producing One of my methods to test quality of screenplay : Program it as visual-novel video game

Hello Creative Minds,

In this post, i would like to share one of my earliest works, which shows one of my methods to test quality of screenplay, to explore, other filmmaking aspects in simpler way, and relatively easier to implement with zero cost

the method, is turning my screenplay into visual-novel video game, in term of programming, visual-novel games is one of easiest to develop, as it depends mainly on showing artwork and visual scenes more than real interaction which requires real programing

for me, as i have programing background, it was easy for me, to dive in and tries this approach, the below video is example for applying this methodology as result for testing screenplay of short story,

Humans (-1): Glory`s Guardians (1st chapter of Humans Negative Anthology)​

talking about serious issue, common in societies which are still formed of "tribes", and the common crime there which is called "Honor Murder"

I am thinking about re-producing this simple story into short film, raising awareness toward this serious crime

Hope you find that inspiring, enjoy :)

Note: as i was just testing, the dialogues have been roughly written , and can be seen at the bottom of screen, my apologies in advance for unclear text



Currently, I am working on testing screenplay of 2nd chapter, using completely different method, Stay tuned :)
 
Last edited:
Check out this post here

Seems like a great alternative way to produce a visual story
Interesting, so now we have AI auto-illustration tools, what interesting results, let us explore this approach :)

Thank You Sean, that is great :)
 
Continuing to use AI for illustration , I just remembered something, one time, i have been reading an issue raised by illustrators, that some AI models use existing illustrations as reference within the database, and photocopy it with some improvements, affecting the original credits, many illustrators have reported their work have been reproduced without their credits, so maybe this is a concern we may need to consider when we want to use those models, especially if we choose to publish it to others, and not only for testing, but again , it is still fascinating AI advancement in past years
 
Last edited:

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
Continuing to use AI for illustration , I just remembered something, one time, i have been reading an issue raised by illustrators, that some AI models use existing illustrations as reference within the database, and photocopy it with some improvements, affecting the original credits, many illustrators have reported their work have been reproduced without their credits, so maybe this is a concern we may need to consider when we want to use those models, especially if we choose to publish it to others, and not only for testing, but again , it is still fascinating AI advancement in past years

Interesting.

It's not a photocopy at all according to my understanding, what they are doing is way way more sophisticated than that.

Take this short film for example (i've never seen it - just searched it up randomly "in the style of david fincher")

David Fincher could come in here and complain, hey that person watched my movies, looked at my style, and then copied it!!
And they would be right... but so what?

That's what people have been doing for thousands of years, thats how pretty much ever artist - ever - has learned their craft.
By looking at other works of art and then taking that information in and making it your own.


Can you show me an example you're talking about where someones work was copied with what the original artist did and then what the AI produced? I understand some artists are upset by this revolution and don't like that it learned from their paintings, but that is way different than a photocopy.
 
Last edited:
Regarding the film example, this case is common, and such arguments exist long ago, even some people stop this argument by calling it "inspiration",

But for AI photocopying, here is an image shared by illustrator, shows that some AI models actually accepts as input to feed it specific illustration, then bring very close results

of course there is room for argument, that AI has "inspired" your style, and as reply to that, another illustrator has prepared like graph telling difference between "Human Inspiration" & "AI Sampling", also attached

by sharing those cases, i want to re-confirm , that i am still with trying more creative technologies to save time and efforts, but in parallel to ensure this advancement to proceed with minimum side effects as possible, in term of protecting our creative rights, it is time to call out philosophy professors from their isolated classes, and request their help to find and look for new meaning of ethics and define "New Ethics & Policies" regarding the usage on public to these AI models or any highly advanced technology which protects our rights, such step become important with this fast advancement, because maybe the next step AI may photocopy a film, as we already have A.I animation technology named "deepfake "

That is my humble opinion, what weird world we live in these days huh? :)
 

Attachments

  • 1673285020241.jpg
    1673285020241.jpg
    71.9 KB · Views: 7
  • 1670361390537.jpg
    1670361390537.jpg
    140.7 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
Regarding the film example, this case is common, and such arguments exist long ago, even some people stop this argument by calling it "inspiration",

But for AI photocopying, here is an image shared by illustrator, shows that some AI models actually accepts as input to feed it specific illustration, then bring very close results

of course there is room for argument, that AI has "inspired" your style, and as reply to that, another illustrator has prepared like graph telling difference between "Human Inspiration" & "AI Sampling", also attached

by sharing those cases, i want to re-confirm , that i am still with trying more creative technologies to save time and efforts, but in parallel to ensure this advancement to proceed with minimum side effects as possible, in term of protecting our creative rights, it is time to call out philosophy professors from their isolated classes, and request their help to find and look for new meaning of ethics and define "New Ethics & Policies" regarding the usage on public to these AI models or any highly advanced technology which protects our rights, such step become important with this fast advancement, because maybe the next step AI may photocopy a film, as we already have A.I animation technology named "deepfake "

That is my humble opinion, what weird world we live in these days huh? :)
Your example doesn't work for me because it's extremely incomplete.
For an example to be valid you need to include what the text string was to create that art.

For example if I tell an AI painting to "create the mona lisa by leonardo" yeah it's probably gonna photocopy the original painting but thats exactly the same thing as if a human sat down and decided to copy it too.

If your INTENTION is to copy, then yes the AI will copy, and that is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to someone using it for original work.
What matters is if you tell the AI to create something original and then it gives you a copy instead -- THAT would be a serious issue.

When you intend to create something original and instead it gives you a copy?
Are there any examples like that - Where it copies someones work WITHOUT explicitly being told to copy the work?
 
Last edited:
It's an interesting discussion. George Lucas openly stated that Star Wars was a refabrication of older western movies, and that he basically templated it from Joseph Campbell's book "The Hero with 1000 faces". I think the story of art history is one of each generation standing on the shoulders of giants to achieve new artistic heights by building on top of what's been established. Should John Ford have sued Lucas and shut down the production of Star Wars before anyone could see it? I doubt that a society so protective of the past could ever venture too far into the future.

Here's a demonstration of how the art world would work if no one could ever do anything derivative.


And here's what it would look like if no one had any creative ideas, and everything was derived from an earlier creative work.

 
Hi Sean,

"When you intend to create something original and instead it gives you a copy?
Are there any examples like that - Where it copies someones work WITHOUT explicitly being told to copy the work?"

currently i do not have that example, unless if i have access to source code of used AI model, and how it does work, but let us forget about all what we have discussed and ask this very simple question

"How AI produce art based on chosen text?

is it based on highly complex mathematical calculations, with no database to store other works as reference"

OR

"AI needs to store examples in huge database, and the more you feed it , the better its work will be, such approach known now and called Machine Learning", now ethically, if AI is producing work based on stored works of others, without knowing who they are, is it ethical to consider work your work or not? this is philosophical question, and this is why i mentioned philosophy professors, because some weeks ago, in Saudi arabia they organized conference to gather philosophy researchers from all the world to highlight and discuss the questions that should be the questions of this age, and among the main topics they discussed was "Space" & "AI" and concerned ethics around it

so basically, Sean, we can not completely have conclusive judgment unless we know the used AI how it works, but again, i wanted to raise this concern just if we choose this path, need to tread carefully, personally i may use such approach for testing my screenplay, to help me consider visual aspects, and improve my screenplay, but i do not think i will consider officially publish my screenplay using it as medium until i make sure all concerns were properly answered
 

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
Hi Sean,

"When you intend to create something original and instead it gives you a copy?
Are there any examples like that - Where it copies someones work WITHOUT explicitly being told to copy the work?"

currently i do not have that example, unless if i have access to source code of used AI model, and how it does work, but let us forget about all what we have discussed and ask this very simple question

"How AI produce art based on chosen text?

is it based on highly complex mathematical calculations, with no database to store other works as reference"

OR

"AI needs to store examples in huge database, and the more you feed it , the better its work will be, such approach known now and called Machine Learning", now ethically, if AI is producing work based on stored works of others, without knowing who they are, is it ethical to consider work your work or not? this is philosophical question, and this is why i mentioned philosophy professors, because some weeks ago, in Saudi arabia they organized conference to gather philosophy researchers from all the world to highlight and discuss the questions that should be the questions of this age, and among the main topics they discussed was "Space" & "AI" and concerned ethics around it

so basically, Sean, we can not completely have conclusive judgment unless we know the used AI how it works, but again, i wanted to raise this concern just if we choose this path, need to tread carefully, personally i may use such approach for testing my screenplay, to help me consider visual aspects, and improve my screenplay, but i do not think i will consider officially publish my screenplay using it as medium until i make sure all concerns were properly answered
I'm just saying I've yet to see a single example where someone asked a program to create something original and they were given a copy of someone elses work. I think if something like that existed it would have made it into my news cycle.

but surely i cannot have a conclusive judgement about it, you're right.
Time goes on. I think the most serious ethtical concerns about AI are more about how it can imitate someones voice now, and how it can imitate someones face. a scammer with AI can literally facetime your grandma and have your face, and your voice too, and tell her they're in trouble and scam her out of money. It's crazy what is possible these days.
 
Last edited:
I think I'm the only one here who actually knows how the AI works on a math level, and explaining it would take many pages, and then no one would understand anyway. I took a 6 week course from udemy, and at the end, I just barely understood what's going on. The first 2 weeks were about how to have the system arrange and map an insanely large matrix of random numbers, and then after you've packed ten billion random 1s and 0s into labeled crates (a cartesian variable filing matrix) then it kind of starts raining data into the matrix like a pachinko machine.

It's completely insane in scale, but relatively simple one atom at a time.

To try and answer your basic question, all of the AI's output is refabrication of an aggregated database of imagery that was used to "train the model" This can be movie frames, internet images, etc. Then the text prompt and settings are used to influence how the database fabricates image X.

I think that it's relevant to your question to note that this is also how human artists function, albeit in an analog sense. Every painting or film in history is made by a creative refabrication of sensory input we've collected in our lifespan. Have you seen the shows "Dexter" and "You"? They are clearly driven from the same creative template, but have unique identities.

I would not spend a huge amount of time second guessing yourself. What will happen is that while you're thinking about whether or not it's ok to use AI, 100,000 people will just use it and snatch up all the entertainment contracts. If you're stealing something from another creative, I think you'll know you're doing it. If you accidentally come up with a similar thing to someone else, that happens all the time, and is not considered theft. There are defined legal limits, and you might find it useful to research them if this area is confusing, but the bottom line is that if you are working hard at your creativity, you shouldn't really have to worry about it.

Here's an interesting video that sheds some light on your question, in a roundabout way.

 
Last edited:
Hi Nate,

My apologies for the delay in replying to you, in fact our local time now is 11:19 am, still our working time , i am talking while tending to other works in my office lol

For your first reply, lol, it is interesting how things repeat their selves but this time with more visible way,

For 2nd reply, interesting to know you have background in how those AI works, sure will help us decode their black boxes, I totally agre with you, in fact, the main concept of AI is to mimic how human mind works, your words let me think of interesting twist, could it be what AI did was exposing our old errors as humans, which before was difficult to proof, but now you easily can call for it, with tangible proofs? could be AI will not only make our life easier but also will help us understand our selves much easier as reflection to us? here goes interesting question to trigger interesting film idea :)

For me , it is festinating and some how reassuring to me, that with all we achieved , we as individual can still bring something new, the beauty of life :)

Regarding the posted video, interesting one, I love philosophical challenges from there, you can dig great ideas for films, watching it now

(Loading...Please wait) :)
 

sfoster

Staff Member
Moderator
the main concept of AI is to mimic how human mind works
That's actually not true, at least from an academic standpoint.
the purpose of AI has nothing to do with imitating humans, or simulating emotions, or being alive, or any of that.

The study of AI is simply this - the pratical application of problem solving techniques.
My major was computer science, I'm no expert in AI - I only took one senior level AI class as an undergraduate with this textbook
 
Hi Nate,

My apologies for the delay in replying to you, in fact our local time now is 11:19 am, still our working time , i am talking while tending to other works in my office lol

For your first reply, lol, it is interesting how things repeat their selves but this time with more visible way,

For 2nd reply, interesting to know you have background in how those AI works, sure will help us decode their black boxes, I totally agre with you, in fact, the main concept of AI is to mimic how human mind works, your words let me think of interesting twist, could it be what AI did was exposing our old errors as humans, which before was difficult to proof, but now you easily can call for it, with tangible proofs? could be AI will not only make our life easier but also will help us understand our selves much easier as reflection to us? here goes interesting question to trigger interesting film idea :)

For me , it is festinating and some how reassuring to me, that with all we achieved , we as individual can still bring something new, the beauty of life :)

Regarding the posted video, interesting one, I love philosophical challenges from there, you can dig great ideas for films, watching it now

(Loading...Please wait) :)
Lol, you bring up another interesting topic. It's my belief that AI will indeed shine a light on many human errors, and probably the sooner the better. Every human including myself has a million biases, built up over life. Situations and relationships exert pressure, medical conditions and financial circumstances affect decision making. Robots don't have those issues. A military contractor in the US sold claw hammers for 800 dollars a piece, and the military bought them. That would never happen with an AI supervising transactions. The supplier was greedy and criminally unethical, the buyers were stupid and lazy about oversight, and I'm sure many other factors played in. Maybe the guy who owned the hammer company had an expensive wedding to pay for. None of it excuses robbing the taxpayer blind, and an AI would come to that conclusion 10x in a row in the time it took a coin to fall to the floor.
 
Robots don't have those issues. A military contractor in the US sold claw hammers for 800 dollars a piece, and the military bought them. That would never happen with an AI supervising transactions.

They don't? :weird:

So stock trading software sending prices through the floor, or Google Maps being fooled into thinking there's a traffic jam on a particular route, or YouTube/TikTok pushing fake news to the top of their recommendations - are all just ... glitches?

But perhaps that's a topic for another thread, as even with my most creative human mind, I'm struggling to make a link with the OP's idea for testing a screenplay's inherent quality. :)
 
Well, I'm describing a different level of AI that doesn't exist yet but will someday. The systems you are describing are not designed to find flaws in human decision making processes. One day, it is inevitable that such software will exist, since many of our problems as a society are derived from the bias of individuals with motives irrelevant to the task at hand.

And yeah, maybe it's off topic, but the OP seemed interested in talking about AI, so only a little off.
 
That's actually not true, at least from an academic standpoint.
the purpose of AI has nothing to do with imitating humans, or simulating emotions, or being alive, or any of that.

The study of AI is simply this - the pratical application of problem solving techniques.
My major was computer science, I'm no expert in AI - I only took one senior level AI class as an undergraduate with this textbook
(Loading Complete 100%)
Finished watching Nate`s video about why computer was invented in first place, "Spoiler Alert!", to just proof if math/logic is consistent or not

and it actually supports what you are saying here Sean, how math/problem solving pushed to find more creative ways, so all evolutions we have these days, just because of a man`s strong desire to find answer for question

but like all evolutions, AI applications have taken different diversion and find its way to other minds who forgot its original purpose, re-use it for something different, so this is basically an agreement to both what you have mentioned and what i have mentioned about mimicking human behavior

BTW, my major is computer science too, welcome mate :)
 
Last edited:
Lol, you bring up another interesting topic. It's my belief that AI will indeed shine a light on many human errors, and probably the sooner the better. Every human including myself has a million biases, built up over life. Situations and relationships exert pressure, medical conditions and financial circumstances affect decision making. Robots don't have those issues. A military contractor in the US sold claw hammers for 800 dollars a piece, and the military bought them. That would never happen with an AI supervising transactions. The supplier was greedy and criminally unethical, the buyers were stupid and lazy about oversight, and I'm sure many other factors played in. Maybe the guy who owned the hammer company had an expensive wedding to pay for. None of it excuses robbing the taxpayer blind, and an AI would come to that conclusion 10x in a row in the time it took a coin to fall to the floor.
and that is another thing your video is supporting and my main take from the video, "you can not understand life and others by just mere logic, as logic is incomplete in its self", [Drop The Mic] lol
 
They don't? :weird:

So stock trading software sending prices through the floor, or Google Maps being fooled into thinking there's a traffic jam on a particular route, or YouTube/TikTok pushing fake news to the top of their recommendations - are all just ... glitches?

But perhaps that's a topic for another thread, as even with my most creative human mind, I'm struggling to make a link with the OP's idea for testing a screenplay's inherent quality. :)
Hi Brian,

Welcome, man, you just reminded me of interesting case supporting what you are saying (why my mind works like google search, do not ask me lol)

The case was one of companies who are specialized to sell products regarding new born babies, were working on system, how can they predict when the woman become pregnant using deep data mining analysis, so they can plan their marketing campaign to target those families, after long time of collecting data of different customers who usually buy their products, until they finished this system, one time, they received a complaint from a married man that their company keep sending him continuous ads of baby products, telling them, he is sure that his wife not pregrenet with any baby, the company checked their system and found out the system is telling them this family should be targeted, here they start to doubt the accuracy of their data, days later, the same man called back apologizing for his previous complain, as it was unknown to him, his daughter was pregnant, and he understands now why he was targeted by ads,

so yah data analysis can lead to accurate prediction, but sure there are numerous cases proof the opposite too lol
 
Top