- This topic has 18 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
There's been a TON of writers and visual artists who are absolutely p!ssed at AI.
They call it stealing, but let's be honest here, most artists get their inspiration from somewhere/something/someone else too - most won't admit it. I think Steve Jobs was one of the few exceptions with his great "Good artists copy; great artists steal" line.
I guess it's because all that talent, work, sweat, and tears suddenly doesn't mean as much, and industry at large looks at the bleeding-edge AI art as 'good enough' now, making most commercial artists worth a lot less on the jobs market.
Without the initial base of art to draw from I doubt AI art would have gotten the boost it needed.
Once artist give up or give in to AI we will lose a little more of our "soul". Its one thing to want to emulate your idols art. Its another thing to copy and paste it.Robotics replaced humans physically. AI replaces humans mentally. One more step towards being obsolete.
I understand the feeling - originality is harder to find these days.
But then again, consider...
Cubism, Impressionism, Brutalism, Atomic Age, art deco, manga, even stuff as old as the Renaissance, woodcuts, and the Dutch Masters... all of these have flocks of artists copying each others' style, enough so and exacting enough that seeing just one is instantly distinct and recognizable as part of a grouping. It's like seeing a political cartoon out of 18th-19th Century US papers - even though hordes of artists drew and printed them, they all looked rather alike - enough to instantly recognize them if you knew where they came from.
The only reason we don't look at these styles in the same light as AI is that these genres competed with each other, even across time as they shared space in the same museum, gallery, collection, or even book.
AI is just doing what all those artists did, except that you can tell the AI via prompt to use one of those styles...
I think the biggest professional complaints against it is that 1) it's not yet very good at it but in the pedestrian sense is 'good enough', and 2) what it can produce is almost good-enough, but doesn't really require any work to produce. Oh, and I forgot the most important: 3) companies don't have to hire good artists at high wages for gfx - just hire someone cheaper who knows prompts well and knows enough about Photoshop CS to tweak over the AI errors, and you're all set.
............Cubism, Impressionism, Brutalism, Atomic Age, art deco, manga, even stuff as old as the Renaissance, woodcuts, and the Dutch Masters... all of these have flocks of artists copying each others' style.............
This is true, but they still had to be able to do. They needed (manual) skills.
I can look at say the mona lisa, but if I would have to make a copy by hand.....no way!
( This is why I play with DS)
If I could draw, I wouldn't need to learn a fairly difficult program, all I would need is pencils or paint or...
Same goes for all the arts.
I work with clay, have seen work of people in an "art club" That I would be ashamed of to show.
Their skills are inadequate
I do not consider myself an artist ever, just saying.
SO..
Even copying requires skill
AI does not have skillI've been trying hard not to get involved in this debate because it's really only a matter of opinion and which view one takes. You've tried AI yourself so you would know the randomness of it makes copying impossible. Perhaps with styles but the same would apply to music, painting, literature etc. Do not your own sculptures borrow "steal" the style of other artists? People who use AI don't do so to make copies of other people's artwork as that would be pointless.
You're way off the mark if you think producing images with generative AI requires no skill. In fact I find it harder than working with DS and other people's pre-made models. It comes down to how much work one wants to put into their art, and laziness isn't unique to AI... have a look through the Daz gallery with +50% of it complete junk IMO. The same with the Civiitai gallery.
We might have to agree to disagree because as I said art is, and has always been, just a matter of perception. The method one chooses to arrive at a result is irrelevant. IMO most of the opposition to AI comes from a luddite mentality.
Is AI cool?
Seems soIs this Art?
Id say yesIs AI dangerous
ProbablyAI will open new jobs. Sure
It is allowing us to do things we dreamed of.
Will it destroy art as we know it. Already has
Will it destroy jobs. Already has.Is it a good thing? Depends on your perspective. Doubt many automotive workers were happy with robotic assembly lines but it made people that sell robots happy. Pretty sure the camera industry took a hit with cellphone cameras.
Its a hot industry ATM and its getting ridiculous fast. The creativity a young teen could do with a little effort will eventually (if not already) be near production quality of movies like Ironman. That opens up the flood gates for amazing creative potential. How much of that potential is a computer doing the work for you? AI will write the script. AI will make the movie. AI will voice the actors. AI will do everything accept take the credit.
Humans are always at odds with themselves. I would not steal a TV from my neighbors house but Ill download a G8F in a second. is that hypocrisy? I should be able to both hate and like AI.
@Frank
I knew someone would come up and say AI needs skills to.I find it hard to find the right words, but I was refering to Adam's point of people needed, say painter skills, to mimic a painter. Not everybody can learn to be Rembrant, you need an amount of talent to.
But almost anybody could learn how to use AI or DAZ for that matter
Hope you get what I am trying to say.
I know it takes more than a few propts and Lora's to make an image you want in AI, but is it skill( as in painting sunlight), or clever programming?Well it's certainly not manual skill nor physical dexterity but I suppose neither would that be the case with writing an opera or composing music. It's true that AI can reduce necessary talent to some degree if all one wants is a pretty and meaningless picture. The same would apply to DS. To say that anybody can learn AI suggests that there is no skill progression and I don't think that's true for either AI or DS.
Long ago in Junior high-school I liked to draw. I wasn't good but I wasn't bad. I'd say probably better than average for my age but I saw my limits. I met a student and saw his art. He drew absolutely amazing art. Nothing I could even attempt to come close to. It was at that point I discovered the difference between skill and talent. He had never taken any art training. He drew good naturally. I might have been able to "learn" skills to draw as good as he did but he would always have been born with talent.
I've seen gifted children that easily surpass adults that have had a decade of training in art/music. AI is the equalizer. And while I might feel good that I can surpass that kid by typing a few words on the keyboard it feels like a hollow victory
We moved from the cave to the canvas.
The canvas to the computer.
Now from thinking for ourselves to having the computer think for us.I used to be able to remember people's phone numbers and remember driving directions. Now the cellphone remembers my contacts and GPS tells me where I am. Might as well have the computer imagine for me as well. If I want an elf with moons for eyes am I accepting what the computer thinks I want or is it actually what I want.
@gaver art is about expression, not technique.
I guess most artists fail to remember that, and that's why they always try to define what is "not art", which is typically what is not their preferred / approved technique.
@d0gg0d I guess that's a bit like the difference between someone that draws random shapesbwith random colors and the one that draws precisely what he wants.
Similarly, an AI artist could either use just a prompt, or use more involved techniques like controlnet, impainting, compositionimg, photoshopping, etc. to get what he wants.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
