A.I. Art Is Destroying My Life Purpose

[Tyler Robinson]

What if AI gets mega expensive, like Tesla cars. 

What if AI goes obsolete? 

 

I predict a lot of awkward trends with AI. 

What if AI turns into a laughing stock? 

 

What if AI turns into Call of Duty that nobody gives a damn about anymore? 

What if AI turns into Facebook that nobody logs onto anymore? 

 

What if AI turns into TikTok that everyone begins to laugh at after a few years? 

What if AI turns into an apocalyptic zombie that Ted Kaczynski always predicted? 

 

[mmKay]

here is another tool for y'all artists ;
 

i love so much that he shared an exact step by step of his exacty style. This made him explode in popularity as his style has become to be known as the " joel haver style " . and also hundreds are using it in their own animatons and they refer back to Joel. 

A true abundance mindset, " I wanna get this info out there, because the more creative toos people have, the better " .

Edited September 7, 2022 by mmKay

[ZzzleepingBear]

I just come to think about a thing with this AI copying different styles. When artist have such a niche that the way they create can be called a style and then copied. Then that particular artist is the main source and inspiration for any other work that tries to implement it to a lesser degree than what it is known for. So if you happen to like a certain look from a AI generated image, you may find yourself asking "Wow, what is that style that this image is made from?" And so you will intentionally or untentionally be drawn to the origin of the style to see more work from the actual artist, whos style has heavily influenced the image of an AI render.

So this could be a potential net positive for artists, whos styles becomes recognized enough to be known as a style in the firstplace. You may even ask any real artists yourself who they are inspired by, and so they will gladly mention other artists with their unique style.

As for AI rendered images, I have a hard time imagining that you can develop a certain style yourself, from having the majority of the work done by rendering images of many styles that becomes less defined. So any style that bleeds through the generated AI images is going to be admired based on that particular style that make the image stand out. And generate a growing curiosity around where that style originate from. So the gained attention from a AI image, would probably lead most people back to the original artist whos style is used in a watered down version to create beautiful images.

 

[mmKay]

calculators destroyed my abacus

[Kensho]

I played with MidJourny for a while and there were tens, hundreds of images showing in the feed of just one channel. 

This reminded me of ENIAC, the first computer, that as is said, in its first year of operation it made more calculations than the entire human race had done throughout history. 

Likewise, Midjourney and similar AIs will produce in one year, more artwork than the entire human race has ever produced. 

(I am talking about the number of ideas -> images, not necessarily great artwork)

[Jalextheopenminded]

I think the artist as a person will start to be considered the marketed product, not just his or her creations. Everyone has some fear of this unknown ai force, and in a world that is being more and more influenced by machine, people are goung to latch onto personas that they see as "authentically" human. And like mentioned, if you see art as the maximisation of beauty,, then there is no problem letting the machines work for you. But I get where you are coming from, for the longest time I had a bias against photoshop because I felt like it was too inauthentic and manipulative... which was just self limitation

[Jalextheopenminded]

So the question is, do you have an audience that you can sell yourself as a human force to?

[Thought Art]

The Fine Art of Problem Solving

I wonder if this book is relevant 

Edited September 7, 2022 by Thought Art

[illusory]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

No!

Yes, there are millions of artists, but most of them suck. If you truly created great art you would not have any problem surviving. The issue is that great art is extremely difficult to get right. And it's not a problem of lack of technical drawing skills, it's a problem of vision, execution of that vision, and taste.

The majority of films, video games, novels, songs, etc are bad art.

As an example, a truly great video game comes out once every few years at best. There is an enormous market for such video games. The supply cannot meet the demand. If only such games were easy to make.

If you make something amazing, people will flock to you and even adore you. But you cannot achieve this amazingness via narrow technical skill. It's important for you guys to grasp that art is primarily about vision. The rest is niggly details.

Is Martial Arts about end results or the practice itself?

Is meditation a practice for the sake of practice or just the end results?

If you could push in some word prompts and push an AI button and it would make your next video would that make you happy? Where your only job now was to become a full time video editor / uploader? Would you even value your work anymore if it was that easy? or would you change your life purpose?

Art is not just about vision, it also includes draughtsmanship, you said execution, draughtsmanship is part of execution. Art is about a whole set of skills, this combination of skills is what makes it hard and a valuable skill. It's not just vision dude. Maybe for "Art director" then maybe its just about directing the vision.

The problem with AI art is that its too much of a finisher rather than a tool. A ruler is a tool, Photoshop is a powerful tool but you still have a blank canvas and even you was a MASTER at photoshop or had programmed and developed photoshop itself, you'd still be a crap artist without practice and knowledge in art foundation.

Therefore AI is not a tool, in the same way stealing a stock image and calling it your own art work is not a tool. The only difference is stock images is a easy to figure out whilst AI is uniquely generated, the effort is about the same.  It can take hours finding the perfect stock images as it could generating the right AI image, But AI does have unlimited generations as opposed to finite availability of stock images.

AI art is much closer to using stock images, more than it is to being an "Artist".

And whilst AI images would be great as a resource of images that "real" artist can use for photobashing or texturing, or idea generating, the majority of people are going to use it for finished products, and they're going to claim to have created it themselves (especially when AI becomes even better and less obvious).

Lastly it does underdmine and undervalue everything. Because Leo, many people like me would never look at Digital art the same way again.

I will never see an amazing digital art piece and think "oh WOW that's amazing I wonder how he did this or that, did he use 3D?, did he photo bash, but this part looks really hand drawn and traditional, Wow this must of taken hours to make".

My reaction to a digital peice of artwork will now always be like "5 second generated AI PoS (PROBABLY)" regardless if it was handmade from scratch. I will not give it the time of day or faith, unless the person has a whole video showing it drawn from scratch.

You cannot impress me with your choice of "word prompts" as your "artisitic talent". As for "taste" most people have a decent taste. They can subconciously understand beauty or what looks nice. They however cannot CREATE something beautiful because they don't consciously understand beauty and art. They cannot fix a bad face or artwork because they dont know what to fix. That's where the real artistic talent is missing.

So again taste or knowing what image is good is valueless, most guys can agree on what's a beautiful women, they dont need to study it or be artistic about it. Knowing how to sculpt a beautiful face in 3D or clay is ENTIRELY A DIFFERENT THING.

So don't tell me it does not undervalue or undermine anything, IN MY DIRECT EXPERIENCE it does. You're being heavily biased towards AI art because you dont have the draughtsmanship, because most of the population doesnt have draughtsmanship they will of course like AI. It basically removes the years of training you have to do as an artist. all the grind, blood and sweat in a dark room.

And now with AI you will have illusion that you're an artist and undervalue artist even more, because you lowered the skill gap between you and them. There will be serious delusions with a regular people thinking well my AI art looks betteer than this artist's work who spend 5 hours painting this.

If i know amazing digital art can be spat out in mere seconds by every average person now why I would value that? How long are you going to admire the Midjourney best image galleries before you get bored of visiting that page ever again?
I can literally see the 10-15 keywords that person used, honestly I'm not impressed.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by illusory

[illusory]

Also another thing to prove you're NOT an artist using AI.

The company in charge of these AI's could change their Terms and conditions that every AI image created using their services is OWNED by them and not allowed to be distributed.

Therefore pretty sure the law recognises the company as the owner of the images. If you were a real artist that wouldnt ever be an issue.

That should demonstrate to you fully that you are not the creator of the images. The AI is.

You putting your different word prompts and seeds and picking best image is LAUGHABLE to think you're an artist. This will be like comissioning someone to paint for you, and after he's listened to all your input you're like "Oh yea I like it, I PAINTED this", what a joke.

And i gurantee you 99.9% of the time the AI isn't even going to give you what you imagined in your mind... It's going to give you an image that you like even more or that you settled for after experimenting. It's going to be close to your words but not the image in your mind's eye. So actually you're not even directing the art work as much as you're directing the topic.

The AI is also doing most of the visioning and aesthetics. You're literally just typing out topics and words man nothing more.

It's like you think you own that MMORPG game character that you levelled? earnt all the accomplishments and gear? No you never owned it, it was always the property of the game company, they could ban you and resell your character if they wanted for no reason.

Edited September 7, 2022 by illusory

[Leo Gura]

On 9/7/2022 at 8:37 AM, illusory said:

You putting your different word prompts and seeds and picking best image is LAUGHABLE to think you're an artist. This will be like comissioning someone to paint for you, and after he's listened to all your input you're like "Oh yea I like it, I PAINTED this", what a joke.

Apparently you've never heard of photography or photoshop.

Edited September 11, 2022 by Leo Gura

[LSD-Rumi]

On 9/7/2022 at 6:37 PM, illusory said:

Also another thing to prove you're NOT an artist using AI.

 

I think Art is more about how visionary and creative you are. AI is just eliminating the extra steps. . And with time the emphasis on this point will be much clearer. Indie game developers for example now will be able to complete their visions in much shorter times with the help of AI, Does this make them less of an artist? I don't think so. 

Edited September 11, 2022 by LSD-Rumi

[Danioover9000]

@illusory

On 9/7/2022 at 4:37 PM, illusory said:

Also another thing to prove you're NOT an artist using AI.

The company in charge of these AI's could change their Terms and conditions that every AI image created using their services is OWNED by them and not allowed to be distributed.

Therefore pretty sure the law recognises the company as the owner of the images. If you were a real artist that wouldnt ever be an issue.

That should demonstrate to you fully that you are not the creator of the images. The AI is.

You putting your different word prompts and seeds and picking best image is LAUGHABLE to think you're an artist. This will be like comissioning someone to paint for you, and after he's listened to all your input you're like "Oh yea I like it, I PAINTED this", what a joke.

And i gurantee you 99.9% of the time the AI isn't even going to give you what you imagined in your mind... It's going to give you an image that you like even more or that you settled for after experimenting. It's going to be close to your words but not the image in your mind's eye. So actually you're not even directing the art work as much as you're directing the topic.

The AI is also doing most of the visioning and aesthetics. You're literally just typing out topics and words man nothing more.

It's like you think you own that MMORPG game character that you levelled? earnt all the accomplishments and gear? No you never owned it, it was always the property of the game company, they could ban you and resell your character if they wanted for no reason.

   My personal take, I absolutely agree! It's my value and standards, but you should never call yourself an artist if you haven't actually created the image in the first place. I really hate when people do that, take another artist's image and call it their own under other forms of legal conditions, when technically that art never was created by the person, but was taken and put on videos, websites or other by the person. That's the other feeling I get when I see A.I. doing the drawings instead of you, it's sacrilege to obfuscate your drawing talent to a robot! Whoever disagrees with this strongly, is a leech and a thief and has low standards for being an artist.

   That said, if anyone still wishes to use A.I. programs for art, I suggest when you feel writer's or creative block, and feeling strongly negative, generate an image, and draw from observation of that image into something else. That's acceptable.

[Girzo]

@illusory The appeal to currently existing laws is not a proper argument for such philosophical questions. The laws are made for various reasons, and I am 100% sure these particular ones have not been made with "philosophically determining who is the artist" in mind. Copyright laws have been made to protect financial interests of companies, because we live in capitalism. Adobe could add a pragraph like you describe to their products, if they were lunatics. Would that mean people using Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign are not artists anymore?

[AtheisticNonduality]

The idea AI will be at human level (or greater!) soon is laughably a waste of time anyway, so this is a hypothetical drivel-fest.

[gettoefl]

art is ten a penny, artists are one in a million

art is valued because of the one who made it

we like artists because of their story their humanity their relatability their ingenuity their brand

art is about putting your personal slant on something so that it reflects represents brings to mind ... the unique you that you are

[Leo Gura]

https://www.actualized.org/insights/ai-art-is-here

[Thought Art]

@Leo Gura You are an artist 

[zurew]

@Leo Gura Very good stuff!

[LSD-Rumi]

@Leo Gura you can fix artifacts in faces using this AI technology 

https://arc.tencent.com/en/ai-demos/faceRestoration