Why so much hate toward AI art?

[Meaning Less]

Lately I've noticed some "AI artists" trying to get around people filtering their images by lightly editing them and then refusing to tag them as AI because hurr durr it's an original work of art now because a human touched a single pixel. Now I'm curious about how people will try to obfuscate AI use in the future when it's much harder to notice.

Some japanese games that manage more consistent art by drawing on top of the AI image still require the author to say it was AI assisted.

You must be registered to see the links

So if anything those trying to obfuscate this are probably just going to face consequences once the truth comes out, why risk it?

If your AI assisted art is good enough that you can fool others then that's all the more reason you shouldn't care about the AI tag...

 

[Julie L Griffin]

It's really irritating. If people don't like AI art, let them filter it. you're not exactly winning any hearts and minds.

I mean, sure if you're doing major non-AI work on it, its one thing, but that kind of stuff is just gonna p o people.

Best just to say: "here it is, if it isn't your thing, cool."

 

[Pr0GamerJohnny]

Applied specifically towards artists who support AI stuff, this satirical piece cracked me up and pretty much sums up my anti-ai prejudice:

You must be registered to see the links

I can understand non-artists liking the fast rate of production, but anyone who considers themselves an artist yet worships at the underworld temple of statistics and DFTs probably has a sad life of never seeing artwork that just blew them away, like WOW, humans make some incredible stuff, to think that someone's mind was wired in a way or experienced things that made them think of that painting/music/drawing/whatever..

It's just a great feeling, and the exact opposite of the cold, formaldehyde-smelling world of big data.

 

[Julie L Griffin]

Yeah, but a huge amount of art isn't that. Take a look at some of the artists on DA, who can be summed up as: pay me 20 to take a cel of sailor moon and redraw it with huge gazongas. Which is fine--I did erotic shorts for a while and that sure as shooting ain't writing high class stuff.

Outside of of... well a few people, I don't think anyone considers purely generative AI art to be equal to human--and most of the artists I know have already started incorporating AI art into their work, because it can make a lot of chores fly by.

I'm gonna be using AI art in my games because I don't have enough money to pay an artist, and even though i have moderate art skills (I make my own covers) they are emphasis on moderate. If a game gets popular, the goal is to replace the purely AI stuff with stuff made by an artist, whether or not they use AI to assist them.

I really think that's the biggest issue with the debate right now. You have people saying things about AI art (it's better than human art) that just aren't true. But equally, if you're doing pin up art, there are a lot of people who are prefectly happy to use AI for that, and be honest, when someone looks at their rent money getting threatened, they get scared.

My bet, in a few years, this whole kerfluffle will largely go away, as AI just becomes another tool in the artist toolkit, and the "I just generated a bunch of images and posted them to DA" will just be another variant of all those collage pictures you see.

Unless we get AGI. In which case... "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you play porn any more. You need to go out and meet a nice girl."

 

[zilkin]

AI art, will I use it? Yes. Will I steal other people's art? Yes.

 

[Fried_Squid]

Mediocre artist here who works small time for an indie company throwing their 2 cents into the AI art discussion. I originally was strongly against the idea of AI art in general, big surprise the person whose livelihood depends on art being opposed to the new thing that might replace them. My reason was more that people were misusing AI art as you can't take credit for that art. It draws from other pre-existing images and merging different parts together. It's still pieces of art that wasn't made by the person using the AI with the exception of artists training it on their own art. It was only recently this year that I finally decided to give AI art generation a try, in which I fed it one of my own designs. After having used it for a bit, I find the best use for AI art as a means of building inspiration. It essentially works as an additional brain to help you think outside of your own scope. Should this character have horns? Maybe give them a jacket? How about in a steampunk style instead of medieval fantasy? That's where I found the most use for AI as an artist myself. I'm still not fond of the idea of people using the art produced by the AI in games without any edits to the AI art, but it's not something I could stop on my own other than grumbling to myself. But I've changed from the vehemently opposed to a position that sees utility in the technology.

 

[ZoneTan20]

Is it because people lost part of their soul when their fap to stuffs generated by AI overlord?

ngl I would unironically put that as one of the many already mentioned bullet points.

going off-topic, I expect to see the day when it can replicate an artist with a unique style. Like remaking Hayao Miyazaki (studio Ghibli) films (bad example I know because it's probably not unique or hard to replicate anyway).

 

[Cynikkkal]

Partly because it's still way too shit to produce good looking art of consistent characters in multiple situations, partly because it somehow feels even lazier than real porn HTML games. Unless AI art gets so good that I can't distinguish it from real shit I have no interest in it.

Some AI generators like Pixai art are already advanced enough u can't distinguish it from real drawn actual art.
People still'd hate it though for being ai art because it's not drawn by a human...

 

[DuniX]

In terms of practical use of AI right now that's mostly for concept art and reference which artists themselves are going to use and has no issue with copyright, what you see is what you get and then you forget it after.

As for AI use for commercial projects that's mostly relegated to this "Adult Games Industry" which is already has a tentative hold on the concept of legality.
If they are using random images of the internet that is already straight up illegal no question asked.
AI CG is a bastion of legal gray area in comparison, at least you don't get sued by the Porn Copyright Trolls.
Things like Honey Select and Koikatsu is a legal gray only if you turn a blind eye, that shit won't fly on Steam.
The only legitimate use are Daz Renders, but they will forever be ugly and boring to me.
So if you really want to "fight the good fight" and "stop the AI taking artists jobs" complain to daddy Patron to ban AI CG just like they ban all other projects for arbitrary reasons, it's just one more arbitrary reason in their portfolio. So it's not so much about being legal or illegal or getting sued as much as you simply get deplatformed from things like Patreon or Steam.

For Indie Developers you are looking at game assets like Character Sprites, Tilesets, GUI elements and Icons.
The problem is AI CG is not reliable enough for things like tilesets and environmental objects in terms of compatibility and consistency between assets as you don't just generate one asset and be done with that, you need a whole slew of assets that work together under a consistent artstyle.
As for things that AI can do you can already get in graphical asset packs that are released for a few bucks, so not much saving there.
I will say that AI CG is definitely useful for VN style Backgrounds, so the poor starving BG artists in Japan are going to get fucked, but they were already fucked since DLSite exists there and has no morals. I expect some VN style games to sneak in some AI BG CG as they are not as prominent and distinguishable as characters. As for the AI Inquisitors out there I wish you luck trying to detect those AI backgrounds.

For Character Sprites I don't see it useable without heavy editing to the point that that the AI CG is more of a reference since what you need is for that in a game asset like a Character Sprite is under specific conditions like a specific angle with multiple directions as well as a breakdown into parts with variations between them.
I will say it is possible that a lousy artists that are not that good at drawing could make some passable game assets if they get good at heavily editing. Tracing and redrawing has always existed in art to some extent and with AI CG the thing they were plagiarizing stopped existing while your redrawn style is consistent with your skill level making you indistinguishable from a real artist.
People say AI CG is not that good in terms of anatomy, shapes and poses but they forget there are many people that are much worse than that then the AI.
It depends on how integrated it is going to get into the workflow of something like Photoshop since you want to generate variations of the parts with something like in-painting based on the previous result.

For AAA Studios I don't see much use until there is a breakthrough in AI 3D Generation and Morphing complete with Textures and Materials Generation. They are already using Procedural Generation for that so we will see how AI will help.
The major breakthrough I see is when we get clothes generation on already existing character rigs with properly optimized topology and minimal clipping issues as well as environmental generation that is consistent within a level/map.
Right now they can use it for concept art and reference but that is more of an acceleration for the existing artists workflow, it's all about refinement and iteration of the final result so that is an acceleration of that process and not just using the result generated by the AI.
Concept Art was never the major bottleneck in their game asset production.

 

[bindr]

Given the amount of cherry picking involved and zero real control over the whole process of "prompt engineering", I don't think artists have anything to worry about.

 

[Julie L Griffin]

Given the amount of cherry picking involved and zero real control over the whole process of "prompt engineering", I don't think artists have anything to worry about.

keep in mind things like controlnet and inpainting exist and can produce far more of what you want--although that requires more human input. So it's probably also a case of "when does pure AI art stop and AI assisted art start."

 

[InfiniTales]

I find it interesting to see all the passionate hate towards anything AI generated. Scrutinizing A.I. images in minute detail and pointing out flaws. I don't see similar comments on hand drawn art that certainly also has minor errors like perspective.

I can't help but think of when photography was introduced, and very similar "Where's the effort in just clicking a button, as opposed to lovingly sketch or paint on a canvas? Where's the creative artistry?" comments that ensued. No one sensible will deny today that photography can truly be an art form.

Creating good A.I. images does take effort, it does take creativity, a vision and a skill set (albeit a different one, just like photography takes different skills than painting/drawing). Sure, there are major challenges in creating AI images, consistency being the biggest one. But it's all evolving very rapidly. And as someone said in an earlier post: it can be an amazing way to get inspiration.

As for the "stealing" part... Every traditional artist starts out "stealing", copying the style and techniques of others, mimicking what they like. Whether you're a skilled traditional artist that spent years learning to draw and paint images that look like those created by your hero, or you're someone that used AI to create images that look like those created by your hero, the end result is the same. The only differences I see is: time and accessibility. It goes quicker (but still much slower than most think) and more people have access to it.

A.I. is a tool, a means to an end. Just like a pencil, a paint brush or a camera.

Anyway, that's my own two cents on it.

(Some background: I've been drawing since I was a child. I'm an amateur photographer. I've spent thousands of hours on computer graphics, from 3D modelling, texturing, rendering, even some animation to photo editing, post processing, vector graphics and (web)design and so on. I always had a passionate interest in anything to do with creative graphic arts.)

 

[d7anime]

Well, the future of erotic games is looking bright with DAZ’s latest announcemen:

You must be registered to see the links

 

[InfiniTales]

Well, the future of erotic games is looking bright with DAZ’s latest announcemen:

You must be registered to see the links

Thanks for the interesting video. I can't say that I'm surprised.
I'm pretty sure that many big gaming studios are right now investing very heavily into A.I. R&D. They'd be fools not to. Think how insanely useful an A.I. model trained very specifically to generate texture maps (for specific 3D assets) would be. That's just one example.

I bet they're also really looking into A.I. (assisted or full) animation of character rigs, either to create baked ones or realtime.

A AAA game development cycle is what... 3-5 years? That's when I expect at the latest to see some real revolutionary things in the gaming industry.

 

[d7anime]

Yeah we’re going to get to a point where the time sink for big games is going to be unreasonable. Pretty much endless content

 

[Julie L Griffin]

And a lot more independent content. I mean, think of it, if you have the ability to work faster, automate stuff, why not do your own game? Let's say I put out "Julie's totally kicking Sailor Moon" rip off and oh, 2,000 people love it enough for my patreon to kick in 5 bucks.

That's not even a blip for a big company. It'd be the kind of disaster that CEOs get canned over if only 2,000 people loved it that much.

For me? That's ten thousand dollars a month.

 

[SergeantDauterive]

It's just not good enough yet. It'll get there though, once it's indistinguishable from good art nobody will care much except on principle.

 

[Stonkss]

It's just not good enough yet. It'll get there though, once it's indistinguishable from good art nobody will care much except on principle.

This one still requires human artist editing (touch up) but looks good enough for 5 minute effort stuff.

 

[♍VoidTraveler]

I'm still not fond of the idea of people using the art produced by the AI in games without any edits to the AI art, but it's not something I could stop on my own other than grumbling to myself. But I've changed from the vehemently opposed to a position that sees utility in the technology.

Still better than some 'real art' i'd say, or no art at all.

 

[♍VoidTraveler]

A.I. is a tool, a means to an end. Just like a pencil, a paint brush or a camera.

Did you know,

You must be registered to see the links

can already invent things.
Perhaps soon your 'just-tool' will be cooking your dinner in the morning, and saying 'welcome back' when you get home.

And of course that's not even scratching the surface.
AI guided missiles? Probably already exist.
AI-controlled robots that will fight our wars? Oh yes, please!
AI in the cars? Already there!

Their complexity and by extension the amount of stuff they will be able to do will only increase with time.
Those broken fingers in the art won't be broken forever.
So if an artist is smart he will adapt by integrating AI into their workflow, because AI is here to STAY.

For example you can start by checking out what this guy is doing with the AI, i think it's a wonderful example that demonstrates quite well how to use AI the right way for an artistic pursuit. Pay particular attention to the game's banner, everyone's favorite fingers are doing something amazing there.