4 ms·

Is it me or is this very depressing and scary? I always assumed the creative industries would be relatively resistant to automation, with more algorithmic jobs

Is it me or is this very depressing and scary? I always assumed the creative industries would be relatively resistant to automation, with more algorithmic jobs more easily replaceable. But with this you never need to buy stock pictures ever again, right? I saw several stock-picture-esque images of indistinguishable quality, and yet with incredible specificity to the user-supplied description.

Gigachad 4y ago
I thought this way originally but I have realised these tools are being used right now to massively amplify the creative output of individuals. AI text to voice tech is being used for a lot of hilarious content right now. I saw an image upscailer ai used in a 1 week project to rebuild a ps2 game to make it look modern. There is a long runway of human guided ai generation. Imagine if a single human was able to produce an entire animated TV show and all it took was good story telling skills without requiring 100 animators.
- elephanlemon 4y ago
  This is the right way to think about this IMO. Wouldn’t it be amazing if tools like this massively increased the scope of what is possible for a single artist? Something I think about a lot is video game creation - what if AI tools let you quickly create 3D objects and a world without a big, dedicated team of artists? (Check this out by Nvidia! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5j8I7V6blqM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5j8I7V6blqM)
  - lelandfe 4y ago
    Humorously, the narration on that video also sounds like an AI. The rising inflection on nearly every clause almost sounds like they’re recording every sentence separately
- antiterra 4y ago
  It’s similar to how photography grants anyone the technical ability to render a photo-realistic image, but the majority of photos we see are easily discarded from memory. It did put painters out of the portrait business, but also freed them from a realist ideal.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
andybak 4y ago
I find it amazing and exciting - but then I don't earn my living as an illustrator. I suspect there was similar wailings and gnashings of teeth when photography was invented. Humans adapt and it's us that decides what to value. We are quite fond of other people so tastes will alter to preserve that balance.
- bigDinosaur 4y ago
  There was a clear career path for anyone out of a job due to photographs though. Become a photographer. Which was a perfectly fine career for a very long time. It still is, really, despite the high quality cameras available to many people, because it requires artistic and technical skill. The career path for an artist trying to find something else while AI is developing at this pace is...less clear, and definitely scarier.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    Conceptual art remains a possibility.
  - notahacker 4y ago
    Photography didn't replace visual art though (which is just as well for painters and sculptors really, the skill needed to operate an early camera was pretty orthogonal). A subset doing the grunt work of simply recording details for prosperity had a competitive alternative, but even in the subset of image production where photorealism is considered desirable, people still commission painters for "lifelike" portraits and Canaletto renderings of Venice are still worth a fortune despite a near infinitude of similar images on Instagram. Same goes for this really, but perhaps even more so. It's impressive at producing eye-catching photos quality images of simple concepts you might use in advertising campaigns, and can do a good job of reproducing well defined cartoon styles. But the artists working in those sort of roles are already working digitally and using image libraries, and this is a massive productivity boost for them - dozens of "$brand on beach" concept images for no effort at all, and they'll still need all the retouching and layering and colour balancing and combining with other images. And as soon as the brief gets more precise about details of layout and colour scheme or what they want the model to look like, they're either back to their original creative flow or designing text prompts and curating images for the brief is an advanced skill in itself. Non artists can produce "good enough" images too (looks great for memes), but much like non-artists wielding cameras they're mostly satisfying their own whims rather than competing with the business of art
TaupeRanger 4y ago
Creative industries are still safe from automation. This doesn't do anything except generate nice stock art or album covers. Unless you're in those industries, there's nothing to worry about. It can't even do text.
- wubbert 4y ago
  >It can't even do text. An unpaid intern adding text to AI generated images would be trivial.
antiterra 4y ago
The quality is not indistinguishable to any deliberate observation. Plus, I think people will begin to casually notice how off it is once they become ‘trained’ as to the quirks of these images. That is, unless the quality of the generated images continues to steadily improve.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Every time I think I have come to understand the limits of ML generated content, I see something a few months later that completely surpasses what I believed possible.

Gigachad 4y ago

I thought this way originally but I have realised these tools are being used right now to massively amplify the creative output of individuals. AI text to voice tech is being used for a lot of hilarious content right now. I saw an image upscailer ai used in a 1 week project to rebuild a ps2 game to make it look modern. There is a long runway of human guided ai generation. Imagine if a single human was able to produce an entire animated TV show and all it took was good story telling skills without requiring 100 animators.

elephanlemon 4y ago
This is the right way to think about this IMO. Wouldn’t it be amazing if tools like this massively increased the scope of what is possible for a single artist? Something I think about a lot is video game creation - what if AI tools let you quickly create 3D objects and a world without a big, dedicated team of artists? (Check this out by Nvidia! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5j8I7V6blqM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5j8I7V6blqM)
- lelandfe 4y ago
  Humorously, the narration on that video also sounds like an AI. The rising inflection on nearly every clause almost sounds like they’re recording every sentence separately
antiterra 4y ago
It’s similar to how photography grants anyone the technical ability to render a photo-realistic image, but the majority of photos we see are easily discarded from memory. It did put painters out of the portrait business, but also freed them from a realist ideal.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

andybak 4y ago

I find it amazing and exciting - but then I don't earn my living as an illustrator. I suspect there was similar wailings and gnashings of teeth when photography was invented. Humans adapt and it's us that decides what to value. We are quite fond of other people so tastes will alter to preserve that balance.

bigDinosaur 4y ago
There was a clear career path for anyone out of a job due to photographs though. Become a photographer. Which was a perfectly fine career for a very long time. It still is, really, despite the high quality cameras available to many people, because it requires artistic and technical skill. The career path for an artist trying to find something else while AI is developing at this pace is...less clear, and definitely scarier.
- eternalban 4y ago
  Conceptual art remains a possibility.
- notahacker 4y ago
  Photography didn't replace visual art though (which is just as well for painters and sculptors really, the skill needed to operate an early camera was pretty orthogonal). A subset doing the grunt work of simply recording details for prosperity had a competitive alternative, but even in the subset of image production where photorealism is considered desirable, people still commission painters for "lifelike" portraits and Canaletto renderings of Venice are still worth a fortune despite a near infinitude of similar images on Instagram. Same goes for this really, but perhaps even more so. It's impressive at producing eye-catching photos quality images of simple concepts you might use in advertising campaigns, and can do a good job of reproducing well defined cartoon styles. But the artists working in those sort of roles are already working digitally and using image libraries, and this is a massive productivity boost for them - dozens of "$brand on beach" concept images for no effort at all, and they'll still need all the retouching and layering and colour balancing and combining with other images. And as soon as the brief gets more precise about details of layout and colour scheme or what they want the model to look like, they're either back to their original creative flow or designing text prompts and curating images for the brief is an advanced skill in itself. Non artists can produce "good enough" images too (looks great for memes), but much like non-artists wielding cameras they're mostly satisfying their own whims rather than competing with the business of art

TaupeRanger 4y ago

Creative industries are still safe from automation. This doesn't do anything except generate nice stock art or album covers. Unless you're in those industries, there's nothing to worry about. It can't even do text.

wubbert 4y ago
>It can't even do text. An unpaid intern adding text to AI generated images would be trivial.

antiterra 4y ago

The quality is not indistinguishable to any deliberate observation. Plus, I think people will begin to casually notice how off it is once they become ‘trained’ as to the quirks of these images. That is, unless the quality of the generated images continues to steadily improve.

Gigachad 4y ago
Every time I think I have come to understand the limits of ML generated content, I see something a few months later that completely surpasses what I believed possible.