5 ms·
I find it unlikely that someone who was willing to pay an artist for a charcoal sketch would be satisfied with an AI alternative. You don't just buy art for th
by Taek 2y ago
I find it unlikely that someone who was willing to pay an artist for a charcoal sketch would be satisfied with an AI alternative.
You don't just buy art for the aethstetic, you buy it for a lot of reasons and AI doesn't give any of the same satisfaction.
- zwnow 2y agoI'm all for paying artists for their work. Unfortunately, same as tattoo artists, some just heavily overcharge for mediocre results (been tattooing myself AND I know a few things about art). Like, sorry, but if you want to earn money doing art, please be good at it...
- RhysU 2y ago> Like, sorry, but if you want to earn money doing art, please be good at it... By definition, almost half of all $ARTISTS are worse than the median. Should that half not get paid for their time?
- zwnow 2y agoYes. They should look for a job that actually covers their lifestyle instead of crying about AI taking their jobs. They can always put in more hours and become better. I cant imagine they have a lot of paying customers anyway.
- WindyMiller 2y agoWhat about the half of the remaining artists that are below the new median?
- zwnow 2y agoShould be good enough to alrdy have established some customers.
- flkiwi 2y agoThe problem with that is that people aren't asking for AI generated images in the style of Raven from Topeka with an Etsy shop. They're asking for Ghibli. So the people whose livelihoods are most directly impacted are (assuming they're not centuries dead) the famous, talented, and trend-making artists, not the lower tier making bad Precious Moments knockoffs. Society's problem is understanding that not wanting to pay for bad Precious Moments knockoffs is rational, while not wanting to pay, say, a Studio Ghibli for quality, professional creativity is insane.
- nasmorn 2y agoCouldn’t Ghibli zeitgeist moment lead to them making out hugely with a new release or just a cinema screening of Totoro right now?
- flkiwi 2y agoThat is "artists should be grateful to work for exposure" on a grand scale.
- nasmorn 2y agoExcept they didn’t do any work for the exposure. If a marketing agency had come up and executed the Ghiblify everything model as a PR stunt we would call it the most genius creative campaign of the decade
- flkiwi 2y agoThey did though. The studio engaged in tremendous amounts of work and created good will, in addition to their specific creative works. Their visual style is tied up in that good will. Use of the visual style for profit without consent is, at least ethically, misappropriation of another's value. And "You should be pleased I used your creative work because now more people will know about you and you will make a lot of money from this!" is one of the oldest defenses to misappropriation of creativity. I'm not even mad. We do a terrible job in our society of valuing artists and creative people generally and in explaining the value of intangible things, especially something like good will. People have been misappropriating fonts and clipart and screenshots in presentations and posters and whatnot, duplicating clever branding ideas and the creative efforts of others, and so on for _decades_ if not longer, all without ill intent. It's something we need to fix and never will. But when that becomes a channel for another to directly profit, it begins to venture out of harmlessness.
- RhysU 2y agoI keep waiting for physical objects to become important again. AI isn't coming for the ceramic folks.
- zwnow 2y agoI think that would be great. Traditional art market is not nearly as big as the digital space. I'd love if people valued traditional art again as thats the only stuff I do.
- ane 2y agoDepends on the niche. Original physical art for trading card games or comics is a significant chunk of the income of your typical artist. Digital art in those niches does not have this source of income. But then again digital art has other niches where the actual commission rates are high enough to not make this a problem.
- ben_w 2y ago> AI isn't coming for the ceramic folks. *looks at 3D printer on desk that can apparently handle ceramic filaments, thinks about all the mass-produced ceramics sold in supermarkets*
- amazingamazing 2y ago> some just heavily overcharge for mediocre results if people are paying, then they aren't "overcharging"
- zwnow 2y agoIn the tattoo business people have no other places to go. Charging 1k€+ for half a sleeve is extremely overcharged. If people are paying they often simply don't have enough alternatives.
- flkiwi 2y agoGiven the time commitment and network of basic biological, anatomical, and health knowledge required, that doesn't strike me as an insane price, assuming an artist who is able to create the requested art.
- zwnow 2y agoTbh you barely have to know anything, most important one is how deep to go with the needle and sanitizing. Everything else is not rlly important.
- flkiwi 2y agoA friend who is heavily inked has gone on at length to me about understanding skin elasticity--particularly how it changes over a lifetime--as well as the way joints and muscles change and distort visual lines, etc. It sure seems like a skilled trade to me. And, I don't know, depth of penetration of a needle in flesh and sanitation don't strike me as minor things to get right.
- zwnow 2y agoPeople love to make things seem harder than they are. I tattoo people, I am aware about skin types, usually thats not a big issue unless its heavily scarred. The quality of your tattoo machine matters most, as my 70€ eBay makeshift one wasnt nearly as good as a proper one. Amount of ink matters, needle depth, skin type, sweat. But thats stuff you have figured put after your 20th tattoo. Its like knowing datatypes in programming. You just know stuff after some practice.