If given the choice between something made using an AI tool by a techie and a creative, “I know which one I would rather watch at the end,” Davies, who founded video editing software company FXhome before it was acquired by Artlist in 2021, said.
Davies acknowledged the industry’s anxiety was not unfounded, with new video models having “struck fear in the hearts of everybody” – not just over copyright and personality infringement, but over the fundamental question of how film and television production will look in a matter of years.
“If I was bringing out an Iron Man movie in 2027, 2028 – would I be going to multiple visual effects houses, would I expect them to be utilising AI? We’re all kind of working out our way through that,” he said.
Davies described the platform’s AI video tools as a way to “fill in the bits that you can’t shoot, or didn’t shoot, or you don’t have the budget to shoot”, rather than a wholesale substitution for going out on location.
‘Holy grail’
Yet the timing is charged. Editors, visual effects artists and other Hollywood professions have watched the rapid advance of generative AI with alarm, fearing that tools capable of producing broadcast-quality footage at a fraction of traditional costs could hollow out entire job categories.
Major studios are actively evaluating how AI can be integrated into production pipelines, foreshadowing significant workforce changes across an industry that has already endured a bruising period following the Covid pandemic and writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023.
Artlist made headlines in February when it produced a Super Bowl LX spot in under five days using its own products, at a fraction of the multi-million-dollar cost typical of Big Game advertising.
Davies was keen to push back on the narrative that the ad represented the future of production without human involvement.
That wasn’t what it was, he said. It was creatives “using the tool to get the very best out of it”.
A self-described “techie guy,” Davies said the platform’s current obsession is on giving creators nuanced control over creating or editing footage – something he described as the company’s “holy grail”.
Existing models, he said, handle simple static shots reasonably well but struggle with complex camera movements and consistent performance across multiple takes.
You can prompt an elaborate shot, but for now “you’ll get something random” that you can’t work with.
On cost, Davies cautioned against unrealistic expectations, suggesting AI would reduce production expenses significantly but not eliminate them.
Davies said his long-term hope was that AI would serve as a levelling force for independent film-makers and content creators who currently lack the budgets to realise their ambitions.
“There are definitely YouTubers who make some of the best action work out there on no budget,” he said.
“AI will level that playing field completely – the story will be what matters.”
He struck a cautiously optimistic note on the creative industry’s direction, dismissing the most dystopian predictions.
“The idea that no one works at the end of it is the bit that doesn’t hold any water with me,” he said.
“There’s been more and more of everything, not less and less – and the cream rises to the top anyway, because the human element is what we crave.”
– Agence France-Presse
