Originally Posted By LonghornAR:


The only way AI creates "better" things for humans is if humans allow it to. And given how sheeple were so willing to obey during pandemics and also be shaped by social media, AI certainly has a chance at being allowed to.

Originally Posted By TaskForce:


It just doesn't do it well. And maybe never will. Studios have tried.

Originally Posted By Kingdead:
The posters video before you had a good comment:

The best human weightlifter is easily outcompeted by a small forklift, but we don't call the forklift "strong".


For those that think AI making a cool picture of their pet dog in a generals uniform holding a rifle is good art, I honestly feel bad for them. I'm sure it's a cool picture, but I think they haven't experienced good art that has touched them. I couldn't imagine a life without it. To me that would be like putting on corporate jingles and calling it great music. That feels psychopathic.

Originally Posted By BUCC_Guy:
It depends entirely on the target market.

I collect art.  I've considered some modern paintings (high realism), but revert back to antique.  A big part of that is I can't pay an artist the $30k they want for something that took them three months because I can buy multiple, older paintings for that much.  I'm financially comfortable, not retarded.

AI simply isn't going to eliminate the oil-on-canvas market because if we wanted something that could be replicated 1000 times, we'd be buying prints or glicees, and those are for peasants.

A lot of the art we've consumed for years has been computer assisted, like coloring in comic books, book covers, and trading card games.  THOSE are the artists that I worry about, as a creative, complicated fantasy game card would now be boiled down to a trial and error prompt for five minutes.

AI won't replace all artists.  It will, and has, replace low-end, talentless twats with an Etsy store of prints on mugs.

The canvas world should remain untouched.

Originally Posted By TaskForce:


To be fair I don't think most people have really thought about this. Especially if when they hear the phrase "AI art" they only consider visual art. It's a lot more than that.

Originally Posted By Kingdead:
You wouldn't want to read a poem about American slavery written by an AI author?

Originally Posted By Kingdead:
I think you and I agree about this topic.

Originally Posted By BUCC_Guy:

I'll make an exception for Japanese wood prints and most pre-1900 prints.  Modern, mass produced stuff is gross.

Originally Posted By konger:

AI is only going to continue improving.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssta0_4GkRA

Originally Posted By BUCC_Guy:
It depends entirely on the target market.

I collect art.  I've considered some modern paintings (high realism), but revert back to antique.  A big part of that is I can't pay an artist the $30k they want for something that took them three months because I can buy multiple, older paintings for that much.  I'm financially comfortable, not retarded.

AI simply isn't going to eliminate the oil-on-canvas market because if we wanted something that could be replicated 1000 times, we'd be buying prints or glicees, and those are for peasants.

A lot of the art we've consumed for years has been computer assisted, like coloring in comic books, book covers, and trading card games.  THOSE are the artists that I worry about, as a creative, complicated fantasy game card would now be boiled down to a trial and error prompt for five minutes.

AI won't replace all artists.  It will, and has, replace low-end, talentless twats with an Etsy store of prints on mugs.

The canvas world should remain untouched.

Hell, I have four paintings I haven't even hung up yet.  I just keep buying more.  *shrug*

Here's King David playing a harp because. . .  reasons.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/45309/4D2668CF-BE97-401F-AE0B-CC2A212186D7_jpe-3224462.JPG

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:
The whole thing reminds me of the "desktop publishing" craze of the @980s and early 1990s.

Was the software revolutionary, putting capabilities in the hands of average schmoes that used to require tools and talen that took years to obtain? Yes.

Was it absolutely obvious when some dumb schmuck who had zero aesthetic sense and no appreciation of basic design principles had the hubris to publish something without any professional oversight? That too.

AI will be a tool to accelerate a good artist's productive capability. It's not going to replace it anytime soon. Some people who might have hired an artist will now think they can just do it themselves, though. The results will be... non-ideal.

Originally Posted By konger:

Snark but no answer from you. Just what is the purpose of art?!? Don’t give me some romanticized crap about enriching humanity. What purpose does it serve?

Originally Posted By Burnsy:
Not about how it works, I get all that.  About one of the reasons given that it is so bad.  That reason is often that it will put the human artist out of work.  I don't know if that is actually true....  I can see a world in which both exist for their own separate purposes but let's say that's true.  Let's say that AI does take the career of the human artist.  Why is that specifically such a horrible thing that we should not use AI art?

In another example, the world is pushing hard for EVs.  If that comes to fruition and ICE vehicles no longer exist....doesn't that take the career of the vast majority of oil related workers?  What of the oil rig worker and the oil refinery worker?  What of the truck driver whom works for big oil?  etc?  

How come nobody is crying big tears for them?

Fixing shoes used to be a very common thing...nobody really does that much anymore.  I don't take my shoes to a shoe repairer to have new soles put on or some shit.  I have never done that in my life and I don't know a single person who has.  Shoe repair career path is a LOT smaller than it used to be.  

90%+ efficiency furnaces do not need a chimney.  They vent out of a PVC pipe that sticks out of the side of the house at about ground level...kinda like a clothes dryer.  So the career path of chimney sweep is....not so much a thing as it use to be.

There are a ton of examples of tech eating careers and the people who did those jobs had to adapt.  They had to find something else they could do for society to make a living.  If AI does put lots of artists out of work because nobody wants their service anymore.....why is that suddenly such a big deal specifically in their case?

Originally Posted By Jambalaya:
My youngest daughter is 7, and she already shows a lot of promise as an artist.  She loves to draw and paint, and easily follows tutorials to draw stuff that is surprisingly advanced for her age.

But, she will never have a career in art of any kind because of AI.

Also, the push for electric cars killing off oil jobs directly hurts me as well.

If I could push a button and erase all of the technological progress of the last 20 years, I'd do it.

Originally Posted By LonghornAR:


It doesn't matter. For now, we have past experiences that set the contextual standards of what we like and do not like. But over time and generations, those standards shift. Sadly, I've seen people that completely trust what garbage AI tells them is the truth. Give it enough generations, humans may allow AI to define what is good or not for them.

Originally Posted By Kingdead:
What is the purpose of art?

Originally Posted By BUCC_Guy:
It depends entirely on the target market.

I collect art.  I've considered some modern paintings (high realism), but revert back to antique.  A big part of that is I can't pay an artist the $30k they want for something that took them three months because I can buy multiple, older paintings for that much.  I'm financially comfortable, not retarded.

AI simply isn't going to eliminate the oil-on-canvas market because if we wanted something that could be replicated 1000 times, we'd be buying prints or glicees, and those are for peasants.

A lot of the art we've consumed for years has been computer assisted, like coloring in comic books, book covers, and trading card games.  THOSE are the artists that I worry about, as a creative, complicated fantasy game card would now be boiled down to a trial and error prompt for five minutes.

AI won't replace all artists.  It will, and has, replace low-end, talentless twats with an Etsy store of prints on mugs.

The canvas world should remain untouched.

Hell, I have four paintings I haven't even hung up yet.  I just keep buying more.  *shrug*

Here's King David playing a harp because. . .  reasons.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/45309/4D2668CF-BE97-401F-AE0B-CC2A212186D7_jpe-3224462.JPG

Originally Posted By Jambalaya:
My youngest daughter is 7, and she already shows a lot of promise as an artist.  She loves to draw and paint, and easily follows tutorials to draw stuff that is surprisingly advanced for her age.

But, she will never have a career in art of any kind because of AI.

Also, the push for electric cars killing off oil jobs directly hurts me as well.

If I could push a button and erase all of the technological progress of the last 20 years, I'd do it.