[deleted]
Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
111–120 of 356 posts
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#112For artists who continue to paint, or use other physical means of expression through base materials and sell them as physical works, this entire AI art surge remains largely irrelevant in a practical sense. A buyer or patron who wants real, physical art will still need and want real, physical art, and I don't see an AI imitating much of that easily any time soon. The people or organizations to which AI-churned art ap…
Dall-e can create beautiful images of oil paintings that can be printed to canvas, much like original oil paintings are printed to canvas.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#113Art takes effort. Training models and feeding them information takes effort. AI is not magic. Art is just getting another toolset.
Yes, creating the actual ML model and curating it's input takes effort, a lot of it in fact. Taking someone else's ML model and shitting prompts into it does not
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#114I have a degree in Studio Arts in addition to being a software developer (and recently I've started making a lot of creative work with AI). Back when I was in school, there was already plenty of debate about 'what is "Art"'? It's always been hotly contested. Most of my teachers felt that 'technique' was not Art. Others were more purists – life painters, etc – and felt that, no, technique is art. Duchamp poked the art…
I'll always remember 2022 as the year that creativity died. That sounds a bit negative I guess, but techniques like stable diffusion will be applied to other problem domains, so all other art forms like music and creative writing will be automated within the next 5-10 years. And if computers can do that, they can do anything. Because that's how our brains work. Our neurons are microscopic filters magnifying patterns…
I dunno. Fast food haven't killed restaurants, and restaurants haven't killed home cooking. Fast food is a huge problem, but many go to restaurants and many still cook at home. We're in no endgame at all. If it worked this way, artists from poorer economies would have drowned out all other art. But for some reason, it just doesn't work that way.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#115I think the AI generated art, even at this early stage, is pretty good and have no problem with people submitting it to contests and/or selling it.
Also, as a sometime painter, I would view AI generated art as a great and fun source of inspiration. I'd pick some generated pieces that I like, combine parts from this and that and make it my own.
This stuff may open more doors than it closes, IMHO.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#116I think the communities involved here like digital artists, furries etc got a lot of attention hating on NFTs last year, so they are doubling down with the anti-art-generator movement. But I don't think this one will be so successful. Like sure, maybe art community sites could require you to tag prompt-generated art just as a way to label things, but in terms of widespread usage the cat is out of the bag. Whenever I…
One of the biggest furry art archives has always banned art without much, if any, actual input from the human who created the artpiece. For example, game screenshots are banned almost universally, picture generated art is as well (something like picrew) 3d models aren't, assuming there is posing and such and so on. It seems a perfectly fine continuation to the existing rules to ban ai generated art.
Also, Art AI can't click on ads, which is probably, ultimately their main concern. If you replace all the monetized users with AI that can't buy things, the economic incentive to keep the website running disappears.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem being solved by these decisions is that AI art is a visible threat to the livelihoods of the people the site is designed to support and uplift. Art sites have already had rate limits for years. These communities are explicitly saying "no" to this disruptive technology . If you want to go make a new gallery site for showing off your prompt engineering that's your own lookout, have fun trying to build a com…
> The problem being solved by these decisions is that AI art is a visible threat to the livelihoods of the people the site is designed to support and uplift. That's not a solvable problem. Art will be made by computers, it's inevitable. Eventually it will get good enough to be indistinguishable from human made art. It's already good enough that a human can use the AI to get 90% of the way there and then finish it the…
No post body was provided.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#118> AI-generated art was not allowed because it “lacked artistic merit.”
As a consumer, what I want is the art, not the merit. Over the last few weeks, I've been able to get images that I simply would have never gotten without Dall-e. Maybe it doesn't provide "merit", but it certainly provides a ton of value that I wouldn't have gotten otherwise.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#119For artists who continue to paint, or use other physical means of expression through base materials and sell them as physical works, this entire AI art surge remains largely irrelevant in a practical sense. A buyer or patron who wants real, physical art will still need and want real, physical art, and I don't see an AI imitating much of that easily any time soon. The people or organizations to which AI-churned art ap…
> For artists who continue to paint, or use other physical means of expression through base materials and sell them as physical works, this entire AI art surge remains largely irrelevant in a practical sense. A buyer or patron who wants real, physical art will still need and want real, physical art, and I don't see an AI imitating much of that easily any time soon. I don't think it would be that hard to get a machine…
Importantly, a physical painting machine isn't gonna be something anyone with a beefy GPU can download for free. It would pretty much only be useful for factories in Mexico making "Henry Rogers"-style mass-produced paintings [0], which would be bad news for the impoverished workers currently making them, but not for most other painters.
Re: Online art communities begin banning AI-generated images
#120I have a degree in Studio Arts in addition to being a software developer (and recently I've started making a lot of creative work with AI). Back when I was in school, there was already plenty of debate about 'what is "Art"'? It's always been hotly contested. Most of my teachers felt that 'technique' was not Art. Others were more purists – life painters, etc – and felt that, no, technique is art. Duchamp poked the art…
As a non-artist whose compensation is, so far, unaffected by ML-generated images, I'm more interested in the effects the technology has on people. Over the past 150 years it became possible to compute cube roots in milliseconds, instead of minutes. Slide rules became obsolete, and the things we learn to do do arithmetic changed. Over the past 20 years, the way we look up arbitrary facts changed. We learned to constru…
I think it will be interesting, but not result in total annihilation of the existing field. As a general counterexample, TV did not kill radio despite it having more dimensions for creativity. Radio changed, but it did not die, and was quite comfortable for many decades after.
Coallescing on prompt languages is probably unlikely, if only because part of the thing that defines a language is that a community has rules, both opaque and explicit, about what is acceptable in the language and what is not, and there's no effort to standardize inputs.