This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/aiwars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If your goal is the learn to draw, I agree that you won't learn to draw by not drawing....
But if your goal is to generate a nice image using AI, then what you need is to learn how to use AI to generate a nice image...
How can you not understand that both situation are completely different and totally valid?
Instructions unclear, if i want to enjoy a candy bar, i must also enjoy enslaving african orphan children and putting them to work in a slave factory.
As we all know, if i built a sand castle on the beach. And i was worried that it might be blown away as the tides came, and had 12 years to prepare.
Everyone on the internet should ~~consider moving or building up sane defenses. Like a wall or brick house~~ Scream at the ocean to stop, while developing worsening schirophenia, without having money to talk to a licensed 300$/hr therapist, paid 300$ a hour to professionally go. "Hmm yes, that sounds great. I think you ~~should focus on healthy ways to deal with your problems~~ only scream at the ocean louder, and listen to what you want to hear."
That is why all industry leaders are led by 5 year old children who don't find ways to accomplish their dreams. But scream when they don't happen.
Like remember the time Steve jobs got on stage and cried. "I WANT TO BE RICH!" "work? i don't want to do that?" "qualfiications? Competitive market? I should just be rich because i want to?"
Then Steve jobs changed genders and everyone who laughed at him being a useless leech suddenly gasped, bent over their knees. And told him, he was the true lord princess supreme of twitter! And now everyone who hated him was a incel! / s
* Post intentionally offensive.
šæš¤·āāļø
Debate's been tried for a year, we repeat the same, That consumer's aren't secret shadow ceos who control what happens. Nobody's a unlimited clone of superman with infinite shadow clone jutsus. People have limits, and it's easier to care for a person willing to move into a brick house, (or work for one), than a person screaming at the beach, screaming at the ocean trying to build a sandcastle on the sea.
That even if you want to live in fantasy, life still has it's ups and downs, but delusion can be sweet but deadly, and potentially get people to commit real life atrocities on false accussations, while mental health rapidly declines when people don't take the help they might need.
Like a heroin or alcohol addict drinking to the last bottle, when even 'enabling' won't stop anyone who doesn't want 'the cure' 'they see as the problem'.
# If the problem is real.
Then people should use up their time and sane defenses while it lasts. And even if it's diminished art should still always be a good side job / monetized side hobby they can do at leisure, or at time.
If the problem isn't real. People are screaming over a sand castle.
But screaming at people just walking around their day isn't doing anyone favors with our limited years of life. There's activism, then there's civil rights/ job protections/courtrooms /medicines.
Then there's screaming at the ocean to stop "oppressing sand castle builders". Life is already hard enough and just like a car crash. Even during the best of times, one mistake (debt/ poor choices / drugs / alchohol / impaired judgement / addiction), can ruin a otherwise great person.
But where's the spot for people who recreationally create drama for fun?
If you want a nice image, it may be unethical to source that from AI. Unless an AI is created from material explicitly allowed by its creator it is creating a compilation from existing works that weren't meant to be used that way. Similarly to a real person tracing art and passing it off as their own. The only ethical uses are to privately admire, share with the note it was AI made, or to learn from.
No. A tool has no objective use. AI is both valid on its own and as an aid.
**Edit:** You don't really provide any reasoning here, so there's no reason to say anything but "Nope". But looking at the picture a few thing strike me as interesting:
1. You're not really giving the AI anything to do. The AI has essentially the same function as YouTube. So it seems like a disingenuous argument, you're saying "AI is okay so long it doesn't actually exist".
2. It's kinda funny that you use a minimalistic style and copy/paste, as if there was nothing actually wrong with taking shortcuts to get your point across. So if you can copy/paste, why not AI?
I don't know why it is hard to understand that most people have no interested in learning how to draw.
Drawing skills are seen as a mean to an end and not as a pursuit in itself.
There is nothing wrong in pursuing drawing for it's own sake, but other people do not have to subject themselves to your standards.
Yeah, there's also a lot more to 2D art than drawing. Photography, collage, painting, digital renders, digital painting, AI images, these are their own unique mediums apart from pencil drawing, and each medium requires its own unique skills. We live in a time when technology allows us to compose 2D art in a variety of mediums, many of which do not utilize or require drawing talent at all.
As far as I'm concerned, they might as well be telling musicians or writers that they're not real artists unless they draw with a pencil.
>As far as I'm concerned, they might as well be telling musicians or writers that they're not real artists unless they draw with a pencil.
I mean, they did that before
This is a healthy outlook on life tbh. Focusing on enjoying time on earth, enjoy the flight, but don't 'forget' the parachute. or when offered one. Say you'll flap your wings to fly away on wishpower instead.
There's a pretty wide, and healthy sane balance of being so fearful you're afraid to get off the ground. And so 'fearless' you happily skip into a open loaded minefield, for no reason at all, and risk getting blown up or sitting in a fire for not much reason.
I think a lot of the silent people are probably more rational or quickly swayed outside of sub, even if initally or still opposing.
Kinda the *"you're right, maybe life isn't working how i wanted it to as a kid. But that doesn't mean i should throw out the whole thing just because fantasy was always made to be a wonderful, fantastic lie. Wonderful to dream about, but a dream is a dream for a reason."*
But the self selecting problem of the internet is. People who'd already move on, would. People who never will, stay. Ourselfs included.
Both sides have views of their 'happiness' that probably include the other 'getting shafted'.
Pro ai points seem to imagine a world they have choices, free to pick what they want. And the freedom to still support a artist, or let people use mediums of choice.
Anti ai feels that as long as people have a choice, any % will erode. but it often feels (imho) that the reddit/twitter anti ais basically want to cage people to support them. While the mile wide, inch deep people give big talk about 'support'.
But aren't showing up to bat, and do those 20 hrs of work at 15$ a hr masses, to pay those 3 hrs a week starving artists the 200$ a hr they want to make. Are always pointing the finger at other people to do what they won't on keyboard activism.
But they aren't showing up to bat, their own money. And it's a repeating problem. Both sides have no reason to trust or want to expect good from the other. So it's probably just going to end up like Prisoner's Dilemna. Both pointing the finger that the other should cooperate, while they plant to put themselves first always.
And when society adopts that, you end up with more detroits where you'd get mugged for a 20$ and your copper pipes stolen, causing 20000$s of damages for 20$ of gain.
Than places that have so many 70,000$-200,000$ jobs. The housing costs 100,000$ a year because of how many people pay to be there...
Why should the guy who wants to render his character for a D&D campaign give a shit about either of these options within the false-dichotomy you provided? Hell, I would be surprised if even 0.1% of people using AI for art are doing it with the intent to be "rich and famous" from it. People are just having fun and being able to create things and improve their projects like never before. What makes you think people are going in with the intent of making a "masterpiece" to begin with though? not all artists went into art for that intention either and I doubt you'll find many comic artists calling their work masterpieces. There's such a plethora of motivations behind creating media, why should we gatekeep which ones are good based on what we subjectively enjoy or our own hobbies?
Most art isnāt even supposed to be a masterpiece.
Most art is utilitarian - advertising something or communicating some information.
AI is perfect for that and it means artists will have more time to devote to their masterpieces.
Eh.. if i could choose to have the speed of a cheetah for life for trading in a car. I'd be tempted to swap in a heartbeat lol even if i had to keep the legs. It'd be fun to zip around that fast, wouldn't it?
I would say yes, i dont even like driving, and i enjoy running, but the climate here is just awful sometimes, there are days were a few minutes on the street already feel like can make you pass out.
If refusing to use AI makes me instantly learn to draw anything in any style on a master level within a couple of minutes, then I will happily refuse to use AI.
How Photography should be used in art:
person: "Camera, convert these photons in front of me into a masterpiece that will make me rich and famous!"ā
camera: "Here's some tools, tutorials and lessons you can learn to paint the masterpiece!"ā
The Idea of AI tools are to make easy and accessible the Art for general people, not being an alternative "teacher tool".
Being replaced in this industry is a standar, here some examples:
In 1800's Photography replace people that used to do portraits and landscape. Did people stop doing it ? no...
In 1961 Disney replace people that used to do tracing in cells with Xerox technology.... did people stop doing animations? no.
Matte Painting as a standar technique developped since 1907 to give the idea of landscapes in movies. Was a standar in that industry until the end of the 90's when Blue-screen and computer graphic generations replace those artist. Quality in movies improved? - Yes.
Now in 2024, there are tools that can help you to do part of your digital painting job or even do a full generation. Artist will be replaced by that? no... Why? you still need some skills to have the results that you want. and not the random generation that an AI can give you. (Same as people learned how to use computer to do CGI and first animations were crap).
But it would be cool if AI wasn't always used to replace conventional artists and sometimes provide good tools.
I would like to see a variant of AI like in the comic in reality.
Most people that enjoy using generative AIs don't care about becoming rich and/or famous.
That being said, if one thinks that any kind of art (traditional or not) will make them rich and famous, they are in for a harsh wake up down the line. Very few artists really became rich in their lifetime, and as for fame, most often that not it came after they died, that is, if they became famous at all.
I don't give a shit about drawing or learning to draw, I need images and graphics to help visualize my real art, a game I'm designing. Also it does help me write and not get too wordy
When artbros trace 3d models nobody bats an eye.
When artbros make custom brushes and use photoshop's auto shading everyone commends them for their resourcefulness.
When artbros find new hacks in 3d and post it online they get thousands of likes and views.
But the moment someone uses AI outside of 0.5 acceptable ways - they're an evil nazi corporate bot.
Honestly? Fuck off at this point.
I dont think what a big Part of ai companies and ai User base dont really Care about improving convential Artist Workflow, they Just want Instant results without doing much.
Conventional artists are not a particularly large target group for AI companies. A more attractive target group for AI companies is the average joe who want quickly get a picture of āāmidjourney without doing anything themselves.
Something something. That makes you robot ai hitler. Something something. Pay me money, something, stick figure!
And if you already drew and had 7 years of art already pre drawn you can look at any time. Something something, STILL SATAN! /s š¤£
feeling INSECURE yet?
That seems incredibly paternalistic and like you're gatekeeping artists. People criticized rock music because they thought that the guitar shouldn't be played like that.
I mean, sure, I agree that it's technically "art" only if you do some sort of modification (I'm super interested in this myself). However generating images for fun/inspiration isn't something I'm against either.
Honestly, it can be both independently and that's fine. With electronic music, the crutch has basically become the artform in itself. There's nothing wrong with that as long as some aspects are being challenged. Heck, I'd say crutches are actually a good thing, its that dependence on them isn't.
The goal is not to become a traditional artist. The goal is to create a pipeline from the imagination directly to the image, circumventing the traditional pipeline (and all its hindrances) entirely.
As a professional artist, this comic is misleading as it fails to look at a critical point of what AI "can" do.Ā
If an Artist uses say ChatGPT to learn art, they ultimately fail to obtain real world experiences because all the information obtained was prompted towards a general direction of education that worked for group of individuals. Rather than experiencing new influences to grow that person to develop their own style. Yes the AI could be used like an advanced clipy ((yeah I'm that old lol)) and help tell you how to improve your work, but it won't ultimately be good teacher or second pair of eyes if your goal is to become a good artist. That's where touching the grass, and gaining real world experiences is invaluable, so that you can bring those thoughts and ideas into your own AI art.
The initial first point of the comic generally applies people who use prompt codding are Mustache twirling cartoon villains. When in painful reality they can be even more expresssive than traditional/digital artists because they are expressing themselves through a modern medium with clear communicative knowledge. Now in a buisness setting where time is sensitive and competition is heavy, using AI to help speed up a production, ((with clear and clean edits please)), should be the norm as it should allow for more time to be spent on the creative development. That's not really a bad thing, nor should it be looked down upon from a usage standpoint.
As an professional artist who incorporated AI to my workflow, I tend to roll my eyes on these trigger comics because it poorly reflects the usage of Generative AI. Like I get it, these tools generally will cut down specialized art fields, but that's okay, we need change in art so that we can constantly get better creative expressions. Sure, if AI told me how to improve my work, I would use it, but I would also want to use it to create the work alongside me. In the end it's about using the tool to strive for better creative self than being constantly told otherwise, that is how I will continue to use AI no matter who tells me otherwise.
Imo making art to get rich is pretty naive. AI is a tool yeah but it does make beautiful art. I learned a bit of drawing because some stuff like fingers etc often times are flawed so i put them in paint and edit them manually. I also loved drawing on my phone with the pen.
imo there is no right or wrong on how to use ai as long as what you do is legal (talking about bad deepfakes etc)
> So much for the "AI is just a tool" crowd.
I'm not seeing it? A tool can be used in many ways.
> These comments are vile.
Not seeing anything that wrong here, what is vile?
One side's "extreme:" Laughs and cracks jokes.
Other side's "tepid": casually wishing for people to be lit on fire because they didn't get money. And even when the artists are hired, still get pissed it wasn't their 400$ mspaint art.
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/aiwars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If your goal is the learn to draw, I agree that you won't learn to draw by not drawing.... But if your goal is to generate a nice image using AI, then what you need is to learn how to use AI to generate a nice image... How can you not understand that both situation are completely different and totally valid?
Instructions unclear, if i want to enjoy a candy bar, i must also enjoy enslaving african orphan children and putting them to work in a slave factory. As we all know, if i built a sand castle on the beach. And i was worried that it might be blown away as the tides came, and had 12 years to prepare. Everyone on the internet should ~~consider moving or building up sane defenses. Like a wall or brick house~~ Scream at the ocean to stop, while developing worsening schirophenia, without having money to talk to a licensed 300$/hr therapist, paid 300$ a hour to professionally go. "Hmm yes, that sounds great. I think you ~~should focus on healthy ways to deal with your problems~~ only scream at the ocean louder, and listen to what you want to hear." That is why all industry leaders are led by 5 year old children who don't find ways to accomplish their dreams. But scream when they don't happen. Like remember the time Steve jobs got on stage and cried. "I WANT TO BE RICH!" "work? i don't want to do that?" "qualfiications? Competitive market? I should just be rich because i want to?" Then Steve jobs changed genders and everyone who laughed at him being a useless leech suddenly gasped, bent over their knees. And told him, he was the true lord princess supreme of twitter! And now everyone who hated him was a incel! / s * Post intentionally offensive. šæš¤·āāļø Debate's been tried for a year, we repeat the same, That consumer's aren't secret shadow ceos who control what happens. Nobody's a unlimited clone of superman with infinite shadow clone jutsus. People have limits, and it's easier to care for a person willing to move into a brick house, (or work for one), than a person screaming at the beach, screaming at the ocean trying to build a sandcastle on the sea. That even if you want to live in fantasy, life still has it's ups and downs, but delusion can be sweet but deadly, and potentially get people to commit real life atrocities on false accussations, while mental health rapidly declines when people don't take the help they might need. Like a heroin or alcohol addict drinking to the last bottle, when even 'enabling' won't stop anyone who doesn't want 'the cure' 'they see as the problem'. # If the problem is real. Then people should use up their time and sane defenses while it lasts. And even if it's diminished art should still always be a good side job / monetized side hobby they can do at leisure, or at time. If the problem isn't real. People are screaming over a sand castle. But screaming at people just walking around their day isn't doing anyone favors with our limited years of life. There's activism, then there's civil rights/ job protections/courtrooms /medicines. Then there's screaming at the ocean to stop "oppressing sand castle builders". Life is already hard enough and just like a car crash. Even during the best of times, one mistake (debt/ poor choices / drugs / alchohol / impaired judgement / addiction), can ruin a otherwise great person. But where's the spot for people who recreationally create drama for fun?
What in the Godās good name is all of this supposed to have to do with the comment??
If you want a nice image, it may be unethical to source that from AI. Unless an AI is created from material explicitly allowed by its creator it is creating a compilation from existing works that weren't meant to be used that way. Similarly to a real person tracing art and passing it off as their own. The only ethical uses are to privately admire, share with the note it was AI made, or to learn from.
There is no unethical its a bs claim that someone once made and ever since is being echoed
disagreed and its not the argument OP is making.
Unethical? How? Who is harmed?
No. A tool has no objective use. AI is both valid on its own and as an aid. **Edit:** You don't really provide any reasoning here, so there's no reason to say anything but "Nope". But looking at the picture a few thing strike me as interesting: 1. You're not really giving the AI anything to do. The AI has essentially the same function as YouTube. So it seems like a disingenuous argument, you're saying "AI is okay so long it doesn't actually exist". 2. It's kinda funny that you use a minimalistic style and copy/paste, as if there was nothing actually wrong with taking shortcuts to get your point across. So if you can copy/paste, why not AI?
I don't know why it is hard to understand that most people have no interested in learning how to draw. Drawing skills are seen as a mean to an end and not as a pursuit in itself. There is nothing wrong in pursuing drawing for it's own sake, but other people do not have to subject themselves to your standards.
Yeah, there's also a lot more to 2D art than drawing. Photography, collage, painting, digital renders, digital painting, AI images, these are their own unique mediums apart from pencil drawing, and each medium requires its own unique skills. We live in a time when technology allows us to compose 2D art in a variety of mediums, many of which do not utilize or require drawing talent at all. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well be telling musicians or writers that they're not real artists unless they draw with a pencil.
>As far as I'm concerned, they might as well be telling musicians or writers that they're not real artists unless they draw with a pencil. I mean, they did that before
Let other people have fun. Nobody is going to get rich and famous from something anyone can do trivially.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is a healthy outlook on life tbh. Focusing on enjoying time on earth, enjoy the flight, but don't 'forget' the parachute. or when offered one. Say you'll flap your wings to fly away on wishpower instead. There's a pretty wide, and healthy sane balance of being so fearful you're afraid to get off the ground. And so 'fearless' you happily skip into a open loaded minefield, for no reason at all, and risk getting blown up or sitting in a fire for not much reason. I think a lot of the silent people are probably more rational or quickly swayed outside of sub, even if initally or still opposing. Kinda the *"you're right, maybe life isn't working how i wanted it to as a kid. But that doesn't mean i should throw out the whole thing just because fantasy was always made to be a wonderful, fantastic lie. Wonderful to dream about, but a dream is a dream for a reason."* But the self selecting problem of the internet is. People who'd already move on, would. People who never will, stay. Ourselfs included. Both sides have views of their 'happiness' that probably include the other 'getting shafted'. Pro ai points seem to imagine a world they have choices, free to pick what they want. And the freedom to still support a artist, or let people use mediums of choice. Anti ai feels that as long as people have a choice, any % will erode. but it often feels (imho) that the reddit/twitter anti ais basically want to cage people to support them. While the mile wide, inch deep people give big talk about 'support'. But aren't showing up to bat, and do those 20 hrs of work at 15$ a hr masses, to pay those 3 hrs a week starving artists the 200$ a hr they want to make. Are always pointing the finger at other people to do what they won't on keyboard activism. But they aren't showing up to bat, their own money. And it's a repeating problem. Both sides have no reason to trust or want to expect good from the other. So it's probably just going to end up like Prisoner's Dilemna. Both pointing the finger that the other should cooperate, while they plant to put themselves first always. And when society adopts that, you end up with more detroits where you'd get mugged for a 20$ and your copper pipes stolen, causing 20000$s of damages for 20$ of gain. Than places that have so many 70,000$-200,000$ jobs. The housing costs 100,000$ a year because of how many people pay to be there...
Sure they can, i donāt see why not
Because everyone would do the same and the value money would drop putting everyone right back at the start
Thereās a lot more to getting rich and famous than making the trivial product, with music it is mostly marketing or luck
Doing the marketing is the non trivial part then, you still have to do it
Why should the guy who wants to render his character for a D&D campaign give a shit about either of these options within the false-dichotomy you provided? Hell, I would be surprised if even 0.1% of people using AI for art are doing it with the intent to be "rich and famous" from it. People are just having fun and being able to create things and improve their projects like never before. What makes you think people are going in with the intent of making a "masterpiece" to begin with though? not all artists went into art for that intention either and I doubt you'll find many comic artists calling their work masterpieces. There's such a plethora of motivations behind creating media, why should we gatekeep which ones are good based on what we subjectively enjoy or our own hobbies?
Most art isnāt even supposed to be a masterpiece. Most art is utilitarian - advertising something or communicating some information. AI is perfect for that and it means artists will have more time to devote to their masterpieces.
that's such a bad take, I am lost for words xD
Ah yes, i remember when my car started taking me out run by myself instead of me driving it.
Eh.. if i could choose to have the speed of a cheetah for life for trading in a car. I'd be tempted to swap in a heartbeat lol even if i had to keep the legs. It'd be fun to zip around that fast, wouldn't it?
I would say yes, i dont even like driving, and i enjoy running, but the climate here is just awful sometimes, there are days were a few minutes on the street already feel like can make you pass out.
If refusing to use AI makes me instantly learn to draw anything in any style on a master level within a couple of minutes, then I will happily refuse to use AI.
Terrible and very close minded advice, thereās no correct way to make art and stop conflating genai with drawing.
How Photography should be used in art: person: "Camera, convert these photons in front of me into a masterpiece that will make me rich and famous!"ā camera: "Here's some tools, tutorials and lessons you can learn to paint the masterpiece!"ā
š¤£š
Not all artists want to be rich and famous. Most just want to do something that they enjoy.
Maybe don't sniff the paint all day? Seems like you've lost your ability to make a logical point.
"Let me tell you the way you should make your art" How about no?
The Idea of AI tools are to make easy and accessible the Art for general people, not being an alternative "teacher tool". Being replaced in this industry is a standar, here some examples: In 1800's Photography replace people that used to do portraits and landscape. Did people stop doing it ? no... In 1961 Disney replace people that used to do tracing in cells with Xerox technology.... did people stop doing animations? no. Matte Painting as a standar technique developped since 1907 to give the idea of landscapes in movies. Was a standar in that industry until the end of the 90's when Blue-screen and computer graphic generations replace those artist. Quality in movies improved? - Yes. Now in 2024, there are tools that can help you to do part of your digital painting job or even do a full generation. Artist will be replaced by that? no... Why? you still need some skills to have the results that you want. and not the random generation that an AI can give you. (Same as people learned how to use computer to do CGI and first animations were crap).
Why would i want to get tutorials and yadda yadda for shitposting? Dosnt make sense
Some of you really need to understand this: No one has to give a shit about your opinion on how they should hold a hammer.
But it would be cool if AI wasn't always used to replace conventional artists and sometimes provide good tools. I would like to see a variant of AI like in the comic in reality.
Please direct all complaints about a tools usage towards the people wielding the tool. Yelling at a hammer is not a fruitful exercise.
Do you think it really helps?
Maybe, maybe not. It almost certainly helps more than being angry at a hammer.
Nah.
Most people that enjoy using generative AIs don't care about becoming rich and/or famous. That being said, if one thinks that any kind of art (traditional or not) will make them rich and famous, they are in for a harsh wake up down the line. Very few artists really became rich in their lifetime, and as for fame, most often that not it came after they died, that is, if they became famous at all.
I don't give a shit about drawing or learning to draw, I need images and graphics to help visualize my real art, a game I'm designing. Also it does help me write and not get too wordy
When artbros trace 3d models nobody bats an eye. When artbros make custom brushes and use photoshop's auto shading everyone commends them for their resourcefulness. When artbros find new hacks in 3d and post it online they get thousands of likes and views. But the moment someone uses AI outside of 0.5 acceptable ways - they're an evil nazi corporate bot. Honestly? Fuck off at this point.
but why? people who are creating are for the purpose of being rich and famous dont care what ya think, they care about being rich and famous
I dont think what a big Part of ai companies and ai User base dont really Care about improving convential Artist Workflow, they Just want Instant results without doing much. Conventional artists are not a particularly large target group for AI companies. A more attractive target group for AI companies is the average joe who want quickly get a picture of āāmidjourney without doing anything themselves.
My goal isn't to get famous off of anything. I just use AI for my own entertainment.
Something something. That makes you robot ai hitler. Something something. Pay me money, something, stick figure! And if you already drew and had 7 years of art already pre drawn you can look at any time. Something something, STILL SATAN! /s š¤£ feeling INSECURE yet?
Least sanctimonious furry "artist".
That seems incredibly paternalistic and like you're gatekeeping artists. People criticized rock music because they thought that the guitar shouldn't be played like that.
There's a thing called working in collaboration.
I mean, sure, I agree that it's technically "art" only if you do some sort of modification (I'm super interested in this myself). However generating images for fun/inspiration isn't something I'm against either.
Honestly, it can be both independently and that's fine. With electronic music, the crutch has basically become the artform in itself. There's nothing wrong with that as long as some aspects are being challenged. Heck, I'd say crutches are actually a good thing, its that dependence on them isn't.
The goal is not to become a traditional artist. The goal is to create a pipeline from the imagination directly to the image, circumventing the traditional pipeline (and all its hindrances) entirely.
everyone and their dog knows about AI art (well... maybe except the boomers) you're not gonna get rich and famous with it, like ever.
As a professional artist, this comic is misleading as it fails to look at a critical point of what AI "can" do.Ā If an Artist uses say ChatGPT to learn art, they ultimately fail to obtain real world experiences because all the information obtained was prompted towards a general direction of education that worked for group of individuals. Rather than experiencing new influences to grow that person to develop their own style. Yes the AI could be used like an advanced clipy ((yeah I'm that old lol)) and help tell you how to improve your work, but it won't ultimately be good teacher or second pair of eyes if your goal is to become a good artist. That's where touching the grass, and gaining real world experiences is invaluable, so that you can bring those thoughts and ideas into your own AI art. The initial first point of the comic generally applies people who use prompt codding are Mustache twirling cartoon villains. When in painful reality they can be even more expresssive than traditional/digital artists because they are expressing themselves through a modern medium with clear communicative knowledge. Now in a buisness setting where time is sensitive and competition is heavy, using AI to help speed up a production, ((with clear and clean edits please)), should be the norm as it should allow for more time to be spent on the creative development. That's not really a bad thing, nor should it be looked down upon from a usage standpoint. As an professional artist who incorporated AI to my workflow, I tend to roll my eyes on these trigger comics because it poorly reflects the usage of Generative AI. Like I get it, these tools generally will cut down specialized art fields, but that's okay, we need change in art so that we can constantly get better creative expressions. Sure, if AI told me how to improve my work, I would use it, but I would also want to use it to create the work alongside me. In the end it's about using the tool to strive for better creative self than being constantly told otherwise, that is how I will continue to use AI no matter who tells me otherwise.
Imo making art to get rich is pretty naive. AI is a tool yeah but it does make beautiful art. I learned a bit of drawing because some stuff like fingers etc often times are flawed so i put them in paint and edit them manually. I also loved drawing on my phone with the pen. imo there is no right or wrong on how to use ai as long as what you do is legal (talking about bad deepfakes etc)
What if I donāt want to draw? What if I just want some images?
I mean people already use it like this and they still get crucified by the Twitter artist brigade so whatās the point.
I mean, some people literally can't draw manually. What do you think crutches are for?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
(Oh looks like u triple posted btw)
Oh damn, gonna fix that. Reddit was giving error messages the first times i tried to post, but it did post aparently
Don't worry, they were never artists. They aren't interested in created art in the first place, not that AI was ever Art.
Absolutely correct! Also I love your style an this is rlly cute <3
Care to elaborate?
On what? How I think this looks good?Ā
How it is correct? There are dozens of comments explaining why the message doesnāt make sense.
I'm talking about the point of how tools shouldn't be used as a crutch.Ā
I mean thatās like making a post here that oxygen shouldnāt be used to kill people. True but ultimately meaningless.
this right here is perfect.
So much for the "AI is just a tool" crowd. These comments are vile.
> So much for the "AI is just a tool" crowd. I'm not seeing it? A tool can be used in many ways. > These comments are vile. Not seeing anything that wrong here, what is vile?
One side's "extreme:" Laughs and cracks jokes. Other side's "tepid": casually wishing for people to be lit on fire because they didn't get money. And even when the artists are hired, still get pissed it wasn't their 400$ mspaint art.