I can't predict the future, but in the short term, AI seems to hurt people and the act of creation overall.
Yeah.. we need harcore regulations or a lot of painters, writers, composers or anykind of artists for that matter will be put down by the usage of AI soon.
There is no way AI will completely replace especially literature industry .
The problem is that some marketing teams might not seek for real quality, but cheap products.
Ya some law needs to be set .
Yup, quickly
Some artists use AI for brainstorming
Indeed. I also use other's artworks to start working sometimes. Its practical to jumpstart an idea. But I never keep the material in the final product. And I never trace it (unless its an exercice meant to trace, in which case I keep the work for myself). I only uses it as references or thumbnailing.
Indeed but you are interested in his work right ?
I don't really like his work. I know a little bit about his work and understand the importance of his artistic journey but I don't really like his work no. Cubism and surrealism don't really speaks to me, I'm a barock kinda guys when it comes to preference. I'm also very big fan of concept arts and softer styles of painting (mainly what I gave as reference earlier is my kind of preference)
I met some people who didn’t want to make a stop at his museum in Paris because of that
Oh, no, this is not what would stop me to go there. But I won't still. I can understand the need to create a place to make art accessible, but I consider that museums are not really places where we should look art. Art is not meant to be an elitist things that sits on a throne. Art always has a context and when you suppress the context, well there is not much left beside a good painting. Museum are centralizing art where art should be localized in its original context to begin with.
Specially when my complaint was a indirect jab at Onix Path and their methods. Im sure that you didn't even bother to google people complaining about the shit art in their products.
I didn't say that this doesn't exist, I said that it was a niche sector to begin with. Plus, when I type those IP on google, I don't really see bad art mate. Its actually quite decent.
Yeah, I'm sure that you can go to the post I replied and find the proof. It's not something in your head or anything
Go to any /slop thread in TG and ask why they use it and plenty of people will say that the end result is better and faster than the actual professionals in the area.
We are talking about realistic work. So show me the comparison mate where IA is better than artists.
Because when we compare what people say and the actual reality, there is a difference.
Can you please show proof that she shares prompts of other artists instead of focusing on her work? Because what you stated was that the ''artists'' would do that.
Ortiz don't use prompts Einstein.
If she does what you stated? Yes.
Wow.. the guy literally have the best artwork possible in front of him and call the artist a "failed artist".. What a shame.
Those fallacies are usually done by woman or men trying (and failing) to be woman.
What ?
That's a silly argument.
Photography took away from skilled humans, Cinematography too.
Printing took away from skilled humans.
The invention of any piece of technology made humans obsolete.
Fallacious comparison.
Photography, printing, cinematography are TOOLS. THere are set of technological products meant to HELP YOU create not to create for you. AI is based on STOLEN WORK. Meaning that its trained on already existing art.
Therefore its problematic as long as it is trained without the consent of artists.
Humans will still be the initiators of the operas, and AI, just like a pen, a tool.
No its not. When using AI, you create a prompt, you do not create art, you copy it. You do not use your brain to reproduce what you understand about reality into art, you use a sentence. Tools are made to help us create, not to create at our place.
In Germany they stopped teaching how to spell properly. I'm not kidding, they introduced a new teaching method that lets kids write like they want and teach them spelling much later. Teachers were told not to correct spelling mistakes or even make suggestion such as "take a look at this word again".
Which is not necessarly a bad thing as it will help studiant to be less afraid of the langage and focuse more on its function. The idea that we should punish in some way or another bad spelling is a linguistical non sense to begin with.
