent.
Finally, I have to complaint that Flow claims to not be available in Puerto Rico: "Flow is not available in your country yet." Despite being a US territory and being US citizens.
by arduinomancer on 5/21/25, 6:18 AM
I’ve noticed ads with AI voices already, but having it lip synced with someone talking in a video really sells it more
by gloosx on 5/20/25, 7:47 PM
Interesting logic the new era brings: something else creates, and you only "bring your vision to life", but what it means is left for readers questioning, your "vision" here is your text prompt?
Were at a crossroads where the tools are powerful enough to make the process optional.
That raises uncomfortable questions: if you don’t have to create anymore, will people still value the journey? Will vision alone be enough? What's the creative purpose in life? To create, or to to bring creative vision to life? Isn't the act of creation is being subtly redefined?
by Imnimo on 5/20/25, 7:36 PM
I'm always hesitant with rollouts like this. If I go to one of these, there's no indication which Imagen version I'm getting results from. If I get an output that's underwhelming, how do I know whether it's the new model or if the rollout hasn't reached me yet?
by sech8420 on 5/21/25, 4:41 AM
by afroboy on 5/21/25, 11:24 AM
by baxtr on 5/21/25, 5:51 AM
Why is it that all these AI concept videos are completely crazy?
by jader201 on 5/20/25, 6:39 PM
This naming seems very confusing, as I originally thought there must be some connection. But I don't think there is.
by numpad0 on 5/21/25, 2:25 AM
The obvious aim of these foundational image/movie generation AI developments is for these to become the primary source of values at cost and quality unparalleled by preexisting human experts, while allowing but not necessitating further modifications by now heavily commoditized and devalued ex-professional editors at downstream to allow for their slow deprecation.
But the opposite seem to be happening: better data are still human generated, generators are increasingly human curated, and are used increasingly closer to the tail end of the pipeline instead of head. Which isn't so threatening nor interesting to me, but I do wonder if that's a safe, let alone expected, outcome for those pushing these developments.
Aren't you welding a nozzle onto open can of worms?
by cryptoegorophy on 5/20/25, 9:32 PM
by lelandbatey on 5/20/25, 10:08 PM
Since Google seems super cagey about what their exact limits actually are, even for paying customers, it's hard to know if that's an error or not. If it's not an error, if it's intentional, I don't understand how that's at all worth $20 a month. I'm literally trying to use your product Google, why won't you let me?
by itissid on 5/20/25, 8:58 PM
https://www.figure.ai/ does not exist yet, at least not for the masses. Why are Meta and Google just building the next coder and not the next robot?
Its because those problem are at the bottom of the economic ladder. But they have the money for it and it would create so much abundance, it would crash the cost of living and free up human labor to imagine and do things more creatively than whatever Veo 4 can ever do.
by tianshuo on 5/21/25, 4:15 AM
Ideogram and gpt4o passes only a few, but not all of them.
by Animats on 5/20/25, 5:54 PM
Soon, you should be able to put in a screenplay and a cast, and get a movie out. Then, "Google Sequels" - generates a sequel for any movie.
by ericskiff on 5/20/25, 9:02 PM
by curvaturearth on 5/20/25, 8:28 PM
The guy in the third video looks like a dressed up Ewan McGregor, anyone else see that?
I guess we can welcome even more quality 5 second clips for Shorts and Instagram
by ravenical on 5/21/25, 2:05 PM
by brm on 5/20/25, 8:06 PM
by IncreasePosts on 5/20/25, 5:53 PM
by skc on 5/21/25, 2:08 PM
Think of all of your favorite novels that are deemed "impossible" to adapt to the screen.
Or think of all the brilliant ideas for films that are destined to die in the minds of people who will never, ever have the luck or connections required to make it to Hollywood.
When this stuff truly matures and gets commoditized I think we are going to see an explosion of some of the most mind blowing art.
by sergiotapia on 5/20/25, 6:16 PM
by pelagicAustral on 5/20/25, 6:38 PM
by onlyreal_1 on 5/21/25, 10:46 AM
by airstrike on 5/20/25, 6:37 PM
On a more societal level, I'm not sure continuously diminishing costs for producing AI slop is a net benefit to humanity.
I think this whole thing parallels some of the social media pros and cons. We gained the chance to reconnect with long lost friends—from whom we probably drifted apart for real reasons, consciously or not—at the cost of letting the general level of discourse to tank to its current state thanks to engagement-maximizing algorithms.
by sebau on 5/20/25, 6:48 PM
Not in 10 years but now.
People who just see this as terrible are wrong. AI improving curves is exponential.
People adaptability is at best linear.
This makes me really sad. For creativity. For people.
by skybrian on 5/20/25, 7:09 PM
by celespider on 5/21/25, 3:42 AM
by pier25 on 5/20/25, 6:46 PM
by nico on 5/20/25, 7:41 PM
Can’t wait to see what people start making with these
by nprateem on 5/21/25, 11:01 AM
by flakiness on 5/20/25, 7:10 PM
by ugh123 on 5/20/25, 7:07 PM
by methuselah_in on 5/21/25, 1:43 AM
by StefanBatory on 5/20/25, 7:22 PM
Thank you, researchers, for making our world worse. Thank you for helping to kill democracy.
by bowsamic on 5/20/25, 6:35 PM
by clarkcharlie03 on 5/21/25, 2:41 PM
by kumarm on 5/20/25, 11:44 PM
by rvz on 5/20/25, 6:58 PM
They all got smoked by Google with what they just announced.
by htrp on 5/20/25, 7:32 PM
by 999900000999 on 5/20/25, 7:18 PM
Google what is this?
How would anyone use this for a commercial application.
by impalallama on 5/21/25, 2:12 PM
by matthewaveryusa on 5/20/25, 7:25 PM
by _ncuy on 5/21/25, 2:52 AM
by phh on 5/20/25, 6:02 PM
by quantumHazer on 5/20/25, 6:09 PM
by Lucasoato on 5/20/25, 11:25 PM
A bit depressing.
by lenerdenator on 5/20/25, 7:19 PM
I mean obviously the answer is "no" and this is going to get a bunch of replies saying that inventors are not to blame but the negative results of a technology like this are fairly obvious.
We had a movie two years ago about a blubbering scientist who blatantly ignored that to the detriment of his own mental health.
by ionwake on 5/20/25, 11:05 PM
I cant be the only one wondering where the swedish beach volleyball channel is though.
by crat3r on 5/20/25, 7:29 PM
I imagine video is a far tougher thing to model, but it's kind of weird how all these models are incapable of not looking like AI generated content. They all are smooth and shiny and robotic, year after year its the same. If anything, the earlier generators like that horrifying "Will Smith eating spaghetti" generation from back like three years ago looks LESS robotic than any of the recent floaty clips that are generated now.
I'm sure it will get better, whatever, but unlike the goal of LLMs for code/writing where the primary concern is how correct the output is, video won't be accepted as easily without it NOT looking like AI.
I am starting to wonder if thats even possible since these are effectively making composite guesses based on training data and the outputs do ultimately look similar to those "Here is what the average American's face looks like, based on 1000 people's faces super-imposed onto each other" that used to show up on Reddit all the time. Uncanny, soft, and not particularly interesting.