Some incredible things being done by that damn alien. Apart from the hyper-realism, I'm also impressed by the comic art techniques:
It's going to be hard to find any career not heavily impacted by AI in the coming years. Add in advances in robotics, and even classic human labor blue collar jobs are going to be threatened. But think of it like this, the majority of us will go buy a table made in a factory by machines, but we can still buy a hand-made table made by a carpenter. And not only that, but you can buy a handmade table using only tools available in the 1800s if the idea of hand-made table with wood cut by electric circular saws bothers you. But those are relegated to niche markets. The vast majority of people have no qualms about buying a table made exclusively by machines. Same with art made by computers. Whether or not it's art "helped" by computer tools, or made 100% by an AI, it's just a matter of time for the public to become accustomed to it. But people need to keep the distinction between fine art and commercial illustration clear in their heads. Traditional, human created art and music is never going completely away, but it will be relegated to niche markets. The more "100%" human made, the smaller the market. Like finding a recording artist who still uses 70s and 80s analog recording tools. Computer have nearly wiped out professions such as model-making and painting and drawing for commercial purposes in film. It's just going to accelerate whether people want it to or not. I'm a professional concept artist, and when was graduating school, Photoshop was becoming the industry-wide tool everyone used. There was a lot of push-back from old timer instructors who spent their living perfecting analog skills like pencil, pen, gauche and acrylic. Some of them stubbornly fought and fought against Photoshop. But in the end, Photoshop is a required skill for every person in my profession. So in that sense, computers took away human skill that took a lifetime to create. With Photoshop you can freely create and modify images in a fraction of the time required before. Imagine grabbing a portion of an image and distorting it with the selection tool, or tinting it to more blue. Simple things in computers that would necessitate entirely redoing a hand painted image. In 5 seconds you can do what would take months to redo. In 5 minutes I can generate variations and iterate what would take a year to do traditionally. Then a few years later, personal computers became fast enough for the average person to use 3D software. Modeling software like Alias Power Animator on Silicon Graphics machines that cost 20K in 1995 became available for just a few thousand dollars on PCs with cracked Maya, Softimage and 3DS Max software. Instead of huge film and game studios being gatekeepers to such tech, now any young kid on the planet could use those tools. Again, tons of people who spent enormous amounts of money getting an education on that hardware and software were being threatened and put out of business by people who spent nearly nothing. Commercial illustration, concept art, 3D modeling, etc were all radically transformed within the span of about 1o years. Now almost every artist in my field uses 3D, and many jobs require even a 2D guy to have a working knowledge of 3D tools. At every point along the way, the older establishment tended to consider whatever tools they had grew up with as acceptable, and resisted the newer tools as "taking away the role of the artist" The younger generation is much more accepting of newer paradigms. I remember thinking there is no way anyone would pay money to watch someone else play a video game, and now we have people making millions of dollars a year to stream them playing games lol. So whether any of use like it or not, these tools are here to stay for commercial work where time is money, and generating options for free is paramount. People need to adapt to stay relevant for as long as we can. I use AI all the time in my workflow to brainstorm ideas and spark creativity. But the tools are not there yet to replace what I do. We are at this classic moment in time when people are rebelling against the idea of AI art, but like resisting Photoshop and 3D, they will have to adapt or be left behind. Nothing is stopping me from painting in acrylic for my own personal pleasure or to sell art on the side, but for business I would never think of such a thing. Old timers might consider that me painting over 3D in Photoshop as "cheating" and not real art, just like people who grew up with those tools are still freaked out by AI, while younger kids are jumping into it headfirst and mastering the tools. Right now my industry is still in turmoil as the current generation tries to take stand against AI on the public PR level, but behind the scenes many of us are using it to meet deadlines. But then again we are using the tools to convey an idea or create a commercial product, not create fine art. Yes, I know I wrote a novel, sry.
It’s not the opposite of Art, it’s a tool like any other. Is electricity the opposite of Art; or a camera, or a pencil, or a paint brush, or a piece of paper?
Or finding an "analog horror" filmmaker who uses actual analog recording tools like VCR recorders and film cameras and not digital emulations of VHS tape effects. (Sorry, I couldn't resist)
Except that "I think" is more certain than "methinks". YOU look it up, so YOU can realize he used it correctly.
I knew someone who was a graphic designer - creating logos, designing layouts, etc. Ithinks that career will likely cease to exist pretty soon.
I do graphic design for movies and series TV, items featured within the show. Right now our union is in negotiations with the Studios and a major issue is A.I.. A huge stumbling block for A.I. to be gully implemented by the Studios is copyright. The Studios are already zealous about owning everything within their final product or having absolute clear cut license to use items. Unless the A.I.’s resources are all owned by a Studio the resulting art and imagry cannot be copyrighted. We used to be able to freely appropriate or base designs on references we found, but today everything is gone over with a microscope. As a graphic designer I must report and provide all my references and inspiration, the stock art file numbers if used, the specific fonts used, and all of the written content including names of products, stores, people etc. must be cleared. The Studios fears over copyright lawsuit rule over all aspects of what you see in the final show. It will be a while before A.I. changes my job even more until it takes it over, and I’ll bet in tje end it doesn’t.
The images are created from prompts and that is all. There is no artistic input beyond the choice of words. It is imagery but it isn't art. When AGI develops a consciousness, it will be the equivalent of... alien art.
That’s not true. There are choices made every step of the way. It’s just a tool. As for consciousness, we don’t even know what consciousness is, or why it is, and we have no idea if computers (intelligent or otherwise) can become conscious.
I don’t need to look it up. Methinks means “it seems”, not “I think”. I don’t know why people insist on using the word, but don’t bother learn how to use it. No one is impressed by Elizabethan English.
I think what you are saying is that text prompts are artistic choices. That can hardly be compared to the use of a crayon or a brush, where creative skills are required to create the work. That process doesn't happen in AI "art". The scientific community is holding its breath as they feel that it is about to arrive (with AGI).
yeah just slightly beyond my belief. Every time I give Dolly a prompt I get a picture of like a horse with a tractor wheel coming out of its side I get horrible images. Somebody must spend a lot of time trying to get the good ones
AI = Art thief. here’s one example from the Dalle3 website I think the properly written prompt should say “rip me off of Leroy Nieman painting.”
There is evidently a certain "skill" in knowing how the write prompts that will give a good result (with the right program(s). An example of how thorough some prompts can be:
The referenced A.I. video up thread is redefining (poorly) the meaning of creativity within the limits of visual art where basically one is throwing crap on a wall to see what sticks or communicates effectively a thought worth communicating. As a former graphic artist I liken it to "Clip Art" which was mainly used to save time for me from having to draw and ink it myself to be used to grab eyeballs in advertising art. It's just that A.I. makes it even more cold, thoughtless and lacking or conveying any form of humanity or idea that inspires. A.I. in visual art will never know the meaning nor reproduce what inspires humans, especially when you have uninspired humans defining what's creative from knowing what prompts to write. Might as well throw poop on a wall and see if the shapes inspire meaningful thought.
Exactly. The problem is that the non-artist typing the prompts (marketing manager or assistant, the company director (in his pyjamas) is perfectly happy with what AI regurgitates and so is his target audience. It's a dream come true for those companies/entrepreneurs: no need for art directors, designers, illustrators, photographers,...
