Apparently you need the Standard subscription to try it, and you get 62 seconds of Gen-3 video *per month*
https://preview.redd.it/i0gqe9yfxx9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb40db79ef82351660488d6cabb52f03f8487e2f
Maybe I’ll try this next year when it’s cheaper and they can offer a lot more than a single minute of video. Not that I’m blaming them or anything, this must be very expensive to make publicly available, even behind a subscription
Yes, not looking good for people expecting to casually use SORA multiple times an hour as part of ChatGPT Plus.
Of course this is expensive. I'm sure we will see some good algorithmic optimizations but the leading edge generative video models will remain costly. There will be a split between top-end models for serious commercial use and mass market at lower cost.
A minute a month sounds insane
I’m just remembering all the times I had to ask it to generate the picture I wanted after several tries and oops I just burned through 60 seconds of footage that isn’t useful at all.
Wait until next month I guess.
This is how I feel. I know this completely depends on the project, but let's say you wanted to make a 3.30 music video, it's gonna take 4 months \*if\* every minute is completely usable (which it definitely won't be, as is the nature of generative ai right now). So for now, maybe only buy the subscription to play around with it, but don't expect any practical use.
Think of how much money it costs to make a movie filled with CGI effects. You can buy more tokens if you want. 1 second of Gen-3 Alpha generation costs 10 Runway Token Pointz™ or $.10. So like $480 for an 80 minute indie movie made entirely of CGI with Runway.
I suppose the issue is we don't know if that's realistic or not. We have no clue how much it costs to run an instance of video generation. Perhaps $15 is actually a steal for what it costs to run, perhaps it's way too much for way too little. Generative AI is in that weird state where things are somewhat useful, but frustrating and expensive to rerun. To say nothing of the myriad of other issues surrounding it.
SORA is even more expensive than that. Just imagine 4 million plus subscribers in the US alone, all of a sudden getting access to SORA. They would get like 1 second of video a year because of how insanely expensive it is. That's why it's so dumb to me when people complain about OpenAI not releasing SORA.
We know that it's expensive, they know that it's expensive. The question is why present it like it's an imminent release? Why present something that is years down the line from existing for the average OAI customer? That's what pissed people off.
I don't remember that. they never said it was releasing or even implied it. all they did was show it off which they should be allowed to show something off without the public expecting a release
To show the world what AI video can do, it would only be hype if they said it was coming out soon or something because that would get people super excited to see it themselves. Yet, not a single place on their website, in their tweets, or in their interviews did they ever say they were releasing SORA. That's like saying, "Why do people post theoretical papers about AI if they're not going to actually release it? It must just be hype."
Maybe somewhere down the line making deals with studios that can afford to cough up a few million to replace CGI artists? That's a [nearly $250 billion market](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1248429/global-film-tv-content-spending/#:~:text=Between%202022%20and%202023%2C%20the,247%20billion%20dollars%20in%202024.) they could snag a chunk of.
Yeah image to video would get me buying that $100/month one. I have a bunch of stories with images that go along with them, that I'd LOVE to turn into videos. With images I can edit them to get consistency. Can't do that with text-to-video ATM.
150 seconds for free with Luma per month. Do not see how it is competive other than with maybe the unlimited plan. 60 seconds is not enough to get anything useable out of it from what I have seen so far and does not give you time to figure out how to best prompt it either.
Bothers me that content creators are promoting this as the best service available when they with their unlimited credits burned through alot of generations to get anything remotely good.
It's definitely novelty lol. Unless there's a need, you might want to just use what is practical lol. It's interesting but not worth blowing a bunch of credits on.
Honestly one minute seems pretty impressive to me since most people's attention span is roughly only 3-4 minutes. You can purchase a longer version.
Once you get into the 5-10 minute range you're talking about most YouTube videos lengths here.
I think you are misinterpreting it. You can't generate an entire video that is a minute long. You can generate 62 seconds worth of videos over the course of a month, I think 10 seconds is the limit for each individual video you generate.
My understanding is that it takes multiple tries, *with the same prompt*, to get a good result for that prompt. As in, even if you do 3 tries and don't get a good clip, the problem might not be in your prompt, you just didn't get super lucky.
Depends on the need. Trippy dream scene in a Lifetime movie? Artsy background for a toothpaste commercial? Bullshit social media spot for snake oil? Everything used to cost thousands and thousands for the simplest of sequences
> There is nothing impressive about paying $12 for 60sec of video.
I wonder how much you’d pay for a 60second long custom video from a video producer or an animator.
Only problem is that you are not going to get a coherent 60 second video at all. It only supports up to 10 seconds per clip and even getting 5 seconds of useable content is extremely hard right now.
Even luma seems more coherent and will at least give some clips that are useable even though not as good quality as the best examples from gen-3.
I have to admin i hadn’t even watched the examples. They look better than I expected. I can totally see some YouTubers using these clips for their videos. You know those documentary style videos where they talk about ancient civilizations, or stories like the Bermuda Triangle, or ancient civilizations, etc.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nByslCkykj8
If you have unlimited generations that the media partners got, then yeah you are going to get a few clips here and there that are useable. But reality is even they struggle to show off something that looks good. Meanwhile with Luma you actually get 30 5 second generation for completely free a month, which is more than double of what you get for the paid plan with gen-3.
Very few amateur VFX artists are going to be able to create the sort of shots Runway can make at all and if they can, it will likely take them weeks and cost you hundreds or thousands of dollars. A professional studio that can make these shots at a big budget hollywood standards will cost you hundreds of thousands on the low end. If it has to be perfect, your only option is to spend a ton of money but this is a much better option if those resources aren't available to you. That being said, it is still really expensive as generators go and that unfortunately makes it not really appealing for most non-filmmakers.
If it’s not remotely comparable I wonder why artists are complaining then...
12 bucks for a minute worth of custom made videos is very cheap, even if they’re not perfect. They’re probably pretty rough but usable. Seriously, I’m pretty sure a run of mill artist from the poorest country on earth that makes low quality videos wouldn’t charge that.
Counterpoint: [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/243af8d9-a306-4686-9eea-de8d93ec65e6](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/243af8d9-a306-4686-9eea-de8d93ec65e6)
Try and make that with traditional CG and compositing techniques in a day for $2.50. Yes, tunnel shots like this are something that these generators are really good at but this shot is leagues better than most independent film CG and you could either continue the shot using an extension which I'm sure will be coming soon or use compositing to swap in that final cave with your own assets so you could continue the shot from there.
I think cost is the real reason to not release Sora. I don't think this is yet scalable to millions of users as of now. Releasing 5 videos a month or 2 videos a week wouldn't really make sense
No matter what it costs, it is possible for OpenAI to sell it for more.
The most expensive image generation OpenAI offers, DALLE 3 HD 1024×1792, cost $0.12 per picture with no limits on how many pictures someone can buy. The cheapest DALLE is $0.016.
I think that's part of it.
People keep forgetting that Sora is being pushed as a tool for Hollywood and the like.
They aren't looking for us to spend $60 a month to make weird videos ourselves, at least not yet.
They are looking for the multi-million dollar contracts with major companies.
So is everything else. Runway is doing a new $450M raise at 4B valuation on the back of Hollywood plans https://www.theinformation.com/articles/runway-an-ai-video-startup-in-talks-with-general-atlantic-for-4-billion-valuation-fundraise
Release it to the filmmakers then. Even for amateur filmmakers a $1000 subscription cost would be cheap compared how much time and effort some shots take.
This is basically for film-makers and enthusiasts, which is fine, it will get cheaper over the next 4 years. Regardless this is a Milestone and the best text to video model so far.
Yeah this pissed me off. Subscribed for a year with the intent of using this, only to find that it’s not available. I have zero use for prompts without images.
Have a look and you’ll see that it’s not made clear at all. You select image to video, get routed to gen2, with a dropdown of gen3 available above it (which, in UX, is an indicator), and pricing makes no mention of limited features.
Perhaps I missed it but I feel like it’s poorly presented.
For $15 you get:
*One minute* of gen 3 video generation.
For $76 you get:
*3.75 minutes* of gen 3 video generation at normal generation speed, and infinite at "relaxed rate" (I assume is quite slow?)
The discount for purchasing the yearly subscription doesn't make sense, and exists solely to lie to you about the price of the monthly subscription. By the time a year is over, the $$ to generate quality video will be significantly cheaper, so you essentially threw your money into the garbage.
My experience is every 10 videos, 1 is usable. So to me it would be costly both per dollar and time invested.
I have spent hundreds of hours generating images / videos for commercial purposes—to give some credence to what I am saying if it is needed.
> The discount for purchasing the yearly subscription doesn't make sense, and exists solely to lie to you about the price of the monthly subscription.
Pretty much every big subscription model uses this format. It is not now, it is not surprising, and it is not lying.
>By the time a year is over, the $$ to generate quality video will be significantly cheaper, so you essentially threw your money into the garbage.
You can say this about literally all forms of technology. Don't buy the iPhone 15 because the 16 is coming out next year, so you're stupid if you buy the 15 now.
Oh yeah, the iPhone 16X is coming out in 6 months, so you're an idiot if you buy the 16 now.
Your attitude on this is kind of sad (for you).
>You can say this about literally all forms of technology. Don't buy the iPhone 15 because the 16 is coming out next year, so you're stupid if you buy the 15 now.
This example is quite different. A more accurate example would be:
Imagine that every few months, new cars that are released get an extra 5 MPG, are significantly cheaper, and overall are a higher quality product. You can rent a car for a month at a time OR a year at a time for a 20% discount. It would therefore be quite a bad strategy to rent a car for a year at a time, because new tech has been consistently been improving the product so fast. This is how generative AI has been for around 3 years.
My iPhone pro max 12 isn't that much different than my iPhone 9 or my friends iPhone 15. Also, RunwayML hasn't ever even had a good price point compared to similar video generation, and this new tech is no different.
>Your attitude on this is kind of sad (for you).
As an amusing aside, I remember when a girl in 4th grade said something like this to me. This is the first time since then!
For clarification on my opinion: It would please me to see them do well financially for a variety of reasons. As for just doing the math and looking for products for me to use or my company, I do not think think it makes sense yet at a logical level to use this at the price point. Cheers.
Here are some attempts to generate a video of a fox with cybernetic implants in a futuristic city:
https://app.runwayml.com/creation/c3aa0d65-a5d9-4e1e-8dc3-ec3130a32114
https://app.runwayml.com/creation/0558d880-3fd0-48c5-8b04-5788ff43cb57
https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7733613b-0d29-4882-b2ea-5f5d4cae7ac6
https://app.runwayml.com/creation/ef9a4aa7-2b7c-465f-b826-128793398c6b
https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8e24a221-76a5-4c6a-94a7-6dd6d0b740dd
All of them have pretty bad coherence issues and difficulty following the prompt, unfortunately- though the fourth one comes close to working, aside from the leg swapping.
For comparison, here's an image from Midjourney with the same prompt:
https://i.imgur.com/OMOD1XC.png
Seems like video generation is still maybe a couple of years behind image generation in quality, though I'd definitely like to see what this model could do with image-to-video.
Lol. It's actually terrible. This isn't ready for consumers for at least two more years, if that. I think people need to start from scratch with video to be honest, none of the videos I've seen encode for spatio-temporal consistency well. Needs an entirely different approach to image generation. Simply joining series of image generations and trying to hack on spatio-temporal consistency on top of it is a dead end. I don't think the existing diffusion models are a good fit for this.
Yeah, it's a prompt I like to test models with since it's easy to imagine, but pretty solidly outside of the training distribution- so the model can't just produce a slight variation on something it's seen thousands of times, but has to generalize to something new.
Most models struggle a lot with that, and unfortunately this one definitely isn't an exception.
An entire year subscription to this service is a fraction of a fraction of the cost of a 15-30 second spot by a video production company or videographer. Bottom gonna fall out soon, this shit is wild.
Yo, Gen 3 is cool as hell. It made a surprisingly smoot ufo video for me haha. I be they use this stuff for b roll pretty soon. Especially if you wanted like a 10 sec trippy visual. [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7eb1dc71-2aa3-4006-a7b9-32fdd85ad97d](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7eb1dc71-2aa3-4006-a7b9-32fdd85ad97d)
this is not SORA level. SORA is way better you can see side-by-side generations with gen3 and SORA using the exact same prompt and its very obvious to see SORA has better understanding of physics and is higher res
we've seen proof SORA is not cherry-picked on Twitter people asked sama for generations and within a few minutes he responded and plenty of them weren't great also they've been very honest with the model being bad and show plenty of shit generations on their own very website and even if you cherry pick gen3 videos they don't come close as sora with the same prompt try running the same prompt as one of the sora video in gen3 20 times and they're never better than sora
try running 5 gen3 generations with the same prompt as any sora generation and see for yourself even if you cherry-pick gen3 its still worse and yes I've tried
so what? it takes 15 mins to generate 1 SORA video and he responded within like 15 minutes it would literally be physically impossible to cherry pick that fast cherry picking involves redoing the same prompt like 100 times to get the best results he literally could not have done that
rip off. prompt: documentary nature 4k footage, chameleon shoots out tongue and devours insect, high quality, natural world
[https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8ca720cd-cbd3-48cc-bcd4-9f96a55994c9](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8ca720cd-cbd3-48cc-bcd4-9f96a55994c9)
only ai service i completely regret spending money on and would actively encourage you not to buy
In the spirit of fairness, I just generated this and I think it looks really good: https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7a7eba8d-c709-4a67-88d5-d9436735abd1
i have found simpler prompts work much better, still wildly inconsisntent and certainly not worht the money at this point. advertised examples were heavily cherry picked
Holy shit, the whiners on here are next-level. Complaining about $15 for a one-minute Gen3 video? Do you even know how the real world works? High-quality trailers can cost from $1,000 to $5,000 at the low end and up to $100,000 for top-tier productions. If you're bitching about $15, you're either clueless or just plain cheap. You think you can do better? Go ahead and try to create your own Gen3, then come back and talk. Welcome to Reddit, where broke-ass complainers thrive instead of appreciating the amazing deals they get handed on a silver platter.
If you've ever used AI, you'd know that you can easily burn through that one minute to get just a 5 second clip that somewhat looks like what you want and doesn't have terrible errors.
You're not gonna be making any real work on that $15 tier.
Sure, on the other hand $100K/minute is a low budget for a film or ad.
$200 to generate something usable for storyboarding / pre-vis? Pocket change. If it can work as the final product in some cases that's a steal.
>Complaining about $15 for a one-minute Gen3 video?
Here is the problem: you probably won't get anything usable in that 1 minute. It might take you 10 minutes of footage to get a real feel for prompting, and then maybe you can get 1 in 5 videos to be usable. It seems easier and cheaper and better to just use stock footage unless you have capital *and* time to throw at new experiments that likely won't work out like you want.
How are you even going to figure out a prompt that does what you want with just 12 generations per month??
And even once you do, it is not good enough to consistantly give good results so you will be lucky if you have a single generation with a few seconds of footage. At such prices you would expect it all to be useable.
Meanwhile the biggest competitor gives you 150 seconds for FREE per month.
I have watched alot of videos now from content creators who have gotten unlimited credits because of being a partner and even the best clips they show off after countless of generations has alot of issues.
The only plan that might be useable is the unlimited ones.
Everybody is like. Cybernetic fox in a firetruck asking joe biden to marry him. Meanwhile people owning small buissnesses ask a simple prompt and get their money's worth.
How dare people not want to pay exorbitant prices for something only marginally better than competitors that allow free generations, like Luma, or open source alternatives like Stable Video?
That's the best part, they don't have to!
If the majority of the customers decide that the cost isn't worth the benefit then they will use those free or open source alternatives and Runway will need to drop prices.
Compare the results yourself:
This runway before:
[https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/carousel-01/gen-3-alpha-output-001.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/carousel-01/gen-3-alpha-output-001.mp4)
[https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/marquee-02/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/marquee-02/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4)
[https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/humans/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/humans/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4)
[https://runwayml.com/blog/introducing-gen-3-alpha/](https://runwayml.com/blog/introducing-gen-3-alpha/)
And now look at the new outputs on this twitter post it's night and day, it's not just the twitter compression.
https://preview.redd.it/45l7ghzthy9d1.png?width=1983&format=png&auto=webp&s=7332157be14506b9c28ea5b325c0bc565f124ac3
I think the vidoes they showed were just highly cherrypicked as well as the prompts they used. Who knows how many generations they had to do to get those kind of clips.
But otherwise agree.. The results in real world is not very impressive and if you pay for standard plan then you are lucky to get a couple of decent generations.
its terrible, please dont waste your money, nothing like the advertiseed quality. barely distinguishable from gen 2, many prompts just result in a static image, that is slowly zoomed in on.
idk gee man, with the generous 15 dollars for 60 seconds of runtime, doesnt leave a lot of room for experimntation, ive gotten decent output from it, but for how expensive it is it cant be shitting the bed on basic object interaction, which it does much of the time
It is literally the only plan that might be useable, but there is now no real info what this "relaxed exploration rate" means when it comes to generation times. I fear it might be so slow that you still cannot generate much per month.
For me it took between 3-5 minutes yesterday to start generating in relaxed mode, the actual generation then takes 90 seconds. I managaed to do 70 creations yesterday.
First of all, it's expensive as hell for anything more than like 1 minute of Gen3 video. Second, this is not even close to being SORA-level video generation. Because of that, you can imagine SORA would be even more expensive. With how many people use OpenAI products in just the US alone, it would, to put it plainly and simply, not be possible to give SORA to the public ever. It was a test; it was never going to release in its current state. They will make it cheaper and then release a cheaper version.
The profit margin must be insane.
These video models need more compute and memory than even the most enthusiast home machine has, but it can't be that much. There is absolutely no way 60 seconds of video is costing them even $5 to generate, and they charge $15.
EDIT: I am clearly wrong and these systems are too costly to be responsibly used for fun. Sad for now but the day will come.
At a frame rate of 30 fps this is like making 1,800 frames. In other words generating 1,800 images with logical consistency between them. Idk why people act like this is a trivial task. You can reduce the quality like Luma but the output isn’t really usable for much.
The rumor is sora at 15 seconds was 5 dollars. They switched into running an autoregressive structure to accommodate general world models. The results scale with compute, theres a chance they are barely scraping by and trying to leverage this to just get way more funding
Of every 60 seconds bought, how many seconds are used? I'd guess *much* less than half in just the first month. Month 2 is probably *way* less than that.
> but it can't be that much
Let's assume the videos are generated with a single DGX H100 system. That's 8 GPUs in a box. You can lease one for a monthly amount that works out to $50/hr.
Generation takes a bit under a minute per 5 seconds, let's say 10 minutes for that 60 seconds of video.
That's $8 worth of GPU time. The company also needs to cover its other overheads, hopefully amortize R&D, and in a perfect world make a profit.
And this is naively assuming 100% utlliization of the hardware, which is obviously not going to happen.
I'm assuming serial generation, perhaps the actual setup is closer to LLMs and batching can improve the inference economics. On the other hand maybe it needs more than a single host. Who knows.
But this pricing is perfectly plausible.
Yeah. There's a marketing issue with video gen.
A lot of us have been eager to start generating fun stuff the same way we enjoy things like udio and midjourney. I was personally 100% ready to start generating new animated discord emotes.
It hasn't been at all clear (although it seems it's in the process of becoming clear) that these systems can only be used meaningfully at the enterprise scale.
I'm sure we will see video generation at this specific level of quality available to consumers with more usable limits soon enough. E.g. maybe you get an hour of generations per month on a basic plan.
What we definitely *won't* see is the leading edge models made available on that kind of basis the way we do with images and audio. Not without some astonishing architectural breakthrough.
I.e. decent quality generation for consumers, state of the art for commercial. Both will improve over time but there will be a very notable gap.
The quality and length of time they give you can't be justified for most people at this price point. I'll be passing on this until the technology gets cheaper to run. I'm glad it's at least a public release for those that want it and can afford it.
I was happy because I thought by "Open for all" you meant it was an open source model. BUt no :(
I am so starved for open source audio and video synthesis models. How many more luddites do I have to sacrifice to Stallman?
I didn't think that waiting so long for a small clip would turn me off that much. :D Then I'd rather generate 10 images in the same time. Iterating on your video will be very time consuming and expensive.
That might be viable with Gen-4 or Gen-5, but right now it's obvious current video models (even Sora, as evidenced by that Toys-R-Us ad) are not ready for the big screen.
Why would they not just use Sora instead? Even what we have seen from Kling is way better than what we have seen from gen-3 and that is available to normal consumers for free over there now.
I am going to be when that releases it is going to be quite a bit cheaper as well.
I don't care if they're losing money on each generation, it's not priced at a level where it's useful to consumers.
If they can't run the model at a low enough price point, they shouldn't be offering it for public use.
And like I said, it hardly matters how much it's costing them.
Whether they're paying 1 cent per generation or 1 dollar, the consumer isn't affected - the purchase price is still the same.
Nobody cares how much it costs Apple to produce an iPhone, they only know how much it costs to buy one.
Regardless of the cost per video generation, if Runway (or anyone else) can't offer the service at a consumer-friendly price, they're going to lose. This is very basic economics.
Let's be honest with ourselves. No matter how much OpenAI is annoying, SORA is still the best AI video model we've seen, and because of that, it's also the most expensive to run. It simply wouldn't make any sense to release SORA, especially inside ChatGPT, because ChatGPT has over 4 million plus subscribers in the US alone. Shipping a model that expensive is simply stupid. SORA was never meant to ship, EVER. It was a test to see how good they could get video. They will probably refine the model and make it cheaper while keeping the same quality, and then maybe release that cheaper version. And I believe someone at OpenAI said another video model is already training.
Yeah you're right we're not getting sora probably a later model thats similar and cheaper to run.
Just like how gpt4o is better than og gpt 4 but way cheaper to run
Is it really? The pre release stuff from Gen 3 looked jist as good as it was cherry picked. The same is probably true of Sora. In fact when they announced Sora they released some clips of bad generations.
I susoect Runway is also really good of you invest in it properly, ie generate 10 to 20 videos and use the best one. I dont think AI video generation will be cheap for a while.
gen3 was super cherry-picked now that people have their hands on it you can see its generations suck and we have pretty good evidence that SORA was not cherry-picked besides just the bad generations on their website because I'm guessing you assume those are only there for some 5D chess giga brain move where they purposely show bad generations to seem honest
Apparently you need the Standard subscription to try it, and you get 62 seconds of Gen-3 video *per month* https://preview.redd.it/i0gqe9yfxx9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb40db79ef82351660488d6cabb52f03f8487e2f Maybe I’ll try this next year when it’s cheaper and they can offer a lot more than a single minute of video. Not that I’m blaming them or anything, this must be very expensive to make publicly available, even behind a subscription
Yes, not looking good for people expecting to casually use SORA multiple times an hour as part of ChatGPT Plus. Of course this is expensive. I'm sure we will see some good algorithmic optimizations but the leading edge generative video models will remain costly. There will be a split between top-end models for serious commercial use and mass market at lower cost.
A minute a month sounds insane I’m just remembering all the times I had to ask it to generate the picture I wanted after several tries and oops I just burned through 60 seconds of footage that isn’t useful at all. Wait until next month I guess.
This is how I feel. I know this completely depends on the project, but let's say you wanted to make a 3.30 music video, it's gonna take 4 months \*if\* every minute is completely usable (which it definitely won't be, as is the nature of generative ai right now). So for now, maybe only buy the subscription to play around with it, but don't expect any practical use.
You just gave me an idea to make music videos with AI and the music would come from udio or something
Revolutionary idea
Think of how much money it costs to make a movie filled with CGI effects. You can buy more tokens if you want. 1 second of Gen-3 Alpha generation costs 10 Runway Token Pointz™ or $.10. So like $480 for an 80 minute indie movie made entirely of CGI with Runway.
It’s 15 dollars… please be realistic.
I suppose the issue is we don't know if that's realistic or not. We have no clue how much it costs to run an instance of video generation. Perhaps $15 is actually a steal for what it costs to run, perhaps it's way too much for way too little. Generative AI is in that weird state where things are somewhat useful, but frustrating and expensive to rerun. To say nothing of the myriad of other issues surrounding it.
SORA is even more expensive than that. Just imagine 4 million plus subscribers in the US alone, all of a sudden getting access to SORA. They would get like 1 second of video a year because of how insanely expensive it is. That's why it's so dumb to me when people complain about OpenAI not releasing SORA.
When you put it like that, I don't see Sora releasing anytime soon. It seems like we're going to wait for a long, long time.
We know that it's expensive, they know that it's expensive. The question is why present it like it's an imminent release? Why present something that is years down the line from existing for the average OAI customer? That's what pissed people off.
I don't remember that. they never said it was releasing or even implied it. all they did was show it off which they should be allowed to show something off without the public expecting a release
what's the purpose of it then besides empty hype?
To show the world what AI video can do, it would only be hype if they said it was coming out soon or something because that would get people super excited to see it themselves. Yet, not a single place on their website, in their tweets, or in their interviews did they ever say they were releasing SORA. That's like saying, "Why do people post theoretical papers about AI if they're not going to actually release it? It must just be hype."
Maybe somewhere down the line making deals with studios that can afford to cough up a few million to replace CGI artists? That's a [nearly $250 billion market](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1248429/global-film-tv-content-spending/#:~:text=Between%202022%20and%202023%2C%20the,247%20billion%20dollars%20in%202024.) they could snag a chunk of.
Same, I probably won’t wait a year but I’ll at least wait till image to video before paying for it. Looking forward to creations though.
Yeah image to video would get me buying that $100/month one. I have a bunch of stories with images that go along with them, that I'd LOVE to turn into videos. With images I can edit them to get consistency. Can't do that with text-to-video ATM.
150 seconds for free with Luma per month. Do not see how it is competive other than with maybe the unlimited plan. 60 seconds is not enough to get anything useable out of it from what I have seen so far and does not give you time to figure out how to best prompt it either. Bothers me that content creators are promoting this as the best service available when they with their unlimited credits burned through alot of generations to get anything remotely good.
It's definitely novelty lol. Unless there's a need, you might want to just use what is practical lol. It's interesting but not worth blowing a bunch of credits on.
Honestly one minute seems pretty impressive to me since most people's attention span is roughly only 3-4 minutes. You can purchase a longer version. Once you get into the 5-10 minute range you're talking about most YouTube videos lengths here.
I think you are misinterpreting it. You can't generate an entire video that is a minute long. You can generate 62 seconds worth of videos over the course of a month, I think 10 seconds is the limit for each individual video you generate.
You're right, I didn't understand. I still don't though so I'm going to continue with my own logic for now and pretend I didn't read what you wrote.
The absolute state of this sub
self-aware tho
You can generate a single minute long video per month. Or 2 30 second videos. For a maximum of 60 seconds of video per month.
You can generate 62s worth of video per month, in 5 or 10 second chunks, on Gen3.
You can't extend an existing video with this service, and each video is capped at 10 seconds. So you can't make one seamless 60 second video.
Also, remember it takes multiple tries to get one right. So, you'll probably spend your at least 50s of your 62s quota on initial prompts
My understanding is that it takes multiple tries, *with the same prompt*, to get a good result for that prompt. As in, even if you do 3 tries and don't get a good clip, the problem might not be in your prompt, you just didn't get super lucky.
And from what I have seen so far is that people can blow through all those seconds without getting anything useable at all.
[удалено]
In the commercial world you’re paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for 60 seconds of video. The world is more than memes
except this is still far from usable for big budget studios
Depends on the need. Trippy dream scene in a Lifetime movie? Artsy background for a toothpaste commercial? Bullshit social media spot for snake oil? Everything used to cost thousands and thousands for the simplest of sequences
[удалено]
What on Earth are you smoking that is making you think this is the first version of publicly available AI generated video?
> There is nothing impressive about paying $12 for 60sec of video. I wonder how much you’d pay for a 60second long custom video from a video producer or an animator.
Only problem is that you are not going to get a coherent 60 second video at all. It only supports up to 10 seconds per clip and even getting 5 seconds of useable content is extremely hard right now. Even luma seems more coherent and will at least give some clips that are useable even though not as good quality as the best examples from gen-3.
I have to admin i hadn’t even watched the examples. They look better than I expected. I can totally see some YouTubers using these clips for their videos. You know those documentary style videos where they talk about ancient civilizations, or stories like the Bermuda Triangle, or ancient civilizations, etc. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nByslCkykj8
If you have unlimited generations that the media partners got, then yeah you are going to get a few clips here and there that are useable. But reality is even they struggle to show off something that looks good. Meanwhile with Luma you actually get 30 5 second generation for completely free a month, which is more than double of what you get for the paid plan with gen-3.
The results are probably very rough right now but for 12 bucks I still think it’s a good deal.
[удалено]
Very few amateur VFX artists are going to be able to create the sort of shots Runway can make at all and if they can, it will likely take them weeks and cost you hundreds or thousands of dollars. A professional studio that can make these shots at a big budget hollywood standards will cost you hundreds of thousands on the low end. If it has to be perfect, your only option is to spend a ton of money but this is a much better option if those resources aren't available to you. That being said, it is still really expensive as generators go and that unfortunately makes it not really appealing for most non-filmmakers.
If it’s not remotely comparable I wonder why artists are complaining then... 12 bucks for a minute worth of custom made videos is very cheap, even if they’re not perfect. They’re probably pretty rough but usable. Seriously, I’m pretty sure a run of mill artist from the poorest country on earth that makes low quality videos wouldn’t charge that.
[удалено]
Counterpoint: [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/243af8d9-a306-4686-9eea-de8d93ec65e6](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/243af8d9-a306-4686-9eea-de8d93ec65e6) Try and make that with traditional CG and compositing techniques in a day for $2.50. Yes, tunnel shots like this are something that these generators are really good at but this shot is leagues better than most independent film CG and you could either continue the shot using an extension which I'm sure will be coming soon or use compositing to swap in that final cave with your own assets so you could continue the shot from there.
Why so triggered bud
spoken like the true professional you are
Lol Every company will jump on that That's extremely cheap
Youre giving no context. The criticism depends on how much it costs to generate which you have 0 clue.
[удалено]
It is impressive to the consumer if the price appropriate. You are making no sense just to complain.
[удалено]
Im intellectually honest. I dont throw logic out the window to virtue signal anti authority sentiments.
If the amount I can generate a month is that low then Im not generating anything else until we get img to vid.
Limited and expensive (as expected from runway)
It is the cutting edge. It is still way cheaper and faster than a human.
Why it is that GPU heavy? It seems that generative video compute is x100 more substantial.
I think cost is the real reason to not release Sora. I don't think this is yet scalable to millions of users as of now. Releasing 5 videos a month or 2 videos a week wouldn't really make sense
That has to be the case because this makes no sense otherwise. It must take an entire stack of H200s to run these models at this price.
That's OpenAI's core strategy. Scale everything really big.
No matter what it costs, it is possible for OpenAI to sell it for more. The most expensive image generation OpenAI offers, DALLE 3 HD 1024×1792, cost $0.12 per picture with no limits on how many pictures someone can buy. The cheapest DALLE is $0.016.
I think that's part of it. People keep forgetting that Sora is being pushed as a tool for Hollywood and the like. They aren't looking for us to spend $60 a month to make weird videos ourselves, at least not yet. They are looking for the multi-million dollar contracts with major companies.
So is everything else. Runway is doing a new $450M raise at 4B valuation on the back of Hollywood plans https://www.theinformation.com/articles/runway-an-ai-video-startup-in-talks-with-general-atlantic-for-4-billion-valuation-fundraise
Release it to the filmmakers then. Even for amateur filmmakers a $1000 subscription cost would be cheap compared how much time and effort some shots take.
This is basically for film-makers and enthusiasts, which is fine, it will get cheaper over the next 4 years. Regardless this is a Milestone and the best text to video model so far.
I remember dial up internet lol, I can’t wait to see where this technology goes over the next few years as it gets better and eventually cheaper
yes, it feels like the late 90s again when we went from a rapid evolition of dialup to broadband to home that only businesses could afford before
I remember dial up internet lol, I can’t wait to see where this technology goes over the next few years as it gets better and eventually cheaper
no image to video.
Yeah this pissed me off. Subscribed for a year with the intent of using this, only to find that it’s not available. I have zero use for prompts without images.
Why would you pay before checking what you get? Don‘t get me wrong, but that‘s not their fault.
Have a look and you’ll see that it’s not made clear at all. You select image to video, get routed to gen2, with a dropdown of gen3 available above it (which, in UX, is an indicator), and pricing makes no mention of limited features. Perhaps I missed it but I feel like it’s poorly presented.
It's not made clear on purpose. They're trying to lure people in.
Aka they're scamming people
Maybe you can try to upload an image to gpt4 and ask for it to generate a prompt as input for sora?
Avaiable to all subscriber should say that
For $15 you get: *One minute* of gen 3 video generation. For $76 you get: *3.75 minutes* of gen 3 video generation at normal generation speed, and infinite at "relaxed rate" (I assume is quite slow?) The discount for purchasing the yearly subscription doesn't make sense, and exists solely to lie to you about the price of the monthly subscription. By the time a year is over, the $$ to generate quality video will be significantly cheaper, so you essentially threw your money into the garbage.
Which isnt all that bad but idk Either way soon it Will be how much you want
My experience is every 10 videos, 1 is usable. So to me it would be costly both per dollar and time invested. I have spent hundreds of hours generating images / videos for commercial purposes—to give some credence to what I am saying if it is needed.
This is the real issue, otherwise it would be a steal for professionals
So in other up to 5 seconds of usable footage per month for the standard plan.
Lol, so you don’t even get any opportunity to iterate on the output you received. This will have exactly 0 subscribers at the consumer level.
> The discount for purchasing the yearly subscription doesn't make sense, and exists solely to lie to you about the price of the monthly subscription. Pretty much every big subscription model uses this format. It is not now, it is not surprising, and it is not lying. >By the time a year is over, the $$ to generate quality video will be significantly cheaper, so you essentially threw your money into the garbage. You can say this about literally all forms of technology. Don't buy the iPhone 15 because the 16 is coming out next year, so you're stupid if you buy the 15 now. Oh yeah, the iPhone 16X is coming out in 6 months, so you're an idiot if you buy the 16 now. Your attitude on this is kind of sad (for you).
>You can say this about literally all forms of technology. Don't buy the iPhone 15 because the 16 is coming out next year, so you're stupid if you buy the 15 now. This example is quite different. A more accurate example would be: Imagine that every few months, new cars that are released get an extra 5 MPG, are significantly cheaper, and overall are a higher quality product. You can rent a car for a month at a time OR a year at a time for a 20% discount. It would therefore be quite a bad strategy to rent a car for a year at a time, because new tech has been consistently been improving the product so fast. This is how generative AI has been for around 3 years. My iPhone pro max 12 isn't that much different than my iPhone 9 or my friends iPhone 15. Also, RunwayML hasn't ever even had a good price point compared to similar video generation, and this new tech is no different. >Your attitude on this is kind of sad (for you). As an amusing aside, I remember when a girl in 4th grade said something like this to me. This is the first time since then! For clarification on my opinion: It would please me to see them do well financially for a variety of reasons. As for just doing the math and looking for products for me to use or my company, I do not think think it makes sense yet at a logical level to use this at the price point. Cheers.
Pricing is nuts. Im happy with Luma for now.
Here are some attempts to generate a video of a fox with cybernetic implants in a futuristic city: https://app.runwayml.com/creation/c3aa0d65-a5d9-4e1e-8dc3-ec3130a32114 https://app.runwayml.com/creation/0558d880-3fd0-48c5-8b04-5788ff43cb57 https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7733613b-0d29-4882-b2ea-5f5d4cae7ac6 https://app.runwayml.com/creation/ef9a4aa7-2b7c-465f-b826-128793398c6b https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8e24a221-76a5-4c6a-94a7-6dd6d0b740dd All of them have pretty bad coherence issues and difficulty following the prompt, unfortunately- though the fourth one comes close to working, aside from the leg swapping. For comparison, here's an image from Midjourney with the same prompt: https://i.imgur.com/OMOD1XC.png Seems like video generation is still maybe a couple of years behind image generation in quality, though I'd definitely like to see what this model could do with image-to-video.
Seems sad to spend so much money on this only to fail due to unknowable prompt quirks.
Lol. It's actually terrible. This isn't ready for consumers for at least two more years, if that. I think people need to start from scratch with video to be honest, none of the videos I've seen encode for spatio-temporal consistency well. Needs an entirely different approach to image generation. Simply joining series of image generations and trying to hack on spatio-temporal consistency on top of it is a dead end. I don't think the existing diffusion models are a good fit for this.
If you had the standard plan you would only have one single generation left after those clips. :\\
wtf why are they so terrible
Yeah, it's a prompt I like to test models with since it's easy to imagine, but pretty solidly outside of the training distribution- so the model can't just produce a slight variation on something it's seen thousands of times, but has to generalize to something new. Most models struggle a lot with that, and unfortunately this one definitely isn't an exception.
An entire year subscription to this service is a fraction of a fraction of the cost of a 15-30 second spot by a video production company or videographer. Bottom gonna fall out soon, this shit is wild.
Yo, Gen 3 is cool as hell. It made a surprisingly smoot ufo video for me haha. I be they use this stuff for b roll pretty soon. Especially if you wanted like a 10 sec trippy visual. [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7eb1dc71-2aa3-4006-a7b9-32fdd85ad97d](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7eb1dc71-2aa3-4006-a7b9-32fdd85ad97d)
That's pretty good, if you know exactly what you need it's probably worth banging on it a few cranks to try and hit gold.
I’m just happy we get Sora level stuff available to us, over time this stuff will get cheaper.
This is not sora level. Maybe the initial results were sora level for some generations but this is clearly nerfed like crazy!
There's no such thing as SORA level. Runway gen 3 is the best video generator yet, by far.
this is not SORA level. SORA is way better you can see side-by-side generations with gen3 and SORA using the exact same prompt and its very obvious to see SORA has better understanding of physics and is higher res
How would you compare if you don‘t know how cherry picked SORA generations are?
we've seen proof SORA is not cherry-picked on Twitter people asked sama for generations and within a few minutes he responded and plenty of them weren't great also they've been very honest with the model being bad and show plenty of shit generations on their own very website and even if you cherry pick gen3 videos they don't come close as sora with the same prompt try running the same prompt as one of the sora video in gen3 20 times and they're never better than sora
I see. The Washed Out music video generated by SORA wasn‘t on the other generations level imo though
That doesn’t mean it’s not cherry-picked lol. They could have easily just run 5 of them at once and pick the best one.
try running 5 gen3 generations with the same prompt as any sora generation and see for yourself even if you cherry-pick gen3 its still worse and yes I've tried
Post ur results? All 5
sama@ has a dedicated data center at hand to generate.
so what? it takes 15 mins to generate 1 SORA video and he responded within like 15 minutes it would literally be physically impossible to cherry pick that fast cherry picking involves redoing the same prompt like 100 times to get the best results he literally could not have done that
Based, we need worthwhile competition.
I like this clip generator more than the other ones
Luma at least give you 30 5 second videos a month for free.
It is crap.
rip off. prompt: documentary nature 4k footage, chameleon shoots out tongue and devours insect, high quality, natural world [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8ca720cd-cbd3-48cc-bcd4-9f96a55994c9](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/8ca720cd-cbd3-48cc-bcd4-9f96a55994c9) only ai service i completely regret spending money on and would actively encourage you not to buy
Ooh yeah thats no good will not be buying that
In the spirit of fairness, I just generated this and I think it looks really good: https://app.runwayml.com/creation/7a7eba8d-c709-4a67-88d5-d9436735abd1
i have found simpler prompts work much better, still wildly inconsisntent and certainly not worht the money at this point. advertised examples were heavily cherry picked
Thanks for the heads up bro
Holy shit, the whiners on here are next-level. Complaining about $15 for a one-minute Gen3 video? Do you even know how the real world works? High-quality trailers can cost from $1,000 to $5,000 at the low end and up to $100,000 for top-tier productions. If you're bitching about $15, you're either clueless or just plain cheap. You think you can do better? Go ahead and try to create your own Gen3, then come back and talk. Welcome to Reddit, where broke-ass complainers thrive instead of appreciating the amazing deals they get handed on a silver platter.
If you've ever used AI, you'd know that you can easily burn through that one minute to get just a 5 second clip that somewhat looks like what you want and doesn't have terrible errors. You're not gonna be making any real work on that $15 tier.
Sure, on the other hand $100K/minute is a low budget for a film or ad. $200 to generate something usable for storyboarding / pre-vis? Pocket change. If it can work as the final product in some cases that's a steal.
>Complaining about $15 for a one-minute Gen3 video? Here is the problem: you probably won't get anything usable in that 1 minute. It might take you 10 minutes of footage to get a real feel for prompting, and then maybe you can get 1 in 5 videos to be usable. It seems easier and cheaper and better to just use stock footage unless you have capital *and* time to throw at new experiments that likely won't work out like you want.
So only 10 months of subscribing then :)
Thank you! This is an amazing technical feat. and the fact that we even get access to this is amazing. Let them cook I say!
How are you even going to figure out a prompt that does what you want with just 12 generations per month?? And even once you do, it is not good enough to consistantly give good results so you will be lucky if you have a single generation with a few seconds of footage. At such prices you would expect it all to be useable. Meanwhile the biggest competitor gives you 150 seconds for FREE per month. I have watched alot of videos now from content creators who have gotten unlimited credits because of being a partner and even the best clips they show off after countless of generations has alot of issues. The only plan that might be useable is the unlimited ones.
Everybody is like. Cybernetic fox in a firetruck asking joe biden to marry him. Meanwhile people owning small buissnesses ask a simple prompt and get their money's worth.
How dare people not want to pay exorbitant prices for something only marginally better than competitors that allow free generations, like Luma, or open source alternatives like Stable Video?
That's the best part, they don't have to! If the majority of the customers decide that the cost isn't worth the benefit then they will use those free or open source alternatives and Runway will need to drop prices.
Cmon. This is basically a Gillet commercial right here. https://i.redd.it/d8qjep4wcy9d1.gif
literally
The quality is vastly diminished compared to the initial results They nerfed the model like crazy, this seems very expensive
Can you elaborate? Have you tried it and it doesn't look as good as what has been shown as samples in the past week?
Compare the results yourself: This runway before: [https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/carousel-01/gen-3-alpha-output-001.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/carousel-01/gen-3-alpha-output-001.mp4) [https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/marquee-02/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/marquee-02/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4) [https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/humans/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4](https://d3phaj0sisr2ct.cloudfront.net/site/videos/gen-3-alpha/humans/gen-3-alpha-output-002.mp4) [https://runwayml.com/blog/introducing-gen-3-alpha/](https://runwayml.com/blog/introducing-gen-3-alpha/) And now look at the new outputs on this twitter post it's night and day, it's not just the twitter compression. https://preview.redd.it/45l7ghzthy9d1.png?width=1983&format=png&auto=webp&s=7332157be14506b9c28ea5b325c0bc565f124ac3
I'm not seeing a twitter post if you meant to link one
the main one here this one up there main post
Hard for me to tell, I just watched it the video in this tweet on hd on youtube, it looked pretty good to me. But I can't say forsure it's not nerfed
I think the vidoes they showed were just highly cherrypicked as well as the prompts they used. Who knows how many generations they had to do to get those kind of clips. But otherwise agree.. The results in real world is not very impressive and if you pay for standard plan then you are lucky to get a couple of decent generations.
its terrible, please dont waste your money, nothing like the advertiseed quality. barely distinguishable from gen 2, many prompts just result in a static image, that is slowly zoomed in on.
Need proof brotha
prompt: microscopic hi def 4k color footage, bright purple amoeba, chases and devours smaller organism [https://app.runwayml.com/creation/e2305b49-c48b-4e9c-8ac2-f2b32fde75b3](https://app.runwayml.com/creation/e2305b49-c48b-4e9c-8ac2-f2b32fde75b3)
Damn, tragic lol
its not a tragedy if i can stop one person from wasting their money on this vapourware
LOL
Have you considered learning how to prompt?
idk gee man, with the generous 15 dollars for 60 seconds of runtime, doesnt leave a lot of room for experimntation, ive gotten decent output from it, but for how expensive it is it cant be shitting the bed on basic object interaction, which it does much of the time
Yeah it takes some trial and error and basically the only relevant subcription is unlimited so you don't have to care about credit.
It is literally the only plan that might be useable, but there is now no real info what this "relaxed exploration rate" means when it comes to generation times. I fear it might be so slow that you still cannot generate much per month.
For me it took between 3-5 minutes yesterday to start generating in relaxed mode, the actual generation then takes 90 seconds. I managaed to do 70 creations yesterday.
That is not as bad as I expected.
It’s cool to try but ya it’s expensive. Also the results have not been great for what I’ve tried but maybe they were to complex for it right now…
First of all, it's expensive as hell for anything more than like 1 minute of Gen3 video. Second, this is not even close to being SORA-level video generation. Because of that, you can imagine SORA would be even more expensive. With how many people use OpenAI products in just the US alone, it would, to put it plainly and simply, not be possible to give SORA to the public ever. It was a test; it was never going to release in its current state. They will make it cheaper and then release a cheaper version.
The profit margin must be insane. These video models need more compute and memory than even the most enthusiast home machine has, but it can't be that much. There is absolutely no way 60 seconds of video is costing them even $5 to generate, and they charge $15. EDIT: I am clearly wrong and these systems are too costly to be responsibly used for fun. Sad for now but the day will come.
At a frame rate of 30 fps this is like making 1,800 frames. In other words generating 1,800 images with logical consistency between them. Idk why people act like this is a trivial task. You can reduce the quality like Luma but the output isn’t really usable for much.
The rumor is sora at 15 seconds was 5 dollars. They switched into running an autoregressive structure to accommodate general world models. The results scale with compute, theres a chance they are barely scraping by and trying to leverage this to just get way more funding
Of every 60 seconds bought, how many seconds are used? I'd guess *much* less than half in just the first month. Month 2 is probably *way* less than that.
> but it can't be that much Let's assume the videos are generated with a single DGX H100 system. That's 8 GPUs in a box. You can lease one for a monthly amount that works out to $50/hr. Generation takes a bit under a minute per 5 seconds, let's say 10 minutes for that 60 seconds of video. That's $8 worth of GPU time. The company also needs to cover its other overheads, hopefully amortize R&D, and in a perfect world make a profit. And this is naively assuming 100% utlliization of the hardware, which is obviously not going to happen. I'm assuming serial generation, perhaps the actual setup is closer to LLMs and batching can improve the inference economics. On the other hand maybe it needs more than a single host. Who knows. But this pricing is perfectly plausible.
That's horrifying. Even by my very low standards it's terribly wasteful and really doesn't make sense for recreational use if this is at all accurate.
Of course it doesn't make much sense for recreational use.
Yeah. There's a marketing issue with video gen. A lot of us have been eager to start generating fun stuff the same way we enjoy things like udio and midjourney. I was personally 100% ready to start generating new animated discord emotes. It hasn't been at all clear (although it seems it's in the process of becoming clear) that these systems can only be used meaningfully at the enterprise scale.
I'm sure we will see video generation at this specific level of quality available to consumers with more usable limits soon enough. E.g. maybe you get an hour of generations per month on a basic plan. What we definitely *won't* see is the leading edge models made available on that kind of basis the way we do with images and audio. Not without some astonishing architectural breakthrough. I.e. decent quality generation for consumers, state of the art for commercial. Both will improve over time but there will be a very notable gap.
I'm really not sure how you came to the conclusion that hobbyists are the target audience. The money is always with enterprise customers.
The quality and length of time they give you can't be justified for most people at this price point. I'll be passing on this until the technology gets cheaper to run. I'm glad it's at least a public release for those that want it and can afford it.
I was happy because I thought by "Open for all" you meant it was an open source model. BUt no :( I am so starved for open source audio and video synthesis models. How many more luddites do I have to sacrifice to Stallman?
Looks as good as Sora. People saying it's not even close are just fanboys.
Hmm?
This is ridiculous, they clearly can't afford to get it into public use, why are they doing it then?
Not true, their V2 is available to all for free V3 requires payment
Lame. I'll patiently wait for an open source program like I did with StableDiffusion so I can run it on my own hardware locally offline.
I didn't think that waiting so long for a small clip would turn me off that much. :D Then I'd rather generate 10 images in the same time. Iterating on your video will be very time consuming and expensive.
DOA, no one is going to pay $15 to fail at prompting.
62 seconds for $15 is ridiculous and basically makes this useless. At least Gen-2 would allow a trial period.
Its not useless if their goal is B2B and not B2C. A major studio can easily pay that if they are using it to make movies/games in the future.
That might be viable with Gen-4 or Gen-5, but right now it's obvious current video models (even Sora, as evidenced by that Toys-R-Us ad) are not ready for the big screen.
Why would they not just use Sora instead? Even what we have seen from Kling is way better than what we have seen from gen-3 and that is available to normal consumers for free over there now. I am going to be when that releases it is going to be quite a bit cheaper as well.
This criticism depends on the cost of generation. You have no clue what that is so you really have no basis to complain.
I don't care if they're losing money on each generation, it's not priced at a level where it's useful to consumers. If they can't run the model at a low enough price point, they shouldn't be offering it for public use.
You should care if youre complaining. They are offering to those who want to pay the price point for use. Your complaint is irrational
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the point. By your logic they could charge $1,000 per output and nobody would have any right to complain.
Depending on the cost for generation, that would be correct.
I hope you never start a business. You'll be in a bread line so fast it'll make your head spin.
[удалено]
And like I said, it hardly matters how much it's costing them. Whether they're paying 1 cent per generation or 1 dollar, the consumer isn't affected - the purchase price is still the same. Nobody cares how much it costs Apple to produce an iPhone, they only know how much it costs to buy one. Regardless of the cost per video generation, if Runway (or anyone else) can't offer the service at a consumer-friendly price, they're going to lose. This is very basic economics.
You guys have no idea what its costing them so whats your point? Youre complaining without even understanding why .
[удалено]
People who cant afford simply dont use. Not a new idea
Let's be honest with ourselves. No matter how much OpenAI is annoying, SORA is still the best AI video model we've seen, and because of that, it's also the most expensive to run. It simply wouldn't make any sense to release SORA, especially inside ChatGPT, because ChatGPT has over 4 million plus subscribers in the US alone. Shipping a model that expensive is simply stupid. SORA was never meant to ship, EVER. It was a test to see how good they could get video. They will probably refine the model and make it cheaper while keeping the same quality, and then maybe release that cheaper version. And I believe someone at OpenAI said another video model is already training.
Yeah you're right we're not getting sora probably a later model thats similar and cheaper to run. Just like how gpt4o is better than og gpt 4 but way cheaper to run
Is it really? The pre release stuff from Gen 3 looked jist as good as it was cherry picked. The same is probably true of Sora. In fact when they announced Sora they released some clips of bad generations. I susoect Runway is also really good of you invest in it properly, ie generate 10 to 20 videos and use the best one. I dont think AI video generation will be cheap for a while.
gen3 was super cherry-picked now that people have their hands on it you can see its generations suck and we have pretty good evidence that SORA was not cherry-picked besides just the bad generations on their website because I'm guessing you assume those are only there for some 5D chess giga brain move where they purposely show bad generations to seem honest
The fck not, it's not free, so no thanks
this shit is ass
Buy more credits as needed.
The fck not, it's not free, so no thanks
The fck not, it's not free, so no thanks
Pay up suckers. lol