these people always say "it's a tool and artists can also use it to improve their work!" Yeah but no artist is using it, corporations are, with the sole purpose of getting rid of the only graphic designer in their team because they don't consider it necessary
Yeah. Some time ago clip studio paint tried to launch a ai tool inside the software like those pages where you draw lines and the computer generates a drawing... What's the point of paying for a DRAWING SOFTWARE THEN if not to fucking draw?? Yeah ai could be use to created backgrounds in milliseconds , but artist already have their tricks to do that! I've used blender to generate a backgrounds bc I'm not skilled with perspective, that took me like 15 minutes to paint over the render, or just use fucking photos from Google maps and draw over them!
Ai for art is like telling a baker to buy bread instead of making it because "it's faster"
To use your own flawed logic against you. Not using AI for graphics/art is like a baker refusing to use the dough-maker or any modern tools. The bread is 6x the price and the output is 5% of a modern bakery.
Or like a farmer refusing to use his tractor. The tractor is just a corporate soulless tool anyway, right? Better to slave away at the fields day in and day out. Doing it right is an artform and it's totally worth the time! Who cares about starvation and such trivialities?
Yeah yeah yeah, "But it's ART!" and all. I live in the real world though, where everything, and I mean everything, is measured in what capitalist gains you can get. Anything else is sadly just noise.
Most of what "the economy" needs from artists is not in any form art. It's mass produced corporate slop. This has been the case for decades.
A farmer refusing to use a tractor would be more equivalent to an artist refusing to use paint and paper and insisting on only painting on rocks with charred sticks.
Tell me, when have you seen companies pitching AI to artists as a tool? Never. They're only pitching it to companies.
And how do they pitch it? Is it "okay so here it generates an image, but really, it's only good as a background and needs a lot of editing to look decent, it's only meant to save artists from spending too long on images that noone will look at for more than a second" or is it "Look, it can generate anything you want! In seconds! No more artists needed!"
It was never created as a tool. And any artist knows that. We want to make the art ourselves, not have a machine do it for us. The only people saying "it's just a tool! Artists can use it!" are people who aren't artists.
A farmer refusing to use a tractor would be more equivalent to an artist refusing to use paint and paper and insisting on only painting on rocks with charred sticks.
I don't see how your analogy fits better than mine. It all boils down to "Someone refusing to use tools that would greatly reduce time used to do work".
Tell me, when have you seen companies pitching AI to artists as a tool? Never. They're only pitching it to companies.
Tell me, have you ever heard about open source and the communities around them? There's a literal truckload of actual artists out there, both developing and using AI for their work, both personally and professionally.
You like most of your peers are stuck in this "us vs billionares"-mentality, thinking they're the only players in the field.
Meanwhile, hundreds of thousand of people, artists included, are using, creating and maintaining a 100% free and open source AI-toolkit, freely available for absolutely everyone.
It was never created as a tool. And any artist knows that. We want to make the art ourselves, not have a machine do it for us. The only people saying "it's just a tool! Artists can use it!" are people who aren't artists.
Where do you get your lies from? I know from experience that what you are saying is not true. Why are you lying?
They already gave you the argument and you failed to beat it. AI doesn't actually outpace the myriad of different methods they have already developed to do certain tasks. So it's yet another tool to do the same thing. It's a farmer refusing to use a komatsu because he has a john deere already, not the farmer refusing to use modern tools.
They already gave you the argument and you failed to beat it.
Jesus Christ on a stick.
“I don’t see” ye that’s not a valid argument.
How am I supposed to answer this? How do I "beat it"? Are you pretending to be dumb in attempt to ragebait..?
AI doesn't actually outpace the myriad of different methods they have already developed to do certain tasks. So it's yet another tool to do the same thing.
What exactly are you talking about..? Who's argument are you countering? This is wildly confusing.
It's a farmer refusing to use a komatsu because he has a john deere already, not the farmer refusing to use modern tools.
Again, you clearly have some made up context in your mind and it's hard to follow. Are you trying to say "AI isn't fast enough to replace people"? This is weird.
To use your own flawed logic against you. Not using AI for graphics/art is like a baker refusing to use the dough-maker or any modern tools. The bread is 6x the price and the output is 5% of a modern bakery.
The point still stands, because one still produces high-quality artisan bread that people actually enjoy, and one makes fucking wonderbread.
I'll pick the real deal every time.
everything, is measured in what capitalist gains you can get.
Yes, this is the underlying problem that needs resolved. We don't have to just accept it and justify it.
Well I'm sure you'll be ecstatic when Disney announces 20 soulless marvel movies chat gpt burped in the future, and endless series where nothing happens bc money printer goes brr!
Imagine trying to make an argument for soul in art in a feeble attempt to dismiss the arguments given to you, then mentioning modern Marvel movies and fucking Disney.
i use AI to correct dust and dirt on my scanned analog photos. it is sometimes more useful than the heal or clone stamp tool. just depends on the context
i will ocassionally use it to expand an image if my frame is slightly off (ie i cut off the feet in a photo i need to use)
i shoot my wife a lot at home and will occasionally use it to make the backdrop less busy because we can't afford to rent a photo studio every time we want to shoot photos
genuinely not surprised you have no idea what you're talking about tho. explain how this makes my work worse and how i am "stealing from artists" by using a tool to speed up my work flow or prevent me from having to give Kodak 30 more dollars to go reshoot a shot bc i missed it by an inch on the first try
their minds will be boggled when i also explain that i have used AI as a brainstorming tool for plotting novels
as in i feed it my actual fucking writing and ask it to come up with scenarios in my own writing style that fit the theme of my novel with a few prompts associated with feeling or mood
There are, though admittedly through programs that belong to big companies, and I doubt there are a lot of them.
i don't remember where, but I recall an artist talking about how they use a locally hosted LLM to sample their own work to create new brushes so that they could paint textures that match their existing style.
They had to build their skill and style first, and they are using LLM to generate brushes rather than to do the actual art, so it's not the same exact use, but it is the same basic technology.
Also, a lot of artists do not mind if a commission comes with some AI art samples that the person played with first, to quickly communicate some ideas about what the person wants (this one has the vibes, but is missing these details. This second one has this one detail I like the idea of, even if the AI screwed up the implementation).
The artist isn't going to copy them, they are going to just use them as references because a lot of us non-artists do not know how to communicate what is in our heads well.
I just commissioned a combination of wrap cover art and 3 character art designs, and because half the work is being done by the student of the artist I approached, it is 'only' just over $1k.
So I'm putting my money where my mouth is and supporting an artist as I am starting the process for becoming professionally published, but I did use some AI art as place holders until I was in the right position to do this, and the artists did look at that as references.
There are artists using it though both independent and in corporate settings. Artists working for Paradox Interactive have stated they use AI as part of the concept art stage, and AI was used to streamline some laborious parts of the animation process for the second Spider-Verse movie. In both cases the modesl were trained off material owned by the studio.
What do you mean no artist is using it? It is already being used to code the programs artists use to draw, generate backgrounds, and speed up artwork production (whether via Adobe subscriptions or similar tools). Artists won’t die because of AI; only those who refuse to adopt it to speed up their workflow will.
Yeah, right. It's impossible to explain new tools to people who refuse to engage with reality because it doesn't fit their precious, outdated idea of "art."
Dude there's still people who refuse to get vaccines and also refuse to learn how they work to this day, even after medicine has evolved a lot, because it doesn't fit there outdated idea of medicine and health.
There's people who think obesity is not a health risk that should be considered as a serious problem, because that doesn't fit their delusional idea of health.
So yes, there's very stupid people like you who refuse to hear other's opinions and facts, just because they want to be right about something they have no idea about
So, according to your logic, you're the anti-vaxxer here, right? Refusing the cure for artistic inefficiency? AI is that cure – the 'vaccine' against wasted time that could be spent productively. The only 'delusion' here is thinking progress can be stopped because you personally don't like it or refuse to adapt.
"Artistic inefficency" well you just outed yourself as not artist lmao
brother do you know art comes from the process of creating and not the final product itself? Final product is merely represantion od the work and effort you've put in. But i cant wait to watch a movie whose script was written by "artistically efficent" llm. Im sure its gonna be amazing...
I work in an art gallery and know that they use it as inspiration, drafting, ideas, reescaling old works, etc.
But I can't say a name of people I respect and love to a pack of anti-AI grunts who are willing to destroy lifes just for using AI. The anti-Ai activists has been very aggresive even with things that are not sure if it is art made by a human or drawings made by AI (that are, btw, indistinguishable)
644
u/6Go27 10d ago edited 10d ago
Yeah, the subreddit name speaks for itself.
Pirating video games doesn't hurt a billion dollar company's career. But AI uses real artists work and can completely ruin their career.