3 ms·
They could have gone viral because an AI recreated their art style to the degree that they could? And therefore people would abandon the AI to pay the artist in
by Avicebron 4y ago
They could have gone viral because an AI recreated their art style to the degree that they could? And therefore people would abandon the AI to pay the artist individually?
I'm not sure I follow, wouldn't those people just us the AI to continue creating what they want unless you think that driving the artist to compete monetarily with an AI will somehow work in the artist's favor?
- scotty79 4y ago> They could have gone viral because an AI recreated their art style to the degree that they could? I didn't know of any artist (except for long dead ones) that I saw the names of in prompts. > And therefore people would abandon the AI to pay the artist individually? If you have particular commercial needs you discovered through the use of AI you might want to go to the source, not for everything, but for some things. It might be easier to explain some of the stuff you need to a live human than to AI. AI images are still very imperfect and prompts are not easy to create.
- l33tman 4y agoI had absolute zero interest in digital art before, now I have some and would at least react to the artists often mentioned in prompts. They didn't get any money from me before, but the chance is > 0.0 now at least, I might at some point commission some original digital art and now I would checkout both the AI and the humans. Before this I might instead have opted for a stock photo for $5. But who knows how the numbers turn out in the long run. I don't think the artists is the group that's going to get the most annoyed in the next couple of years - copy writers and programmers, 3D artists, basically anybody who's doing grunt work.. I think the main problem with all of this is that it has entered our lives so fast, compared to other revolutions.