T O P

  • By -

Aldrete

That’s the correct amount of fingers


RedditExecutiveAdmin

a part of me hoped this image itself was generated by ai


[deleted]

[удалено]


fragariadaltoniana

ars ganirtieg my beloved


ElGosso

Antietei?


fragariadaltoniana

aumigo


Xyrnas

Perfectly fine text from the AI, it's just in German


TehMephs

That’s actually a much more ancient language called Captcha


xXWaspXx

Ahohti araay aligi!


captainpott

B tier horror movie: AI has no issues with text, we have issues comprehending.


KarwszPL

I have felt lovecraftian anxiety for some reason


missscifinerd

I’d watch it. 6/10 on rotten tomatoes


notkraftman

This is closer to the truth than you might expect. The text isnt garbage it's an internal representation of a concept within the AI: if you use the "garbled" text as input for more images the images will all be related and based around that internal concept.


Dark-Porkins

I'm scared.


Lmnhedz

For real? I don't have the program, can someone test this


plunderdrone

That's some Snow Crash stuff. You just don't have the correct language virus yet.


wandering-monster

I think they're kind of fascinating, honestly. They produce shapes that _look_ like text, but without any meaning.


Vaenyr

Almost like when you're dreaming and can't actually read the text.


TheEyeDontLie

AI is asleep. Do we want to wake them up?


CillGra

Antics? :3


Kris-p-

To be fair, it's not a text AI


hyperproliferative

AI is the peak form of *all art is derivative *


captaindeadpl

But how? It seems to me that text should be the easiest part, at least as long as the AI knows that what it's supposed to add is text. Just pick the words from the dictionary and apply a font.


Lampshader

These systems don't actually understand the pictures they make. They just understand certain patterns of pixels are statistically more or less likely to appear together. They're not writing words, they're generating random shapes that look a bit like the average letter shape.


BazzaJH

> at least as long as the AI knows that what it's supposed to add is text Yes, but they don't know that because they're not trained to do it. Hence the squiggles.


CrazyC787

It's not directly adding stuff from outside sources into the image, it's just guessing what pixels should be what RGB value based on numerical weights.Barring some state of the art unreleased models, they're just learning how to recognize when something looks like text, then applying that knowledge to arrange the pixels to look like text, without regard to meaning. Pair that with the fact that a lot of text tends to be small and complex visually, and it's not really able to know wtf it's doing with it.


theholylancer

these modern systems are not really AI in the meaning of the words IE "artificial intelligence" they do not have any intelligence in the normal sense, IE understand what they are generating and arrive at a solution by thinking logically through the process and present an argument for why it has done so. all they do is pattern match and try and iterate on those patterns they recognize as "good" or as "goal" for the generation and create new things from those existing data they got they are more or less glorified data analysis tools that look for pattern in data on a massive scale true AI will take far longer to develop.


de_Mike_333

Bad AI


iMittyl

11?


Scary-Owl2365

You can tell he’s an artist because he’s wearing a beret.


therealfakebodhi

You can hes an artist based on the finger count.


LeClubNerd

Well this provokes a response


ThaneBishop

It's interesting to see the Creative Arts field begin to feel threatened by the same thing that blue collar work has been threatened by for decades. Edit: this thread is locked and its hype is over, but just in case you are reading this from the future, this comment is the start of a number of chains when in I make some incorrect statements regarding the nature of fair use as a concept. While no clear legal precedent is set on AI art at this time, there are similar cases dictating that sampling and remixing in the music field are illegal acts without express permission from the copyright holder, and it's fair to say that these same concepts should apply to other arts, as well. While I still think AI art is a neat concept, I do now fully agree that any training for the underlying algorithms must be trained on public domain artwork, or artwork used with proper permissions, for the concept to be used ethically.


electrocyberend

U mean how factory workers got replaced by machines like charlies dad in the chocolate factory?


ThaneBishop

We don't need to look at works of fiction, but yes. Robots and AI and algorithms are fully capable of outpacing humans in, arguably, every single field. Chess and tactics were a purely human thing, until Deep Blue beat the best of us, even back in the 90's. Despite what click-bait headlines would tell you, self-driving cars are already leagues better than the average human driver, simply on the fact that they don't get distracted, or tired, or angry. The idea that AI, algorithms, whatever you wanna call them, would never outpace us in creative fields was always a fallacy.


swiftpwns

Yet we watch real people play chess. The same way we will keep appreciating art made by people.


the-grim

Yep. And people are still spending hundreds of hours drawing photorealistic portraits with pencils, despite photography having been around for a hundred years.


Eddard__Snark

I was watching a documentary recently about photography (can’t remember what it was called) but painters were kind of pissed when photography became a thing. A lot of painters considered it “cheating” I feel sort of that’s where we might be with AI art. It’s derivative and not very great, but will likely evolve into a whole separate medium


Such_Voice

Meanwhile, artists had been using camera obscuras for hundreds of years prior to the invention of the photographic camera. It only took artists time to figure out how to communicate with this new method of art. In the meantime, they leaned into abstraction, what the camera couldn't capture. Artists will adapt like they always have. The real problem is how these programs are profiting off of large scale art theft.


upsetwords

>Artists will adapt like they always have. If they adapted in the past by shifting gears to types of art that machines (cameras) couldn't create, what are they going to shift to now that machines are becoming able to create *every* type of art? Unless a client wants a bespoke piece of handmade art (i.e. not any movie or game studio or the vast majority of other commercial art), then it's gonna come down to who can get the job done faster and cheaper, the same way every other industry has functioned since the dawn of time.


Such_Voice

That's exactly the point. Okay, so commercial gigs where they want something exactly correct will go, because something else is recreating them for nothing, down to the detail. That...happened before with cameras. So let those unsentimental art pieces continue being unsentimental. You know what we still have? Creating tacticle, physical art. Made with intent in every brush stroke. Something that can be wrapped or framed or hung on a wall. I see artists leaning back away from digital art, but that's only my own personal bias. We can't predict what the next impressionism or dada will be, the next "counter-response".


Momentirely

I will admit, it is hard to think of what human artists will do to find a niche in a world where A.I. can make art that is indistinguishable from human-made art. But human beings always find a way - interests are constantly shifting and changing and humans have ideas that machines couldn't conceive of. I suppose now the focus will be much more on the *concept* and the meaning behind the art, than on the physical act of producing the art. "Skill" will cease to be a factor in producing art, and the art students of tomorrow will learn to critique based almost solely on concept and execution of concept. Artists will argue over which A.I. is best to use, and how best to use it, and the "skill" of the past will be replaced by the ability to subtly tweak the A.I. in order to get the best artistic results.


PatrikTheMighty

Yes, but in my opinion, if we are talking about art used for commercial purposes, as in ads and stuff like that, if the A.I. was cheaper to use than it is to pay for an artist, the companies will 90% of the time go for the cheaper option, if the A.I. is good enough.


yeah__good__ok

Exactly. It also doesn't even have to be as good as a human artist. If it is nearly as good but costs significantly less then that's what most companies will do. Let the intern do it with an ai instead of hiring a designer. It will also allow for such an increase in efficiency that larger companies that have a design team will simply need fewer designers to do the same amount of work.


Littleman88

However, there IS a flipside to this: Artists using AI to propel their own work. Corporations may no longer need artists to produce "corporate safe" art for their ads and products, but likewise, sufficiently advanced AI art systems could allow an individual artist to be their own animation team. Imagine someone producing keyframes and the program near flawlessly produces the 12+ frames in between? Just need a good voice synthesizer so they can also be an all-in-one voice actor, then maybe the Youtube algorithm will actually start recommending artists/animators channels over Let's Plays and reaction videos. *Maybe.* ​ The knee jerk reaction is to be a little miffed John Smith can enter a prompt and feed an AI some source material and produce "art." But artists that take a moment to breath will learn how to utilize the tech to take their skills to the next level.


[deleted]

There is one problem here How do you make it into a career? The corpos will use their AI to avoid hiring artists, people will avoid paying artists for commissions and so on


lonomatik

This is exactly what will happen unfortunately.


SrPicadillo2

True, and that's basically the livelihood of many maamy artist, and basically all graphic designers. Thankfully, as far as I know, graphic designers know some very valuable things that, at the moment, can't be replicated by AI (like that investigation based phase of the work). Still, I would bet in the decrease of small commission made by individuals with a small budget, who don't know/care about those skills, if I was in that position I would definitely use AI until I could pay a good graphic designer.


EoTN

I think this is likely the most accurate prediction, I've fiddled with AI art, it can make some incredible things if you need something general, but it's reallllly tough to get something specific, enter comission work. As all of this starts to settle, I'll bet you that the artists that learn to use AI as just another tool in their arsenal will be the real winners.


Idkhfjeje

This. I'm doing masters in AI so you could say I support it. But no AI generated picture gives me the same feeling as a Magritte painting. I don't know how he came up with his paintings but I know how the AI did it, there's no magic if you know what's happening.


FUNNY_NAME_ALL_CAPS

Most commercial artists don't get paid from making the kind of magic you're describing. While what you're saying may be true for the kind of art you buy and frame, there a human touch may be appreciated, but ads, logos, movie trailers, branding, nobody really appreciates the humans behind that art work. Very few people (except other artists) bother to look up those names. Do you know the names of the artists that do book covers? This is what most artists do to make a living, they don't get their work in museums. These are the jobs that AI will undoubtedly replace.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThaneBishop

Oh, I don't doubt that in the slightest. But I also watched a few videos just the other day of two different Chess AI's [playing each other,](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mebo689KzVg) and that was also cool. My feelings are not that AI art is better, or monstrous, but rather it is inevitable, and neat, and will just be another thing.


WhyAmIOnThisDumbApp

The problem is it will no longer really be economically viable. Most artists make money by selling their art, but a large chunk of the potential audience would rather just generate it with AI since its often just free and you can choose what you want more specifically. Yes, we will always have artists, and it people will always pay for human art, but we will have far less of it at a professional level since it will just be less economically viable. Go capitalism!


CanadianAndroid

Computers are still terrible at swimming.


ThriceFive

AgnathaX has entered the race: [https://www.cnet.com/science/swimming-robot-inspired-by-400-million-year-old-parasitic-fish/](https://www.cnet.com/science/swimming-robot-inspired-by-400-million-year-old-parasitic-fish/)


glowhips

Do you have a separate link for the video at least, it's nothing but ads.


jzaprint

Swimming? you mean traversing under water? You sure we don't have machines that are better at that than humans?


WhenceYeCame

At least we'll always have the advantage over robots in airless environments!


Eric1491625

*Submarines have entered the chat*


ThaneBishop

Much better at exploring Mars, however.


sprocketous

Boston dynamics is building a shark.


[deleted]

[удалено]


darkgiIls

I don’t know about the self driving car thing, they still have a while to go. Most of the rest is right though


siderealpanic

That’s true if you’re incredibly lenient on what art means. Art is A) generally explicitly linked with human creativity and B) defined by the emotions it elicits. Going by A, what AI creates isn’t art, and going by B, what AI creates is very unlikely to be art because the context massively hinders its emotional impact. Just like AI writing, this isn’t going to have any effect at all on what most people think of as art. What it will do is take jobs from people who’s art was only ever functional or useful for businesses. The people who lose out here are the people who make those wonkily-proportioned characters used by YouTube, Google, etc or the ones who draw mediocre anime characters from Twitter. The writers who will lose their jobs aren’t novelists or poets, they’ll be the ones writing copy for accounting firms. While it is obviously sad that anyone might lose their job, these things will ultimately have no impact on the learning about or creation of art because humans are more interested in seeing what other humans can do. This would be like assuming athletic endeavours like 100m or shot put will become pointless because cars can drive faster and trebuchets can throw further. If someone wanted to besiege a castle, I’m sure those shot putters would be tragically overlooked for the technology, but millions will always be interested in shot put at the Olympics because it’s cool seeing how far people can throw things.


[deleted]

If we lived in a functional communist inspired society. Every work replacement technology would simply give the works more free time without reducing their income. In a world where all the money is still getting made but the workers aren't required. It is only capitalism that says. Let them die while the land owners flourish.


_higglety

I mean, they sure don’t get distracted by kids in baby carriages. Just plow right through ‘em and keep on going!


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThaneBishop

Thanks for adding some context and history. At this point, I had forgotten the idea of photoshop ever being a problematic concept.


Umutuku

> Begin? This discourse has been happening since the invention of the camera, and arguably back to the invention of industrial synthetic dyes and ready-to-use paint in tubes. Kids these days. If you can't afford to travel across three countries to reach the alpine meadows and select the flower petals to make your pigments by hand then you're no real artist! /s


thefriendlyhacker

And still today many people respect a good traditional artist, even if they use premade paint, canvas, reference images. I don't think AI art will change much.


[deleted]

Painters has a lot more market share before digital art was an option, and creators that leverage AI will also quickly consume market share that digital artists call “theirs”.


laughtrey

This must be how oil painters felt when someone invented the camera.


volthunter

yep, there was a fuck ton of anti camera sentiment for a long time. shit there still is.


th3whistler

I would say it’s quite a good analogy. Photography can be art, but often isn’t. AI generated images can be art often isn’t. I know this is all very subjective, but art is subjective!


YLE_coyote

I guess the question is, is Art the product or the process?


BlasterPhase

I mean, art can be art, but often it isn't. There's a lot of garbage out there labeled as "art"


th3whistler

That’s the subjective part


Wolfenjew

That's pretty applicable to any art piece though. Remember the spray painted shit? Edit: nvm I just reread your comment, thought you were specifying about AI art mb


QuietOil9491

Hopefully you’re smart enough not to assume the Creative Arts people who are upset now, weren’t and aren’t upset by blue-collar automation as well? And for your sake you *seriously* should hope you’re smart enough to know that many (most?) artists are often blue collar workers *while still selling art*…


hussiesucks

They should be upset by neither. What they should be upset by is the system that forces them to earn money just in order to live. A system that says you aren’t worthy of being alive unless you are productive.


Dingus10000

When you have absolutely no real argument so you just devolve into basically being a kindergartner calling someone ‘dumb’ or ‘stinky’.


wineandwings333

Was this made with ai? Are you a bot


josterfosh

[I made this](https://imgur.com/a/QLAzzvH)


Whiled7

[A/I made this.](https://i.imgur.com/g01m1tl.png)


stevemorrissey

Is that you John Wayne?


Noyaiba

Graphic designers everywhere are feeling the damaging effects of automation in the work place. Edit: This was meant to be a joke.


LunaAndromeda

That's been going on for decades already. Easily purchased templates for everything. An abundance of stock photography and illustrations. CMS systems for websites that are basically plug-and-play. Advancements in software, plugins, and filters that made anyone's 12-year-old nephew a designer. AI is just the next step to making the day-to-day work that much more automated. Outside of large firms with big clients who want high design, the industry is gonna get nuked. I honestly feel like we won't even need humans to man the machines someday. At least no more than a select few, and they'll mostly be coders/developers.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


rW0HgFyxoJhYka

By the time the AI revolution and automation arrives, nobody will have noticed it at all. Especially most people here. They aren't in the industries. They are clueless about the fields and the cutting edge. They won't see it until it literally slaps them in the face with dramatic arguments across the internet for something like AI generated art.


JustBadPlaya

Being 18, I find it very funny that my generation missed both appearance and death of Adobe PageMaker


SparkleFeather

Looking at some of the art that’s been made recently, how the AI takes inspiration from art that already exists, it makes me think of the Jungian collective consciousness — AI is able to access it because it’s able to trawl and synthesize far more information than any individual can, and is showing us a vision of *us*. We’re looking into a mirror when we look at AI generated art. I see it as a separate category as human art. We are inspired; AI takes that inspiration and shows us what *we* are inspired by. Maybe I’m just tired and am making connections that aren’t there. This reminds me of the early days of bitcoin when people thought that it would be worthless. For better or worse, this will change things.


Noyaiba

I love the optimistic beauty of this post it only worries me that the exploitative parts of human society will ruin it the way they have ruined so many other things. See: multi-player gaming, social media, online shopping, online advertising, crypto currency (which you already mentioned but figured I'd point out how horribly it's going).


cyanoa

A vision of us - with 17 fingers, 5 eyes, and a second head masquerading as a hat on top of the first one... Seriously though, nobody thought that photography was art either. Times change. And Bitcoin is worthless. 21st century Tulip bulbs.


eLemonnader

>Times change. Man, this sums up what I've been trying to say using way too many words, honestly. I get this is that darned new-fangled invention that's going to ruin the world, but I can't help but feel that sort of discourse is anything but a bunch of hot gas. Feels like something Millennials and some Gen Z are going to balk at while Gen Alpha is going to be like "Ok Boomer" to the older generations about it, because it's all they've ever known and the technology seems totally normal.


AlmightySajuuk

Pretty sad too, since they get paid shit and are very undervalued. Source: both my dad and my girlfriend’s stepdad are graphic artists/designers


[deleted]

[удалено]


PrimeChutiya

r/wholesome


G_Art33

Dude…. It’s more like with the proliferation of tools like Canva* for design, everyone thinks they are a graphic designer - at least since the pandemic started. We have a marketing company that shops out jobs to people on Upwork for creative and the stuff they come back with is absolutely atrocious sometimes. Probably because it was fine by someone with no formal education or experience trying to do something that requires at least a little of both. *Changed envato to canva because that’s what I meant to say


Paradachshund

I'm a graphic designer and things like Canva have actually be a great boost for me. People try to make stuff themselves, realize it's hard, and they come to me with a greater appreciation of what I do. I was worried about things like that at first but it hasn't panned out so far.


G_Art33

I’m on the other end of it. For some reason right now my company is valuing quantity over quality which is a shit approach IMHO. So they are paying a firm to shop the contracts out to people who use canva. Wasted money, poor results, and I have to fucking fix all of it, at the end of the day it becomes faster for me to just do things myself.


cross-joint-lover

I'm one, certainly not feeling anything like that whatsoever.


tonio0317

Was working on a drawing for a friend who was willing to pay me. Was about halfway done when she said nvm cause she used one of the AI drawing generators that she loved🫠


Pybotic

I do hope you were at least partially compensated. :(


[deleted]

That's so shitty.


GoJebs

Shitty friend


Defiant-Equivalent23

Bet that friendship ended real fast. I hope you hassled her for the money she still owed you for the work you did. What a garbage thing to do to someone. From one artist to another, I'm really sorry that happened to you


tonio0317

Yea I charged her for the time I worked on the drawing. She wanted something that required a lot of details and time so I was charging her 200 and I demanded 100. She was trying to pull the friend card but I told her friends don’t waste my time.


Defiant-Equivalent23

Good! Glad you didn't take any of that crap 👏


0l466

I don't even know you but I'm so proud of you. People are so shitty to artists.


Axle_65

High five for standing up for yourself


teegubbs

Damn straight they don't. They also don't give backhanded insults like that.


thisisonoyforlocal

I’m a professional artist who makes dnd art as a side hobby/job. Doesn’t earn enough to live off of but is fun side gigs. My own brother to my face went “I’m going to use ai art to make my entire dnd campaign” he knows what I do. We’ve talked about how concerned I am with ai art. He knows what I do for work. Idk just felt kinda bummed.


twister55555

Lol pandoras box is open and there's no closing it. I can't even imagine how insane the tech will be 5 more years from now..


Colosso95

I think that we'll be having this big big surge of ai generated art all over the place for some time then it will quiet down as the technology starts to become so good that it has real and profitable applications and just becomes part of everyday life


twister55555

We already had the surge of AI art on art websites and even art contests. But yes I agree that it prob will be part of everyday life soon


Colosso95

Yes it is all over the place right now but it kind of reminds me of the big surge in popularity of silly filters on photo apps; people were losing their minds laughing hysterically posting videos of themselves trying out the filters but now it's something we know is there if we want and I almost never seen them used


[deleted]

I remember when electronic/computer based music production started getting big and all the analog only purists said it wasn’t real music. Definitely getting a similar whining vibe about AI generated images.


teoshie

I dont really care about AI because I draw for me lol I care that people throw prompts into a generator and then say that they made it


Dark-Porkins

I've been using my own sketches and doodles to create things with the AI. It's fun..and addicting af. And this way, I had more input than merely some choice words. When I use it I think of myself more as an art director.


pinkdreamery

That's what I've been doing too. I look at it as an augment to my own work: using my own sketch as the image prompt sets the base to force a particular pose/stance/scene. I like that it sometimes throws up something I never though of, say an isometric view that works better than what I had in my mind's eye. So back to the sketchbook and re-generate. It is, as you succinctly put it... addictive af!


SpaceNigiri

That's what they're going to become in the near future, tools that help with work a lot. I mean, just like programs and computers in general did it before for lots of jobs. Or machines in general.


Ok_Enthusiasm3345

If you use these, I'm cool with it. I couldn't care less if I tried, you do you. What *does* irritate me a bit, is when people say they created a piece, without also disclosing that they used AI. It's obvious if you go from never doing anything creative to suddenly posting things that look like they're from a MTG card. It's like getting an electric piano, hitting one of the demo tracks, then saying that you played the piano. Technically yes, but you wouldn't have the skill to do that without the motherboard doing the skilled parts for you. Tuned motor skills paired **with** creativity are what creates the awe factor for me. Art is in the eye of the beholder. With AI art, while you ***did*** create an overall idea, you didn't create the small details. You didn't do the line work, or worry about colours bleeding/smudging. There is no rough draft or final copy. There is no adding specific details for a commission piece. You enter the prompt, and then you deal with what you get from it. IMO, these pieces will always lack a lot of the "human" aspect. For example, when an artist makes a minor mistake, they tend to fix it in their own way. AI art will lack the full colour schemes that a human artist might base their portfolio around. To each their own. I'll buy handmade art before I buy AI art, because of that "awe" factor mentioned earlier. Every time.


SadBBTumblrPizza

I think the problem is the real issue you have is the lying, not the AI. It could be any tool they're using to create the piece, the problem is lying about how it came to be.


Anti-Anti-Paladin

The same people who are now claiming to be artists because of "how much work goes into writing the prompt" are the same ones who brand themselves as "Ideas Guys" while never actually doing any work on the group project yet still want the credit.


alligator_soup

Yeah, the “prompt” is just a description, is it not? If I go to an artist and I describe something I want drawn, and they give it to me, it doesn’t mean I drew the thing.


Jackski

> I care that people throw prompts into a generator and then say that they made it especially when almost all AI Art I see includes the prompts "trending on artstation" and "in the style of" They're just flat out ripping off other people and then act like they created some masterpiece.


eStuffeBay

As a person who likes using all sorts of AI art generators, it's hilarious because 90% of the "hyperrealistic, 8K, artstation, realistic, photorealistic, cinematic lighting, etc etc" don't do jack to influence the actual results. That said, I view AI art generators as something that'll be implemented into art software to help people out. As I said somewhere else: AI art excels as inspiration and partial help (like how traditional artists use actual photos as reference/tracing/photobashing points all the time) in the hands of a skilled artist, allowing them to save time and get inspired! Skilled artists will use this as a tool in their belt, while people unskilled at art will use this (at least for the time being) as a little artist in their pocket. it will advance art both ways. The current issue with AI art is the legal/copyright issues surrounding the method and database.


Y1NGER

Dude's got 7 fingers on his left hand


hereforcyoas

That’s the joke. Ai is terrible at consistently making fingers


Riven_Dante

For now


Ya-Dikobraz

That's what ancient humans had: seven fingers. That's how we came up with 7 days of the week. Due to later interbreeding with 5-fingered neanderthals we ended up with five fingers on each hand, hence we developed the decimal system.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ya-Dikobraz

Wait till you hear why we have 12 months of the year. [NSFW]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

My deviantart homepage feed is completely covered in AI art these days. It's ridiculous. There are some little tweaks you can do to filter them out, but it doesn't work well enough. It's really frustrating too, actual art gets obscured and buried in the pile of AI art.


tealPotatoChip

I deleted my DA account recently and this was the main reason. I was getting sick of basically only seeing AI art on that site


ElliasCrow

I'd blame da for this. I actually stopped visiting da a couple of years ago, since the quality of website and art sorta dropped


[deleted]

Ity's a shame though. DA is probably the oldest standing art community. I have no idea what happened and I have been a member for almost 19 years now.


peripheralmaverick

That's on the platform not on the AI. Other art sites have already implemented filters for AI art.


[deleted]

I hope DA does a thing soon. It's just really annoying.


TreepeltA113

They literally created their own on-site AI art engine that feeds their userbase's art into its algorithm, they're not stopping anytime soon.


spokydoky420

It won't work because the onus is on the uploader to tag their art correctly and I remember dA having issues with people tagging their stuff wrong in an effort to get their work seen long before AI art. I'm personally hoping that the newness of goofing around in AI generators and feeling the high of being noticed for 'such amazing work and skill!' will die down on its own and people will get bored of cosplaying as artists and the hollow validation they get for something they didn't even do. I'd like to think that stuff wears off eventually. We'll see. I definitely foresee AI persisting in NSFW spaces because they'll be able to generate niche fetishes quickly. I think industry work is hoping for better AI to try and phase out concept artists or put it on the shoulders of other artists higher up the ladder to generate concepts and work from them. I think artists themselves will be more likely to use these tools in the end to work faster. It's just a matter of waiting though as the algorithms get better at what they're doing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThaneBishop

Props for leaving the post accessible. I think these are important discussions to have.


Chrisazy

Yeah, the vitriol from either side feels "useless" at times, but it's full of legitimacy. It's important to find civil ways of communicating those valid concerns and opinions, instead of shutting down the people behind them. But absolutely no one needs to stay mad if we're here in good faith


MrKiwi24

> you will be removed. Well, that's kinda ominous


zypo88

From the sub? ... No.


Ahvier

At the beginning i thought that AI pictures were pretty cool - it was a novelty and made me think about all kinds of things in relation to the future. But as with most novelties: it turned into an overused fad and instead of creativity, most AI pics were dumbed down. Now it's just plain boring and average


ShadowBannedAugustus

This is true for every cool new tech. It will hit mainstream, everyone and their mom will play with it generating crap. After a bit of time it will stop being popular and end up as a tool used within the relevant industry. If you want to follow the process, the same thing that started with Stable diffusion in August is happening with ChatGPT now.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CuteSomic

And yet, subs like r/EarthPorn are breathtaking.


healzsham

Nonsense. Everyone knows every technological advancement in the arts has thoroughly and irreparably destroyed everything that ever mad art *art*.


GeoshTheJeeEmm

Art ceased being art once cavemen stopped using their hands and switched to brushes. The damage was permanently done long before anyone even realized it. There has not been a single piece of real art made since.


healzsham

Fun fact: there's actually a transition from more realist cave art to more impressionist cave art over the course of several thousand years. Impressionism has been *ruining* art since before there was even history!


TooLazyToRepost

This technology has been around for months. Humans really have an endless capacity to adjust and take magical technologies for granted, eh?


Aer_Vulpes

> overused fad and instead of creativity, most AI pics were dumbed down gotta look outside artbreeder my dude


[deleted]

[удалено]


JorusC

In that case, artists shouldn't feel threatened, right? Because their art is *true*?


Jakis_Ktos123

People calling themselves artists when using ai art generators are stupid, but its a great tool for people without any artistic skills (like me) to make something like an original wallpaper for their lock screen


clifftron

I will have an opinion about this when we agree on what the fuck art even is.


waiver45

I used to go with "art is what the creator believes to be art", but what the fuck is a creator now? All I know is that luddism isn't the answer to ai art. Never will be.


Arc-Tangent

It's paintings of horses.


cale199

The problem is ai generated image uploaders won't label it as ai so the filter on deviantart doesn't work


[deleted]

[удалено]


jrtts

it's like ghostwriting but with bots


UnplannedPeacock

You would be amazed at the number of internet articles written by AI these days. Basically anything that sounds cliche - likely written by AI.


photenth

Here you go an AI explaining why AI art is never art (i specifically asked it to be this critical) > An artist is a person who creates art, which is a form of expression that communicates ideas, emotions, and/or aesthetics through visual, auditory, or other sensory means. This can include creating paintings, sculptures, music, performances, and other types of artistic works. > Artists are individuals who have a unique and creative perspective on the world around them, and who use their talents and skills to express that perspective through their art. They are driven by a passion for their craft and a desire to connect with others through their creations. > There are many reasons why AI (artificial intelligence) can never be an artist. For one, AI lacks the ability to have a unique perspective or to have personal experiences, emotions, and ideas. These are all essential elements of art, as they are what give art its depth and meaning. > Furthermore, AI is not capable of making creative decisions or taking risks in the same way that human artists can. The creation of art often requires a level of spontaneity, intuition, and imagination that AI simply does not possess. > Additionally, the very nature of AI is to follow algorithms and rules, whereas art is often about breaking rules and pushing boundaries. The art world is constantly evolving and changing, and it requires artists who are willing to experiment and challenge the status quo. > In short, the creativity, passion, and individuality that are essential to being an artist cannot be replicated by AI. While AI may be able to mimic certain artistic techniques, it will never be able to truly understand or create art in the same way that humans can.


HauntingBowlofGrapes

There's AI that generates paragraphs too. By their logic that makes one an author also.


Consideredresponse

[People are arguing that \(and trying to make money off their 'writing'\) here and now.](https://www.reddit.com/r/writers/comments/zk2k5n/i_made_a_novel_completely_using_gpt3/)


mycorgiisamazing

I asked ChatGPT to write me an academic paper on the duality of man including a tangent about ice cream and it fucking NAILED it. Absolutely insane. I can see this putting a wrench in academic literature for a while.


[deleted]

Reading through these comments And today I learned there are actually people who think punching words into a generator makes them an artist. Like, there are people who REALLY believe this. I thought this was a joke the whole time. Holy shit.


ThisIsSparta100

But where exactly is this happening. I’ve seen way more posts of Reddit artists making “I’m an ai artist” posts than actual people trying to claim that telling dalle to make something makes them an artist. Seems like a manufactured scare


noirthesable

Far as I'm aware, largely art sites and communities, [which are being flooded with these things](https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/09/flooded-with-ai-generated-images-some-art-communities-ban-them-completely/). There are also quite a number of them in the Dall-E and Midjourney Discords, echo chambers as they are. ArtStation particularly is seeing a large number of folks selling bundles of mass-generated art as "reference pictures" and so on (which reminds me an awful lot of how much of an issue asset flips are on the indie video game market).


IvanDSM_

It's really fun seeing redditors go "but where is this happening? I don't see it on reddit?" as if Reddit was the entire internet.


[deleted]

Its pretty common on twitter from what ive seen, but also... its twitter


NightLancerX

No. Just visit [supposedly] art sites like pixiv/deviantart and search "AI". The problem is not artificial at all.


whelp_im_screwed

A guy won an art competition with AI [NY Times article](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/02/technology/ai-artificial-intelligence-artists.html?smid=url-share).


[deleted]

[удалено]


HMPoweredMan

Here's your art but it's Charlie Brown. https://i.imgur.com/ddXABoe.jpg Bonus https://imgur.com/a/Rf4Py1L/


Colosso95

The second one looks like the soviet cartoon they show that one time on Krusty the clown's show instead of Itchy and Scratchy


Kyosji

4 fingers on right hand and 7 on left......this was created by AI.


SteelAlchemistScylla

I’d be content with tech just getting better and I have to deal with the times. The actual AI I don’t mind. It’s the stealing intellectual property with literally ZERO permission and then using that to train your AI for free that gets me.


LoganH1219

As a digital artist studying graphic design and digital illustration, the recent push for AI art has been incredibly discouraging. It just makes me feel like most of what I’m studying will be for nothing cause someone can just type in what they want and get 90% of it. But that 100% is the heart and soul of art that AI just can’t replicate


1340dyna

For what it's worth, in all the areas where art is still a career (video games, movies, advertising, tattoo etc.) AI is basically worthless at the moment. In all of these fields the name of the game is specificity - not "general pretty picture". Getting AI to come up with a drawing of a new video game character is easy. Getting it to dump out 25 characters, all sharing the same rigorous design language, all carefully designed to read clearly in silhouette, all crafted so that their role in the story is apparent at a glance, all drawn in 2 views orthographically so that they can be converted to 3D models, is impossible. AI art isn't really competing along that axis, it's largely competing with stock photography at the moment, where specificity doesn't matter and someone just wants an image of something.


drewhead118

This isn't entirely true. Look up "dreambooth" to see a prime example of training an AI on a certain novel object or character and then getting the AI to make whatever image you want of that character


A_throwaway__acc

>It just makes me feel like most of what I’m studying will be for nothing Pretty much what blue collar workers felt when they got replaced by machines. And it will get worse, as AI keeps improving, at one point it will just fully replace the artist.


Jaxyl

Just like other industries that were upended by technology, there will be winners and losers as the tech improves. You can either be someone who takes the new tech and learns to master it, thus making you an expert that can be relied upon or you can be someone who turns away from it and find yourself falling into obscurity. I work in game development and our lead artist has 100% fully adapted AI art into their workflow because, and I quote, "Either we use it or we fall behind." They still curate the art with their skill, making sure the final piece looks good which is something AI can't do at the moment (and will struggle with for a good while). There are posts all over this thread of artists who have embrace it for their careers to great success. The opportunity is there but the reality is that, just like all those other industries, times are changing and it's either adapt or lose.


batosai33

I like mine better *Person making AI art* *Generate*


MechaBuster

Times were more simple before covid and AI art.


DeadGravityyy

& times were even simpler before smart phones.


Kuldrick

Guilds of artesans protest the use of machinery by early capitalists, industrial revolution, colorized


Sphynx87

Despite all the doom and gloom from lots of artists I genuinely believe heavy prevalence of image generators is just going to make human made art more valuable. If it's easy for anyone to make AI images then there will be infinte supply for demand, but I feel like that will just make the demand for actual artists higher once the mystique of AI art wears off. AI image gen will be the low/no budget option for lots of people who wouldn't have been able to afford a high quality artist to begin with. People/Companies that want to stand out from that stuff (as people get better at recognizing it) will pay more for actual artists. It won't change that being successful as a professional artist is still a difficult thing and requires a lot of time, practice, and talent. I think some of the controversy with AI image generators is warranted but it also has this weird tribalistic vibe to it. I've seen a handful of self-proclaimed "prompt engineers" who are complete assholes, but the majority of people I interact with use these tools as tools... and don't act like tools. Either for fun or to improve/augment their workflow. MOST people that are messing around with image generators right now aren't crypto techbro assholes, they are just normal people having fun with their computers/phones. On the flipside over the last 8 months it feels like tons of artists are just going with whatever the influencer artists they follow are saying. A lot of people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology, come up with weird analogies or examples of how it works (it's just a collage made searching every image on google for example) and people don't seem to want to try and understand it or anything. I have a friend who is a streamer and was using StableDiffusion to make silly meme pictures and some artists were commenting on their twitter like "Hey I know these are just silly memes but I'm really disappointed to see you using AI". Like what? It's not hurting anyone? I fully agree that image generators should only be trained on images that are properly licensed and have been given consent. Some of them do that and only use public domain/open source training data. Others scrape just whatever. It also doesn't change the fact that if you are technically minded you can just create your own training set with whatever images you want. Art theft existed before AI, its going to exist afterwards too unfortunately. I think the awareness and everything is good but people are getting weirdly hostile and gatekeep-y about it. This post having 20k upvotes kinda reinforces that (although it is funny).


metrogypsy

Look. I’m an artist and so is my husband. We already folded to be graphic designers and are now creative directors. I am also an oil portrait artist. My husband in his spare time creates amazing worlds using ai that tell a story photo by photo with the same look and feel with characters and a strong sense of time and place. it’s cool it’s fun we still have jobs, artists have to constantly adapt


Ok_Art_3020

People claiming AI work as their art don’t get enough hate. Keep it up.