Hey, me too!
Hey, me too!
This is a really great piece, though I am curious about your opinions on AI art. I've heard a lot of people complaining about it but I don't really know why and would like to know why everyone says it so bad.
Edit: I agree that it is bad that it could be putting people out of jobs and I agree that it often looks bad but I would like to give you a little push-back on some of the other arguments, not because I am pro-AI art, as I stated I don't really know very much about it, just that I feel like some of these seem a little logically unsound.
Is it really stealing to use other people's art to teach your AI? The way human artists learn how to create art is by looking at other people's artwork and running it through their brains. Is this really any different? They're both learning. It would be absurd to have to ask an artist for permission for you to study their painting, why should the software devs have to do the same thing?
Also claiming to know the definition of art seems a little bold to me. Saying that since there is no skill in pressing a button it is not art doesn't sit right with me. People say that there is supposedly no skill in Jackson Pollock's abstract drip paintings they are not art and I would not agree with that assertion. Is Pollock picking out the colors really that different than someone typing in the prompts? What about pendulum paintings or stuff like that? The laws of physics are as mechanical as a computer, if not more so.
1) It's trained off of existing artwork WITHOUT the artists' permission or knowing, so it's basically art theft. If these AI companies commissioned/paid artists for art pieces or used public domain artwork to train their algorithms, then it wouldn't be AS BIG of a problem... from what I've seen, that's basically what Music Generation AI is doing. These companies are making actual money off of this.
2) The pro-AI art crowd are just vile. They bullied artists like SamDoesArt who spoke out about their art being used in AI Image Generation. It's the same shit as those techbros jeering at artists whose work was being stolen to be used as NFTs and going "iF yOu had jUST puT it on tHE bLOckChaiN, tHis WouLDn'T hAve HapPenED, lololololol". Their views on it are just delusional. It's NOT akin to the camera affecting the art world, and it CERTAINLY FUCKING ISN'T akin to using reference in your own artwork.
3) It often looks like garbage. Can't do hands for shit
4) The legitimate threat that it is going to put artists out of jobs.
5) It's being put up on actual portfolio sites like ArtStation, hence why there's a huge protest going on.
6) Art is about skill, passion, and life experience honed by years of cultivation. There is no skill needed to type a bunch of words into a box and pressing a button to spit out an image.
I didn't mind AI Image Generation when it was being used to make shitposts and body horror imagery, as it would yield legitimately funny and sometimes horrifying results. If AI was used to actually HELP artists do stuff like color in entire comic pages, upscale smaller images, or unwrap UVs for 3D objects, then we'd most likely use it as a tool! But the fact that it's being used maliciously against artists is a huge disappointment and we need to hold these AI companies accountable.
Anyway, that's my rant. XD
No way! It's @metalsonic655!
R Crumb rules!
Poor Jeff Smith :(
Love how you did the shadow on the face
Really, really, great. Your signature could use a little work but that's about it.
I don't recognize the character in the bottom right-hand corner, who is that?
I'm still here!!
Joined on 3/15/20