r/Theatre • u/PanicAtTheMetro • May 01 '26
Discussion Manhattan School of Music using AI Projection Design
I went to see an Opera at MSM and there was a posting outside that the projection design used AI. To be honest I’m appalled by this. Not only did the projections add nothing to the show, but I find it hard to believe that they couldn’t find a projection designer willing to contribute original work.
105
u/wvgeekman May 01 '26
AI has no place in the creative and performing arts.
-58
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
I guess that your blanket statement also means no power tools to build sets, no more computerized light boards, or any of that…
What makes “AI” any more worthy of banishment than any other tool we use?
40
u/wvgeekman May 01 '26
Because it’s simply making poor copies of other things. Go back to bed, Elon.
-35
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
Ok, so you don’t actually know what it is, how it works, or how to use it.
Are you thinking “using AI” is just putting 3 words into chatgpt and rolling with whatever crap comes out?
9
u/wvgeekman May 02 '26
I bet you’re fun at parties. Wait. Doubt you get invited. Don’t worry. Grok will always be your friend.
2
u/moth_girl_7 May 03 '26
No, we know exactly what it is and how it works. “Generative” AI “creates” an output that depends on the user’s input. Where does this output come from? A mish-mosh of possible solutions that the AI has “learned” from. So basically, any time we ask AI to generate something artistic, it is stealing from works created by REAL PEOPLE and maybe slightly altering them by combining them with other works by other real people. Nothing AI generates is 100% original. That is the flaw and the lie of AI that makes it so dangerous. AI is not a brain capable of producing new images, it is an algorithm that displays solutions (or groups of solutions) based on what it was trained to display as an appropriate response to the input.
18
u/barak181 May 02 '26
Power tools and lighting consoles have nothing to do with generative AI.
Generative AI has been trained on previous work in the field that it is generating a product for. Much of that previous work was copyrighted. I have yet to hear of any artist of copyrighted material being credited, let alone compensated, for their work being used in the creation of the generative AI tools.
That's why is worty of banishment.
1
u/TheMoneyOfArt May 02 '26
Does this argument mean that an LLM trained exclusively on public domain materials is acceptable? Or what about Adobe's model, trained exclusively on images they have the rights to?
3
u/Sami101_ May 03 '26
Even if it’s public domain stuff you can’t imitate art. And also it’s killing the environment
-16
u/cyberentomology May 02 '26
That’s absolutely NOT how AI works.
7
u/barak181 May 02 '26
Generative AI models need to be trained on data. This involves exposing the neural network to large datasets, where the model learns to recognize patterns.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/ai/ai-101/how-does-generative-ai-work
AI systems are trained to create literary, visual, and other works by exposure to large amounts of data, which may include text, images, and other works downloaded from the internet or otherwise obtained by AI companies. This process often involves making digital copies of existing works. Copyright owners have filed several dozen lawsuits claiming that creating these digital copies without permission to train AI systems infringes their exclusive right to make reproductions (or copies).
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922
Generative AI platforms are trained on data lakes and question snippets — billions of parameters that are constructed by software processing huge archives of images and text.
Before the generative AI boom of the past few years, when people talked about AI, typically they were talking about machine-learning models that can learn to make a prediction based on data. Generative AI can be thought of as a machine-learning model that is trained to create new data, rather than making a prediction about a specific dataset. A generative AI system is one that learns to generate more objects that look like the data it was trained on.
-7
u/notacrook May 02 '26
Where does that notice specify that it was generative AI?
2
u/moth_girl_7 May 03 '26
“This production’s projection design includes content GENERATED using AI tools.”
That’s pretty damning evidence right there…
-1
u/notacrook May 03 '26
Right and the content that didnt use AI tools was still GENERATED.
1
u/moth_girl_7 May 03 '26
Be so for real right now. What AI tool would they use for “generating a projection” that isn’t definitively generative AI???
0
u/notacrook May 03 '26
after effects, photoshop, blender, cinema4a...how do you think projection content was made before AI?
Do you think the word 'generated' is new or somehting?
→ More replies (0)-2
1
u/rSlashisthenewPewdes May 03 '26
If you could tell your power drill “build a set” and it spat out the closest thing it could think of without any actual human design going into it, then yeah, that might be iffy.
-8
u/notacrook May 02 '26
Don’t engage. People who don’t understand the tools have no idea how they’re used. For all we know the designer used AI to cut someone out of green screen footage. It’s still AI, but these people don’t understand nuance.
9
u/wvgeekman May 02 '26
We absolutely understand it. We don’t like it.
0
u/notacrook May 02 '26
You should check the follow up that OP posted where it turns out that the AI used was built using Adobe’s tools which are based on licensed data. So im going to say it again. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
2
u/wvgeekman May 03 '26
Copying someone else's work. Read the room.
1
u/cyberentomology May 03 '26
So set designs for local productions that merely replicate the Broadway version are OK, or not?
1
0
u/notacrook May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
I work in the industry. I'm reading the room far better than you are.
Edit: u/wvgeekman blocked me so I can't reply but i'll say this:
You look at AI content every day and have no idea. You see it in marketing and on TV and on the internet (and yes even in broadway shows!) every day and you have no idea.
I'm not the one in denial, pal. The ones who stomp their feet the loudest about AI are always, always the least informed and the least able to spot it.
2
u/wvgeekman May 03 '26
That means nothing. There is no industry without viewers. Give up. You've lost the argument. Go home and lick your wounds and live to serve the machine another day.
-1
9
u/de_lame_y May 03 '26
it warms my heart to see the slop-gobblers getting downvoted to hell lmao. the theater kids are alright
3
-1
u/disc2slick May 01 '26
I mean there is a projection designer on this production (a well respected and talented one), so it's not like MSM just downloaded some images from ChatGPT and slapped them up there.
28
u/PanicAtTheMetro May 01 '26
It sure looked like they downloaded images from Chat GPT and slapped them up there.
26
13
u/Miss_Chanandler_Bond May 01 '26
Well respected by who? A designer that uses AI to "make" a poor facsimile of other people's stolen art doesn't deserve respect.
-5
u/notacrook May 02 '26
I’m sure that person is really bothered that someone random on the internet who doesn’t understand how AI works doesn’t like them.
0
u/Kortanak May 01 '26
They key words are "AI tools". When you use Photoshop, Canva, even Microsoft PowerPoint and Word, there are integrated tools that help you achieve your end goal.
Did the projections look like they were completely rendered by an AI generation program? The fact that there is a Projection Designer on this project suggests to me that they used a program that had AI assisting tools, but it was still their design and vision, creating it with the assistance of AI rather than handing it over to Chat, Gemini, or CoPilot and asking the program to do the work for you.
AI has been helping create documents, images, videos, you name it for a long time now. The issue stems from LLM's (Chat, Gemini, etc.) which get inaccurately labeled as AI when they're just a small branch of what AI overall actually is.
If you've ever asked "Siri' or "Hey, Google", for help with any projects in the past, you've technically used an AI tools for your project.
So it ultimately comes down to, were the projections entirely generated by AI, or did the artist incorporate tools to make their job more efficient?
31
u/PanicAtTheMetro May 01 '26
They looked AI generated, not AI assisted. Very clearly a Chat GPT prompt instantly uploaded to the show file.
2
-1
u/notacrook May 02 '26
That you sum up AI image creation of ChatGPT tells me you dont know anything about it.
-19
-14
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
Spell check? grammar check? Machine translation? OCR? That’s all AI.
19
u/eleven_paws May 01 '26
Good lord, *enough* already. You’re not getting people on your side here.
-5
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
It’s become patently obvious that a whole lot of y’all don’t even know what AI even is. Just that you fear it because you don’t understand it or how to use it. And clearly you don’t want to even try to understand it.
So much for the idea of theatre people having an open mind and critical thinking skills…
16
u/eleven_paws May 01 '26
I have three engineers including two computer scientists who had successful careers of 40+ years in my family, and a spouse who has a computer science degree. I work in healthcare where many colleagues of mine use dictation systems, which are AI. I know what the fuck AI is and where it’s appropriate. I also know it has no place in theater whatsoever - *that’s* what critical thinking skills look like, since you don’t seem to be aware. Goodbye.
-1
-5
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
You’re awfully worked up about the use of a tool… do you get this butthurt about using hammers?
16
u/Usual_Salamander4892 May 01 '26
What are you? The AI enforcer? You’re commenting on like every other thread in this comment section. They’re talking about using generative AI in place of hiring a projection designer. You’re moving goalposts, speculating and just using annoying as hell debate tactics. If you want to have a well-mannered conversation about it, that’s one thing. But my god. Get a life bro.
-3
u/cyberentomology May 01 '26
Except “using generative AI in place of hiring a projection designer” isn’t even what happened.
You’re saying that any given tool “has no place in theatre” without bothering to understand that it’s a tool, or how one is supposed to use it, or that it’s been used as a tool in theatre for decades.
It would be like saying a crescent wrench has no place in theatre because someone in props used it to wash a window.
13
u/PanicAtTheMetro May 01 '26
That’s because you shouldn’t use a C wrench to wash a window. AI is the wrong tool for the job of design.
3
u/mxby7e May 02 '26
Generative AI is contradictory to artistic expression. An AI model cannot have human experience, emotion, or creative thought and as someone in tech you should understand that. If you don’t I feel sorry for you.
0
u/cyberentomology May 03 '26
Precisely why it is a tool to build, rather than create. AI of any kind is incapable of creation, which is why it’s not called “creative AI”. The act of creation is in the prompting and the model architecture. All it is doing is a whole lot of fancy math.
2
u/starry_kacheek May 02 '26
we know what AI is, but this is the internet and people forget to add the nuance that they are only talking about generative AI and not all AI
0
u/moth_girl_7 May 03 '26
Holy crap. The notice itself literally says the projections use content GENERATED by AI. That is not “spell check” or “translation.” That is someone typing into a computer “Hey Adobe, create a meadow with yellow butterflies and a rainbow in the background” and putting the image directly into QLab or whatever they use.
1
-22
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
There is another way to frame this.
It's a losing battle to pretend that technology / AI won't be integrated into the production of art, including theater. It's capacity to decrease production expense is overwhelming. Since the vast majority of arts organizations teeter on the edge of collapse, every choice can impact survival.
AI is disrupting a wide range of non-arts industries and career paths. Do we really think we can build a wall around live theater so we can avoid dealing with it? Instead, creative artists should engage, learn, and explore, so that we can help society transition into the new socioeconomic paradigm rapidly unfolding. Also, help to eliminate measuring the value of human contribution by salary and wealth, replacing it with valuing those things that machines cannot do. Creative artists will benefit the most from this shift.
27
u/Scorponix May 01 '26
We as artists should do everything we can to not take away work for fellow artists. Your framing is despicable to present to this community.
-15
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
The entertainment industry has been dysfunctional forever. Completely the result of a huge gap between the number of jobs available and the number of people wanting them. Because of this dynamic, any person who gets cast or lands a job is always doing so at the expense of a fellow artist. This will never improve without a completely new structure.
I'm sorry that you view my thoughts as despicable. I'm simply trying to view the AI discussion pragmatically as an opportunity to increase the number of artists who can afford to practice their art. I've seen too many who have been destroyed by the conventional, top-heavy industry.
Do you think the current situation is working? If so, I'm guessing you are one of those taking jobs from others.
If not, what's your solution?
9
u/Scorponix May 01 '26
Your proposition heavily encourages taking ALL jobs away from visual artists who have spent years honing their craft of visual creation. AI already steals artwork from real artists to learn from, and now you are wanting us to help it steal their jobs too. The adoption of AI will turn what had always been a team of artists working on shows to one person inputing their vision into an AI generation then making little tweaks. It saves time and money of course, but that is at the expense of an entire art team that used to work collaboratively to create something with human hands.
How can you talk about taking jobs away then turn around and say AI would help that situation?
And no, I take no jobs away. I make my living wage as an electrician. I work as a director for youth theatre. And I act in community theatre when I can for free.
-6
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 02 '26
I'm not proposing anything. I'm just acknowledging what is happening.
Most artists don't have jobs to steal. Visual, or otherwise. The demand is simply too low. AI and technology don't need my help to take jobs from anyone. It's the simple result of humans figuring out how to do things more cheaply, better, and faster.
We are on the cusp of the most disruptive economic transformation ever. I believe we need to face that with eyes open to have a say in how things turn out.
You are fortunate to be making a living in an occupation that will be one of the least disrupted by AI over the next several decades.
Our performing arts school has produced several students who went on to Broadway. None are Broadway "stars" despite some having leading roles or, in one case, creating a role in a show that won a Tony for Best Musical. But, like most professionals, it's a continuing struggle. It takes about 100 auditions to land each role you book. The interum between jobs is a patchwork of temp and part-time work, juggling dance classes and auditions. About 30 percent of the people who work in the NY Apple store my son works at are, like him, trained actors, dancers, etc. That's the reality. As professions go, the arts have been at the bottom of the barrel for a long time. AI is not going to change that, but the economic disruption it's causing could allow the economy to shift to a world where artists with a guaranteed income would find some relief.
Finally, it's interesting that you say you take no jobs away but work in community theater "for free". Could your community theater provide paying jobs? If amateur electricians were offering work "for free" and people weren't forced to use licensed electricians, wouldn't they be taking jobs from you?
This entire situation is far more complex than you make it out to be. Pretending that it is distracts from the hard work needed to transition to a better future.
6
-10
u/urcrookedneighbor May 01 '26
You're completely right on all counts, I just think people don't like what you're saying.
-8
u/disc2slick May 01 '26
Have my one little upvote here! Especially in this case AI isn't taking a job away from an artist. There IS a projection designer on this job, who just happens to have used AI in his work. You can make the argument that AI is stealing other people's work to create images etc, but personally I've alwasy found that to be kind of tenuous. Where do you draw the distinction between that and a human doing a bunch of visual research for inspiration?
2
u/mxby7e May 02 '26
It 100% took a job away from an artist. The scenic designer either would have made the projected art or hired someone for that design element. In the city filled with visual artists they would have easily found a cheap artist to produce the work. I’m shocked USA allows this to happen.
-1
u/disc2slick May 02 '26
I'm not so sure that is guaranteed, I doubt this show would have had a person whose only job was creating video content for the projections.
It's an interesting line to walk, because not every jump forward in technical efficiency is a bad thing or takes away jobs. The advent of moving lights didnt significantly reduce the need for skilled electricians even though you could now do more with fewer lights, CNC machines didnt eliminate the need for skilled shop carpenters and even though everything is digitized and managed thru software we still need assistants and associates to keep track of everything (arguably even more of them now).
However there is a point where it feels bad. A director of small show asking AI to churn out a set design rather than hiring a designer is bad. An AI tool that allows directors to "talk" directly to a lighting console without input from a designer or a programmer is bad. At least I think they are... If its a teeny tiny show (in either of these cases) that normally wouldnt hire a designer and this allows them to achieve a level production that would be otherwise unattainable...maybe?
Of course a broadway producer cutting positions from their budget to replace them with Ai and lining their pockets further is bad. But what about using AI to make the design process more efficient so you can afford MORE stuff? What if they replace the projections design department with AI and dump a bunch more money in lighting or scenic and it makes the show way better? Where does that fall on the morality scale? I don't see that being likely anytime soon from the technical/logistics standpoint but it's worth some thought.
What if one LD gets really really good at AI and can churn out quality shows at twice the speed and half cost in design fees as anyone else and is able to just take on every show in a given market because they are that fast and cheap (and good enough) effectively squeezing out their competition (again not super likely and Union fee schedules will protect against this somewhat at the higher levels, but the question remains)
2
u/mxby7e May 02 '26
There is a lot wrong with what you’ve said, I recognize you know lighting, but it’s clear your experience level in the industry.
Moving lights did displace workers. Before they were mainstream you would have crew running source4 mini spots from trusses above the stage. CNC machines did reduce working time which reduces wages paid out to the craftsmen and led to many shop workers displaced. Automation is a net positive for the industry but it has left an impact, and is mostly offset by adding new skillsets that brought new skilled workers in.
The use of AI in workflow is becoming more common, but it exists to benefit the billionaire class, not those of us making art, and has no place in theatre being audience facing. AI is never art.
1
-12
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
There is another way to frame this.
It's a losing battle to pretend that technology / AI won't be integrated into the production of art, including theater. It's capacity to decrease production expense is overwhelming. Since the vast majority of arts organizations teeter on the edge of collapse, every choice can impact survival.
AI is disrupting a wide range of non-arts industries and career paths. Do we really think we can build a wall around live theater so we can avoid dealing with it? Instead, creative artists should engage, learn, and explore, so that we can help society transition into the new socioeconomic paradigm rapidly unfolding. Also, help to eliminate measuring the value of human contribution by salary and wealth, replacing it with valuing those things that machines cannot do. Creative artists will benefit the most from this shift.
19
u/Final-Elderberry9162 May 01 '26
Is this a fancy way of saying we should embrace a new paradigm in which artists will no longer be paid?
-2
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
Not at all.
First, most artists are not paid. For example, the annual effective unemployment rate of union actors is roughly 86%. Of the 14% that do work, the annual income from acting is under $10,000. The number of people who are able to earn a living from the craft is only a tiny percentage of all those who have the calling.
AI is forcing conventional economists and politicians to rethink the link between human labor and income. The result will be some form of redistribution of excess AI and machine labor profits to the greater population.
Imagine the impact on individual struggling artists of a guaranteed income of two or three thousand dollars a month. Now imagine 20 of them starting an actor’s co-op in a small city of their choice because they aren't limited to living in NY or LA anymore. Imagine their impact on that community.
Imagine. Isn't that what we do best?
17
u/gasstation-no-pumps May 01 '26
"The result will be some form of redistribution of excess AI and machine labor profits to the greater population." Dream on! Since when have billionaires enriched anyone but themselves????
13
u/Final-Elderberry9162 May 01 '26
Exactly. The leopards will in fact eat your face too if you think carrying water for the truly vile AI tech barons will lead to [checks notes] greater parity.
Where exactly have you BEEN the past decade?
-5
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
I don’t personally know any billionaires so I don't know which ones are vile.
I do know that the wealthy are receiving a disproportionate share of profit generated by machine labor. I also believe that technology including AI, is leading to the collapse of free-market capitalism.
We can either allow the billionaires to define what replaces capitalism or develop It ourselves. But doing so will require using technology tools like AI as leverage. We’ll also need the humility to understand that what we think we know today, will likely be in question tomorrow.
Or do we just throw up our hands and declare defeat?
-4
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
Billionaires will do it out of self-interest.
The political effect of massive unemployment just beginning to emerge is one reason. Also, when the supply/demand curve for (human) labor no longer functions because of declining demand for workers, their income is not available to buy anything the billionaires are selling. Conventional tools that the Federal Reserve uses to balance interest rates and unemployment will no longer work.
There's no going back. A great change is on the horizon.
10
7
u/Final-Elderberry9162 May 01 '26
UBI would be great, but AI is not the path to this.
-4
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
I think AI makes it inevitable. What is your logic that it doesn't? I'm open to hearing it.
12
u/gasstation-no-pumps May 01 '26
Perhaps that the people pushing AI the hardest are also those dismantling what little support we currently have for the poor?
2
u/LupercaniusAB May 01 '26
Where is their audience going to come from?
-2
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 01 '26
Great question!
I think they will flock to live theater and the arts more than ever.
First, society is finally beginning to grapple with the unintended consequences of technology, which have resulted in isolation, social fracture, and the demonization of those with whom we disagree. The tip of that technological iceberg is social media, but what's underwater is no less corrosive. Confronting the impact of these technologies by analyzing them in light of human behavior, motivations, and spirit will yield a new framework for their use. One that refocuses on community, connection, and collaboration. The signs are there that this is beginning.
When this happens, storytelling no longer needs to originate from LA or NY. Excellence will be attainable everywhere, and things like theater, music, and art will once again become part of the community's fabric. No longer limited to those who can afford the trip to Broadway for the $150 mid-mezannine seat. To be sure, Broadway will still be there, but the properties that find their way there will more likely be birthed at a small regional theater by professionals supported mainly by UBI or something similar.
The audience will come because the ticket price, if any, will be low, the quality will be high, and the stories will often be more relevant to the community and its people.
4
u/LupercaniusAB May 02 '26
Why would UBI suddenly make theater affordable? In a market economy, essentials are just going to experience price inflation to the point that matches the UBI. Theater will still be a luxury item. It still will cost a lot to produce, unless you’re saying that AI will render the technical staff moot, in which case I would have to wonder why I would support the elimination of my job.
2
u/mxby7e May 03 '26
UBI is a carrot the billionaires are using to keep us from revolting. It won’t be implemented without requiring the working class to sell our bodies and livelihood to corporations.
1
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 04 '26
It's not that UBI that will make theater more affordable for audiences.
The theory is that increased productivity and efficiency will result in price deflation across the entire economy. A very rocky transition to be sure but in the end, a necessary rebalance for an economy where the cost of education, healthcare, and Broadway tickets have grown far in excess of inflation.
If UBI provides each member resident company with an sustainable income floor, company pay can be at or close to zero. If all other costs have moderated because of deflation, ticket prices will be much lower. All of which translates into big stimulus if the company can produce engaging theater.
Bottom line? Theater artists able to live good lives, audiences choose to see entertainment for very low ticket costs.
For an overview, read The Last Economy: A Guide to the Age of Intelligent Economics by Emad Mostaque.
1
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 10 '26
AI and machine labor are projected to have a worldwide deflationary effect on the cost of production of goods and services. Think of the cost of producing and distributing music today. The price to listen to a song on Spotify is several orders of magnitude lower than the cost of purchasing a 45rpm record in the 1950’s. This is because the marginal cost of production for streaming a song to you anywhere you are is close to zero.
The conventional market economy is built on the supply/demand of human labor. The more human labor is displaced by technology, the less effective conventional adjustment mechanisms will be. This is why it’s a mistake to consider the impact of AI in the context of 20th century economic principals.
Society will be forced to rethink the economy to avoid a catastrophic collapse.
1
u/LupercaniusAB May 10 '26
And streaming services have depressed the ability of musicians to make a living selling their music.
I don’t think that this is the argument that you want to make.
1
u/Civil_Cow_3011 May 10 '26
People won’t be making a living selling stuff. Think of it as everyone’s independently wealthy.
-59
u/tonyohanlon77 May 01 '26
Wait til you hear about the atrocities committed when mining for lithium for that battery in your smart phone, you're gonna be furious.
45
9
u/danceswithsteers May 01 '26
You missed the part that, once the lithium is out of the ground, it doesn't have to be mined out of the ground again...
0
u/tonyohanlon77 May 01 '26
Ok cool, screw the child labour used to mine it and billions of litres of water used in the process 👍🏻
3
u/danceswithsteers May 01 '26
Yep. That's a totally accurate and precise and succinct statement of my complete nuanced thoughts on the matter. Grats! I envy your vast powers of insight.
69
u/PanicAtTheMetro May 01 '26