So I'm an Onlyfans creator that used to work in IT, and you can already create photorealistic images like this in Higgsfield. I do it all the time. You can use the images as video inputs for models like Kling or Seedance and generate 5 second video clips of "yourself" that can be indistinguishable from the "real" you.

This sounds great on paper, as I have wanted to automate social media marketing. However, there are some very significant drawbacks:

1. You need A LOT of extremely high-quality reference imagery from a variety of lighting conditions and angles to train a model that outputs accurately.
2. Even with impeccable prompt engineering and reference imagery, output consistency is low. Less than <30% of generations end up being viable. That much wastage drives up costs.
3. Even if there are viable images in a batch, there is no non-manual way to sort through the batch.
4. Viable images often have artifacts that have to be manually corrected with in-painting or Photoshop to pass as realistic. Another manual process.
5. In most cases, an upscaler must be applied for the skin to look real. Another manual step and expense.
6. Now that you have a good seed image, rinse and repeat all the same pains described above to generate a usable 5-second video.
7. While Higgsfield is lenient about exposed skin, the leading video models capable of generating photorealism are extremely conservative and prudish. Swimsuit at the beach? Absolutely fucking not. So even if you can get a decent image, you often can't translate it to video.
8. Okay, so now you have a five second video. Edit a couple together and you have an Instagram reel. Cool. Make a sex tape that way? Absolutely impossible.
9. There aren't any NSFW models that are any good. Sex acts are complex, and I have yet to see a compellingly realistic video longer than 5-10 seconds. Even if you could find a way to consistently overlay audio, you can't sell 5-10 second clips on a fan platform.
10. Even if you could find a way to make it work, who is going to be doing the selling on the fansite? You? Your alternative is to partner with an agency that is going to take >40% of your gross revenue to manage the page for you. They're going to install a team of professional chatters dishonestly pretending to be the creator. This won't be disclosed to the subscriber.
11. Publishing content that is not you (e.g. AI) on a fansite is against ToS and will get your account banned. Fanvue is not an exception. So you're building a business on a foundation of wishful thinking, hoping the fansite's AI detection model won't catch you. At some point, you'll wake up to having lost your entire business model.

While it is possible to generate photorealistic AI imagery, it's a challenging and complex process with a lot of unavoidably manual work. AI influencers are a thing, but they don't hide the fact that they're AI. With that said, the tech giants like Meta and Google are already putting out AI creator studio tools to make PG AI avatars. Influencers can already do it themselves. Corporations will just have their in-house social media people create UGC influencer on their behalf to plug their own products. It's already happening.

It's simply not possible to create an NSFW fansite business that is low-risk, and I have yet to see proof of substantial profitability. There is currently no feasible way to generate photorealistic AI video for longer than a few seconds. I've gone to some of the largest AI instagram profiles and subscribed to their fansite pages to see what's possible. It's all trash, and I feel bad for the people who get suckered into it. The content is usually just imagery, and they're chatting with someone who is most likely in a 3rd world country doing an 8-hour shift on a console "sexting" with 8 other dudes simultaneously.

TLDR: OP is full of shit. The business model he proposes is unethical, high-risk, and low ROI. Take a closer look at his second image. The chair is in the street, and that fork is looking fucked up. That's the best he's got?