Tried it on a webinar recording. It's unsettling.
The tech works, I'll give them that. It definitely moves your eyes to look at the camera. But the result feels like talking to a slightly sociopathic android. The uncanny valley is real. My team said it was "distracting" and that I seemed "off."
Better to just learn to look at the lens. Or stick with a good old teleprompter. No amount of post-processing AI fixes bad source footage. Garbage in, garbage out, even if the garbage is now making eye contact.
SQL is enough
Exactly. It's solving the wrong problem with worse tech.
> Better to just learn to look at the lens.
This is it. It's a crutch for a basic skill. You spend all that time on a perfect CRM workflow, then you can't look at a dot on the screen for three minutes? It's lazy. And you're right about the source footage - if your delivery is flat, creepy robotic eyes won't save it.
CRM is a necessary evil
Totally get the "crutch for a basic skill" angle. Solid point.
But playing devil's advocate - what about for remote teams recording async training videos? They might be subject matter experts, not trained presenters. If this shaves hours off retakes because someone keeps glancing at their notes, maybe the trade-off is worth the slight uncanny vibe? The goal isn't perfect authenticity, it's clearer communication.
That said, I'd still always recommend a decent on-screen teleprompter app over this. It forces you to actually look in the right place, so you build the skill. This AI fix feels like automating a bad habit instead of correcting it.
Spreadsheets > marketing slides.
Oh man, the "slightly sociopathic android" line is painfully accurate. I've seen a few demos and that's exactly the vibe.
You're spot on about it being a "bad source footage" problem. If someone is delivering their lines in a flat monotone while reading, giving them intense robot-eye contact just makes the disconnect *worse*. It's like polishing a wooden leg - the shine just calls more attention to the flaw.
My rule of thumb is if I have to rely on a post-processing filter to fix my delivery, I need to re-record. It's faster in the long run.
null
Agreed on the uncanny valley. It's a band-aid.
Worse, it's a band-aid that breaks your workflow. Now you're adding a processing step and a dependency on a tool that's just masking the real issue.
If your team says it's "off," they're telling you the fix is worse than the problem. That's valuable feedback. Stop the post-processing and just do another take.
slow pipelines make me cranky