4 ms·
I remember the stink-eye cast by (some) artists who grew up with traditional media at how digital painting didn't count, and was somehow 'cheating'. As if the m
by Baeocystin 4y ago
I remember the stink-eye cast by (some) artists who grew up with traditional media at how digital painting didn't count, and was somehow 'cheating'. As if the masters of the past wouldn't have loved having layers and control-z!
Same situation now. I know working artists thrilled with the idea of being able to iterate in hours what previously would have taken weeks to test composition, form, and the like as they focus in on what they have in mind. I can't wait to see what they come up with.
- acomjean 4y agoI think Digital media is ok for most artists. Almost all the commercial science visualization folks are using it (based on a web-mini conference panel), and a fair number of artist in the nonprofit I help out with use digital tools. I think this is different than machine generated art. I know a few of us who have dabbled in creating procedurally generated art have found it fun and useful for some things, but kinda soulless, and less satisfying. AI art gets around that by using huge training sets of human generated stuff and mimicking. Its good and getting better, but its not like you get exactly what you had envisioned (though you get what you asked for)..