How I stopped worrying and learned to love AI - Kinda.....

[Jephyr]

Ok, so the progress AI has done over the last year or so is absolutely astounding & I've felt very discouraged that people can whip out amazing 'art' in minutes with just a few prompts.

I saw one where a guy was asking AI to do an angry chipmunk (maybe you've seen it too).  The AI kept saying it was as angry as it could make it and the guy kept challenging it, saying 'that sounds like a YOU problem.'  

Then within minutes he had a dozen or so images of an increasingly angry and CRAZIER chipmunk that would take even the fastest artist weeks to do.

Then, the other night as I was painting away on a new image and it occurred to me how much I was enjoying the process.  Yeah — sometimes getting over an issue is a pain — but the joy of painting (hmmm — where have I heard that before) is always outweighed by the process — ESPECIALLY as an image nears completion.

So I thought — 'yeah AI is going to be used more and more and make it harder for us working artists — but it will NEVER take away the natural urge we humanoids have to create.'

Thoughts??  What do you think??

[darktiste]

You can get far knowing how to fully utilize Ai but it still require to learn a tool it not like you get what you envision knowing nothing about the tool.Think of a baby can it describe it world right away?No.In a similar way you might think you know what you want but asking something is like being a toddler who need to learn how to arrange sound for someone else to interpert.You have to learn to describe often beyond what you would normally usually do .Some Ai are kinda good at interpreting context will other work better with keyword.

But it often take an iterative approch to get something that is true to a vision.It like tracing over something you did and take a new approch.
An amateur artist will certainly feel like he now as super human when he play around with the AI tool because it doesn't require you to have drawing capacity.

But yet he as no concept of mood or exaggeration etc art fundamental that ultimaltely result in better art.

I feel like it a tool that more or less help you figure out your color palette,the composition,proportion and other element.It a window into the possible.But where i think it fall short is telling a story.Personally i think it much better and suited for concept artist then illustrator just because of how complex the question of ''scrapping'' data is right now.

The thing is that Ai as no taste it cannot use it knowledge of something to understand it if i understand correctly. It make prediction base on repetition will associating keyword throught a process called denoising.

You can learn more about how Ai art is generate here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVaJKzr4a8c

I still do enjoy the process and i know probably more then anyone around here the frustration that come with generating to much of those Ai generated image.

What is it about the process that is so therapeutic ? Color therapy? Doodling relaxation? Puzzle solving?Story making? World building?

We are creative creature we invented tool as way to survive.

I don't think you learned to love Ai nor did you stop worrying about Ai you learned how to value the process.After all you did not post anything you did with it for all i know not that this mean much maybe you do love it but it doesn't show yet.I think you admire it therefor
envy so it looking to obtain those quality but being discouraged because you understand the difference between you an the Ai.

Why should you feel discouraged by something that as not your quality.Does it rob you of something?What kind of insecurity does it create in you.Why is it something we compare were self to. I think those are more question we need to answers wereself to see tool as complementary not as something that replace us.

Personally i love playing around with idea but i don't find rendering material to be that fun i love to play around with an idea but ultimately i need to settle down because it necessary for project to go foward.

I see Ai like a search engine that combine idea.It complement my process it doesn't take me away from it.It make art more acessible it still doesn't have a mind of it own as of now...

But really the problem is that none artist don't care about the process or artist.What they care about is the legality and how to get around it.It there job to generate income.So it obvious that we make progress as human and that the consequence of that is that some job disappear.Did people stop building armor because it got out of fashion?Did people still buy armor to day?Yes they do.We just don't make them the same way or use them for the same purpose thing evolve.

Ai is concerning if you are trying to making a living out of art or if you don't like the idea of people making money out of your work or you don't like people using your work pure and simple.

The problem to me is that people make an opinion that is often from an outside perspective they never really tried it for themselve.So they are truely making an outsider opinion.

Hearing music is not the same thing as playing music and it would be reductive to assume you understand what the intrument can do with an outsider perspective.Just imagine the different style of music you can create a new genre with the help of someone who can play but that limiting.If your a kinesthetic person and never touch and instrument you are loosing part of the experience because it the physical process you enjoy.It why having an inside understand of a subject teach you about the process and the subtlety that rarely make it into conversation.

[Zizka]

@Jephyr: I agree with you and found solace when I came to the same conclusion you did.

I wanted to quote an article shared in the shoutbox. You should probably read the article, Darktiste:

https://www.muddycolors.com/2024/04/the-a-i-lie/

If only for this part:

And that is: I think A.I. is a poison to the creative process. I think it makes your work worse and makes you less interesting and less employable. And that’s what I think is worth talking about today.

While style-chameleon artists were common in the era of in-house illustration departments at advertising firms, the current landscape rewards artists whose work is memorable and contributes something unique.

Which I thought was a great argument.

In regards to:

“A.I. is a tool”

It has become standard to describe A.I. as a tool. I argue that this framing is incorrect. It does not aid in the completion of a task. It completes the task for you.

I think the conclusion is important:

If there is a button one can push that spits out images and it is available to everybody, why on earth would any creative professional push that button? Clients don’t need to hire you to push it. They can do that themselves. The central lie behind these programs is that they are meant for artists. They’re not. We don’t need them and using them only hurts us. What our clients really need from us is what the A.I. button cannot and never will be able to give: a human expression in all its flawed, beautiful glory.

It complement my process it doesn't take me away from it.

See the first quote.

[darktiste]

The problem with is whole article is he believe pressing a button make magic as i previously said it not the case. He seem to believe you achieve something finish when it not the case. He discard the idea that it a tool because he think it magic and will give you flawlessly result whatever you ask everytime which is not the case.For an illustrator perspective it probably make more sense because they loose there style for a concept artist i think as he say we are more chameleon we design to fit a niche if your freelance you make a living by having a individual recognisable signature so i suspect he an illustrator and i know he was a freelance so i see the angle of the argument he make

Overall he way to emotional about the whole issue and it understanble when you don't want to encourage something that ultimately you see as a possible career ending.

Surely you loose some individuality when the ai spew something out but you are still imputing your personality inside the promp making process and it ridicule to suggest it not a creative process.No body describe the same tree the same way.

The thing is ai is dry it can't pick up your subtility you taste you have to inject it and it not going to spew it out with ''individuality''.Subtility your not even aware cannot be translated but yet they are in your subconcious that why when you create thing emerge from unspected abstract connection that are not necessarly pick up when thing are done.

What a client want he does not know it not a matter of if it human or not.He know it when he see it.He pressing a button that hire someone because he doesn't know and is result would be far off because he doesn,t have the experience to use the Ai tool.He also doesn't know how to press the button.In all case we are the button with or without Ai.Because in the end the result is what he see not who did it.But the question is what is lost.

If he knew what he wanted and knew how to do it... he would do it... ai exist... why did he not do it?Why have all artist not been replace by now?They are not chasing were personality they are chasing after a vision the illusion of what we offer.

They don't care if it human or Ai what matter is that they like what they see and can pass it down to an audience who will receive it positively may it be human or Ai made.

[darktiste]

The problem of commercial art is that it not very creative because it try to replicate previous sucess sacrificing innovation in the decision making process it also try to appeal to a large audience which make it hard to go outside convention.

Innovation is expensive and risky and require people that don't deal in the generic which mean they are hard to come by and they are also not afraid to challenge the norm when everything combine sucessfully it will massive pay off.

[RottenPocket]

Some of us a guilty of trying out AI, at least in the beginning I know I dabbled with a few apps but once it became obvious just where it was leading and what it was costing us - as an artist my position became clear. People who are still 'testing', 'trialing' or 'experimenting' with Plagiarist software with conscious avoidance have no integrity as an Artist. If someone chooses to accept what the software has been built upon and continues to be used for, they need to check their priorities.

There are people who tried the Professional Art route, and yet when floundered use AI as a fallback plan. I see this as no less than hypocritic. This may be called Innovation as it's 'New', but it's not an Improvement. I don't give a shit about commercial art, it's besides the point. As an artist in an artist space, AI has no place. Tracing is a 'tool', but AI Generative Imaging is not being used as a 'tool', it's being marketed as a means of production, ignoring the expense. 

Perhaps the issue is Art is an emotional media and some people just struggle perceive it.

It's a carousel of Red Flags to me, supporting Plagiarist Software. Even if people are covering their arses by saying "Well, there's no going back now, better get used to it", it still doesn't have a place here. In Art Spaces. 

We will war it out with commercial clients, one battle at a time. 

[Zizka]

I’m not sure if people realise that when using a.i. they are training it and improving it. You ultimately have a whole community of people perfecting a.i. as free labor for people who’ll end up selling for exorbitant amount of profit. I was trying to find a video about it I watched but I can’t seem to find it anymore. It explained the whole process pretty well.

Overall he way to emotional about the whole issue and it understanble when you don't want to encourage something that ultimately you see as a possible career ending.

I don’t know of anyone who wouldn’t be upset at having their career threatened. I know I would be. I find his reaction healthier and more rational than artist praising a.i. That’s a lot harder for me to understand. Clapping their hands and patting a.i. on the back as their future replacement is hard to witness.

Surely you loose some individuality when the ai spew something out but you are still imputing your personality inside the promp making process and it ridicule to suggest it not a creative process.No body describe the same tree the same way.

I mean, if describing a tree for you is a creative process, sure, I suppose it is. The thing is, the visual representation of a tree by two different artists involves a whole lot more than just being able to describe it with words, as I’m sure you’re aware.

The thing is ai is dry it can't pick up your subtility you taste you have to inject it and it not going to spew it out with ''individuality''.Subtility your not even aware cannot be translated but yet they are in your subconcious that why when you create thing emerge from unspected abstract connection that are not necessarly pick up when thing are done.

I don’t understand this paragraph.

What a client want he does not know it not a matter of if it human or not.He know it when he see it.He pressing a button that hire someone because he doesn't know and is result would be far off because he doesn,t have the experience to use the Ai tool.He also doesn't know how to press the button.In all case we are the button with or without Ai.Because in the end the result is what he see not who did it.But the question is what is lost.

I’ll try to understand this one as it seems less abstract.

“He (a.i.?) doesn’t know what a human wants.”
I’m unsure what you’re getting at.

“He knows it when he sees it”
Ok I think you mean a client doesn’t know what he wants and that he’ll only realise it when he sees what a.i. provided.

Actually, I don’t understand the rest either, despite trying. Maybe using Google Translator would help as I’d like to understand your point and but it’s really hard to understand what you’re saying here. Or write in your native language and I’ll copy/paste in a translator myself. You’re using a lot of pronouns and it’s difficult to know what which one refers to. I think you’re saying non-artist customers need a.i. prompters in some way.

This was also explained in the video I watched. Now they need people because a.i. is still in its infancy. When the process has been streamlined (and it will be with legions of people training it), I assure you they’ll handle process themselves at the press of a button. They won’t need a.i. prompters to do it for them. A.i. prompters are very, very temporary and will be flushed out once they’ve stopped being useful at training the a.i. And those a.i. prompters will then wish they’d have been honing their skills and developing their unique style instead of typing keywords.

If he knew what he wanted and knew how to do it... he would do it... ai exist... why did he not do it?Why have all artist not been replace by now?They are not chasing were personality they are chasing after a vision the illusion of what we offer.

This is explained above. Because the process still needs to be streamlined. They (artists) are being replaced. Seek and ye shall find. It’s only anecdotal but plenty of people in the industry have mentioned how less people are being hired in the field because of a.i. This will be a progressive process, a (somewhat) slow erosion happening over time.

They don't care if it human or Ai what matter is that they like what they see and can pass it down to an audience who will receive it positively may it be human or Ai made.

Ah yes! The good old “the end justifies the mean”, humanity’s most destructive ideology which has led to countless abuse and tragedies. “Nobody cares how something is made as long as it’s being made” I assure you some people do. I do. When I compare one of Joseph’s drawing from his life drawing, the way it was made by hand makes it worthwhile to me. The same drawing stolen from a.i. doesn’t. I’d hang something on my wall done by hand, I’d trash something made with a.i.

Crunch is something that’s becoming more and more known in sfx or video games. Some people don’t care that the people working on the sfx are working hundreds of hours and are getting burned out. It’s the end that matters, right? Who cares about these guys. Well, some people do, apparently. My point is that how something is made should matter. That’s why Ethics exist. Otherwise people would just focus on reaching their goal by being awful to others as long as they reach said goal.

If your argument is that people don’t care about how something is made (which hopefully it isn’t) and you think it’s something that people believe in general, it’d say it’s more telling of your personal values (or lack thereof). If I misunderstood, then disregard what I said. Believe it or not, I see this very often, it’s a recurrent thing: “As long as I get what I want, I don’t care who suffers because of it.”