Submitted 1 month ago by MooseTheDog@lemmy.world to [deleted]
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1e7ea006-1748-43e9-b92f-dc1d92e7f2f1.jpeg
People who make low effort AI bashing commentary videos, but it’s just them reading a script over some stock footage. You shouldn’t be making worse content than and AI my guy.
What’s wrong with using stock footage for its intended purpose? How do you expect people to provide visuals for their commentary video outside of this? Draw or film it themselves? How would ai be an improvment?
There are so many channels that produce creative visuals for their videos, even if they don’t have deep skills, like plenty of people draw stick people in paint and it’s miles more creative than the guys that just put vaguely relevant stock footage in the background
Most people who make YouTube videos do it as a hobby or side thing and not as their main profession. Can’t expect pro grade from a hobbyist ;)
I think this technique varies in success depending on the content of the video. And for some people even just being satisfied enough with their own drawings is too distracting or time consuming compared to less diverse stock footage options. They may be self conscious about their skills as an artist or worried that their drawing isn’t really expressing their point as well as stock footage might have.
Even just whipping up some stick people in paint, saving the frames, and ordering them in the video can be more time consuming than picking some clips from an existing library of footage. Many youtubers still have full time jobs and may not have the time or creative energy to add their own drawings to a video.
How about don’t use any footage if it’s not relevant to the article?
I’m tired of seeing articles like this ”UHC CEO murdered in the street”, with a stock photo of a CyberTruck …… unless there’s a connection they don’t want us to know about
Genuine question, what’s wrong with stock footage? What else should they use?
AI ofcourse, because thats like totally better bro.
I think the point was more that there’s no big difference in their opinion
What’s wrong with AI?
Probably film the footage themselves, if possible
To stream original content, you must first create the universe.
Or a reaction channel
Reaction channels are proof we’ve degenerated culturally. Fuck independent thought look at this goober make a face at instead of having an opinion yourself.
I don’t get it.
Probably overthinking it but eidunno
I think it’s mostly just content theft. On the audience end, viewers who aren’t immediately put off by the reactor and are too lazy to find the original might just watch it. On the reuploader end, there’s basically no effort involved and it can make them some money. Laziness is nothing new.
“They could have paid real artists to create artwork for their YouTube-Videooooooooo!!!1111!!! But no they use Stock footage, they are so evil! EVIL!!!”
exactly. like, mate, i hate to break it to ya, but people do have to pay to use stock footage. artists do get paid for that
What’s the “bigger problem”?
Algorithms that value engagement over quality are the bigger problem. Stock footage and AI are both fine and basically unrelated to this problem.
If you dislike vapid slop that’s designed to maximize adherence to opaque and fickle metrics, you might wanna reconsider whether gen AI is fine and unrelated to the problem.
We’re seeing the genesis of the information equivalent of Kessler Syndrome here. Toxic promotion algorithms are quaint, comparatively.
May I direct your attention to: youtu.be/gfr4BP4V1R8?si=KtWrbCSwdfY-bRQG ( just add stock footage in your head )
Low effort content and padding the presentation out to maximize ads. I use to automatically discard videos that were around 11 minutes long before signaled that it was optimized for ads, the YouTube changed their policy at some point.
Not AI obviously
Mac@mander.xyz 1 month ago
False.
FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Many of them really consider their spoken part to be the majority of their content, the stock footage is there to keep our attention, it isn’t necessarily the whole point of their channel and lets them get their points across without spending tons of time or money on their own footage. Many of this style of youtuber will also include charts, graphs, or diagrams when relevant between the stock footage. It gets them more views than some boring powerpoint style presentation between graphics.
Mac@mander.xyz 1 month ago
Yes, I agree. I’m often interested in what they have to say and the charts and graphs are a major bonus.
Stock images as visual filler don’t bother me.
This is 1000x better than an AI video.
MooseTheDog@lemmy.world 1 month ago
May I direct your attention to: youtu.be/gfr4BP4V1R8?si=KtWrbCSwdfY-bRQG
Mac@mander.xyz 1 month ago
You may not.