Im so sick and tired of greedy artists trying to halt AI Art

[Millennial_KiwiGamer]

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

[Fumo Bnnuy n Frends]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Xero_Daxter:

Honestly.... AI isn't that bad. I heard AI Songs with Michael Jackson and even Gawr Gura.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwm7Zu9Bv20

oh god

i just know A.I. voices from that marie horse video

so much so they actually had to change her background horse in a stream to a sheriff car lmao

[Michanicks]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fumo Bnnuy Gaming:

opinions and pfp checks out

Of course, it takes being interested in artworks to actually know something about artworks.
People who believe AI will replace the artists never shown themselves being interested in this, that's why they full of so many misconceptions.

[Fumo Bnnuy n Frends]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Michanicks:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fumo Bnnuy Gaming:

opinions and pfp checks out

Of course, it takes being interested in artworks to actually know something about artworks.
People who believe AI will replace the artists never shown themselves being interested in this, that's why they full of so many misconceptions.

whatever helps you sleep at night
keep telling yourself whatever you think is right




i will give you one thing though




your type are single handedly keeping artists and therapists in business

I really do not know of much other groups that will shell out such obscene money for a drawing aside from money laundering crooks (even then it's ugly af art at best so there is that too)




keep at it you insidious bastards

give artists their meal tickets

[Millennial_KiwiGamer]

I'm literally gonna start a Redbubble and Deviant Art page with my AI Art designs and just rub my nipples saying Too Bad to artists. Greedy Hipsters.

[Michanicks]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fumo Bnnuy Gaming:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Michanicks:

Of course, it takes being interested in artworks to actually know something about artworks.
People who believe AI will replace the artists never shown themselves being interested in this, that's why they full of so many misconceptions.

whatever helps you sleep at night
keep telling yourself whatever you think is right




i will give you one thing though




your type are single handedly keeping artists and therapists in business

I really do not know of much other groups that will shell out such obscene money for a drawing aside from money laundering crooks (even then it's ugly af art at best so there is that too)




keep at it you insidious bastards

give artists their meal tickets :lilimok:

Lmao, whatever helps ME sleep at night?
It's not me who talks like i was constantly bullied by one side of the conflict. It's not me who dreaming of their opposition being replaced someday. That was just you!

You really sooooooooo far from drawing that you even keep considering option of money laundering like it does mean anything for people who commission artists and artists who create artworks for money. You the person who compares AI proompters and artists to disabled person and olympic sprinters - it's not surprising you don't understand such obvious things.

Photo didn't replace artists, 3D-modeling didn't replace artists, 3D-animators didn't replace 2D-animators, digital drawing didn't replace traditional artists, why AI-made images should finally replace them?

Art is a LUXURY. You don't commission artist just to get a picture. You pay artists to get something that worth these money - THAT'S the exact point of luxury.
Not only with artworks, people pay to visit the concert with their fav musicians, people buy games instead of pirating them, people buy signed stuff instead of drawing/imitating that sign by themselves (of they are not scammers). THEY AREN'T INTERESTED IN MERE RESULT OF GETTING SOMETHING. That's why artists will never be replaced.

[Tito Shivan]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Michanicks:

Art is a LUXURY. You don't commission artist just to get a picture. You pay artists to get something that worth money - THAT'S the exact point of luxury.

Your definition of art is far too narrow.

[Lora Grim]

Art is culture, not luxury. Lol.
It is an integral part of our culture. People do art as a form of expression. If they make money off it, then that's just a bonus on the side. The real value is cultural in nature.

The only reason why somebody would see art as just a money thing is due to our slide into the capitalist dystopia we are heading towards, where money has infinite value and humans have zero value.

Just a reminder, art existed before money was even a thing.

[Michanicks]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Tito Shivan:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Michanicks:

Art is a LUXURY. You don't commission artist just to get a picture. You pay artists to get something that worth money - THAT'S the exact point of luxury.

Your definition of art is far too narrow.

I talk about commissioned art that people pay for.
I didn't mean that art only exist to be a luxury.

[Michanicks]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Lora Grim:

Art is culture, not luxury. Lol.
It is an integral part of our culture. People do art as a form of expression. If they make money off it, then that's just a bonus on the side. The real value is cultural in nature.

The only reason why somebody would see art as just a money thing is due to our slide into the capitalist dystopia we are heading towards, where money has infinite value and humans have zero value.

Just a reminder, art existed before money was even a thing.

I know, but since the topic about artists getting replaced, i was talked about money-side only.
Most artist will draw EVEN if they will never get any money from it, it's an obvious thing i though was not even worth to mention.

Actually, if you talk about art as part of culture, as form of exoression, then idea of AI replacing people will sound even more freaky.

[Lora Grim]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Michanicks:

I know, but since the topic about artists getting replaced, i was talked about money-side only.
Most artist will draw EVEN if they will never get any money from it, it's an obvious thing i though was not even worth to mention.

Yeah. It's pretty sad that it does need to be mentioned, heh. Many lines in life are starting to blur between multiple different things.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

For the moment humans are still more versatile and good artist will be more consistent then A.I when doing artwork.

Personally I do digital painting with krita because it's fun so I don't care if what I make is not as good then what A.I can make.

Seriously if you want something to be proud just grab a pen and practice drawing , even if it's just an hour or 2 per day you'll eventually get better at it.

[Michanicks]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Lemonfed:

Personally I do digital painting with krita because it's fun so I don't care if what I make is not as good then what A.I can make.

Good way to go.

[Γαῖα]

OP is only saying this as AI does not threaten their living.

[tmwfte]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Γαῖα:

OP is only saying this as AI does not threaten their living.

On a tangent, it is kind of funny that the idea of automation, and often of robot workers, in sci-fi and utopian sociopolitical dreams, were meant to free up our time to make more art, literature, music, etc.

[Phirestar]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Γαῖα:

OP is only saying this as AI does not threaten their living.

“The innovation of AI-generated artwork is great… for me.”

Basically the original post.

(And also the attitude of all those people out there who were mad that an artist wouldn’t accept “exposure” as payment for a commission.)