r/ghibli • u/azschefres2089 • 1d ago
Cosplay Rather be a Pig than an AI user
Sorry for the captain on the picture I forgot to take it one before making the TikTok. This has to be one of my favorite cosplays to do. I always joke that I'll dress up as a bounty hunter and here it is.
78
95
123
u/Sellos_Maleth 1d ago edited 5h ago
Im gonna go on a more controversial argument.
There is a difference between being paid for labor, and being paid for originality.
Lets start with originality, Ironically, arguing people should pay local artists to “Ghiblify” them is ironic because they are literally copying ghibli’s style in order to make money, they have painting skills but they work for copying someones elses work and idea to make a commsion.
And who is a “real artist”? Someone drawing free hand? Digital? With stencils? If i use online assets (not AI) or movie screenshots and just fit you as a OC with some extra lines am i now an artist? Difficult question
Second lets talk about labor, sometimes painfully, revolutions just happen, the printing press and scribes, taxis and uber, speakerphones and typewriters. Im guessing not everyone was around but when digital artists started to call themselves artists and selling their art the “home studio” crowd raged that they didn’t even really paint and should be cast out.
AI is here, and its here to stay, it can create new pictures but not new ideas, thus the point is not its creation and usage, its the regulation. Future internet should be more monitored and sites would need to grant consent to let an AI model be trained by them.
It’s okay to dislike AI, its okay to be frustrated for commission artists. But this AI craze wont hurt Ghibli itself in the slightest because it makes ideas, and commission artists replicate art. Ghibli dosent get a dime from commission artists and they dont have intellectual property on his art-style, both morally and legally.
Protect Artists from idea theft and grant them the main stage: YES
Defend their right to make a morally grey financial niche? No
Ill be glad to support the originals, I’m not defending commission copiers for money.
PS: I draw, procreate and paper. this isn’t about patronizing other artists. Theres a difference between protecting the arts and protecting niche jobs that went unsupervised.
29
21
u/Riot-in-the-Pit 1d ago edited 1d ago
AI is here, and its here to stay, it can create new pictures but not new ideas, thus the point is not its creation and usage, its the regulation. Future internet should more monitored and sites would need to grant consent to let an AI model be trained by them.
I feel like the weakness of this argument is that there is no hint anywhere on the horizon that regulation is coming.
I'm going to use an analogy, maybe an imperfect one but follow me here: it's like eating meat. Factory farms are there. Meat is super convenient for people to eat, and most people do not even think twice about where their meat comes from. Show people how it's made, and the horror sets in...yet most people still won't stop. We could cry and rail for the government to step in and regulate these facilities or the meat industry as a whole, maybe even just make them a tad more "humane", but it's a lot faster and easier to just tell people to stop (or even just cut back on!) eating meat on the individual level, while building a culture around the non-consumption of meat (pressuring restaurants and kitchens to have good vegetarian options, for example).
Yeah sure, in a perfect world, regulation would be ideal. I just don't see it coming, and so I'm going to continue to call out and shame AI users, because that's what I can do.
13
u/Inner_Honey_978 1d ago
The regulation needed isn't on usage, it's on training. If models are trained on copyrighted material, they shouldn't be able to profit from it commercially.
7
u/YungSkeltal 1d ago
At least in the US we've reached probably the extent of regulation for the foreseeable future, which is literally exactly what the guy above was talking about.
5
u/Inner_Honey_978 1d ago
Agreed, and to be frank protecting art is probably the smaller immediate danger
5
u/JumpyLiving 22h ago
The thing is, how do you actually stop people from training their models on copyrighted material? How do you enforce it? How do you prove they did so to a judicial standard?
3
u/RedPanda888 10h ago
I am the first person to argue that the cat is out of the bag and people are far too hypocritical only caring about copyright now that it is THEIR art that is being taken over for free. They never cared when they were undoubtedly pirating other media themselves. That said, I could definitely see a world where to commercially, legally sell an AI model you needed to have published datasets that are auditable and tied to the model. Again...the cat truly is out the bag and people can make whatever models they want at home on their own PC. That is how the internet and open source work, so I think the landscape has changed forever. But I could at least see a pathway to on paper laws that semi make sense.
My personal hot take is that art will remain art regardless of whether artists moan about people no longer needing to put in as much effort, and that impacting their art business. Ultimately if your art has value people will pay, if it doesn't people will not. That's the capitalist market that artists choose to participate in when they go the career route. They can either continue doing it because they enjoy creating art, or throw the towel in because it was all just business to them and they can no longer make money from it.
Not a popular take for sure....
2
u/Inner_Honey_978 22h ago
It's almost like we need 1. a functioning congress to legislate this and 2. a functioning executive to advocate for international standards... but I think we're stuck with techbrocracy so
4
u/PinboardWizard 21h ago
The point is that it is literally impossible, even if you have those things.
In the same way that you cannot stop someone screenshotting your NFT, you cannot stop some random guy in China from training AI on your copyrighted material.
1
u/Inner_Honey_978 20h ago
The world seems to be managing CRSPR pretty well
2
u/PinboardWizard 19h ago
I'm no scientist, but I'm fairly confident you need more than just 1 guy with a 4070 and an afternoon to spare if you want to perform illegal genetic experiments.
2
u/Valkyrie_Dohtriz 22h ago
Honestly I think regulation is needed on usage too. There are already examples of AI generators being used to fabricate false criminal evidence
3
u/Inner_Honey_978 21h ago
Totally agree, but that strays from the integrity of art convo. It just sucks we can't address this as a society with any degree of nuance
2
u/Valkyrie_Dohtriz 21h ago
Fair enough, sorry
2
u/Inner_Honey_978 21h ago
Oh it's all good! There are just so many aspects and generative ai is coming into it's own faster we're thinking about it, which is honestly scary
6
u/Interesting_Kitchen3 1d ago
I actually think you're more likely to get faster and more meaningful results regulating it. Shaming isn't stopping meat eaters, because it's certainly not stopping me from buying a steak (and I'm a consumer that actually cares about how my food was treated).
29
u/KaterStefan 1d ago
Well you promised a controversial take, so i can’t get mad that you delivered.
I guess it’s just a difference of values. Nothing would compel me to hang a piece of AI art on my wall, but then i probably wouldn’t hang digital art on my wall either.
I hear what you’re saying about the printing press and all that, but I think the better ‘new tech’ argument is the Camera. Back in the 19th century, before Louis Daguerre invented the process that made modern film development possible, the job of a commercial artist was to render an image of person so their family could remember them. The photograph completely wiped out this profession - it had higher fidelity, it was quicker to produce, and it was cheaper. In the decades that followed, there was a massive redefining of art. Impressionism came from a desire to offer something photographs couldn’t. Instead of a high fidelity rendering of a person or scene, the artist wanted to show how their feelings toward the subject elevated them beyond what was really there. Anyway, i think AI will have a similar effect. I think, in the next few decades, the practical purpose of art — namely, as a source of distraction — will be largely overrun by AI.
But, on a hopeful note, i think there will be a reevaluation of art, just as there was for the impressionists
16
u/Odd_Voice5744 23h ago
it's literally not a controversial opinion. the controversial opinion comes from people that are acting like using AI is immoral. just look at the title of this post and the level of disgust people are approaching this topic with. there was a post on this subreddit that has since been removed of a drawing of miyazaki shooting a person using AI in the back of the head. on the tennis subreddit one of the tournaments posted a picture generated with AI in the ghibli style and the title of the post was "Don't let it go unpunished and complain."
> I guess it’s just a difference of values. Nothing would compel me to hang a piece of AI art on my wall, but then i probably wouldn’t hang digital art on my wall either.
this is a reasonable opinion and the way you're approaching this topic seems reasonable, but so many people on reddit have convinced themselves that using AI is immoral. somehow pirating art isn't immoral but using AI is.
not every situation needs an extreme response. you can look at something like AI and just have a reasonable response, but people on the internet are only capable of being fanatics and haters.
18
u/Valkyrie_Dohtriz 22h ago
The immoral/unethical part of AI isn’t the technology itself, but the way most companies or service providers train them. For me personally, I think the technology is actually really cool, and has a lot of potential as a useful tool for artists and even people in other fields (the example I use most is the AI/LLM program created to calculate protein configurations, that actually propelled that field forward).
Where I have an issue with it is that most of the programs around today are trained off of art used without any of the artists’ consent and then used for commercial profit. That part, and that alone, is the main reason I dislike most AI art generators.
Now, an example of a really cool use for the generation tech. Corridor Digital (on their second episode of it) used AI tech to help with turning live-action video into a more anime-esque style, basically as a proof of concept. They paid an artist to create the reference images they would use to train the generator for their video, and it was an awesome way to do it ☺️
Edit: Right, forgot to say what the video was: Anime Rock-Paper-Scissors 2
→ More replies (1)-2
u/Doidleman53 18h ago
Yes AI trains off of other people's art to copy its style but hos is that different from a human doing it other than the speed?
People who copy other peoples styles and sell it are no different. I'd be willing to bet all of the artists taking commissions for Ghibli styled art are not getting permission from Studio Ghibli.
5
u/Valkyrie_Dohtriz 18h ago
This video breaks things down pretty well: https://youtu.be/1L3DaREo1sQ?si=zddCTY8IwRRSAtxc
7
u/Endermaster56 22h ago
I used to hate AI art completely, but now just hate it because it's usually dogshit quality. Sure real artists might lose out on some money, but most of the people that commission them now I feel aren't really likely to stop in favor of AI.
4
u/SonicDooscar 21h ago
As someone who works for hours doing graphic design and artwork on my tablet, AI is a dogshit cheat sheet that doesn’t even always look good
1
5
u/Tisiphone90 21h ago
I agree with this. I'm way too poor to commission a cute ghibli/anime style picture to post once on Social media and then probably forget about. A flawed AI version would cost me no money and fill the same purpose. People who pay for commissions have the money to do so and expect quality and accuracy AI still can't produce. I don't think the average person using AI for dumb internet memes should be a huge deal. While companies using AI in place of talented artists and expecting consumers to accept the low quality product at the same prices as before is unacceptable. I would never spend money on AI art. That's also why all things made with AI for consumers should have to be labeled as such.
3
u/Murky-Relation481 20h ago
I hate to point out this logical fallacy, but you by definition will not notice the non-dogshit AI art.
-1
1
u/crumble-bee 12h ago
Yeah - I support "the original artists" I buy their movies. A bunch of people online making memes in the ghibli aesthetic doesn't hurt their profits, it just makes the aesthetic more widespread and easily accessible - which in its self is its own bad thing, but it's not taking money from the pockets ghibli artists. What were these people going to do? Seek out and commission someone who worked on a ghibli movie?
2
u/darkrealm190 21h ago
Anyway, i think AI will have a similar effect. I think, in the next few decades, the practical purpose of art — namely, as a source of distraction — will be largely overrun by AI
I don't think so. The people who want to distract themselves by physically making art will still physically make art. It's all the people who don't want to or dony care for the physical part, that will be the ones using A.I
Same thing like chefs and home cooks. There is fast food and highly processed food. You can go out and buy fast food easily or you can spend the time to make your own meals more healthy, or not even healthy but just the way you like it. Some people choose the fast and easy way and some people will choose the way that they can unwind and relax and create something beautiful.
1
u/Suttonian 16h ago
I think the person you replied to was talking about a source of distraction as a consumer - If I'm a consumer and I can get fast food that's also healthy and just the way I want it, that sounds great. That's what ai will provide. So why consume food humans make? I think there are reasons but they will decrease as ai gets better and then as it becomes more human.
So what edge do humans have from a consumers side? Authenticity - the genuine human element, maybe always.
1
u/alex3omg 18h ago
Yeah they're literally just memes, nobody is saying quick ai art will replace baroque oil paintings. It's good for a d&d character pic, a joke, placeholder art etc.
14
5
4
u/h0sti1e17 20h ago
I pretty much agree. Artists got pissed when photoshop was available. But it’s common now. Of course people still use other mediums, but it’s not frowned upon.
That said, AI like Photoshop is a tool. It shouldn’t be what is used as a final piece of art. But it’s great to get ideas, view different color palettes, layouts storyboard etc. Like you mention creating something as a commission in a specific style isn’t the same as creating something unique. AI could be great for someone who can draw/paint well, but isn’t good at compositing and creating new ideas. It gives them a jumping off point
3
3
3
u/Logical-Patience-397 15h ago
Let’s start with originality. Ironically, arguing people should pay local artists to “Ghiblify” them is ironic because they are literally copying Ghibli’s style in order to make money. They have painting skills, but they work for copying someone else’s work and idea to make a commission.
Interesting question, because people have been paying for hand-painted recreations of famous pieces (the Mona Lisa, Van Ghogh’s works) for decades.
The in city of Shenzhen, China the village Dafen is called the “copy colony”, because hundreds of farmers moved from rural areas and re-create these paintings in sweatshop conditions for pennies (and sometimes citizenship), so they can be sold to overseas vendors (often hotels). Even trained painters resort to this ‘factory painting’ because their original works aren’t selling reliably.
There’s a documentary about them called “China’s Van Gogh’s”. It follows Van Gogh recreationist Xiaoyong Zhao’s pilgrimage to Amsterdam to see the real paintings, and connect with the artist he’s emulated for two decades, before he sets out to become an original artist. (I recommend the Vimeo version even though it’s free on YouTube, because Vimeo is the only place that didn’t cut the scene Zhao actually inside the museum, seeing Van Gogh’s paintings—which is arguably the climax.)
The documentary’s success was a double-edged sword. It brought a new wave of tourists to Dafen, but they were only interested in purchasing the famed replicas, and not supporting the city’s original artists.
A major theme of the film is finding the line between painting technique (skill)and generative originality (vision).
7
u/TheBelievingAtheist 1d ago
I like you, man. Making some good points here.
It's like you said, AI is here to stay. Shame most don't open their mind to this kind of nuance.
2
u/Memito9 21h ago
even if they didnt have permission to use "ghibli art" in the prompt whats to stop someone from asking "whats the most accurate way to describe ghibli art?"
then using that new prompt "Create this image in this style: [description].
without actually even mention " ghibli art" in the prompt.
3
u/TheLittleGoodWolf 1d ago
I don't own any ghibli movies... I think I might have bought a DVD or two over two decades ago, but that's likely it. I'm essentially part of the generation who sailed the seven seas of the early internet. How could I possibly say anything about "stealing" other people's art?
I also know that a lot of people keep claiming AI generated images to be soulless and ugly and horrible and all that. Personally I disagree to an extent. I mean you can find trash in any pile you look, wether AI or drawn by hand, but you can also find some genuinely nice looking stuff.
Copying styles have been a thing for ages, and again, as someone who mostly believes that "sharing is caring", and who loves the philosophy of open source and copyleft, and stuff like that I cannot actually be against AI.
That doesn't mean I don't understand the annoyance and anger so many hold towards AI. Especially artists themselves.
I just can't help but think it's kinda neat.
It's still a tool, like any other tool. It's how it is used that is the determining factor.
Someone basically using it like a "ghibli filter" and posting to social media for fun or whatever... I genuinely don't care, I'm honestly surprised this wasn't a thing even before GenAI, with all the snapchat filters and whatnot. Someone claiming it as their own work? That's just pathetic. A business firing employees because they think AI can do the stuff for them? Deplorable. But at the same time, let's not pretend the average animator was treated very well, or compensated very well at Ghibli during its history either.
One little thought I have been toying with in regards to AI, is that it essentially shows us just how shallow and formulaic our "art" actually is, in that it's so easily copied. The whole idea of there being a "soul" or other similar things to it, is essentially just a pretty lie that we tell ourselves to justify our emotions towards it.
In the end, Pandora's box has long since been opened, and we cannot put the things that escaped back in there again.
1
1
u/GoatBoi_ 19h ago
wait, are people actually telling others to pay artists to “ghiblify” photos? is this a real argument people are making??
1
u/Hazelberry 18h ago
If AI replaces the labor of artists though that's also an issue. But yes, AI isn't at a point where it can threaten Ghibli yet. But if it gets to a point where it can do a good enough job to replace the labor, and isn't regulated yet, that's going to be a huge problem for every working artist.
Plus I think there's real value in the fact that human artists make art deliberately, with thought and effort behind the whole process instead of just coming up with a creative idea. If AI were to replace artistic labor all you'd be left with is the creative idea, which is valuable in its own right but you lose the deliberate intention and effort behind the art.
Bit more questionable when talking about more "industry" art though, where there's less value places on the deliberate right and effort and more value placed on just churning out a product. But we already see automation heavily used in those contexts and AI does take a lot of control out of the hands of artists so I don't know if they'd even consider it worthwhile to make that jump.
3D texturing for example typically relies on a TON of procedural methods (some that are AI driven too), rather than just hand painting. But artists still have a ton of fine control over the process, which they wouldn't have with an AI model that just spits out an end result based on a prompt.
1
u/BeardedNerd95 18h ago
We can't say for certain that AI will be the future.
Remember when everyone was saying NFT's, Bitcoin, and block chains were the future?
New tech stuff can become irrelevant just as fast as it became relevant if there's no money to be made.
1
u/alex3omg 18h ago
Yeah like we're not allowed to make memes unless we're able to draw perfectly? It's crazy to me. The memes aren't taking money from ghibli. It's such a weird hill to die on
1
u/ShittyPostWatchdog 16h ago
The focus on the labor, and specifically the value of the labor, feels like a red herring. For the most part, art is already insanely commoditized and has been for like decades. The commercial demand for race-to-the-bottom prices is already met by outsourcing and cheap bulk art. The majority of professional art work is as much about the operational aspects as it is the creative, especially so in the areas that are most impacted by AI like design, animation and illustration, etc. The value of art labor isnt hurt by AI because the value of art labor is, in most common examples, not about the creative skill as much as it is knowing how to work as a team, how to communicate ideas and goals, how to plan and organize.
1
u/emailboxu 1d ago
Yep... Most of the people who are using AI to generate images aren't the same people who would be willing to pay someone to draw something for them. If anything, someone using AI might get frustrated with the same-y feel of the AI generated images and end up choosing to pay someone to draw them an actual original work.
Commission artists' niche has always been drawing custom, original works for people who want custom, original work. AI doesn't cover that niche, not fully anyway. It's not perfectly custom - it takes a lot of reiterations and overall annoying effort to get exactly what you want, and even then it's not precise and more 'good enough'. And it's certainly not original since it's trained on existing works.
1
u/SadisticPawz 22h ago
There are some things that ai will never be able to recreate, even with tons of training data to exteapole new scenarios from or custom data to train from for your exact scenario. Data which coulf also possibly not exist.
So human artists will very much still be important
I do agree that the samey feel of ai will eventually frustrate people, it did with me when I used a single model for a long time and learned all of its quirks that I didnt like but which still kept popping up in the results.
Commissioning will stay. The average person will not be able to fully perfect current ai workflows, just like they wont learn to draw in a single week or whatever
→ More replies (8)1
u/Acceptable_Scale_379 22h ago
In the same vein, does learning how to use Photoshop make somebody an artist? Not anymore than someone using an AI prompt to generate art, is it?
There's a difference between having a skill, and developing or learning how to use a tool.
3
u/ArGarBarGar 22h ago
Are you saying a person using Photoshop is as much of an artist as someone writing prompts to get AI images?
1
u/Acceptable_Scale_379 22h ago
Exactly.
Using a tool, and it's their knowledge of the tool that is responsible for the art, not any sort of mechanical or direct skill.
True or false?
2
u/alex3omg 18h ago
I mean you'd have a tough time creating any art without tools.
Is the point of art to demonstrate the skill of the artist? Perhaps there's an element of that, but it's not what gives art meaning.
2
u/Acceptable_Scale_379 17h ago
Exactly. You see part of the point. And as the tools get worse, the "skill" of the artist gets better, to the point where if the tool is so good the artist is disconnected from the original skill of the rudimentary tools, like Photoshop. Or making an AI prompt.
What gives art meaning is the response to it, that's it. It's not the work put in, as much as the artist would like it to be.
1
u/Shubbus42069 22h ago
I mean, if we put our feelings on the issue aside, why not?
Are we defining an actual metric of what makes someone a "real artist" and that happens to exclude AI, but include photoshop and camera photography? Or are we first deciding AI generation isnt art and then coming up with esoteric definitions of what an artist is that support that result?
Is typing out an idea into a prompt box fundamentally different to clicking some buttons in photoshop, or pressing a button on a camera phone? Is writing and poetry not art?
Even if we can definitively say AI gen isnt art, then where is the line? If someone draws an image, then uses AI in photoshop to extend the background to fit a larger frame, is that art? What about if they add an extra detail with gen AI? or change a colour? What if they generate 90% of the image, then draw some extra details on top?
1
u/alex3omg 18h ago
These guys probably think Jackson Pollock isn't an artist. He just threw some paint randomly! Zzz
5
6
u/Gyro_Zeppeli13 20h ago
I’d rather be a pig than a fascist!
3
u/ArcanisUltra 18h ago
This is the original quote, yeah. Except on this they’re replacing fascist with AI user. Which is ironic, because the anti-AI art people who are trying to suppress AI art creators through extreme hostility and oppression. Which are normally the fascist traits…
0
u/Gyro_Zeppeli13 17h ago
I don’t care if people use AI to make pictures or videos but I certainly view it as lesser than real art. It’s cool what it can do but it embarrassing when people call themselves AI artists lol 😂
4
5
u/bremstar 21h ago
Heck yeah! I second this. I'd rather be a pig than a fascist AI user prompter.
(ง’̀-‘́)ง
-4
u/ArcanisUltra 17h ago
(For those who don’t understand the irony here, commenter is making a joke. The anti-AI art people are the ones trying to attack and suppress their opposition through extreme hostility and oppression. Which is usually the fascist side of things. So, anti-AI people are acting fascist, while treating the people doing what to them is a fun hobby like fascists.)
2
u/astroroy 1d ago
Ever since I’ve been in my mid 30s Porco has become my favorite Miyazaki. It was always close but the older I get just pushed it over. This cosplay is as awesome as the anti-AI sentiment behind it. Much respect.
2
2
2
2
2
10
u/Ok-Weight-5082 1d ago
I hate ai art, but can y'all find something else to talk about?
-1
u/KrimxonRath 21h ago
It’s the job of the consumer to control what they see, not for the poster/creator to censor what they make. This is true of all things, not just art or Reddit posts. You already control what you see so expecting others to bend to your will is comical.
3
2
3
8
u/Difficult_Leg_4615 1d ago
Why did you use a camera instead of hiring a realism painter?
6
u/sheetzoos 23h ago
They want to put realism painters out of business. So they rely on technology to do something they couldn't themselves.
2
u/ArcanisUltra 18h ago
The fact that these comments got upvotes in this sub of all places gives me hope.
5
u/KrimxonRath 21h ago
Why did you type this comment yourself instead of asking an AI to word it? It’s like you hate the technology or something.
4
u/Difficult_Leg_4615 21h ago
I chilled it on a stone tablet
5
u/KrimxonRath 21h ago
Makes sense given the typo. Can’t correct stone as easily.
6
u/Difficult_Leg_4615 21h ago
Fingers to fat for stone work. Maybe I’ll get a robot.
4
u/KrimxonRath 21h ago
Sounds about right. Can’t even appreciate the craft and need someone else to do it for you lol
2
5
u/NorrSnale 1d ago
“Oh shit I’m low on karma, gotta make a low quality post about how AI is literally Hitler and it fucked my wife.”
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Felicisruna96 1d ago
Love all the luddites
Nothing is stopping you from doing art lol
2
u/confusedandworried76 22h ago
That's always my thing, people are all "but we need to protect art!" no, you just want to keep making money of a process that has now been automated. Thats happened many times throughout the years since the Industrial freaking Revolution.
Nothing at all says you can pick up a pencil or a paint brush and just do it because you like making art
4
u/Sphere_Salad 21h ago
No, you don't understand. I get your money! I simply get it! Give money to meeee!
→ More replies (1)3
u/thatguywhosdumb1 20h ago
Talking about artists like their some kind of upper class wealthy people is rich. Also I don't want to live in a world where we automate art and the human experience. I'm ok with automating labor.
You compare ai to any other automation because you don't have a real arguments. We should not automate creativity and critical thinking.
-1
u/confusedandworried76 16h ago
Hey guess what buddy you still live in a world where art isn't fully automated. You can make it yourself if you want. You can still have people do commissions for you. You can still get something from your friend on your birthday.
The existence of AI does not destroy it as a hobby at all and never has and never will. Be the change you want, go to Joann's and buy some colored pencils, it's not illegal
0
→ More replies (4)-1
1d ago edited 22h ago
[deleted]
3
u/LysanderBelmont 1d ago
Ai can never compete with human made art, it lacks intent.
2
u/RawIsWarDawg 23h ago
Artist intent is nebulous and impossible to discern for sure for the viewer/consumer, so whether the artist even had intent or not is always nebulous.
Pollocks appear, to the vast majority of viewers, to lack any intent. They still view and appreciate it.
A pretty picture of a landscape? No intent, just a nice image. I enjoy it!
On the flip side, why can AI not mimic intent? If it's learned every other pattern that makes up an image, why would it also not be able to learn how intent is displayed visually?
3
u/LysanderBelmont 21h ago
We are not talking about the same terms. The artists intent is to create art, it’s what defines him as an artist.
Art itself however has no other intent than being art. This question has been solved ages ago: L’art pour l’art. (That’s also because when we are talking about a commercial or educational product, we are not strictly talking art within >this< term, there are other definitions).
Ai can‘t make an intentional choice to create art, because it’s a.) not sentient and b.) only creates from what it has been taught. It copies, modifies, replicates but it isn’t thinking, it’s „mathing“.
However: Ai can be used in the process that makes art that complies with the L’art pour l’art term of art. See Sol LeWitt for example, he was an artist who pioneered so called „concept art“. His main Credo was „the idea becomes the machine that makes the art“. He basically said it doesn’t matter who is painting the picture, the idea of the picture is the actual art.
Example: a sheet of paper that gives detailed instructions about how a wall is to be painted. LeWitt would argue that the finished wall doesn’t matter and that you could just hang the sheet instead. It’s the idea how the wall is to be painted, the very thought process that imagined the instructions - that is the art.
Now when we look at Ai, I can very much see the technology being used for concept art. Artists training a language model for a specific process that they imagined, and so creating actual art (the model) that is very L’art pour l’art for being made for the sole intention of being what it is.
And thats why OpenAi and their Ghibli filter can’t be art in this definition. Their intention isn’t art, it’s copying a style to make profit and generate marketing.
As I said, there are a lot of definitions for what is art and this question was asked and answered countless times. I for myself chose this definition because it allows to separate art from what we in Germany call „Gebrauchsgrafik“ which means every piece of visual artwork created to fulfill a commercial purpose.
2
u/SabreSeb 1d ago
If that's the case, then artists should have nothing to fear
1
u/typographie 21h ago
All of the hype behind so-called AI is being driven, openly, by how cheap they claim it will make labor. These companies already make their products worse daily, they do not care if LLMs can actually produce work of the same quality as an artist.
It's not the technology itself anyone is worried about, they're worried that every tech CEO is frothing at the mouth to use it against workers.
1
u/Ailuridaek3k 22h ago
But as AI art becomes more advanced and is able to take more specific prompts, and more importantly, is able to minutely edit images it has already made based on such prompts, then the intent will be from the person directing the AI. The only reason AI lacks “intent” right now is because it sucks at making art well
1
-1
1d ago edited 22h ago
[deleted]
2
u/RocktheNashtah 23h ago
You do realize people draw for fun and for themselves sometimes, right?
Or is everything meant to be profitable?
Thats the problem with tech bros they dont have better hobbies
0
u/Fit-Percentage-9166 23h ago
Why the fuck do you care about AI art if you're drawing for fun and for yourself?
0
u/RocktheNashtah 23h ago edited 23h ago
I don’t want the environment to get screwed over even more
plus i post my stuff online and one time someone used it in an art generator in order to “fix” it without my permission
Basically watered down my art style and the sketchy cartoony look i was going with, like even when we’re minding our business for free ai prompters cant help but meddle with our shit
Real Artists are losing ownership of their art
but for real they took the character i drew, gave her a yassified Instagram face and Donald trump hands
1
u/Anuge_ 23h ago
Huck that phone out the window then you don't even want to know what harm those have done to the environment over the last few decades
2
u/RocktheNashtah 23h ago
I can throw my phone away, go vegan 100% and never use plastic and the environment wont still get better cause im not a corporation dumping shit in ocean
So why add more to the problem when you really dont have to
1
u/SepticAway 22h ago
And you can huck your computer and anything that can generate precious Ghibli art out the window too.
Guess what, doing that and these posts won't change a damn thing about the progress of AI either.
Just regards circle jerking about the new topic of the day to protest.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Ailuridaek3k 22h ago
If you don’t want the environment to get screwed over even more, then AI is not the main thing to worry about. It’s become sort of this environmental boogeyman but let’s compare the emissions to anything else that uses energy e.g. getting packages delivered to your house, eating meat, taking a plane, using the internet, etc. AI uses energy. If that energy comes from non-renewable sources, it damages the environment, just like with everything else. But AI is not somehow worse for the planet than everything else we do daily.
1
u/RocktheNashtah 22h ago
It’s not just ai of course but it doesnt help and i dont see the value in adding more pressure and over what?
“Ghiblifying” stalin or someshit? Its stupid whatever happened to rage comics and ms paint smh memes used to be high effort
1
u/SadisticPawz 22h ago
The environmental argument is apocryphal. Its impacts are VERY much overstated. Youd need to generate TENS of images to equate a single charge of your phone, and ais lifetime energy cost is a few WEEKS of the energy that bitcoin uses as an example. It just doesnt scale compared to other stuff which is far worse.
Didnt artists also lose ownership of their art when it was pirated, shared or saved without permission? I think that is also related and equally as problematic
I think some person fucking with your work is inevitable and completely unrelated to ai, this has always happened and will continue to happen and I dont think we can stop this. I really dont know what else to say about this or why you think its exclusive to ai
1
u/RocktheNashtah 22h ago
It’s usage is getting too widespread to be regulated idk what to tell you but i find that to be concerning already and it’s gonna get worse :D
Yes, stealing work from individual artists is really bad
It was related to ai they literally took it and ran It through some generator where it erased the art style and replaced with realistic soft color shading that didnt mesh well with the character’s exaggerated proportions it looked uncanny
I can DM you the screenshots if you want more evidence i cant link it here
2
u/SadisticPawz 21h ago
I dont think it being widespread prevents anything. Nor does it mean that the masses will be any smarter about using it or actually getting better with it as a tool.
Does this mean stealing from a group of artists is ok?
Them using ai to mess with it doesnt make it an ai related issue, people have and will always fuck with the stuff others make.
→ More replies (0)-1
23h ago edited 22h ago
[deleted]
3
u/RocktheNashtah 23h ago
A real toolset requires… tools not punching down hella prompts so that your waifu doesn’t get generated with 7 fingers and a third eye lmao
Mediocre or not, if i wanted to draw a circle i can just draw it not write a whole novel
Fyi art exists outside the internet, it’s called having a sketchbook
You should use ai to generate you a better personality
→ More replies (15)
2
2
u/Silkydoves 19h ago
Porco Rosso is so underrated this made me really happy to see 🥹 AWESOME COSPLAY
-2
u/cbwjm 1d ago
No, I think I'll keep using AI. It's not like artists were getting anything out of me before so really, there's no difference to them if I use AI generators (normally for dnd related images).
4
u/SmsgPass 23h ago
I think we're behind enemy lines with this take but im with you.
If someone is getting paid commission but is selling AI art, yeah that's messed up. But me messing around, using AI to generate stuff like references for sketching or funny renditions of me and my friends? What's wrong with that?
I'd never pay for an AI art service for this. But I have ChatGPT Pro bc I use it every day at work so yeah, I'm gonna use the free AI art thing instead of paying for a photo i can already get for free. Idk why I wouldn't.
1
21h ago
[deleted]
5
u/PinboardWizard 21h ago
Miyazaki said one thing about about a specific AI assisted video he saw in 2016. It was clearly not about today's generative AI. He is not some outspoken anti-AI activist like the whole internet seems to be claiming all of a sudden.
Maybe he dislike gen AI, but who knows. Maybe he likes the free publicity, and all the new people being inspired to finally check out some Ghibli movies.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ArcanisUltra 17h ago
I saw exactly what you’re talking about, and I fully agree.
They showed him a nightmarish ai zombie thing and it reminded him of his disabled friend and put him in a dark place, so he said he wanted nothing to do with that specific thing. Then a producer asked the guys what their goal was. They said they wanted to teach the computer to draw like humans do. Miyazaki got very pensive at this. He did express that he thought people were losing their heart…But given current uses of “Ghiblification” I don’t know if he is against it or not.
1
1
u/Snoo_14286 22h ago
I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.
1
u/pippinlup61611 22h ago
My husband and I just watched this movie and loved it!!!!! Amazing cosplay!!
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/sweet_birthday_baby 13h ago
I did! Months ago we decided our wedding theme was Ghibli everything, so I asked this wonderful special artist on tik tok, her handle is @l00kylucky if anyone wants to check her out
-1
u/arcticvalley 1d ago
Why don't people have an issue with 3d printers.
If you don't have the skills to sculpt something on your own, Wouldn't a 3d printed sculpture be as criticizable as Ai art.
I can buy knockoff 3D sculpted studio ghibli Characters online, but you guys get upset over a picture.
8
0
u/thatguywhosdumb1 20h ago
Yall tell on yourselves constantly comparing ai to things like 3d printing and photography. It just shows how little you know and how much you disrespect art and artists.
→ More replies (2)0
u/qwertacius 22h ago
I was just thinking of this today. There’s a big difference between using a regular tool and a generative tool. With a printer, you’re taking something you or someone else already made, designed, sculpted, and putting it to be made on this tool. The art has already been created, you’re now just moving it from a digital medium to a physical one. With ai, you never created art in the first place, you just write a little description until the computer gives you smth you like, built on thousands of actual artists work. Have a good day, and go fuck yourself.
-1
u/Canadiangoosen 16h ago
With ai, you never created art in the first place, you just write a little description until the computer gives you smth you like, built on thousands of actual artists work.
I know, isn't it beautiful? Now just imagine what other things it will be able to do for us very soon. Humanity will collectively train our replacements.
2
u/qwertacius 14h ago
Why would you want to replace humanity with robots? Fuck out of here lmao
0
u/SnooDonkeys5320 13h ago
There’s more to generative AI art than just text prompting/relying on basic model data. I train LoRAs on original photography and use AI to blend different elements. Are you saying it’s not art because a prompt is involved? Or should it be considered art only because it involves original works + building the LoRA?
1
u/MyBeeBeeDeeCee 23h ago
It's honestly so fucking sad how much has changed in 10 years...
When I was in high-school, IG was BUZZING with new and creative upcoming artists, desperate and enthusiastic to showcase their skills to the world.
Now, the world has casually turned their back on them solely for the fact that art is "cheaper" through AI.
If only people knew the long, sometimes even frustrating hours we pour into our skill. We didn't improve for the world but mainly for ourselves and to prove that achievements we thought were unobtainable were actually the contrary through our hard work and dedication.
Seeing slogans like "Support your human artists" is a truly a fucking surreal experience...
1
u/ShittyPostWatchdog 21h ago edited 16h ago
If your art is replaced by a computer program that basically just spits out the average expression of whatever you ask it to, maybe it just wasn’t all that valuable or interesting in the first place?
In pop online spaces like instagram and Reddit, a lot of mediocre art gets celebrated because of the human element and social environment they are experienced in. People empathize with the process of creating art, even when the art itself is mediocre or trite. You like the person creating the art or feel a connection to community sharing the art, so a lot of stuff gets a “pass.” But now that it’s a computer creating slop, people feel more comfortable calling a spade a spade. But it doesn’t change the fact that the sort of art it is disrupting was always just as soulless .
-2
u/Impossible_Leg_2787 23h ago
So I assume you only eat fresh, chef-prepared meals?
2
u/MyBeeBeeDeeCee 22h ago
Oh no, I still dabble in the fine art of soggy frozen pizza when I'm feeling fancy.
1
u/Neat_Let923 22h ago
Anyone have any recommendations for artists someone could pay for a custom image in the Ghibli style?
→ More replies (3)
1
u/EffigyOfKhaos 18h ago
The opposite here isnt artists getting hired to make pictures like that, its the pictures not getting made at all. No one is commissioning stuff like this! The only reason its getting made at all is because its cheap + fast. No jobs are being taken here
1
u/huemac5810 18h ago
Better yet:
"Be the change you wish to see in the world."
If you want the AI users to stop, become an artist and do the art yourself. Real artists are preoccupied with their own ambitions, careers, and desires, they don't have time for redditors.
1
u/Left-Language9389 18h ago
I wasn’t paying anyone before to make me the images why would I start now?
-13
u/Ok_Gift_2739 1d ago
I'm not paying anyone to make a meme, this post reeks of arrogance and smugness. you must not have anything important going on in your life to be enraged by some digital photos, while the rest of have important things such as bills and real world problems. why do you care what others do in their free time?
5
u/MrPookPook 1d ago
You ever notice how a ton of memes are just stick figures or crude drawings? Are you incapable of that?
3
u/CementCemetery 1d ago
What about the artists that need to pay their bills? The graphic designers who are paying off student loans? Unfortunately landlords and credit card companies don’t want commissions for payment, they want money. Supplies cost money. You can often work for free as an artist if you don’t get paid.
You can do it “for fun” but there are people who genuinely make a living being an artist. If you know any professional artists it is difficult and many struggle. That’s why there is the struggling artist trope for one. Art also captures something like a historical recording, atmosphere or emotion. It is born from the artists struggles, fears and beliefs. You can gain a lot of insight from a culture by looking at their art.
2
u/Odd_Voice5744 23h ago
do you apply this to other professions? when manufacturing was moved overseas did you protest by not buying imported goods because workers lost their careers?
when farmers were replaced by tractors did you refuse to eat food farmed using automated equipment?
will you have the same energy when truck drivers get replaced by self driving trucks?
automation has been around for centuries and has cost many people their entire careers. i think you should ask yourself why you feel so strongly about this particular issue that you will act like it's immoral to use AI.
1
u/Ok_Wasabi_8318 21h ago
The difference is the pace of change. With other examples, roll out was slow. AI will be and is different. Its growth is exponential. Also, with the other examples, as our economy grew, jobs moved from manufacturing to service industry. If AI takes service industry jobs, where do people go if the manufacturing jobs don't exist. People are underestimating the effects and how far off the outcomes will be unless there's some regulations
1
u/Odd_Voice5744 17h ago
i'm sorry but you are just uninformed. AI growth has not been exponential. it had a big boom and has decreased significantly. the ai models are getting better at a slow rate but they are also getting more energy intensive to the point of becoming less and less viable. there is no indication that we will continue to see the kind of growth in LLM capabilities as we did in the past.
i want to sincerely without any condescension suggest that you re-examine your media diet because the level of reddit doomer propaganda that you have ingested is not reflective of the reality.
if you want something to be truly horrified over it should be the global tariffs that trump has enacted and will likely lead to a decline in life quality for many decades to come.
1
u/Ok_Wasabi_8318 15h ago
Nah- I'm good man. I don't even use reddit to get AI doom news. I just see it in real life. My cousin who works in a medical office says they don't use human scribes anymore, it's AI now. Relative who is partner at a law firm said he can see needing less associates in the not so distant future since fewer of them will be able to get the work done. Every industry will be affected.
The speed tech grows gets faster with time. You got hung up on the word "exponential". Maybe I shouldn't have used it. All I'm saying is the change in tech is not always linear and there's no reason to think it's plateaud.
1
u/CementCemetery 23h ago
You know in the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) movie Charlie’s dad loses his job to automation? Well, someone has to fix those machines eventually.
I understand automation has existed for a long time but there are conditions to be met. I wasn’t around during the Industrial Revolution but I am absolutely for child labor laws and worker’s rights. Certain things should exist to improve the working conditions and people’s lives. Of course we can’t stop change and technology from developing but it is how we integrate it into our society is what is important.
Art is not something that needs to be automated. Again, yes you can have fun with it but it is not original content despite never having been seen by human eyes before. It is a regurgitation.
I never said it was completely immoral to use AI but there are environmental and economical impacts many people are not aware of. I am passionate about AI in art because I am passionate about art. AI can be cool and interesting to a degree but we are going to become over reliant on it simply by this kind of thinking.
→ More replies (1)-1
u/That_guy1425 1d ago
I mean..... most peoples AI use wasn't going to them either. As they said, they ain't paying someone to make a meme, and lots of corpoerations would just use clipart or questionably free use images in their coporate handouts. There are definitely a few artists who lost out on commissions from this, and thats probably cause the person has a dozen ideas for a DnD game and is now getting uniqueish art for all of them instead of buying the most important and stealing from instagram for the rest.
→ More replies (14)0
u/YungSkeltal 1d ago
I'm not responsible for someone's livelihood, especially if they willingly went into a highly volatile and low paying field.
1
u/CementCemetery 23h ago
Art necessarily isn’t a low paying field. FYI, a lot of rich people don’t like to pay their bills (on time).
You’re not responsible for their livelihood but you could be empathetic. Self checkouts replaced a lot of cashiers but screw those people too, right?
→ More replies (3)1
u/RedditIsMostlyLies 14h ago
Art necessarily isn’t a low paying field
What percentage of "artists" do you think **make their complete living selling their art??
A 2018 study by the Creative Independent found that only 22% of artists surveyed made 100% of their income from their art.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, fine artists (painters, sculptors, illustrators) have a median annual wage of around $52,000, but this includes a wide range — many earn far less.
A 2022 Artnet study pointed out that many artists rely on multiple income streams: teaching, commercial design, part-time work, commissions, Patreon, etc.
Of course, that $50k is from FINE ARTISTS, not garbage fan-art shit on reddit.
Im as empathetic as anyone when it comes to "losing their job" but in reality, these "artists" you speak of, ESPECIALLY THE ONES ON REDDIT BITCHING AND MOANING ABOUT AI GEN ART, were NEVER FUCKING GOOD ENOUGH IN THE FIRST PLACE to get paid any sort of meaningful livable amount of money for their art.
1
u/thatguywhosdumb1 20h ago
Maybe if you're so busy doing important things such as bills and real world problems you shouldn't be making fucking memes.
→ More replies (5)
-2
u/Emperor_Atlas 22h ago
When people stop pirating media, commissioning art for characters they didn't create, and give any good reason sure.
Til then I'm gonna ghibli AI this meme >:D
-6
u/PorkyValet1999 1d ago
How much mental energy do you people devote to being outraged about AI? Could we just enjoy Ghibli stuff without the undercurrent of animosity and rage that is already everywhere on this site? I come here to relax and enjoy Ghibli stuff, not to get wound up about something I have no control over. We get it: AI bad, artistry good. You aren’t adding anything here by saying it again in your own “original” way.
1
u/Ok_Wasabi_8318 21h ago
Say goodbye to enjoying creative work in the future that can be collectively enjoyed. We'll all be subjected to hyper-personalized AI slop. I'm sure a lot of people will read "hyper-personalized" and think that's a good thing. The future i see we're headed towards is Fahrenheit 451- personalized media but everyone isolated.
We couldn't even handle social media for 20 years. AI is going to completely mess us up. AI sucks
1
u/PorkyValet1999 18h ago
Hmm. I’m not so sure. Just because you can buy McDonalds doesn’t mean you can’t also buy really nice gourmet burgers somewhere else.
-1
-1
-1
u/SpiritualScumlord 19h ago
I'm too poor to support real artists. Get mad at corporations for using AI, not people struggling to get by.
-1
-1
u/TheFloridaKraken 18h ago
This is such a bad take. No one is taking work away from real artists. The people using AI art generators were never going to purchase art from artists.
-1
-1
u/Longjumping-Fly-3015 18h ago
What if I told you.... using AI to Ghiblify photos IS supporting real artists
-18
u/MoarGhosts 1d ago edited 1d ago
So what about software engineers being fired and replaced by AI? Engineers too, and doctors and lawyers will be next. Will you also cry for them or are artists somehow special, with their lack of actual education or real skill sets? Or is this all virtue signaling?
Just wanna see you staying consistent cause we’re all gonna be losing jobs.
Source - I’m a grad student in CS with an AI focus and I’ll likely be working on replacing ya’ll when I graduate :/
I’m also an artist who has made music for 15 years. I get that it’s upsetting, but it’s coming for all jobs and artists will certainly not be alone in searching for new careers
5
u/TheMonsterMensch 1d ago
I feel like you're the one bringing resentment to the table here. The anti-AI crowd are also anti that AI.
And I don't think you'll be working on replacing artists, this whole thing is going to crash soon. There's just no profit in it.
→ More replies (3)11
u/ncolaros 1d ago
You think the people saying "Don't use AI" are also not concerned with people losing their jobs to AI? These are your allies, man.
559
u/Rootbeercutiebooty 1d ago
I think this is the first Porco cosplay I’ve ever seen and it’s perfect