Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude for Creative Work

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 121 posts

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#61

Post by mbgerring »

hgoel wrote: post #14
make3 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no acceptable use of AI for most people in the artistic field. They see it as an extreme treason, and I understand. They're under incredible incredible threat. They are conscious of preventing momentum in a bad direction. If they don't fight it hyper hard, a huge fraction of them will be out of a job instantly.

That's a strange position to take. I can understand not wanting models that have been trained on questionably sourced data, but otherwise they're opposing essentially a UX change, not based on UX concerns but on ideological fears. Given how much software and other AI/computer vision improvements 3D content often relies on, it's weird to decide that the algorithm itself is unallowable.

Do you have any idea how hard it already is to make a living in a creative field?

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#62

Post by giancarlostoro »

simonw wrote: post #3

Just noticed this notice added at the top of the Blender announcement of their funding from Anthropic: https://www.blender.org/press/anthropic-joins-the-blender-de... > Notice: This announcement is causing a lot of feedback. We are actively evaluating it. Presumably a lot of Blender users work in roles that feel threatened by AI being used for computer graphics work. Lots of negative replies on Blursky here: https://…

> Lots of negative replies on Blursky

To the surprise of no one.

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#63

Post by dannyw »

WillAdams wrote: post #22
dannyw wrote: post #4

If you're interested, for Affinity the way we've built it is through exposing our scripting SDK via MCP. Agents like Claude can write scripts to execute actions, and these scripts can be saved and re-run later, as well have their own UI. It is a massive SDK though (thousands of functions; feel free to poke around with it; Affinity is free) and so it really shows the ability of LLMs to effectively work across long-hor…

The thing is, ages ago, I was told by the scripting evangelist at Adobe Systems that a certain process (adding sub, sub-sub, and sub-sub-sub entries) to an index entry was impossible --- problem was, my boss had already promised a script to do that to a client.... Turns out it is possible, one just has to have the script check to see if each level of a given index entry exists or no, then if it does not yet exist, cr…

So that was our assumption too while building it, but I'm genuinely surprised by how well frontier models can work with large and 'lightly-documented' SDKs.

I think a big part of it comes from deliberately exposing lowest-level atomic actions; not higher-level wrappers with use-case specific documentation. Instead, we supply very technical/'dry' documentation (inputs, action/effects, return values and types). We leave it to the developer (or the LLM) to write scripts that assemble these pieces together to solve problems.

If you try it with Cowork and Opus 4.7 (recommended), you'll probably see it try a few different technical approaches and iterate; as it tries to accomplish this task. While that's less token efficient, the benefit is flexibility/power, and once you have a solid script, you can just save it and use it again and again without any token costs.

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#64

Post by adrithmetiqa »

To repeat what’s been said before, the only way the large AI vendors can get a return on their huge investment is to eat the entire economy ($20/month won’t cut it). All information worker jobs are at risk and the creative ones are not immune.

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#66

Post by ogou »

Lots of creative software has custom scripting with it's own syntax, like Photoshop actions. I'm glad to point Claude at things like that. Inkscape has an extension API that would be interesting to vibe code with. This is not the real danger for creatives.

Right now we're seeing moves to record behaviour by operators of all kinds of software. That will eventually be distilled into sets of automations for agents to use. To me that's far more labor targeted and extractive than generative AI.

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#67

Post by 2001zhaozhao »

make3 wrote: post #11
hgoel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get the backlash about Blender here, this isn't generative art, it's basically a natural language means of scripting blender. This feels like the proper way to have AI act as a tool to make artist's jobs easier without taking away their creativity? Edit: I guess they might want absolutely no AI of any sort in their tools (which seems like a strange line to draw), or is it about the data it's been train…

There is no acceptable use of AI for most people in the artistic field. They see it as an extreme treason, and I understand. They're under incredible incredible threat. They are conscious of preventing momentum in a bad direction. If they don't fight it hyper hard, a huge fraction of them will be out of a job instantly.

This is the best phrasing of the issue I've seen online anywhere.

You can find AI useful and still be against its introduction into your field for entirely understandable reasons.

Unfortunately this does create uphill friction for any good-intentioned people trying to use AI to improve art by empowering people to take on more ambitious projects. (This is a general statement and not related to the case of Anthropic. Of course Anthropic here is just trying to sell their product, which is a fair thing to do in isolation, but I also understand the opposition to it on the grounds of its downstream effects.)

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#68

Post by simianwords »

make3 wrote: post #11
hgoel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get the backlash about Blender here, this isn't generative art, it's basically a natural language means of scripting blender. This feels like the proper way to have AI act as a tool to make artist's jobs easier without taking away their creativity? Edit: I guess they might want absolutely no AI of any sort in their tools (which seems like a strange line to draw), or is it about the data it's been train…

There is no acceptable use of AI for most people in the artistic field. They see it as an extreme treason, and I understand. They're under incredible incredible threat. They are conscious of preventing momentum in a bad direction. If they don't fight it hyper hard, a huge fraction of them will be out of a job instantly.

Completely false and I hate this puritan gatekeeping. Artists who hate AI are the type to put more importance on the craft than the end product itself. Art is a means of communicating something personal. It’s not meant to show off skills in how well you can move a pencil or how many fricking tools you know in adobe.

AI removes all these hurdles and directly presents you with the end problem - communication. Artists hate that because most artists don’t have anything to communicate. These people deserve to be automated away. I don’t wanna see more derivative shit. Artists who have something special to communicate won’t feel threatened by AI but feel more freedom.

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#69

Post by locknitpicker »

ehnto wrote: post #31
hgoel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get the backlash about Blender here, this isn't generative art, it's basically a natural language means of scripting blender. This feels like the proper way to have AI act as a tool to make artist's jobs easier without taking away their creativity? Edit: I guess they might want absolutely no AI of any sort in their tools (which seems like a strange line to draw), or is it about the data it's been train…

It's really clear that businesses are hoping to replace people with AI. In an industry that is already very difficult to make a stable living in, and troubled with regular plagiarism, is it really that surprising that any encroachment of AI into that space would be met with backlash? Even if you can see how individual circumstances could be beneficial to your workflow, it's a general direction I think many take issue…

> It's really clear that businesses are hoping to replace people with AI. In an industry that is already very difficult to make a stable living in, and troubled with regular plagiarism, is it really that surprising that any encroachment of AI into that space would be met with backlash?

But what's the plan, then? Prevent any third party from downloading Blender and integrate it in any way with an agent?

Re: Claude for Creative Work

#70

Post by tomduncalf »

I hooked Claude up to Ableton’s Python API last year and it seemed pretty promising https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2WxSB75U6vg and more recently I created a skill for Claude to manipulate Ableton arrangements (which aren’t exposed via the API so you need to manipulate the file, which is zipped xml, instead).

Both seemed pretty promising and fitted with how I’d like AI to assist rather than replace me for creative tasks.

This reminds me I should open source them as I’ve had no time to do more work on them!

Post reply on HN