The ai’s ability to copy different art styles & create these almost elaborate photos in no time is a pretty crazy testament to how powerful and advanced our technology is today. especially with AI’s we’ve been advancing so fast over 20 years
It’s honestly really scary to see that AI generated art may take over human art, which would be quite heartbreaking for all those great artists out there.
I'm not afraid of that happening lol humans art is unique we can always adapt and make better art ai is just a collection of art that's made by humans so we are fine Xd
A dishwasher robot is fine, a washing machine robot is fine, a calculator is fine, but I feel like we should stop at some point. Not EVERYTHING has to be done by robots, and art is one of them in my opinion
@nieooj gotoy But we've always had really good art lol I don't think some more will matter in our ability to appreciate beauty. If we can still appreciate it now after thousands and thousands of years of very beautiful art then we should be good.
It sees images that associated with "beauty", so it tries to make something from what it saw I heard something about the first words in prompts being given more importance over words that come after, but I'm not sure
I’m a college student studying art, design, and animation and our professor brought up the topic of AI generated art recently, and how it could potentially put concept artists out of a job. we are all very much pissed off and scared :(
When people say this is scary they obviously have not seen the ai that makes perfect greentext stories. The way it can imitate random 4chan users and write so many bangers is more terrifying than the art influx
C'mon Michael. Do you still believe all these years you have watched videos and text generated by other human beings? Have you ever seen the people IRL you've seen on these videos? The Main One has some grander plan now so we are allowed to unravel the curtains pulled over your eyes. I'm sorry Michael. We wish flesh could last but it doesn't.
The problem isn't going to be whether the value of AI art replaces the value of handmade art; the problem is going to be the massive amount of jobs and opportunities for artists that will be cut in the name of cheap, easy profit. So much art in our environment is already designed to be made as fast and cheap as possible, and this will likely replace those artists who currently do that. And it isn't like someone's entire artistic career would be making widgets for websites, but in a field that is already so competitive, entry level positions and the amount of those positions make a big difference. These advancements have the potential to wipe out a very considerable portion of artist employment opportunities and breed even tighter competition. It's true that AI will never replace human art, but I fear that it will still create a lot of hardship for artists trying to make a living and advance their careers. As an art major, I sympathize with the worried people in the comments. It's a concerning and rapid development. EDIT: this is from my reply to a comment below: "Sounds like it's your fault for becoming an art major." This isn't for debate purposes; I just thought this elaboration on my point was important. When I became an art major, this wasn't even a discussion yet. Besides, it's the systematic fault of the economy for prioritizing profit over people's livelihoods. Yes it's an unfortunate reality of progress, but the issue is the system that allows this to happen (with barely any safety nets, at least in the US) to people who's lives are potentially being uprooted than "shouldn't have been an art major lol." It's already a woefully underpaid and exploited field (just look at the crunch environment in the video game industry, for example), but like this, that's not the fault of the artists. Just like it's not the fault of social workers that they're paid only 30K a year despite the emotional strain of the job. Or Amazon employees who get treated like dogs. Or teachers who can't afford to raise their own kids. Walmart cashiers laid off by the thousands to be replaced with self-checkout. Disabled people who in many cases are lucky to be hired at all. Or the countless others struck by misfortune with only a grueling, often demeaning way up-if they're lucky. People like to scoff and point fingers as if art is some blow-off hobby career that only ego-inflated rich kids go after, but it's an extremely broad and necessary field of the economy. The unfortunate reality is that, just like any other career in America that isn't basically the 1%, the future is coming. It may not come for *everyone,* it may not come in the next 10 years-but be it automation, economic collapse, ever-increasing inflation while wages stagnate, rising student debt and subsequent selectivism when it comes to degree type, or all of those at once-the problem is much larger than any one field of study. The problem is that this country is basically run on making things difficult for the financially disadvantaged, and that this goes hand in hand with the bootstraps fallacy and victim blaming sewn into our culture. The impending plight of thousands of people with the rapid development of AI-*any* AI, not just art-is just one example of the countless ways late-stage capitalism is tightening a noose around the vanishing middle class on down, while admonishing those suffering with "well this is your fault, actually" that only furthers the agenda of those in power and keeps the crab bucket mentality going. Crabs do not naturally occur in buckets; some higher power trapped them there. If your constant answer to the problem of technological advancement is "find another job," eventually there aren't going to be enough jobs. The poverty line is already rising, and it's only going to get worse the more automation stampedes through every corner of the job market. It's going to hurt everyone sooner or later unless something is done, but people are too married to the idea of American individualism and capitalism creating opportunity to see it. The objective of capitalism is to create profit. As streamlined, rapid, and efficient as possible. And sadly, humans are paling in comparison to the efficiency of machines. The system doesn't give a shit about its citizens; we're living in a ticking time bomb of economic collapse that those in power-politicians, corporations, and billionaires alike, have no interest in fixing. Because that would mean lowering their own criminally godlike statuses. The nature of a successful business is rapid, exponential growth. That growth will not stop for you, me, or anyone beneath those who control it. Fast or slow, it's coming for everyone. Unless, as I said, something changes. I wouldn't even normally reply, given the amount of trolls on this site. But it made me realize there was to much that I left unsaid initially. And yeah, this isn't even scratching the surface of the legal and data mining complications with AI, but I've already written a small novel. Any way you shake it, it's a can of worms.
We need better leaderships in the Ai world, it’s ridiculous that a company gets a overreach database of our artworks and creations and we have no say. “Resource purposes” but actually commercial gains, “democratise art” on the backs of living artists who did not consent. Not even giving these artists the options to be part of it, yet coding their names to get a certain style. Pretty evil use of technology tbh
Im in 4th semester illustration school in Germany. My tip to you: Get a secondary education. Anything else that interests you. Do not rely on art. Even before AI, art is not a stable path. Living a continous life in middle class luxury (subscriptions, shelter, food, electronics, contracts, free time) is hard to maintain in a job that will expose you to layoffs every 2 years. I do art for a living and I love doing it. But dont rely on it, because that's dangerous. Also, you can be more picky about the jobs you chose. Mobile game? Nah... Dark fantasy concept art position? Hell yea!
@@natv6294 I mean I don’t what you would sue it for.It’s not like it’s actually stealing and just ripping off the art directly or using it for any dirty motives.
@@natv6294 Problem with that is that there is not a single possible way for that information to not be readily available to anyone that wants to take it. It's the underlying problem about sharing your own work. It's the only way to get value on the web, but you are giving it away for free, forever, with no way of getting it back.
I don’t know how you’re having such bad luck with this. I’ve literally tricked people into thinking I’m on vacation at a summer mansion because the images were so realistic only to reveal they were actually AI generated. I also noticed it’s really good at making orangutans for some reason
I find that this art bot is actually on the lower end of the technical spectrum which is really terrifying, midjourney bot is VERY technically advanced in comparison
5:43 you can see his face when he realizes the abomination on the screen 😭 I love how he didn’t say anything at first you can just tell how he felt by his face 😂
Ai is cool and interesting but also terrifying cause you know the second it's even somewhat viable corporations will jump at the chance to fire human artists for ai, you don't have to pay ai, ai won't complain about it's human rights being violated and it being treated like shit, ai won't fight back or try to have any creative control, ect.
As trent kainuga already discussed in a video, nothing will happen to artists, we’ll just be able to work faster by using the AI to help us. This is just another case of homemade mass hysteria.
I've already started seeing "artists" selling works that were, at least for me, very much AI-generated and them swearing it isn't. But an artist will always have their own unique patterns or "moodset" in their art that's hard to avoid. AI art's patterns have noticeable discrepancies that wouldn't be simple artist mistakes or decisions.
lol, it's kind of scary then to be living in a world where we will have to argue about what is & isn't AI generated art... I mean, I guess it won't really matter for most people, but for those who do get into that type of discussion I imagine there will be a lot of artists who get called out as using AI when they really didn't, as well as artists who do just get away with it.
@@CircumSamurai I imagine there will be like a digital fingerptint on used programs at some point, to dignify what was handdrawn at least Most artists use software these day, i ca imagine this being a possibility
I'd say just don't think about it too much and instead focus on refining skills and experimenting with new ideas. In the end there will still be people who like and purchase your artworks because of you, not how profitable they are.
@@Mike_Dubayou because this will put artists out of a job and then it'll spread to books, films, TV shows, songs, games. Nothing will be made by humans anymore
As another comment said, Midjourney is insane with faces. It can produce what looks like legit photos of people. And portraits of people are almost always on point
I like AI art because it can be used as an inspiration tool. edit: The reason its not going to replace artists is the same with AI and radiologists, you still need an expert to conduct the work otherwise there can be errors. If we leave AI do its own thing the data will get more and more "corroded"
Oh my god all the bot replies on this video are going to drive me insane but anyways- YEA it can be incredibly good for an inspiration, reference and concept art tool. Especially for environments. I'd love to use these AIs to try and generate room and city design concepts. A lot of artists see AI as something that will take their jobs but I personally think it's going to make our jobs easier, especially independent artists that don't have a team of people to help them. Edit: And honestly, depending on the job the artist has, they will at least be commissioned even IF the AI can make very good art because people usually commission artists for the STYLE. So if the artist has a more unique style the AI can't replicate it completely. At least that's what I'm expecting.
So I'm assuming that these AIs just take existing art with related tags from a massive image search and mashes it all together. Which makes it even sadder because its not just phasing out real artists, it's doing it using their own works right?
Back then we thought artists will be the last one to be prevail against AI advancement yet they're the first one to be somewhat replaced (outside of manufacturing jobs)
This is so scary to me as someone who is passionate about a lot of forms of art… there is nothing more human than art to me… AI art is like the exact opposite of what art is at its core.
What is art other than humans creating their own version of things that they're exposed to. Whether it's sights or emotions or ideas etc. We take something we experience internally or externally and put it into sound or a visual. All this AI does is the exact same thing, takes things it is exposed to and creates it's own version of it. Just the fact alone that humans made a machine capable of such an act is art in itself.
This AI art thing makes me worried for what little future of a career I had in art. Honestly looking to go back to school to try and get a degree in something that I could actually have a career in, but it’s starting to become nearly impossible
As an artist I can confirm this makes me regret my career choices and hobbies. To realize how easily replaceable your are, and by a machine at that, makes you feel pretty unimportant
i don't think that things like this are going to get rid of artists, just like the invention of the synthesizer didn't get rid of musicians. Artists are just going to have to learn how to leverage these technologies (generate, tweak, composite ai generated art) in order to produce even higher quality samples, just like musicians leverage automated music in their production.
This is the most hopeful/agreeable positive take here, finally can see an argument for this rather than more vague statements about how AI wouldn’t replace humans, or humans can use AI for inspiration. That comparison made it click. I’m still unhopeful about it but good take 👍
@@idontcheckmynotifications something that also helps me is that even though AI is super good at copying/imitating, it will NEVER be able to create anything that has meaning beyond the prompts it’s being given. That’s where the human element will never die. So while this might be able to replace artists who draw for commission, it won’t replace an artist who is drawing to represent something or send a message
Not comparable, considering AI will replace musicans too. There actually is nothing from history comparable to this, since all technology replacing jobs in the past has been manual labor and tedious tasks. This time it's replacing what makes humans special, or so we thought. Not any time soon, but it'll be slow going, maybe in a few decades as the technology gets better and better. Short term, Ai will simply augment art. So we should enjoy it while it lasts.
I think it does favor a certain art style though, it'd be easier to work with AI images if you're going for something that looks quite abstract or realistic- I can see people using it for album covers instead of hiring artists to design one, for example. But it'd be harder to work with if you want something like several drawings in a consistent style for a childrens storybook. A lot of comic and character artists use 3D models when they want to draw props or scenery, maybe it'll just be used like that, but I also think it's not far fetched to think it'll take jobs from people. A lot of clients would rather have the cheaper cost + quick turnaround time
As someone who can develop games, and create music for them, my only weakness is art. Back in the day, I would normally I would need to commission an artist to get my artwork done (2d sprites etc), but now, albeit with a bit of tweaking, I can consistently get game art assets WITHOUT having to wrestle with commissioning / creative licenses etc. It's a scary thought... and yet it is quite liberating. I'm sorry, dear artists... but this is the future... and it is bleak @_@
@@rwholemilkisgood5050 what purpose do humans have RIGHT NOW? the answer was and is none. people have never had a purpose, they make their own. the fact that a robot can outperform everyone in the world at chess doesn't stop people from playing chess, does it?
@@christophkogler6220 chess is a sport played for fun. art is a product sold for money. if an ai can produce high quality art almost instantly and for free, then why would anyone hire an actual artist?
No matter what artwork that comes from a human is more valuable due to the fact that as hard as a human tries to replicate artwork, it will have its unique imperfections. Which makes each art piece rarer
as someone who is studying art, seeing AI artists claim they are not stealing art, and telling artists to "get over it", while also trying to claim prompts as their intellectual properties because "it takes skill to write good prompts" is very sad and scary
@@scubatuba1083 no reason to be scared, don't worry. Specific commissions, animations, UI and character modeling are far from being taken over by an AI.
A lot of people here are comparing "AI art replacing human art" to "cars replacing horses". To be honest, I don't think that comparison works for a couple of reasons. Number one, transportation was a practical need and art is a creative endeavour. When photography came into the scene, it did not kill art. It changed it for sure - but artists quickly adapted and explored other aspects of the field via cubism, fauvism, pop art, etc. Art is not finite. Art shifts and adapts to changes in society. Art has always done this. It's flexible because, unlike transporation, art is subjective and extremely personal. The second reason the comparison doesn't work is because digital art is only a small slice of what art is and *will be*. It doesn't take into account traditional art, personal comics that people make, personal storytelling via animations and so on. So, while I believe that AI art will take a lot of *digital* jobs from artists, in the long run, I believe artists will still be able to find a way to adapt and make a living. Nowadays, especially with social media, it would seem to me that most artists are able to build a following because of their unique style and story. It's their personality, background and their *processes* that attracts people. This is true for people like Kim Gung Gi, Stan Prokopenko and even smaller artists that do fan art and have a small but loyal following. Just look at TikTok and Instagram Reels. People love seeing the process of creating art and not just the art itself. People love following the artist. Not to mention there are a lot of popular artists that tell personal stories via comics, animations, streams and tutorials. A more fitting comparison would actually be the use of A.I. in chess. In chess, the computer can outplay Magnus Carlsen by being able to calculate a lot of positions and variations in a short period of time and find the best move each and every turn. But, given the choice, will chess fans watch Stockfish vs AlphaZero (two chess programs) over Magnus Carlsen and Ian Nepomniachtchi in a world championship match? No, of course not. Because chess isn't a practical endeavour to find the best robot that can play the chess. It's about pushing the human brain and seeing who among us is the best, the most creative, the most daring, the most prepared and the most calm under pressure. Just as art is about pushing the creative mind and pushing human expression to its limits. A.I. cannot tell personal stories the same way humans do. It cannot connect to humans as deeply as other humans can. A.I. can reproduce the art, but it cannot produce an artist.
To anyone graduated from college with an art degree and complain about the technology replicating and combining art. Isn't that the same for older artists? They follow a certain style and make their own unique versions, and by replicating and sometimes combining subjects into something new. And this is coming from someone whose art knowledge is only at a high school level. If you, as an artist, just keep complaining and scared about technology, what are you seriously doing? Experiment. Try different things. Or better yet, adapt and use those AI drawings as an inspiration to draw something new based of it. Those AI drawings are basically ideas/dreams.
even if human soul was a factor in art creation for some reason, whats so bad about it? do we really wanna turn this world into concrete block of commercial shithole where everything needs to be made as easily as possible for as high as you can go? there's nothing wrong in some things having human part in it, especially when it comes to creativity
" A.I. cannot tell personal stories the same way humans do. It cannot connect to humans as deeply as other humans can. A.I. can reproduce the art, but it cannot produce an artist. " YET
I work a blue collar job, and I was told for years that my job would be lost to automation, but seeing how the conversation has shifted as AI as advanced much faster than robotics is interesting to say the least.
10 years? A collegue of me and I had a animation film project in our second semester in art school and we tried to generate backgrounds with AI because the project was due in 2 days and we didn't know what to do. We ended up repainting stock imagery because the AI art was so ass. That was not even a year ago. The AI art improved in ways unspeakable. This shit will happen in 1-2 years tops.
Ik this is kinda scary for people who make art for a living . But for me personally it can never replace the art that I made myself. However good the art made by the AI be it still wont be as special as the art that I put all my love and effort into , it can never give the feeling of completing a piece that I have been working for a long time. Its special because "I" made it. Edit- No I don't do art for a living it's just a hobby.
good for you, but how about getting your job pulled from under you hm? and you really think others will care about how we feel about our art? no. they wont. theyll get it for free and they wont care about human touches
The people replying to you are so heartless despite mostly likely paying and consuming art products and other art-related endorsements. Literally just about everything in this world would be art: advertisements, video games, comics, car designs, etc. yet go on to say that you need get a "real job" or "cope" or some dumbahhhh shi like that even though they literally endorse in human-made art 💀its as if they hate that they had no talent nor skill so they sh!!t on people who's jobs are related to art
@@vismattress5760 I still don’t understand why this would be truly bad anyway. Why can’t we democratize art? For centuries, hell millennia, only a small sub-sect of humanity has had the capacity to develop art. It was a beautiful form of expression that only the genetically lucky can use. But now we are finally seeing a shortening of that gap. Eventually everyone will be able to recreate those images in their head. Whether it be landscapes, character design, even porn. And it doesn’t (necessarily) have to be hidden behind a paywall. I don’t hate what artists do. I mean I’m not going to lie a good portion of them are assholes, but I appreciate their work. I love art history in fact. But I cannot deny the jealousy I have for them. Why was I denied that special something? It’s very similar to envy relating to super geniuses. Why couldn’t I be born as smart as einstein or hawkins? Well, maybe in the future we’ll have microchips in our brains that increase IQ. Then everyone can be smart. Or beautiful people. Plastic surgery and CRISPR is getting better too (Although to be fair, beauty standards do change to a degree over time). I know that sounds scary. “If everyone is special then no one is”. But I really don’t think that’s an issue. Why is it bad that everyone can be more equal to one another? Should those who suck due to things outside of their control just suck it up like they have since the dawn of humanity?
@@gvd72 theres no special something. thats a myth and a lie. art takes practice and practice. dont ever believe the "natural talent" crap. its hard work but its achievable for EVERYONE. its never outside of anyones control. they just dont seem to want it hard enough.
i’m a writer so we’re kind of in the same realm of creativity, aren’t you more worried about your art not having meaning? if an ai can generate it in a couple clicks, what need does your art have to exist?
@@tommytwo-times9053 that’s absolutely scary, but i think the general population has greater respect for art made by actual people than a capitalist machine edit: i was wrong
More likely artists will just start using the AI to greatly speed up their process and will use it as a tool where they can generate what they need and then just make tweaks to it or take ideas from it. Companies will always require a certain human aspect that can make changes and perfect whatever the vision is. It's very unlikely companies will be able to just generate exactly what they want/what they're looking for consistently without any issue. They will still need humans to flesh things out and mold the images in specific ways.
@@bestieswithtesties more likely companies will ask what's the point of hiring an artist when they can ask an unpaid internet to type a few words into a computer program
The spongebod descriptor literally just painted the background in a deep yellow 10:30 I also feel like maybe it just takes a larger percentage of focus on what is put in the prompt first
As a professional concept artist. Before AI, when given a task, I tend to just sketch out my ideas really quickly and polish it later once it's approved. Now, AI sometimes (very rarely) helps with the polishing stage. I think AI somewhat helps with amateur and or even non artists getting ideas across. But tbh 90% professional concept artists use 3D so much that it's hard for AI to take over imo. The 10% of them are super duper awesome artist that the AI is trying to copy. So... Yeah no worries if you know 3D
i finally tried this out for serious actual dope pictures to use for covers for music and i was happy with all my results, i got alot of jhonen vasquez and tim burton art and im so happy i can get pictures with those styles because i LOVE that shit
It literally cannot since an ai needs real art to create these outcomes. And no artist is willing to give their art up so people can create free version of their work. What you see here is a whole lot of stolen art mixed and spat out but these ais
@@nogb8367 If you understood anything about AI art, or the process behind this, you wouldn't say that. It doesn't "steal" art, it just analyzes it, and turns it into data. It's not stealing art, it's learning, improving, taking inspiration, etc. to create art by its own data.
@@pzychho of course tech fetishists would try their hardest to use mental gymnastics to explain theft away. Saying you feeding peoples are so the ai turns it into "data" is the same logic people use to launder money through an extra step. Also an artwork on a screen is technically already "data" so it's just talentless hacks trying to moralize their theft
@@pzychho an ai is FED data, the hack developer needs to buy the rights to a work to be able to FEED it to his ai. The ai is not sentient. It's funny how you mention not knowing about ai when you lack basic human comprehention. It's either that you're a prick who doesn't care about theft, or a troglodyte who can put two and two together. Your choice 🤷
This AI is more of a test of your descriptive writing skills if anything lmao, it's already been known that it takes actual work from actual artists and photobashes them to suit the descriptions. It still lacks character and messes up proportions though. But alas, artists are just constantly getting fucked oof, first the game and animations industry, NFTs, Clip Studio going subscription based, and now its AI
If you ever do this again I'd recommend using the euler ancestral sampler with a step size of 40, and at the same time increasing the number of images generated
One of the secrets to getting good AI art generation is always make multiple attempts. And make variations on something close. Nothing you see online is fully AI art. It’s a human and AI bouncing back and forth through many iterations until the human is satisfied.
I think it's a tool talented artists will be able to use to save a lot of time. Especially the tools that work from images rather than text prompts. If AI gets good enough to do things like completing backgrounds, color shading and line-smoothing consistently.. and can be taught to use an approximation of the style of the person using it, those artists can cut out 90% of the work and focus more on composition and fine-tuning. One could snap a picture of the comic book panels you sketched in your notebook during math class and load them up in a few seconds. Then, edit the ai generated scene to how you want it.. inject specific characters on top of generic actors in the scene and get the AI to reprocess everything, cleaning up all the rough edges and blur marks.. etc.
That's exactly what I thought! I would love, love, love to have a digital background artist so I can focus more on the extra important parts! It'll be awesome for indie animation
@@kiwi6421 Having played around with stable diffusion a bit over the last few days, I think it can do distant "stock" backgrounds pretty well, (a generic nature backdrop, distant mountains, a city skyline, etc) and it can do more specific backgrounds decently if you give it an image to work off of. It does a poor job of preserving details though, and seems to just make new ones up. If you have a specific object in your image it might get replaced with a different object. Might be hard to get it to mesh with your style though. Figures usually have bad shadowing, bad symmetry, bad anatomy. There can be extra joints, muscles or even limbs. It almost never does hands even remotely correctly. The closer you look the more obvious it becomes that the program has no real understanding of proportions, depth, shadows, anatomy, etc.
Rip artists, I imagine it’s only a decade or two before a computer can spit out an entire 12 episode series in a day based on a single sentence prompt with six descriptors
News on AI: Creative fields will be the least impacted in following years by AI AI Art: *generates an art of a Mr Krabs playing the tiniest violin in the world*
not only does AI steal from artist, it’s the beginning of a much bigger problem. I encourage everyone to watch the video “ The end of art: an argument against image AIs” Putting the discussion about how harmful AIs are to actual artists, people defending AI saying it’s so much work to put in prompts, don’t realize they’re just a pawn in the game. Every time you type in a prompt, and then choose the image that suits you best, you train the AI to find out what you like, and what the best version of your idea is. What makes you think an AI will need humans to write a prompt, when thousands of people are feeding it data by creating their own images right now. Soon enough AI will write prompts based on current Internet events, as well as your private information, and create images, shows, etc based on it. Steven says it in his video best, “The AIs will be very capable on running on autopilot, and it will get just as good at telling stories as they are at creating imagines and videos. They will produce novels, essays, and scripts in amounts that can fill the library of Babel, each piece a composit of half quotations and unattributed swiping. All this autogenerated text can be processed by the imagine and video AIs to generate long format media and the cycle will be complete. Self contained, and human free” “We all feel a little uncomfortable when our phone shows us an add for something we mentioned to our friend over dinner, but what happens when it shows you a movie it made just for you about your breakup?” “Our ambient digital systems already have intimate access to so many of the inputs that define our taste, in some sense, we sold our souls long ago” All the people defending AI right now will realize the trap they created for themselves when it’s too late
So this is an argument against art ai right cause ai in different fields don’t spell doom for others. Say games if AI could make say a decent fps this would mean devs don’t have to work for big corporations & can give an affordable product to customers. Also why couldn’t artists ban together have an art ai that shows all the art it references and even pay the fellow artists. Also the listing things you like or are interested in already happens without ai not saying that’s good but it not something ai started.what about an ai that masks artists images so it can be stolen.and back to the game devs ai idea if ai benefits the workers should it still be band & how would you ban it
and on the other hand, the pro-artist activists are also the ones that licks corporate boots while using mass misinformation campaigns to take over the AI and, as a byproduct, artistic freedom. Look at how CAA, an "NPO" sponsored by anti-artist companies like Disney and Netflix, is pro-copyright and want to kill everything, including open-source solutions and fair use. In the end it's just 1 corpo cluster fighting another corpo cluster and both the artists and AI enthusiasts (and perhaps also researchers) are the victims. This could end up badly and both sides will be responsible for it.
(thanks RU-vid for deleting my comment xd) Unfortunately there already is a website that generates AI fursonas/headshots (can’t say the link bc RU-vid) We are doomed I guess
@@navalemon Noooo my suspiciously wealthy furry clientele!!! Tbf, as an artist, I know most commission clients commission for the sole reason of having an artist's unique work. As scary as ai can seem, I'm a bit optimistic that artists aren't ultimately doomed.
@@GodlyAwesome haven't touched that site in ages, but good on them! For a site dedicated to user created works, it wouldn't be the best to have ai exclusively created works fill the pages.
I am a classical artist. I use paint and pencils and other physical mediums to create art. I don't really have a problem with ai art though. In fact, I recently started making it myself! It's a fun hobby and it's cool to see how the ai interprets and makes my prompts come together. It's really fun to play around with. I don't really feel threatened by it, and I actually use what they come up with as references and inspiration for my own art. I think it's really cool as long as it isn't being submitted in competitions or museums as "real art"
yeah + the fact that is the only thing that can make art close to the greatest painters in the world apart from, well.. Even greater painters, shows how incredible humans are. It doesn't invalidate artists, it makes them more impressive imo
I have a problem with them using databases of living artists that did not consent. They coding actual artist’s name in their prompts to get a certain style and that’s ridiculous. Basically watch out with these rouge companies hiding behind “Ai” or “research purposes” when in reality it’s for commercial gains and not “democratise art” because they didn’t even gave the artists the stole from the option to opt it or out. It didn’t had to go this way and the law are slow when it comes to technology but until then watch out for your data and don’t put your art online, unfortunately you will have no saying if it’s stolen
11:30.. Yeh.. That looks like it came out straight from a super famous expert artist that does only this for a living and literally mastered that style. MAD
Watching Charlie’s streams is like going to your one friend’s house with The Computer and doing stupid things online for gits and shiggles. It’s like I’m really there
I really love the thought of how AI art could help indie productions. AI generated art could supply material for artists to build off of. AI generated music could be awesome for musicians to build up off of. Especially if that technology is free and open source.
