Live data from Hacker News

When online commenters detect my art as AI

davidrevoy.com

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#41
post #32

Creative content authors need to move up the ladder. Use AI fully and apply your talent to make it even better. No need to get recognition for your non-AI organic content. When a machine weaves fabric, no point in sticking to handloom and sell it as handicraft. Use powerloom and add your artistry on top of it.

This is myopic “Silicon Valley” rhetoric and lacks understanding of art or why it’s appreciated.

We have video cameras and movies, yet stage actors on Broadway are celebrated like movie stars. People still read books. We have cameras and photoshop, yet a huge market still exists for oil on canvas. We have synthesizers, drum kits, and all the tools we need to make music on a computer, yet live concerts with guitars and drums sell millions of tickets annually. We have the technology to deliver payloads on another continent with millimeter precision, yet every few years, the whole world gathers to watch people who have trained a lifetime to run, jump, and throw stones.

“The old way is dead” doesn’t hold up in the arts like it does in the sciences. Technology moves on, but humans are the same. You can inspire and awe us today using the same tools and methods that were used hundreds or thousands of years ago.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#42
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. This is no better than people who claim writing is AI just because the author uses emdashes

In both cases people are using the heuristics they have to deal with the onslaught of slop, nothing wrong with that.

The error rate is what’s wrong. A heuristic which has a high false positive rate is worse than nothing because it trains people to ignore all reports.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#43
post #17

I see the resemblance to what AI generates, and wow some of those works are painfully detailed. I don’t think it’s just training. His work I is what I would describe as somewhat middle of the road Fantasy / SciFi Pop art. The deviant art of old, or even before, the art that would cover the scifi magazine. It’s an amalgam of styles and interests from the nerdy spectrum, obviously done with great care by the artist. Pr…

Show me an AI-generated work comparable to one of his.

Assembling all of those comments seems like a lot of work to me.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#44
post #17

I see the resemblance to what AI generates, and wow some of those works are painfully detailed. I don’t think it’s just training. His work I is what I would describe as somewhat middle of the road Fantasy / SciFi Pop art. The deviant art of old, or even before, the art that would cover the scifi magazine. It’s an amalgam of styles and interests from the nerdy spectrum, obviously done with great care by the artist. Pr…

> Not flaming the artist at all, these are lovely works With respect, you totally are. Call it what it is - your honest criticism/opinion. Calling their work “middle of the road” and then saying they can’t get certain jobs then trying to pretend you’re being nice is just dishonest.

No, no, you misunderstand my intentions. Say there is art in “pop music” (I think there is, as is in classical music or rock; even in 00s or 10s pop). So there is a pinnacle of art.

But if that pinnacle lies on the average of a lot of types of (pop and non pop) music the LLM might give a sound that at first glance sounds like a specific artist.

The Backstreet Boys (and One Direction as well) were pretty good (lol) but any average of boybands will sound like them. That is not a digg on their artistry but on them being the middle of the road in pop.

AI classical will sound romantic? AI rock will sound Three Doors Down? AI art will be deviant like (but there still can be true artistry in that category). That /I/ usually like arts at least a standard deviation away of the middle, is just my snobbery, which I was trying to explain away because in my opinion artistry is in the craftsmanship (not taste of the public).

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#45

I have never seen an open source comic before, publishing the full res Krita files and all. Mad respect for that. I've donated a couple of bucks.

It could eventually be the case that providing the full speedpaint for a given digital artwork significantly bolsters credibility in the minds of audiences who universally reject AI-generated content as cheap, spiritually enfeebling, and provided largely for commercial motivation. Such a thing can serve as an informal certificate for an art's "human-ness". This approach wouldn't necessarily serve as strict validation that something was not produced by AI, but it would serve as additional evidence that the creative work in question had demanded frequent or exclusive human involvement.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#46
post #32

Creative content authors need to move up the ladder. Use AI fully and apply your talent to make it even better. No need to get recognition for your non-AI organic content. When a machine weaves fabric, no point in sticking to handloom and sell it as handicraft. Use powerloom and add your artistry on top of it.

Please understand that when you think of artists as "creative content authors" you are already off-base so any argument you make based on that is going to be incredibly wrong.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#47
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me an AI-generated work comparable to one of his.

It probably won't look as good if you truly inspect it, but AI can certainly mimic the style .

Sure, but it’s analogous to AI generating a lot of code and a fancy presentation for a product that doesn’t actually work. You can do a lot with that, impress VCs and win stupid hackathons, but the market and need for quality is still there.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#48
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. This is no better than people who claim writing is AI just because the author uses emdashes

In both cases people are using the heuristics they have to deal with the onslaught of slop, nothing wrong with that.

Emdashes as the sole signal is just wrongheaded. Read a piece (a least a little bit of it) to determine if it is slop before calling it AI-slop. Slop is slop but you have to digest at least some of it before the determination can be made.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#49

This sort of thing is older than generative AI. For the last couple of decades it has been impossible to share an interesting photograph without someone claiming that it was Photoshopped.

I can tell from some of the pixels, and from seeing quite a few 'shops in my time.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#50
post #45

I have never seen an open source comic before, publishing the full res Krita files and all. Mad respect for that. I've donated a couple of bucks.

It could eventually be the case that providing the full speedpaint for a given digital artwork significantly bolsters credibility in the minds of audiences who universally reject AI-generated content as cheap, spiritually enfeebling, and provided largely for commercial motivation. Such a thing can serve as an informal certificate for an art's "human-ness". This approach wouldn't necessarily serve as strict validation…

Ironically that would be useful data for AI labs to take. It could be used productively to make digital art training material or nefariously to make models to displace those artists.
Post reply on HN