5 ms·

I've been doing AI art since 2022 and I'm still both disappointed and not quite surprised that this still is a pervasive view of what it takes to create anythin

by lxe 1y ago

I've been doing AI art since 2022 and I'm still both disappointed and not quite surprised that this still is a pervasive view of what it takes to create anything high quality using AI. If you take any high quality AI content and ask their creator what their workflow is, you'll quickly discover that the complexity and nuance required to actually create something high-quality and something that actually "fulfills your vision" is incredibly complex. Whether you measure quality through social media metrics, reach, or artistic metrics, like novelty or nuance, high quality content and art requires a good amount of skill and effort, regardless of the tool. Standard reading for context: https://archive.org/details/Bazin_Andre_The_Ontology_of_Photographic_Image https://archive.org/details/Bazin_Andre_The_Ontology_of_Phot...

kevinventullo 1y ago
Given the pervasiveness of AI slop with hundreds of thousands of likes on Facebook, I wouldn’t be so sure about using social media metrics as proof of high skill and effort.
jplusequalt 1y ago
>If you take any high quality AI content and ask their creator what their workflow is, you'll quickly discover that the complexity and nuance required to actually create something high-quality and something that actually "fulfills your vision" is incredibly complex This comes off as so tone deaf seeing your AI artwork is only possible due to the millions of hours spent by real people who created the art used to train these models. Maybe it's easier to understand why people don't respect AI "artists" with this in mind.
- vessenes 1y ago
  I also feel unhappy when painters get formal art training which summarizes millions of human hours of work. Even worse they then go to Florence and waste their time stealing art by painting..exact copies of other people’s paintings! I feel a real artist would make their own tools: brushes, paint, canvas, and above all be truly creative by not unfairly using anything that’s gone before. If they did they aren’t creative; they’re a thief.
  - GenshoTikamura 1y ago
    You said you're an AI artist, but you've just dismissed all artists upon whose work you build your own art as thieves, so either you've admitted yourself a thief as well or you got some serious trouble with logic
    - vessenes 1y ago
      Sorry, I think you missed the sarcasm in my original post. I am saying that gatekeeping what art is, and what theft is, typically ignores exactly how art is made, how artists are trained, and the history of tools impacting creative endeavors -- basically close to what you say here: there are logical and historical errors that invalidate these complaints in my mind. p.s. def not an artist.
  - hooverd 1y ago
    Ok, there is fundamentally a difference in creation versus consumption here though.
  - jplusequalt 1y ago
    Spending thousands of hours honing a craft and along the way learning from those who came before you, is not the same as using these models. You're being overly reductive to try and force a similarity, but in the process you just come off as disingenuous.
    - vessenes 1y ago
      No. You're gatekeeping what "craft" is. Is craft making your own chisels for woodworking? Perhaps there are craftsman who buy chisels made by others. Okay. Then is craft only making furniture with dovetail joints by hand? Well, I guess people use planers. So, no it's not just hand made wood working that's craft. Someone uses a CnC machine with a design they made to cut wood, then hand sands and polishes. Is that craft? What if you learned it took them three or four times as many hours to learn the CnC machine and design as it did to hand plane a cedar log? To be clear, I don't identify as an artist at all, but I do have a stake in this conversation -- which is that I'd like more young folks to be positive, pick up tools at their disposal and build good things with them. The future's coming, and it's going to be built out by people with open minds who are soaking up everything they can about whatever tools are available. It's a sort of brain rot to gatekeep technology advances out of creativity.

by lxe 1y ago

kevinventullo 1y ago

Given the pervasiveness of AI slop with hundreds of thousands of likes on Facebook, I wouldn’t be so sure about using social media metrics as proof of high skill and effort.

jplusequalt 1y ago

>If you take any high quality AI content and ask their creator what their workflow is, you'll quickly discover that the complexity and nuance required to actually create something high-quality and something that actually "fulfills your vision" is incredibly complex This comes off as so tone deaf seeing your AI artwork is only possible due to the millions of hours spent by real people who created the art used to train these models. Maybe it's easier to understand why people don't respect AI "artists" with this in mind.

vessenes 1y ago
I also feel unhappy when painters get formal art training which summarizes millions of human hours of work. Even worse they then go to Florence and waste their time stealing art by painting..exact copies of other people’s paintings! I feel a real artist would make their own tools: brushes, paint, canvas, and above all be truly creative by not unfairly using anything that’s gone before. If they did they aren’t creative; they’re a thief.
- GenshoTikamura 1y ago
  You said you're an AI artist, but you've just dismissed all artists upon whose work you build your own art as thieves, so either you've admitted yourself a thief as well or you got some serious trouble with logic
  - vessenes 1y ago
    Sorry, I think you missed the sarcasm in my original post. I am saying that gatekeeping what art is, and what theft is, typically ignores exactly how art is made, how artists are trained, and the history of tools impacting creative endeavors -- basically close to what you say here: there are logical and historical errors that invalidate these complaints in my mind. p.s. def not an artist.
- hooverd 1y ago
  Ok, there is fundamentally a difference in creation versus consumption here though.
- jplusequalt 1y ago
  Spending thousands of hours honing a craft and along the way learning from those who came before you, is not the same as using these models. You're being overly reductive to try and force a similarity, but in the process you just come off as disingenuous.
  - vessenes 1y ago
    No. You're gatekeeping what "craft" is. Is craft making your own chisels for woodworking? Perhaps there are craftsman who buy chisels made by others. Okay. Then is craft only making furniture with dovetail joints by hand? Well, I guess people use planers. So, no it's not just hand made wood working that's craft. Someone uses a CnC machine with a design they made to cut wood, then hand sands and polishes. Is that craft? What if you learned it took them three or four times as many hours to learn the CnC machine and design as it did to hand plane a cedar log? To be clear, I don't identify as an artist at all, but I do have a stake in this conversation -- which is that I'd like more young folks to be positive, pick up tools at their disposal and build good things with them. The future's coming, and it's going to be built out by people with open minds who are soaking up everything they can about whatever tools are available. It's a sort of brain rot to gatekeep technology advances out of creativity.