Oriol Rigata has always been fascinated by creating art. He focused entirely on photography  for the last 7 years. However, his true passion has always been the art of filmmaking.  Filmmaking itself is an all -round job- from the idea for the plot and the selection of all the  appropriate sets to various budget issues and constant communication with the entire crew. The  general preference to work independently and self-determined, and also to be able and willing  to work 24 hours a day at certain times due to particular circumstances, is not easy to reconcile  with this. Eight months ago, he discovered Midjourney, and therefore a self-led and fully  autonomous way of AI film creation. This is an interview about new opportunities, the dangers  that arise from it and general food for thought by an AI film creator. 

“In an ethical way I just try to be myself” Oriol Rigata laughs, while answering the question  of what limits or restriction he faces in a creative or ethical way when working in AI  filmmaking. “I always play with the limits, in all aspects of life. There are lots of limits in  AI filmmaking, it is impossible to execute exactly whatever you have in your head. So, it  is like an imagination of what you have in your head and what the AI can do. And my job  is trying to make this gap the slightest as possible. But I think it is not the task of the  creatives, but that of the politicians to regulate the restrictions. And what should and  should not be possible. But I think it is not my responsibility a s a creative to set those. I  do have responsibilities, but different ones when making films. I wouldn’t say in a movie  what I wouldn’t say in person.” 

The statement about what one would and wouldn’t say in real life is exciting. But where do  those original ideas come from? Oriol delves deeper into the topic of authorship in AI and  replies that, in his opinion, it is just a simpler and easier way of referencing, but nothing  completely new or reprehensible. Non-AI filmmaking is also influenced by the filmmaker’s  subjective perspective, which is unconsciously or consciously shaped by previously consumed and produced content. Approaching this topic from an interdisciplinary perspective:

“[…] I  think the best thing that could have happened to documentary photography is the arrival  of AI. Because AI cannot take a photo of this very moment, right now, right here. […] I  don’t know what to expect, but I think in around 5-10 years we will see movies fully  developed by AI.” 

After these interesting statements, the question arises as to what other advantages he sees for  himself in this type of filmmaking. “Since I work by myself most of the time, I am more  efficient, I can work like two people at once. Also not having to organize and handle the  communication under the team itself [is a positive aspect for me].” Therefore, AI  filmmaking is an autonomous and self-directed way to generate films, that used to involve much  more effort, both organizationally and interpersonally. A more inclusive and progressive  technology then?

However, the consequences of increased efficiency and acceleration without human labor  involved, are also an often expressed and, one could also say, feared effect of AI in certain  circles: “[…] it is invadable, but people are scared. Lots of people could be losing their  jobs, but times are changing. I am super excited, I hope it is not a selfish thing to say but  my main source of income is teaching and not filmmaking”, he responds. “I feel them […] 
but it is a new tool. Every time a new tool enters the game, some people are scared, and  others are excited. It is part of the game.” So, a conflict in the community between great  respect, fear, and anticipation? 

Since Oriol stated at the beginning that one of his biggest challenges is to merge the idea with  the technology, the question arises where this original idea comes from: At its core, it has to be  creativity, right? His answer to whether he thinks that AI promotes creativity or inhibits it is the  following:

“In my personal experience it increases creativity 500%. I had the images in  my mind, but I did not have the tools before to express my ideas like I have imagined  them.”  

The tools that make it possible. In his opinion, AI could be an opportunity for the so-called  “tool” of the industry. “A writer has words, painters have colours, photographers have light - it is not a tool for photography or paintings, because there is no process in it. In  filmmaking […] the real work is putting the music, the shots, the timing together […] but  cinematographs don’t have an own tool. Maybe AI could be the tool for filmmaking? That  is something I think about very often. One original tool for filmmaking, because it is not  just photography with movement.” As a result, could AI offer a solution to a phenomenon  that has often been discussed but not yet conclusively answered? And here we are again,  certainly another food for thought. 
 

By Salome Müller