AI artists

[Nogsec]

Are half of them trolling?

I feel a wave of cringe when I hear one say I "drew/composed/wrote/came up with/created" this with AI!

LIKE there's no way they're serious right?

Please tell me Im not the only sane one who thinks they're just failurebound cheating themselves

[astroskiffle]

The distinction between real and AI-generated pron is of little or no practical relevance as I see it. Why should art be any different?

[Uncle Sam]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Noc:

They are dead serious, did you forget about the people who tape a banana to the wall and tell you it is meaningful art? Also, if you ever see AI art sell for a huge sum of money, there is probably something bad going on behind the scenes.

Art (at least the "upper echelons" of art) sometimes is related to money laundering to some degree, so yep you're correct.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

I"ve been following several artist since a while and it's can be really impressive how some of them have progressed over time and how most of them refined their styles.

not all artist are peoples that you only see the work off inside a museum , some of them stream , some of them take commission, some draw each other characters and there is a lot more going on then just putting the right prompt in a program.

making art yourself make you learn something , it"s has a practical differences for the artist themselves.

encourage Artist who make their own arts regardless that it's physical art or digital arts , we don't need and we will never need A.I to make artworks because art is about more then just the results.

[Xero_Daxter]

I use AI to enhance my art.

[Kamiyama]

On reddit I am part of https://www.reddit.com/r/DefendingAIArt/

AI is just a tool. The same as a paintbrush, or photoshop.

I'm old enough to remember the controversy around photoshop in the early 2000's and artists back then flipped their ♥♥♥♥ about all the "fake" photos people were making with photoshop.

It didn't stop photoshop phriday from becoming a thing over at the something awful forums.

https://www.somethingawful.com/photoshop-phriday/

You can still see the posts there all the way back to 2001. People will use the latest tools for fun and creative things, and then the haters will screech, abuse, and discriminate and will inevitably be left behind as the new technology becomes commonplace.

AI is already being used in schools and the school children alive today are growing up in a world where AI is normal and commonplace. They will all be using AI in their jobs 20 years from now. They will be using AI at home. AI will be everywhere.

AI is the next dotcom boom. It will be used for everything.

Instead of threatening people who use it, maybe you could try it and learn something new.

[Maria]

Oprindeligt skrevet af PC director:

Girl (sorry if I'm addressing you incorrectly),
Who is to blame for the fact that artificial intelligence began to work faster than the human brain?

I'm really impressed by the point that you've made, ngl. I think it was a very legit question, but I'm not gonna use appeal to emotion like the other person.

One thing that needs to be addressed more than effort is copyright, tbh. As long as you don't have permission to use them from the original artist, you can't and mustn't use them as a basis.

Then people would argue back by saying that every artist mimicked another some time in the past so what's the difference with copying them for AI? Well, then just remove every copyright and trademark altogether in the world today because every single one is a byproduct of inspiration from others.

Hence, there has to be a point where we can safely say that 'this is where it started to be genuine' or 'this is where this product can be called his/her/them solely', basically at any point BEFORE AI came into the equation.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Maria:

Oprindeligt skrevet af PC director:

Girl (sorry if I'm addressing you incorrectly),
Who is to blame for the fact that artificial intelligence began to work faster than the human brain?

I'm really impressed by the point that you've made, ngl. I think it was a very legit question, but I'm not gonna use appeal to emotion like the other person.

One thing that needs to be addressed more than effort is copyright, tbh. As long as you don't have permission to use them from the original artist, you can't and mustn't use them as a basis.

Then people would argue back by saying that every artist mimicked another some time in the past so what's the difference with copying them for AI? Well, then just remove every copyright and trademark altogether in the world today because every single one is a byproduct of inspiration from others.

Hence, there has to be a point where we can safely say that 'this is where it started to be genuine' or 'this is where this product can be called his/her/them solely', basically at any point BEFORE AI came into the equation.

Easy.

If a machine is responsible for drawing at least 80% of the image, copyright can't be applied.

[Fuki 11in2000]

The only thing it's good for is making more goofier images with the realistic models, but god knows how long until even that becomes something we're worried for our lives over.

[Fuki 11in2000]

Oprindeligt skrevet af 🍋 Lemonfed 🍋:

I"ve been following several artist since a while and it's can be really impressive how some of them have progressed over time and how most of them refined their styles.

not all artist are peoples that you only see the work off inside a museum , some of them stream , some of them take commission, some draw each other characters and there is a lot more going on then just putting the right prompt in a program.

making art yourself make you learn something , it"s has a practical differences for the artist themselves.

encourage Artist who make their own arts regardless that it's physical art or digital arts , we don't need and we will never need A.I to make artworks because art is about more then just the results.

It's impressive how good it is at making photorealism and that's about where anything good about it ends.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Fuki 11in2000:

Oprindeligt skrevet af 🍋 Lemonfed 🍋:

I"ve been following several artist since a while and it's can be really impressive how some of them have progressed over time and how most of them refined their styles.

not all artist are peoples that you only see the work off inside a museum , some of them stream , some of them take commission, some draw each other characters and there is a lot more going on then just putting the right prompt in a program.

making art yourself make you learn something , it"s has a practical differences for the artist themselves.

encourage Artist who make their own arts regardless that it's physical art or digital arts , we don't need and we will never need A.I to make artworks because art is about more then just the results.

It's impressive how good it is at making photorealism and that's about where anything good about it ends.

peoples been able to create photo realistic painting without A.I ,

even then photo realism is not the ultimate goal of art either , it's simply one of the many way we can illustrate a world with pen and papers and usually it's more fun when artist make creative and liberate decision into not just recreating what they see but rather reinterpret it in their own ways.

[Fuki 11in2000]

Oprindeligt skrevet af 🍋 Lemonfed 🍋:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Fuki 11in2000:

It's impressive how good it is at making photorealism and that's about where anything good about it ends.

peoples been able to create photo realistic painting without A.I ,

even then photo realism is not the ultimate goal of art either , it's simply one of the many way we can illustrate a world with pen and papers and usually it's more fun when artist make creative and liberate decision into not just recreating what they see but rather reinterpret it in their own ways.

Less about it being art and more about how it can make a photo-like depiction of whatever words you throw at it.

[permanent name]

i'm sure they're used to having all their work stolen and never get upset about it honk honk.

[Saturn830]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Kamiyama:

AI is just a tool. The same as a paintbrush, or photoshop.

Nope. Complete false equivalency.

When an artist makes a piece of visual art, whether they use their fingers cave painting or a digital stylus, they control every stroke and detail. Every line, every texture, every shade, every pixel or square millimeter of canvas is a conscious creation. When someone prompts a large language model, they supply the idea but all those details are generated by the algorithm. If you prompt a tree, it creates a tree, but every curve of every leaf and knot on the trunk is the work of something else. You can always increase the specificity of the prompt, but unless you're prompting every pixel - which would be as redundant as it is impossible - the machine is doing the actual work.

The easiest way to disprove that prompters are artists is to point out that the work involved in prompting - supplying an idea - is the same as commissioning a human artist to create a work. Under the argument that prompters are artists, Pope Julius II would be the artist of the Sistine Chapel and Francesco di Bartolomeo del Giocondo would be the artist of the Mona Lisa. But obviously Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci are the artists there. Large language models are not a tool for art but a replacement. Except they still require the work of actual artists to be fed into them in order to function.

[Rio]

Ai Art is pretty good, and AI music.

It'll all get better in time

Ai made every part of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNeHvRYGkLI

"AI-generated lyrics.

AI-generated vocals.

AI-generated images."

[Fuki 11in2000]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Velo:

It'll all get better in time

I don't think people want to believe that.