Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists’ permission. And that’s without getting into AI’s negative drag on the environment.

  • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think there are interesting aspects of AI art. It takes a real artist to properly instruct an AI to create something new, different, and interesting. When I think of modern art, a lot of art snobs were dismissive of it because “it’s not art.” I think we will see the same opinions of AI art change as new, different, and interesting artwork is made.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      Thing is, generated art is not new or different. It’s a machine amalgamation of existing works. The only vaguely interesting bits are how it mangles body parts into some kind of Cronenberg horror.

      • The_Vampire@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        7 months ago

        Humans certainly don’t make new things out of nothing. They also take from different sources and combine them together to make something new, whether that’s direct inspiration or on a more abstract level through the brain.

        Learning models aren’t generating art any more than GIMP or Photoshop is. It’s the person behind the tool that makes the art, not the tool. There’s certainly an art to prompt smithing.

        I feel like a lot of people dismiss generated art simply because it’s new (and because as a byproduct is spits out dozens of junk pieces before getting anywhere good). I don’t see how it’s that different from someone using photo-editing software built with dozens of algorithms instead of a ‘pure’ drawing pad, or someone using a drawing pad instead of a pencil, or someone using a pencil instead of chalk. It’s a tool, and a great one at that in comparison to many digital tools for artists.

        • Eccitaze@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          People dismiss AI art because they (correctly) see that it requires zero skill to make compared to actual art, and it has all the novelty of a block of Velveeta.

          If AI is no more a tool than Photoshop, go and make something in GIMP, or photoshop, or any of the dozens of drawing/art programs, from scratch. I’ll wait.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Then those same people will also dismiss bananas taped to the wall for requiring “zero skill” and thus out themselves as having no idea what art actually is.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Art is art, no matter the medium or author. City bureaucrats building a parking lot, and only a parking lot and not commissioning an admonishing memorial or something, can be art if it’s at the place of Hitler’s bunker.

          • The_Vampire@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            7 months ago

            People dismiss AI art because they (correctly) see that it requires zero skill to make compared to actual art, and it has all the novelty of a block of Velveeta.

            I look at art because I find it pretty, not because someone toiled over it for hours on end. Sure, I respect the artist who made it and think their effort commendable, certainly worth a sum of money, but if something is made such that the art of the craft requires less skill and time surely that is a good thing?

            Novelty of the tool doesn’t matter. What’s new changes daily, and the point of a tool is not to be new but to be useful.
            If you mean the art itself that is generated being samey or problematic in that sense of non-uniqueness, I disagree wholeheartedly. You can do a lot with learning models, and the sameness people perceive is from inexperienced novices dipping their hands in and flooding the ecosystem with beginner works, in much the same way DeviantArt was once flooded with drawings on the level of stick figures and box people.

            If AI is no more a tool than Photoshop, go and make something in GIMP, or photoshop, or any of the dozens of drawing/art programs, from scratch. I’ll wait.

            A hammer is a tool, and so is an electric jackhammer. You don’t tell a construction worker to go use a hammer when an electric jackhammer gets the job done far better and far more efficiently, and not everyone is suited to using a hammer just as not everyone is suited to using an electric jackhammer. They also have different purposes, but certainly the electric jackhammer did replace some of the uses the hammer once had, but it doesn’t make the hammer obsolete. I view learning models that generate art in the same manner as an electric jackhammer. Useful and powerful, but ultimately lacking in refinement and the work will certainly need other tools to finish the job.

            This phrase of yours just doesn’t mean much. I don’t see how making something in GIMP proves anything for anyone?

        • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I don’t see how it’s that different from someone using photo-editing software built with dozens of algorithms instead of a ‘pure’ drawing pad, or someone using a drawing pad instead of a pencil, or someone using a pencil instead of chalk. It’s a tool, and a great one at that in comparison to many digital tools for artists.

          It is different because a person isn’t involved, it’s a machine outputting the information without intent whatsoever (as machines do)

          • Keith@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s not true though— extensive effort is put into prompting, parameter tweaking, etc.

            • Eccitaze@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Compared to how much effort it takes to learn how to draw yourself? The effort is trivial. It’s like entering a Toyota Camry into a marathon and then bragging about how good you did and how hard it was to drive the course.

              • The_Vampire@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                It’s commendable to be good at something that requires a lot of effort. Making a hut with your bare hands is a lot more impressive than making a hut with all the construction tools of the modern day at your disposal. However, so what? I’d still rather have a house made with modern tools because it’s cheaper and more efficient for everybody involved.

    • bunnyfc@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think there already is AI art but it’s not the art that everyone is talking about, it’s not your run-of-the-mill fantasy illustration prompt but people exploring what can be made with tools like that.

      Rather than focusing on emulating traditional illustration, they invent their own processes and that is the work.