Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
So the whole AI movie thing is really moving along now…
Everything here: AI generated. Actors, sets, props, stunt pilots, vocal performances, vfx… that’s a lot of people to replace with one guy and a text prompt on his laptop.
And as @MadeofWax has already demonstrated with his own impressive work, the tools are already in the hands of the revolutionaries.
If I was an old school Hollywood apparatchik, a manufacturer of cinema quality cameras, a set builder, an on site caterer, a studio security guard… any part of any industry supporting the current model of movie and tv production, really. I’d be worried. Very worried…
Comments
Still waiting on glitch free consistent scenes with “people” doing plain ordinary acting.
I like the idea of democratisation of content creation.
Folks are cleverly working around the limitations at the moment with short scenes and retaining visual contextual info between scenes, but won't be long before it improves further.
For now, anyone pitching any kind of visual content, be it advert, tv, or movie, should use this tech.
I've seen stuff that tries to create 3D 'assets' from images so possible that AI could generate these drafts, then other AI could help put it into graphics studio apps where it could be refined to the level of quality that's possible through current techniques.
Oh it's been going: we haven't even reached the starting point.
But if one is worried about being replaced by their tools, there's a lot more things to be worried about.
AI is a very very good tool. But just because one has the 400,000 robot doesn't mean all their problems are magically solved.
How do I know? I got paid this year to fix 1100 of those robots.
#IndustrialEngineer
If I was in the movie business, I'd immediately turn every single project I had on the backburner into a real project and have it earn money for me instead of waiting on it. The reason things don't get made in "Hollywood" is because of a lack of resources and because of the gatekeeper system.
Both of those are now gone.
And every actor, writer, director can set up their own shingle or join with another person who is sufficiently skilled in the dark arts of prompting to create their own dream projects.
These advances are huge for people whose entire careers have been captive to the whims of others.
These systems have no self-will, so people must still be the ones setting them in motion. And when driven people get access to the full spectrum of A.I. the results are going to be mind-blowing. We're about to enter a new Golden Age... or a new Dark Ages. People will choose which way the next era goes.
Generative AI and ChatGPT and the like “democratize” creation via theft. They are entirely reliant on having been trained on a corpus of material created by people who have not been compensated.
It will and already has started putting people out of work. Read the words of the people behind the technologies and you hear a sort of contempt for the people whose work they need to mine for the systems to work.
Their goal is not empowering people to create the art of their dreams. Their goal is allowing studios and streaming services to generate content without having to pay the writers, actors, composers and crews…because they don’t view any of those people as having special talents.
[not to mention the enormous carbon footprint]
Still looks bad, still won’t replace good taste and vision.
❤️
If only the legal system defined it as such and shut it down before it even started. Alas.
Sam Altman and Mark Zuckerberg are unintentionally hilarious when they downplay the value of the material they train their systems on. Both ‘If you don’t give us free access to the really good stuff we can’t build our amazing tools that will empower everyone’ and ‘individual contributors don’t add much value’. The latter is literally true but misleading. Because these systems are 100% reliant on the corpus. The “intelligence“ is product of the source material not the algorithms. The algorithms just generate text based on (sophisticated) statistical analysis applied to a massive database of source material.
Do you really think the carbon footprint is larger than that generated by physical production? It seems to me that there's potential for massive net reduction of the carbon footprint of producing entertainment the more real activities are reduced by CGI.
I'm not being facetious. It's a genuine question. That's just my impression, with no practical knowledge of the subject.
Yah it is also goofy seeing people say things like '100% AI generated'. The moment you even mention the training data they assume you are anti, but it is just common sense. Like people will sometimes say 100% CGI but then there would be a ton of photos used as textures etc.
The question around 'stealing' is a tricky one, art and music are supposed to evolve, they just used to call it 'inspiration' or 'tradition'.
With respect to movies, everyone working on those films has already been paid.
The constant blurring of 'real' and 'fake' is already causing issues.
I for one am both horrified and delighted by this:
https://youtu.be/K_XwseDwmuQ?si=OjSAT-MUc6GBx3F9
Yah I just think some people consider data being used by a company to train an AI/ML generator is stealing. I don't personally call it that, but then I also find the anthropomorphizing of AI/ML generators and ascribing words like 'learning' and 'inspiration' to it to fall kind of flat to me and doesn't feel very accurate either. The stuff is neat, useful, legal, I use it all the time and to be honest my main peeves are primarily how people I work with look at it; particularly those who do not use it creatively, or think too much about it, yet make tons of assumptions about it.
What it does show is that no matter what these people do they will not find consciousness inside a computer….art still requires the talent of bringing through ideas and transforming them into emotion.
AI is not going to do that. It is a tool not a life force.
This is a solid point. The real-world activities these virtual products create must more than offset any alleged negatives. You're replacing the time and energy of thousands of people with computing time. I think most criticisms of "A.I." to date are largely irrational.
Wouldn't you agree though that AI is likely to evolve to the point that for most practical purposes humans won't be able to distinguish between it and actual consciousness? If so, then in what way would it matter to a human whether or not it's real?
My grandmother used to argue vehemently back in the 1970's that computers would never replace humans doing regular jobs because "they can't think, they can only do what they're programmed to do". She was a very smart lady, so I didn't argue, but she was dead wrong. I think about those conversations a lot these days.
What about "You're replacing the time and energy of thousands of people with computing time." I mean, some may see that as a valid criticism.
A regular job soon will be people giving 'lap dances etc' in the street.
Not if the freed up time and energy gets used for better purposes.
I dunno, some of the most significant advances in robotics are being driven along just those lines. 😂
What I think your grandmother might have missed is that a lot of the jobs that have existed since the industrial revolution could be termed robotic to start with. I’m always willing to be challenged on it, but I do believe that there is a certain spark that exists within the human being that allows for creation in a way that robots by their very design are not really in a position to do. And that’s OK. I think that the technology can be useful as a tool and I appreciate the various apps and other technologies that I interact with everyday that make my life more comfortable. Honestly, do you think AI will ever appreciate the feeling of a hot shower on a cold morning by just opening a valve? This to me is one of the cornerstones of civilisation and I really don’t think AI could ever get it without being programmed to think this way.
I agree 100% with statements such as
However, I don't think it's a stretch to believe that AI will be able to mimic such thought and emotion to the extent that the average person won't be able to distinguish the real vs. the simulation.
I want very much to believe that there's something fundamental enough in us that we'd always sense the difference. I have a hard time convincing myself that will remain the case though. I'd much rather you be right than me on that point!
(fwiw, I believe we are unique in that we uniquely have a soul and spirit that continue on after death and that nothing can simulate that. I'm talking only of practical distinguishing in real life for most people.)
On the production side, perhaps, but Ai doesn't solve the problems when you come to promotion and distribution. Still a lot of hurdles there.
Bravo, yes it’s just machines imitating art, classical computing will never understand the quantum creative mind, only emulate its filtered output.
Whatever the carbon footprint, it’s replacing loving living humans, all of which are intrinsically unique.
Don't think of the traditional studio model. For the one-person studio head of the near future, promotion and distribution means YouTube, supported by ad revenue. It can mean a lot of different things. There are endless venues for well made things.
Apparently for techbros the ultimate goal is to make other people's existence meaningless.
I just can't get over how depicable this whole AI thing is becoming.
In the cinema complex you have 5 or 6 different films to compete with.
On YouTube there's millions of videos to compete with. Just getting your product noticed would be a huge problem.
And would you really want to rely on YouTube as a distribution partner? Not sure I'd trust them.
But, yeah, the movie industry is going to be shaken up, just like the magazine, newspaper, TV and radio industries have been.
We sure can’t be that far away from feeding the A.I an entire book with a bunch of directions and getting a full movie.
It will change cinema forever.