"I want AI to do my laundry and dishes so I can do art and writing, not AI to do art and writing so I can do dishes and laundry." I don't know who said that, but I think it's exactly right.
This was an amazing discussion, thank you both for this discussion. People always ask if i really drew that and I say everything you see was draw by my hand using an apple pencil. The fact that Procreate lets you do time lapse helps show people that t his is really someone making the picture. You watch my time lapse and you see me do and undo a lot haha. I think the thing that AI has a long way to come with is the randomness and imperfections of nature and humans. People spot AI fast because of it being too perfect and clean. I am always humbled by things I consider mistakes and others see it as character and features of my art. I can say that as a software engineer using tools to help you be more productive and creative is essential. I always look up code for a problem i am solving because others have been there and I can use that to help solve my problem. Also now I wanna see a tutorial on how you guys use AI tools for inspiration and research while doing your art. That would be an amazing topic.
I see all the time on social media where people comment on an image thinking it is real, when it is clearly AI generated, e.g an intricate flower garden, a cute bundle of puppies, a perfect horse etc. Andy Warhol said; If you're not trying to be real, you don't have to get it right. That's art.
Using some complex brush that produces all sorts of magic also has a bit of an AI feeling to me.I spent more time picking which brushes to use than I would spend on the actual painting when I stared with Procreate. James' tutorials for instance which is using simple airbrush type of brushes a lot of the time really freed me from this "pick the best brush" game that I played. Since favoring simple brushes I also feel that I understand much better what I'm doing and why certain brush strokes actually work.
Good topic to discuss, the worst thing AI feeds from artists who spend hours and days creating art. AI is a monster for artists in general, nothing like a human being creating art.
This was a really good discussion. I feel that AI can be very useful in the ways you described, but regarding creative work, I feel this is a very slippery slop that can lead to terrible things. The human species is a thinking and creative species. I worry about how if we lean on this, we could lose this. I feel businesses are pushing this as a cost savings vs. realizing the importance of what a person can bring to a project.
I wonder if at some point the websites/app/anything ai created, will all become so similar, that designers will be required again to do something new and unique with a humans creativity
@@TheSketchWave I’m have had conversations about this with team Members at work. My company is looking into AI for process and flow as well as understanding data. I have been pretty vocal about my comfort level of AI in our work.
I hope that AI doesn't become the norm for companies rather than human artists because you take away the human element that AI can't do. People that try to fob off AI generated pictures as "their art" clearly don't have any desire to do something for themselves which is almost sad. There'll always be a community that needs teachers because some of us really want to learn and improve and artists like yourselves really make a significant difference
Thank you 🙏 I think people will always be interested in what people can do and be impressed by humans. We watch people run and test their limits for example and so similarly I think we’ll always be interested in human abilities and limitations. We appreciate your support and input thank you
Another great topic gents! With regard to AI and in my work as a musician and photographer, I have never even used photoshop with my photos! I occasionally add some contrast or other edits that get me closer to my original concept of the photo but I never change it. As a musician I am a traditionalist. By that I mean that I never enjoyed the craziness in compositions of the 70s and 80s where you'd hear toilets flushing, and electrical sound waves. It was a fad which thankfully has passed. That said, if Bach had today's grand piano at his disposal I've no question that he would have utilized the dynamic palette, the sustain and "una corda" pedals, etc in his compositions. But I also guarantee you that Bach wouldn't have created in AI for a composition. AI discernment is going to be key in preventing wars and other conflicts. I have watched videos where famous people were filmed at a press conference saying things that were not their words but edited with AI to the point that you can't tell the difference. I even posted about it. Then realized that the person in question would never have said the things he did. All AI and very difficult to tell it apart. That's scary! I am so new to my art. I am happy doing what I'm doing and have doubted so many of the photos and artwork I am now seeing online. A quick question on reference photos. I do see photos online or my own photos and use them as reference. Glad to hear you say that's ok to do. However, what is the appropriate thing to do with regard to crediting the reference photo? Is a mention like, " painted with a reference photo found online" etc.? Is that necessary to do at all? Show the reference photo? Thanks! Oh and James, I'm the one who didn't realize I redid your 2019 Pine tree/Mountain tutorial that I originally painted in my third week in this new adventure and was able to compare me at three weeks vs. me at 7 months :). So cool to see the growth!
Ah great yes it was really good to see your improvement, very impressive keep it going. It is a bit scary in so many ways but it is something that won’t be going away anytime soon I guess so we will have to figure it out. In terms of using a reference, then if the image used is made by a person with a specific style or creative expression then yes give credit. If it’s a found photo of a landscape for example and you use it simply to refer to and not 100% copy I’d not worry about giving credit. It’s a tricky one, I’ve used photos I’ve found before and changed them a bit and not given credit on that basis. I think each reference and how you use it needs specific ways of crediting or not crediting however.
Joel: Do you want to get rid of us and have an AI teach you everything? Me: How do I know you’re not an AI? Maybe the real Joel is still in Turkey getting a sunburn. 😂
I don’t think that it’s a wrong time for digital art, it’s always had its challenges and indeed challengers. The best parts of digital art is the ability to really explore your ideas and easily communicate them. You can still learn a ton from digital art that will make you a better artist in every way.
References are so useful to really see details to check. I find my work turns out differently than the photo reference. AI generated references could be useful.
As a graphic designer and web developer AI is useful when needing multiple similar images for icons or symbols, but the making of a website is creative as well as technical so I agree with James about pride of work. AI will add to the commodification of my job that’s already happening. I’m worried about creativity
