zachpiecesThe band Rush just put out a handful of gross and lazy AI-gen music videos. So sick of this trend/degradation
KlankyI don’t understand when someone who is creative in one field uses AI to generate something in another field. Like, how would Rush feel if some visual artist used AI to make crummy knock-off Rush songs with their own art?
In most cases, I expect that moves like this are by the record company/rightsholders/whoever as a cheap cash-grab rather than the artist themselves. Peter Gabriel is a vocal exception to that.
CatoblepasIs this the first time you’ve heard that uploaders get a portion of ad revenue??
The music is the content, not the image. The image isn’t the thing generating ad revenue. You guys are tripping over a placeholder image, made by the guy that did all their album artwork and played keyboard on some of their songs on top of that.
It was this or a static image of their album cover (both of which are made by the same guy, so it’s not like they are screwing over their album artist either).
We don’t even know to what extent AI was used, if he generated the whole thing or just animated it with it. It might not be AI at all.
And having ad revenue doesn’t make everything on YouTube a cash grab, nor is it a cash grab the moment it includes AI. Stop being silly.
The music is the content, not the image
You initially said it was put up for free as a way to excuse it, now that I pointed out they’re making money it’s fine because the image isn’t what people come there for? In that case why use an AI image to begin with?
The music is the content and what is up for free. The image has little to do with the cash grab or ad revenue aspect of it. Free for us doesn’t mean they won’t make a tiny profit. I fail to see how I’m contradicting myself.
Why not use an AI animation. It literally just makes for a better visualizer.