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. :)

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

I repeat my previous statement - artist is who creates art (by himself).

But that statement isn't helpful. You said yourself that it is vague. What does "create" mean? What does "by himself" mean? I could say using AI is creating it by himself, after all there's nobody else involved. An AI is just a computer program.

[Michanicks]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por baby make boom boom:

remind me of the ol traditional vs digital artist

Yes, it's basically the same thing right? But some people think that this is somehow completely different and "replaces the artist" or something.

Both traditional and digital require the same knowledge of fundamentals and expierence with their work. The only thing that different is medium-specific knowledge and expierence. Digital and traditional are as different as painting with oil on canvas and painting with acryl on wood.

Compared to that, AI users are like people who ask an actual artist to draw the picture for them by describing what exactly they want to recieve. Such people already exist for thousands years, they called commissioners, not artists.

[Michanicks]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

I repeat my previous statement - artist is who creates art (by himself).

But that statement isn't helpful. You said yourself that it is vague. What does "create" mean? What does "by himself" mean? I could say using AI is creating it by himself, after all there's nobody else involved.

God dawnit, why if i'd say "programmer is who writes programms" and "dancer is who does dance" nobody would have the questions you are asking right now (But what is the writing exactly? But what means to do dance?)? What is the point? I will not win such discussion considering english isn't my native language.

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

An AI is just a computer program.

A drive-thru station is just a window.

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Digital and traditional are as different as painting with oil on canvas and painting with acryl on wood.

Compared to that, AI users are like people who ask an actual artist to draw the picture for them by describing what exactly they want to recieve.

They are more different than that. A digital painting requires no knowledge about paint, brushes etc. at all. All of those are are replaced by their digital counterparts and require quite different knowledge.

Using an AI program requires even more different knowledge, now you need to understand how to teach the AI how to render the way you want, how to write prompts and so on. It is even more different, but still the same in principle. A program like Photoshop already has lots of automation, AI just takes it further.

[De Hollandse Ezel]

no ai art is not just a new medium

it recombines what excists.. as such it does not creare new not truelly

think sports you can be a grear strategist making you a grear manaher but hace 0 skill in playing the game.
you need real playing skill to win.

ai art is lke a sportsteam without players.
it aint a?sport at thar point anymore.

it is not as you say it we now play hocjkey instead of skating.
it is firing all trye athetes?and hace braibdead managees run the show destying thexactual art if pplaying abulity.

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

God dawnit, why if i'd say "programmer is who writes programms" and "dancer is who does dance" nobody would have the questions you are asking right now (But what is the writing exactly? But what means to do dance?)? What is the point? I will not win such discussion considering english isn't my native language.

You need to do that if you want to discuss these things. Vague, arbitrary definitions like "creating art" can be interpreted however you like, and therefore do not mean anything. I can say that I am creating art using my AI program, and therefore I am an artist.

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por De Hollandse Ezel:

it recombines what excists.. as such it does not creare new not truelly

You could say that about human artists. A painter combines paint with canvas, which both already exist. Even his ideas are combinations and variations of things which already exist.

[Michanicks]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Digital and traditional are as different as painting with oil on canvas and painting with acryl on wood.

Compared to that, AI users are like people who ask an actual artist to draw the picture for them by describing what exactly they want to recieve.

They are more different than that. A digital painting requires no knowledge about paint, brushes etc. at all. All of those are are replaced by their digital counterparts and require quite different knowledge.

And traditional drawing requires you no knowledge of key micromanagement, how do different programms mixing colours, how to manage the HSL sliders etc. As i said, it's a different mediums, but the amount of knowledge traditional and digital drawings DO share surpasses all of the forementioned stuff. Anatomy, gestures, colour theory, render, lighting, composition, constructioning, volume, perspective, just because you trade your paper with digital canvas you don't have to learn all of this from the scratch. All this knowledge would allow you to get better with any medium, even with piss on the snow.

Also there is a lot of traditional mediums that don't require you to know about paint and brushes. Pens, markers, pencils, it's not rocket science, yes still you have a lot of room for improving your meduim-exclusive skills.

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Using an AI program requires even more different knowledge, now you need to understand how to teach the AI how to render the way you want, how to write prompts and so on. It is even more different, but still the same in principle.

What? Everyone who's able to use Google is able to learn how to use promts. That's the very point AI users are bringing - is that "everyone can make art now", what knowledge requirement you talkin about?

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

A program like Photoshop already has lots of automation, AI just takes it further.

Aha, that's the neat part, that's the neat part that affect things A LOT. Taking things further can lead to a lot of stuff.

Soccer: "The footwear already making you to avoid touching ball when you kick it, having a robot to play instead of you is just taking things further" - actually not playing soccer anymore.
Cooking: "Using owen is already means you are using technology to make cooking easy, having a robot to cook all the food instead of you is just taking things further" - actually not cooking anymore.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Digital and traditional are as different as painting with oil on canvas and painting with acryl on wood.

Compared to that, AI users are like people who ask an actual artist to draw the picture for them by describing what exactly they want to recieve.

They are more different than that. A digital painting requires no knowledge about paint, brushes etc. at all. All of those are are replaced by their digital counterparts and require quite different knowledge.

Using an AI program requires even more different knowledge, now you need to understand how to teach the AI how to render the way you want, how to write prompts and so on. It is even more different, but still the same in principle. A program like Photoshop already has lots of automation, AI just takes it further.

you don't sound like someone who worked with Krita at all.

with a painting or editing program you still have to Understand the program interface , getting used to your digital pen sensitivity , getting used to the different virtual brushes , understanding how to actually draw because the program still doesn't automate everything , you still have to do a decent ammount of work with digital arts , even when it's come to just simple graphics designs.

the peoples who put the most efforts in A.I Arts are the programmers that coded it and the artist that created the arts from which the program made use to build it's database.

if the only thing you do is prompting , you're not doing any real works , anyone who can read and know what to type can get the same result as you using the same A.I models , there is no skills required.

saying A.I prompting takes efforts is like saying that a google search also take any efforts , it does but it's on a scale that is insignificant that it is not worth mentioning.

now if you talk about those Hybrid A.I artist (peoples that combine A.I art with traditional arts and graphic designing) then now I'd say these peoples put much more work and values in their arts then simple ''A.I prompters''

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

And traditional drawing requires you no knowledge of key micromanagement, how do different programms mixing colours, how to manage the HSL sliders etc. As i said, it's a different mediums, but the amount of knowledge traditional and digital drawings DO share surpasses all of the forementioned stuff. Anatomy, gestures, colour theory, render, lighting, composition, constructioning, volume, perspective, just because you trade your paper with digital canvas you don't have to learn all of this from the scratch. All this knowledge would allow you to get better with any medium, even with piss on the snow.

That is... partially true I'd say. You need to know about lighting and perspective when using Photoshop, because it mostly will not do that for you. But 3D modeling + rendering software will.

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

What? Everyone who's able to use Google is able to learn how to use promts. That's the very point AI users are bringing - is that "everyone can make art now", what knowledge requirement you talkin about?

Anyone can use it in a simple way, and get at least "something" as a result. But that result might not be great. More advanced users teach the AI how to render by feeding it a selected set of images. And there's parameters which you can tweak and so on.

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Aha, that's the neat part, that's the neat part that affect things A LOT. Taking things further can lead to a lot of stuff.

Well, when IS it "not the thing anymore"? Where is that line? That is what we are trying to determine. And I think it is quite arbitrary. A painter might say: "Clicking a button once to make the whole canvas green? Even with options to have gradients and patterns and so on? That's not painting anymore! The program does it for you!"

[Michanicks]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

God dawnit, why if i'd say "programmer is who writes programms" and "dancer is who does dance" nobody would have the questions you are asking right now (But what is the writing exactly? But what means to do dance?)? What is the point? I will not win such discussion considering english isn't my native language.

You need to do that if you want to discuss these things. Vague, arbitrary definitions like "creating art" can be interpreted however you like, and therefore do not mean anything. I can say that I am creating art using my AI program, and therefore I am an artist.

Is "creating food" a vague definition?
Is "looking at painting" a vague definition?
If neither is, then is it hard to combine the incredibly vague, complex and difficult idea of "creating something" with unbelievebly abstract, incomprehensible and bizzare thing as "drawings and paintings"?

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

I can say that I am creating art using my AI program, and therefore I am an artist.

In this case, i can add a not awkward in the slightest clarification that doing art is "creating the artworks without ordering someone or something else to complete that work for you by making you not having any need to put any considerable amount of labor during which you could transfer your expeirences and emotions on the canvas not linked directly to a description commissioner may or may not give you" just because you making me be overly specific to satisfy your questioning because simplier answers wasn't satisfying for you.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

And traditional drawing requires you no knowledge of key micromanagement, how do different programms mixing colours, how to manage the HSL sliders etc. As i said, it's a different mediums, but the amount of knowledge traditional and digital drawings DO share surpasses all of the forementioned stuff. Anatomy, gestures, colour theory, render, lighting, composition, constructioning, volume, perspective, just because you trade your paper with digital canvas you don't have to learn all of this from the scratch. All this knowledge would allow you to get better with any medium, even with piss on the snow.

That is... partially true I'd say. You need to know about lighting and perspective when using Photoshop, because it mostly will not do that for you. But 3D modeling + rendering software will.

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

What? Everyone who's able to use Google is able to learn how to use promts. That's the very point AI users are bringing - is that "everyone can make art now", what knowledge requirement you talkin about?

Anyone can use it in a simple way, and get at least "something" as a result. But that result might not be great. More advanced users teach the AI how to render by feeding it a selected set of images. And there's parameters which you can tweak and so on.

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Aha, that's the neat part, that's the neat part that affect things A LOT. Taking things further can lead to a lot of stuff.

Well, when IS it "not the thing anymore"? Where is that line? That is what we are trying to determine. And I think it is quite arbitrary. A painter might say: "Clicking a button once to make the whole canvas green? Even with options to have gradients and patterns and so on? That's not painting anymore! The program does it for you!"

you should read the definition of cherry picking because that is what at least half of your post does.

https://www.developgoodhabits.com/cherry-picking/

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por 🍋 Lemonfed 🍋:

Escrito originalmente por lankaras:

They are more different than that. A digital painting requires no knowledge about paint, brushes etc. at all. All of those are are replaced by their digital counterparts and require quite different knowledge.

Using an AI program requires even more different knowledge, now you need to understand how to teach the AI how to render the way you want, how to write prompts and so on. It is even more different, but still the same in principle. A program like Photoshop already has lots of automation, AI just takes it further.

you don't sound like someone who worked with Krita at all.

with a painting or editing program you still have to Understand the program interface , getting used to your digital pen sensitivity , getting used to the different virtual brushes , understanding how to actually draw because the program still doesn't automate everything , you still have to do a decent ammount of work with digital arts , even when it's come to just simple graphics designs.

the peoples who put the most efforts in A.I Arts are the programmers that coded it and the artist that created the arts from which the program made use to build it's database.

if the only thing you do is prompting , you're not doing any real works , anyone who can read and know what to type can get the same result as you using the same A.I models , there is no skills required.

saying A.I prompting takes efforts is like saying that a google search also take any efforts , it does but it's on a scale that is insignificant that it is not worth mentioning.

now if you talk about those Hybrid A.I artist (peoples that combine A.I art with traditional arts and graphic designing) then now I'd say these peoples put much more work and values in their arts then simple ''A.I prompters''

You can use Photoshop or MS paint without knowing anything and get a basic result. Or you can get good at using them and get better results. AI is not much different in that regard. It will make mistakes or draw things which you don't want, or doesn't draw things which you DO want. So unless you are ok with a high level of randomness or errors, it will still take effort to use effectively.

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

Is "creating food" a vague definition?

Yes. If I put a banana and an apple together, did I create food? I didn't make the fruits themselves, I just combined them. What if I peel them or cut them up? Or add spices? At what point did I actually "create food"?

Escrito originalmente por Michanicks:

In this case, i can add a not awkward in the slightest clarification that doing art is "creating the artworks without ordering someone or something else to complete that work for you by making you not having any need to put any considerable amount of labor during which you could transfer your expeirences and emotions on the canvas not linked directly to a description commissioner may or may not give you" just because you making me be overly specific to satisfy your questioning because simplier answers wasn't satisfying for you.

Ok, so you are saying that to be an artist, you need to do a "considerable amount of labor"? What about the sculptor using the 3D printer? Compared to the hand sculptor, the last one has to put in a LOT more work. He would not call what the other guy does "a considerable amount".

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

saying that prompting art take more effort then creating digital art is as a terrible take.

it doesn't make sense and trying to push this idea only show how little you understanding you have of the learning and creative process.

I can create a piano sheet with a program and get a program to play it for me , I can get very good results but I'm not gonna claim I made more efforts then someone who learned to play Piano , that would be pretencious and an insult to anyone who had to pratice for years to learn how to play the piano.