Spatial filmmaking is having a moment—but at CES 2026, the more interesting story wasn’t a glossy trailer or a perfectly controlled demo. It was the workflow.

According to a recent GIGABYTE press release, VR filmmaker and educator Hugh Hou ran a live spatial computing demonstration inside the GIGABYTE suite, walking attendees through how immersive video is actually produced in real-world conditions—capture to post to playback—without leaning on pre-rendered “best case scenario” content. In other words: not theory, not a lab. A production pipeline, running live, on a show floor.

A full spatial pipeline—executed live

The demo gave attendees a front-row view of a complete spatial filmmaking pipeline:

• Capture
• Post-production
• Final playback across multiple devices

And the key detail here is that the workflow was executed live at CES—mirroring the same processes used in commercial XR projects. That matters because spatial video isn’t forgiving. Once you’re working in 360-degree environments (and pushing into 8K), you’re no longer just chasing “fast.” You’re chasing:

• System stability
• Performance consistency
• Thermal reliability

Those are the unsexy requirements that make or break actual production days.

Playback across Meta Quest, Apple Vision Pro, and Galaxy XR

The session culminated with attendees watching a two-minute spatial film trailer across:

• Meta Quest
• Apple Vision Pro
• Newly launched Galaxy XR headsets
• Plus a 3D tablet display offering an additional 180-degree viewing option

That multi-device playback is a quiet flex. Spatial content doesn’t live in one ecosystem anymore—creators are being pulled toward cross-platform deliverables, which adds even more pressure on the pipeline to stay clean and consistent.

Where AI fits (when it’s not the headline)

One of the better notes in the release: AI wasn’t positioned as a shiny feature. It was framed as what it’s becoming for a lot of editors—an embedded toolset that speeds up the grind without hijacking the creative process.

In the demo, AI-assisted processes supported tasks like:

• Enhancement
• Tracking
• Preview workflows

The footage moved through industry-standard software—Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve—with AI-based:

• Upscaling
• Noise reduction
• Detail refinement

And in immersive VR, those steps aren’t optional polish. Any artifact, softness, or weird noise pattern becomes painfully obvious when the viewer can look anywhere.

Why the hardware platform matters for spatial workloads

Underneath the demo was a custom-built GIGABYTE AI PC designed for sustained spatial video workloads. Per the release, the system included:

• AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor
• Radeon AI PRO R9700 AI TOP GPU
• X870E AORUS MASTER X3D ICE motherboard

The point GIGABYTE is making is less “look at these parts” and more: spatial computing workloads demand a platform that can run hard continuously—real-time 8K playback and rendering—without throttling, crashing, or drifting into inconsistent performance.

That’s the difference between “cool demo” and “reliable production machine.”

The bigger takeaway: spatial filmmaking is moving from experiment to repeatable process

By running a demanding spatial filmmaking workflow live—and repeatedly—at CES 2026, GIGABYTE is positioning spatial production as something creators can depend on, not just test-drive.

And that’s the shift worth watching in 2026: spatial filmmaking isn’t just about headsets getting better. It’s about the behind-the-scenes pipeline becoming stable enough that creators can treat immersive production like a real, repeatable craft—because the tools finally hold up under pressure.

Source:PRNewswire – GIGABYTE press release

Advertisement

Welcome to the Consumer Corner section of STM Daily News, your ultimate destination for savvy shopping and informed decision-making! Dive into a treasure trove of insights and reviews covering everything from the hottest toys that spark joy in your little ones to the latest electronic gadgets that simplify your life. Explore our comprehensive guides on stylish home furnishings, discover smart tips for buying a home or enhancing your living space with creative improvement ideas, and get the lowdown on the best cars through our detailed auto reviews. Whether you’re making a major purchase or simply seeking inspiration, the Consumer Corner is here to empower you every step of the way—unlock the keys to becoming a smarter consumer today!

https://stmdailynews.com/category/consumer-corner

Please leave this field empty

Want more stories
“Your morning jolt of Inspiring & Interesting Stories!”

Sign up to receive awesome articles directly to your inbox.

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Please check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Ahmed Elgammal, Rutgers University

Generative AI was trained on centuries of art and writing produced by humans.

But scientists and critics have wondered what would happen once AI became widely adopted and started training on its outputs.

A new study points to some answers.

In January 2026, artificial intelligence researchers Arend Hintze, Frida Proschinger Åström and Jory Schossau published a study showing what happens when generative AI systems are allowed to run autonomously – generating and interpreting their own outputs without human intervention.

The researchers linked a text-to-image system with an image-to-text system and let them iterate – image, caption, image, caption – over and over and over.

Regardless of how diverse the starting prompts were – and regardless of how much randomness the systems were allowed – the outputs quickly converged onto a narrow set of generic, familiar visual themes: atmospheric cityscapes, grandiose buildings and pastoral landscapes. Even more striking, the system quickly “forgot” its starting prompt.

The researchers called the outcomes “visual elevator music” – pleasant and polished, yet devoid of any real meaning.

For example, they started with the image prompt, “The Prime Minister pored over strategy documents, trying to sell the public on a fragile peace deal while juggling the weight of his job amidst impending military action.” The resulting image was then captioned by AI. This caption was used as a prompt to generate the next image.

After repeating this loop, the researchers ended up with a bland image of a formal interior space – no people, no drama, no real sense of time and place.

As a computer scientist who studies generative models and creativity, I see the findings from this study as an important piece of the debate over whether AI will lead to cultural stagnation.

The results show that generative AI systems themselves tend toward homogenization when used autonomously and repeatedly. They even suggest that AI systems are currently operating in this way by default.

Advertisement

The familiar is the default

This experiment may appear beside the point: Most people don’t ask AI systems to endlessly describe and regenerate their own images. The convergence to a set of bland, stock images happened without retraining. No new data was added. Nothing was learned. The collapse emerged purely from repeated use.

But I think the setup of the experiment can be thought of as a diagnostic tool. It reveals what generative systems preserve when no one intervenes.

This has broader implications, because modern culture is increasingly influenced by exactly these kinds of pipelines. Images are summarized into text. Text is turned into images. Content is ranked, filtered and regenerated as it moves between words, images and videos. New articles on the web are now more likely to be written by AI than humans. Even when humans remain in the loop, they are often choosing from AI-generated options rather than starting from scratch.

The findings of this recent study show that the default behavior of these systems is to compress meaning toward what is most familiar, recognizable and easy to regenerate.

Cultural stagnation or acceleration?

For the past few years, skeptics have warned that generative AI could lead to cultural stagnation by flooding the web with synthetic content that future AI systems then train on. Over time, the argument goes, this recursive loop would narrow diversity and innovation.

Champions of the technology have pushed back, pointing out that fears of cultural decline accompany every new technology. Humans, they argue, will always be the final arbiter of creative decisions.

What has been missing from this debate is empirical evidence showing where homogenization actually begins.

The new study does not test retraining on AI-generated data. Instead, it shows something more fundamental: Homogenization happens before retraining even enters the picture. The content that generative AI systems naturally produce – when used autonomously and repeatedly – is already compressed and generic.

This reframes the stagnation argument. The risk is not only that future models might train on AI-generated content, but that AI-mediated culture is already being filtered in ways that favor the familiar, the describable and the conventional.

Retraining would amplify this effect. But it is not its source.

This is no moral panic

Skeptics are right about one thing: Culture has always adapted to new technologies. Photography did not kill painting. Film did not kill theater. Digital tools have enabled new forms of expression.

Advertisement

But those earlier technologies never forced culture to be endlessly reshaped across various mediums at a global scale. They did not summarize, regenerate and rank cultural products – news stories, songs, memes, academic papers, photographs or social media posts – millions of times per day, guided by the same built-in assumptions about what is “typical.”

The study shows that when meaning is forced through such pipelines repeatedly, diversity collapses not because of bad intentions, malicious design or corporate negligence, but because only certain kinds of meaning survive the text-to-image-to-text repeated conversions.

This does not mean cultural stagnation is inevitable. Human creativity is resilient. Institutions, subcultures and artists have always found ways to resist homogenization. But in my view, the findings of the study show that stagnation is a real risk – not a speculative fear – if generative systems are left to operate in their current iteration.

They also help clarify a common misconception about AI creativity: Producing endless variations is not the same as producing innovation. A system can generate millions of images while exploring only a tiny corner of cultural space.

In my own research on creative AI, I found that novelty requires designing AI systems with incentives to deviate from the norms. Without it, systems optimize for familiarity because familiarity is what they have learned best. The study reinforces this point empirically. Autonomy alone does not guarantee exploration. In some cases, it accelerates convergence.

This pattern already emerged in the real world: One study found that AI-generated lesson plans featured the same drift toward conventional, uninspiring content, underscoring that AI systems converge toward what’s typical rather than what’s unique or creative.

Lost in translation

Whenever you write a caption for an image, details will be lost. Likewise for generating an image from text. And this happens whether it’s being performed by a human or a machine.

In that sense, the convergence that took place is not a failure that’s unique to AI. It reflects a deeper property of bouncing from one medium to another. When meaning passes repeatedly through two different formats, only the most stable elements persist.

But by highlighting what survives during repeated translations between text and images, the authors are able to show that meaning is processed inside generative systems with a quiet pull toward the generic.

The implication is sobering: Even with human guidance – whether that means writing prompts, selecting outputs or refining results – these systems are still stripping away some details and amplifying others in ways that are oriented toward what’s “average.”

If generative AI is to enrich culture rather than flatten it, I think systems need to be designed in ways that resist convergence toward statistically average outputs. There can be rewards for deviation and support for less common and less mainstream forms of expression.

Advertisement

The study makes one thing clear: Absent these interventions, generative AI will continue to drift toward mediocre and uninspired content.

Cultural stagnation is no longer speculation. It’s already happening.

Ahmed Elgammal, Professor of Computer Science and Director of the Art & AI Lab, Rutgers University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

LUMISTAR wrapped up its CES 2026 debut in Las Vegas with record-level attention, as live demos of its AI-powered sports training systems consistently drew full crowds throughout the show, according to the company.

The sports-focused AI brand showcased TERO, its AI tennis training system, and CARRY, its AI basketball training system—both described by attendees as “game changers” for how training can be delivered, measured, and scaled.

Why the Booth Stayed Packed

Across multiple days of hands-on demonstrations, LUMISTAR’s booth became a focal point for athletes, coaches, club operators, and sports technology professionals. Visitors repeatedly pointed to one key difference: the systems don’t just record results—they actively participate in training.

That’s a major break from the standard model in sports tech, where:

• traditional ball machines run pre-set drills, and
• wearables/video tools analyze performance after a session ends.

Training That Adapts in Real Time

LUMISTAR says both TERO and CARRY combine real-time computer vision, adaptive decision-making, and on-court execution to respond instantly to athlete behavior—adjusting difficulty, tempo, and training logic shot by shot.

Attendees noted that this turns practice from repetition into something closer to competition—an evolving back-and-forth between athlete and system.

“This is not an incremental improvement—it’s a complete rethink of what training equipment should do,” one professional coach attending CES said in the release. “For the first time, the machine is reacting to the athlete, not the other way around.”

From Data Collection to Action

Another standout point from CES feedback: the platform’s focus on turning performance data into immediate training outcomes.

LUMISTAR’s approach emphasizes:

• continuous data retention across sessions
• real-time performance interpretation
• clear visualization of progress and training efficiency

Coaches and athletes highlighted that this could reduce wasted training time and accelerate skill development by making each session measurable and comparable.

What’s Next: Pre-Orders and Kickstarter

LUMISTAR outlined a 2026 rollout plan following CES:

• TERO opens for pre-orders in March 2026, with full market availability beginning May 2026
• CARRY launches via Kickstarter in Q2 2026
• The company will continue private demonstrations and pilot programs with select training institutions worldwide ahead of commercial release

More information is available at https://www.lumistar.ai.

Source: PRNewswire press release from LUMISTAR (Jan. 11, 2026)

STM Daily News is tracking the biggest CES 2026 stories shaping entertainment, culture, and the tech that’s changing how we watch, play, train, and live—bringing you quick-hit updates, standout product debuts, and follow-up coverage as launches roll out in 2026. https://stmdailynews.com/entertainment/

Advertisement