4 ms·

I strongly disagree. Even as imperfect as the current crop of LLMs are, I'm doing things today that year-ago-me would have considered firmly in the realm of sc

I strongly disagree. Even as imperfect as the current crop of LLMs are, I'm doing things today that year-ago-me would have considered firmly in the realm of science fiction. It's reinvigorating my creative drive across the board, and I love it. I'm getting to make the Interesting Choices that lead to Art faster and more freely than ever. Others will feel differently, and that's ok. I find myself not even mad at such florid proclamations as to the death of the human spirit. Such sanctimonious proclamations were made by portrait artists at the advent of photography as well, and yet here we are, Art intact, all these decades later.

lm28469 3y ago
> I'm doing things today that year-ago-me would have considered firmly in the realm of science fiction. I've read an infinite amount of comment about that but never heard of a single convincing example
- Baeocystin 3y ago
  Having a fully-grammatical, open-ended conversation in a natural language with a computer was 100% science fiction until now.
wddkcs 3y ago
Strong agree. I started writing a comic series in 2016, but had to stop in part because commissioning the art was prohibitively expensive. AI image generation is quickly erasing that ability gap. Most publically consumed art is made by large teams, which naturally leads to a dilution of a singular artists vision. With the current quality mass media, I'm excited to see singular geniuses with the power of whole production companies at their finger tips.
- krapp 3y ago
  Those "singular geniuses" aren't producing anything truly creative or unique, they're just typing "x in the style of Joe Quesada" (or whomever) into a textbox. AI isn't erasing the gap, it's just making the theft of other artists' work easier, and putting the artists themselves out of business. All for software that doesn't even allow real freedom of creative control, or autonomy of vision - the best you can ever do is hope to get an approximation of a concept that probably still has to be run through Photoshop or something to keep everything on model and fix all of the six-fingered hands. If you can't afford to pay real artists to draw for your comic book, maybe you shouldn't be in that business?
  - wddkcs 3y ago
    You're responding to your own argument here, not mine. I'm saying the next generation of artists will be blessed with tools that greatly expand their capabilities. Arguing otherwise, is like saying Photoshop, or VFX, did nothing to push art forward over the last 40 years. Obviously, AI training data is a touchy topic. I completely agree artist should be compensated. To what degree is a hard question. As to whether or not I should be making comics- I have story to express and there are tools available to express it. I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks about the validity of that expression. That's what makes it art. You talk like someone who has never produced art.

lm28469 3y ago

> I'm doing things today that year-ago-me would have considered firmly in the realm of science fiction. I've read an infinite amount of comment about that but never heard of a single convincing example

Baeocystin 3y ago
Having a fully-grammatical, open-ended conversation in a natural language with a computer was 100% science fiction until now.

wddkcs 3y ago

Strong agree. I started writing a comic series in 2016, but had to stop in part because commissioning the art was prohibitively expensive. AI image generation is quickly erasing that ability gap. Most publically consumed art is made by large teams, which naturally leads to a dilution of a singular artists vision. With the current quality mass media, I'm excited to see singular geniuses with the power of whole production companies at their finger tips.

krapp 3y ago
Those "singular geniuses" aren't producing anything truly creative or unique, they're just typing "x in the style of Joe Quesada" (or whomever) into a textbox. AI isn't erasing the gap, it's just making the theft of other artists' work easier, and putting the artists themselves out of business. All for software that doesn't even allow real freedom of creative control, or autonomy of vision - the best you can ever do is hope to get an approximation of a concept that probably still has to be run through Photoshop or something to keep everything on model and fix all of the six-fingered hands. If you can't afford to pay real artists to draw for your comic book, maybe you shouldn't be in that business?
- wddkcs 3y ago
  You're responding to your own argument here, not mine. I'm saying the next generation of artists will be blessed with tools that greatly expand their capabilities. Arguing otherwise, is like saying Photoshop, or VFX, did nothing to push art forward over the last 40 years. Obviously, AI training data is a touchy topic. I completely agree artist should be compensated. To what degree is a hard question. As to whether or not I should be making comics- I have story to express and there are tools available to express it. I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks about the validity of that expression. That's what makes it art. You talk like someone who has never produced art.