- Thread starter Deleted member 6573772
- Start date
I think this should not appear if you take the bus and walk, only if you sleep outside, but maybe I missed something.
All media (especially this kind of media) is going to be using AI in the future, in some way/shape/form, whether we like it or not is irrelevant...
Nice strawman there. It takes skill and knowledge to find a hood composition. Get the lighting right, especially if you're outdoors and dealing with only having natural lighting to work with.
All this is is using an app someone else wrote, using art styles scrapped and stolen from the artists without paying for it, en mass.
Never mind piracy here. This is industrialized piracy that's gonna kill off actual artists. Not glorified app users with delusions of grandeur.
That's one way of looking at it. Another example: when you create music, you use a DAW that someone else created, you use plug-ins that some other people came up with e.t.c. Everyone is stealing something from someone then.
Not all material that uses AI will see success. And not all artists will see success. Such is life. I dedicate my time and effort to do this thing because I like it, no matter if I make a few bucks on this or not (it's a few anyway). People who like their craft will keep going as well.
And bragging about piracy here is funny.
Do you think AI art is also as easy as just clicking the generate button? You have to create your own style by using models, loras, referencing art styles. You have to create a prompt with correct weighting. You have to use the correct words in the prompt to create the right lighting and composition for the image you're trying to go for. If you are trying to create a specific pose, you have to try to wrangle an uncontrollable AI into doing that for you, often by utilising ControlNets or other extensions that require more fine tuning and research. If you're even deeper into AI, you're creating your own workflows using ComfyUI which requires you to manipulate multiple nodes. And 100 other things.
It isn't an 'app' that you click and run. If you want to do anything substantial or high quality at all, you need to put a ton of time and research into achieving the results you want.
AI isn't killing art or artists. It is a tool, just like a camera and just like Photoshop, which if you put time into mastering can enhance your ability to create art.
Further, the AI isn't 'stealing' art. It is trained on art. The same as any human who looks at an artist's work in a textbook and learns concepts from them - is it stealing if I try to copy Rembrandt's lighting in a painting because I think he is a master of it? Of course not. AI is just doing this on a bulk level, but it isn't stealing anything (and this has already been determined in courts of law). Artists can fuck off and stop gatekeeping thanks - personally I hope everyone crying over it loses their jobs because they aren't willing to adapt and accept technological advances.
AI art trained on existing art quickly becomes homogenized due to the lack of original input into the system. If you're going to argue "caveman painting" becomes "warhol" then at some point it all becomes variations on the same systems. There is no volume of individual output that is going to shift the needle enough to move away from anything that someone with the same prompts and baseline cannot recreate. I am not opposed to the utilization of tools as support, but final product will never be intrinsically artistic.
Just consider comics and the battle among inker/tracers and line artists that actually created high quality sequential story-telling.
Just consider comics and the battle among inker/tracers and line artists that actually created high quality sequential story-telling.
Disco Hammered and Chill?
Newbie
- Feb 14, 2021
- 67
- 66
I just straight disagree - there's plenty of AI art which is very unique and artistic. Maybe it doesn't always 'move the needle' in terms of being absolute masterpieces, but how many artists in the world ever do that? A couple a generation?
I can scroll through civitai images and find plenty that I think are artistic and fairly unique. Took me less than a page of scrolling to see these. I think people judge too much based on the random dogshit ai generated stuff they see, rather than actually searching for the good art.
- Jan 13, 2018
- 1,641
- 7,411
And this is the difference. It's not human, but it is impacting living, breathing people. I am a graphic designer, and I am worried I will lose my job later on as AI becomes better and better at doing it. RIght now I am okay, but I can see it changing. Everyone keeps talking like AI is a tool, but the reality, right now... today... is people are losing their jobs to AI and it has nothing to do with their ability to adapt, but simply they are no longer needed. Besides, who wants to buy artwork generated by AI with some minimal input from a human? Not me.
Isn't this a little bit contradicting itself? You are worried for your job but at the same time recognise that people aren't going to want to buy AI generated artwork. Which one is it? Either you have no need to worry for your job, or people want to buy AI generated artwork (otherwise you wouldn't have to worry). I don't want people to lose their jobs, but I absolutely hate the way artists are so opposed to AI art and unwilling to accept it as a tool to create art (going so far as to say that it doesn't count as art, which is ridiculous imo).
pfft0123
Newbie
- Dec 1, 2022
- 23
- 23
Well, wouldn't you know, but you can get really good results with AI generated images already, if you put in the time.
AI itself is not a problem. People using it to create a shitton of poor products will be.
pfft0123
Newbie
- Dec 1, 2022
- 23
- 23
If you're a graphic designer, it's pretty much inevitable that you'll have the choice to either start using AI in your workflow, or you'll be replaced by people who do.
It's like saying "What the fuck are these cars? I'm an honest horse-riding postman and I am afraid I'll be out of my job because of these!"
But also after playing with the AI myself, I could immediately see how limited I was by my lack of any ability to fine-tune the results in photoshop or further work with them.
I was able to get good results, but it cost me hours and hours of trial and error to get them (which I dare say already makes the final result much more than "just an ai generated image"), but someone who knew what they were doing? With actually good hardware?
A computer artist can become a monster if they wield the power of AI in their hands.
I understand the sentiment. People will lose jobs in this field, as well as in many other fields.
But 1) it's basically up to you whether you'll be the one to embrace the new technology and ride the wave or frown upon it and bring the downfall on yourself.
and 2) With how much easier and cheaper it will allow people to create things, instead of job losses we might see the same number of people employed, except instead of working on 20 projects, they will be spread over 200 different projects, because there now don't need to be as many people working on each thing.
So we'll get more new things.
Note: I'm in programming, I know what you're talking about. The sword is above my head as well.
- Jan 13, 2018
- 1,641
- 7,411
The artists feel, imo, two things. Threatened, like me, worried my graphic design work will be replaced by AI. AI can already create company decent company logos and it will only get better. You don't need any skill or talent, you just plug in the parameters and boom... instant logo. And yes, graphic designers probably can utilize this tool to give them ideas or starting points, but still, it's scary.
The second thing they are worried about is plagiarism. Imaging seeing something you created in someone else's work and they are claiming it as their own.
I am not saying there is not a place for tools. Photoshop improvements over the years have made my job a lot easier and I can do things today it would have taken forever to create 10 years ago. I also do taxes during tax season, and the company I work for has AI designed specifically for tax research and I use it all the time to help me find answers to tax questions. Now... it is not always right so I do have to double check it, but it is still a good research tool. So yes, there are applications for AI that can be helpful.
I also recognize, jobs have always been replaced but this time, the transition is happening really fast. Just google jobs lost to AI and you will see there are already thousands of people who have lost their jobs and there are still not a whole lot of jobs that all these corporations promised would be created. RIght now, it is saving corporations a ton of money, but if people keep losing their jobs, who will be left to buy what these corporations are selling? Again, this is another example of the lower income people being impacted to let the rich people get richer. Now the income gap will be even worse.
I hope I am wrong. I hope my daughter, who is an artist, can get a job in the future. I just worry we are too quick to embrace this tech without thinking this through or trying to understand the long term implications.
any singular example can be "good" - art, of course, is subjective. As a tool, I'm all for it - its an exploration exercise. On some level it is an advanced version of the "vision board" mosaic type of work that designers and artists will use to gather up ideas in order to form an idea. But if there is no original work being produced, if everything is just an algorithmic iteration of X previous items, then there's no inherent value to the end result - just a commodity, and that is sad to me.
hi, this game have animations,gifs or something like this or are you planning to add them?
- Oct 27, 2017
- 799
- 5,494