3 ms·

Well, judging by the abysmal quality of the "AI art" coming out, the limitation on creativity is clearly not technological. The limitation is the lack of creati

Well, judging by the abysmal quality of the "AI art" coming out, the limitation on creativity is clearly not technological. The limitation is the lack of creativity coming from these artists. As such, the predictions that AI will "replace all artists" is obviously way overblown. At best, it will be a helpful tool, along the lines of Photoshop or After Effects.

pylua 3y ago
As someone who has no artistic ability I am genuinely impressed with the art coming out of it.
- gorjusborg 3y ago
  For sure, it is impressive. The leap from zero to any positive number is an infinite improvement, but there is a big difference between 2 and 2e6.
- keiferski 3y ago
  Certainly there is some impressive art being created, but the vast majority is uninspired and just kind of silly. Look up #aiart on Twitter as an example.
  - krapp 3y ago
    TBH, the vast majority of most art looks uninspired - Sturgeon's Law applies to everything. Looking at the tag on Twitter or Instagram, a lot of AI art already looks better (or at least not much worse) than what you would find on Artgram[0] or Cara.app[1] (which I picked as communities which have banned AI art altogether) and certainly not "abysmal." ...counting fingers notwithstanding. And how much of AI art is anime porn. So, so much anime porn. So many Asukas JFC. The argument that the quality of AI art is categorically worse than non-AI art is starting to come off as copium, TBH. Like, it isn't. If it were, no one would be worried about it. [0]https://www.artgram.co/ https://www.artgram.co/ [1]https://cara.app/explore https://cara.app/explore
    - keiferski 3y ago
      But does anyone consider Artgram or Cara to be "good" art? This looks mediocre, I agree, but I don't think anyone thinks it isn't. Also, I never made the argument that it will be categorically worse, merely that it being AI is not significant enough by itself to replace highly talented artists.

pylua 3y ago

As someone who has no artistic ability I am genuinely impressed with the art coming out of it.

gorjusborg 3y ago
For sure, it is impressive. The leap from zero to any positive number is an infinite improvement, but there is a big difference between 2 and 2e6.
keiferski 3y ago
Certainly there is some impressive art being created, but the vast majority is uninspired and just kind of silly. Look up #aiart on Twitter as an example.
- krapp 3y ago
  TBH, the vast majority of most art looks uninspired - Sturgeon's Law applies to everything. Looking at the tag on Twitter or Instagram, a lot of AI art already looks better (or at least not much worse) than what you would find on Artgram[0] or Cara.app[1] (which I picked as communities which have banned AI art altogether) and certainly not "abysmal." ...counting fingers notwithstanding. And how much of AI art is anime porn. So, so much anime porn. So many Asukas JFC. The argument that the quality of AI art is categorically worse than non-AI art is starting to come off as copium, TBH. Like, it isn't. If it were, no one would be worried about it. [0]https://www.artgram.co/ https://www.artgram.co/ [1]https://cara.app/explore https://cara.app/explore
  - keiferski 3y ago
    But does anyone consider Artgram or Cara to be "good" art? This looks mediocre, I agree, but I don't think anyone thinks it isn't. Also, I never made the argument that it will be categorically worse, merely that it being AI is not significant enough by itself to replace highly talented artists.