I think they can be super useful for personal use, either as inspirations or for bulk pieces like textures in a beginner game project.
In my opinion you could still call it art, but I'll not acknowledge AI users as artists, when all they do is giving it prompts or doodles and call it a day. In a way, the AI is the artist. Most of them take much time to learn and build skill until they produce the desired quality, similar to how a human learns through experience.
You don't commision an artist and then claim you draw it all by yourself and the artist is just your tool.
I think they can be super useful for personal use, either as inspirations or for bulk pieces like textures in a beginner game project.
In my opinion you could still call it art, but I'll not acknowledge AI users as artists, when all they do is giving it prompts or doodles and call it a day. In a way, the AI is the artist. Most of them take much time to learn and build skill until they produce the desired quality, similar to how a human learns through experience.
You don't commision an artist and then claim you draw it all by yourself and the artist is just your tool.
As long as the AI is trained using stolen art, I will be against it being used for any purpose. The artwork used to train the AI absolutely needs to be paid for and used only with each artist's express written permission. Without that it is straight up theft.
As long as the AI is trained using stolen art, I will be against it being used for any purpose. The artwork used to train the AI absolutely needs to be paid for and used only with each artist's express written permission. Without that it is straight up theft.
AI is a very impressive tool. It has a lot of potential, but where this technology ends up is all up to how we react to it both legally and morally.
Bad actors who scrape the net for art to steal to "train" their AI are obviously in the wrong. This practice needs legal consequences, and we need legislation in place to protect artists and their work from these bad actors.
i think it can be a useful for tool inspiration purposes, especially for fashion designers and fantasy artists! however, i agree with a lot of the points already mentioned such as AI trained on the art on non-consenting artists being unethical, especially when people are using those kinds of AI to profit
i think it can be a useful for tool inspiration purposes, especially for fashion designers and fantasy artists! however, i agree with a lot of the points already mentioned such as AI trained on the art on non-consenting artists being unethical, especially when people are using those kinds of AI to profit
As an artist myself AI are is like this. As a tool I think it could be really interesting, how it's used now however... Artists are having their art being feed into an algorithm without consent and that algorithm is being used to make art that is sold to people, does the artist get any credit for this all??? No! And that's the issue. Artists aren't getting the proper credit and payment they deserve for their art being stolen and used without their consent. If say they were getting commisioned to make art to feed into the algorithms then I wouldn't have as much of an issue because then they'd at least be getting paid.
In all AI is a good tool, just how it's being used now is bad and needs to change
As an artist myself AI are is like this. As a tool I think it could be really interesting, how it's used now however... Artists are having their art being feed into an algorithm without consent and that algorithm is being used to make art that is sold to people, does the artist get any credit for this all??? No! And that's the issue. Artists aren't getting the proper credit and payment they deserve for their art being stolen and used without their consent. If say they were getting commisioned to make art to feed into the algorithms then I wouldn't have as much of an issue because then they'd at least be getting paid.
In all AI is a good tool, just how it's being used now is bad and needs to change
It can be a useful tool. However, it is not always used ethically.
I play some other online games where, same as here, art can be commissioned. Those sites have changed their game rules on art to state that AI art can not be utilized on the site.
It can be a useful tool. However, it is not always used ethically.
I play some other online games where, same as here, art can be commissioned. Those sites have changed their game rules on art to state that AI art can not be utilized on the site.
Art Credits: Poisonedpaper / Drytil / Osiem
Good uses;
- Used for art references
- Used for fun
Bad uses;
- Sold to others
- Saying that the generated art is original
- Being used in certain situations, especially with a money outcome, ex. art contests
So it really depends on what people do.
Good uses;
- Used for art references
- Used for fun
Bad uses;
- Sold to others
- Saying that the generated art is original
- Being used in certain situations, especially with a money outcome, ex. art contests
So it really depends on what people do.
|
Please drink water.
Step away if things get heated.
|
It is a super cool tool, and amazing that something can just create art. Love that it exists, and fun to play with.
That being said, I totally get where people are coming from on the stealing art from artists. Especially when most are under paid to begin with. I get their reasons to not support it, and to ask for more support. Sadly, I use it shamelessly to fill the void on the rare occasion. Some of the pictures from a description leave me dying from laughter.
It is a super cool tool, and amazing that something can just create art. Love that it exists, and fun to play with.
That being said, I totally get where people are coming from on the stealing art from artists. Especially when most are under paid to begin with. I get their reasons to not support it, and to ask for more support. Sadly, I use it shamelessly to fill the void on the rare occasion. Some of the pictures from a description leave me dying from laughter.
I honestly despise it in all its forms and ultimately see no positives to its existence.
AI tools are fed images stolen from actual artists on the internet, and big corporations like Adobe and DeviantArt keep trying to pull the rug from under their userbase by including them in opt-out systems that they think they can get away with until people rightfully get up in arms about it.
I also think all AI art is like, blatantly ugly. A machine will never be smart or skilled enough to convincingly create "art" that is proportionally correct. As an artist I can look at AI art and see fifty problems with it, but the average person only using it to make bland nsfw won't care. Not to mention I think its impossible for anything but a human to create "real" art - loaded term I know - but it's something that requires heart. A three year olds creation is worth infinitely more than anything an AI can make. (And if a machine really does become capable of creating something new from observation and imagination, then it is no longer a mere machine, and a new ethics problem has been made.)
So then shouldn't it be incapable of truly replacing artists? I know it can't, but investors and tech bros and capitalists believe the opposite because they don't care about art, they care about profit. If left unchecked, unopposed, AI art will destroy a lot of careers for current and prospective artists in a time where it's already so hard to make the dream real. Already many artists are reporting a sharp decline in commissions.
As for accessibility - it's not worth it given all these drawbacks when there are other ways to make art accessible. Free art programs for anyone to use regardless of skill. Dollmakers so people can visualize their characters and bring them to life in a way. Anything like that is far better than AI art that you don't even make, only provide inputs for a machine to create something it can never understand. If a non artist makes something, even using assets from someone who willingly provided them, it means a lot more.
edit: And inspiration is something I'm seeing too - but really? Inspiration? What can something AI generated give you that whatever it scraped can't? All the other sources of inspiration we've used for as long as we've been humans, are those not better in every way anyways? If I want inspiration for fashion design, for instance, I can pick a source and derive meaning from it. For example, maybe I want to make an entire fashion line inspired by venomous animals - I know what venomous animals are, I know examples of them, I know what meaning they have been given in culture and what is interesting about their appearances to me. A machine doesn't. If I give it a prompt about this it won't provide something as interesting as if I just went out and looked at pictures myself.
Frankly, I really wish this AI generated stuff just stuck to using images from the public domain and were just used to make ugly but really funny prompts. It's gone way too far, way too fast. Thankfully I think AI art isn't protected by copyright, which is a rare W for U.S copyright law.
I honestly despise it in all its forms and ultimately see no positives to its existence.
AI tools are fed images stolen from actual artists on the internet, and big corporations like Adobe and DeviantArt keep trying to pull the rug from under their userbase by including them in opt-out systems that they think they can get away with until people rightfully get up in arms about it.
I also think all AI art is like, blatantly ugly. A machine will never be smart or skilled enough to convincingly create "art" that is proportionally correct. As an artist I can look at AI art and see fifty problems with it, but the average person only using it to make bland nsfw won't care. Not to mention I think its impossible for anything but a human to create "real" art - loaded term I know - but it's something that requires heart. A three year olds creation is worth infinitely more than anything an AI can make. (And if a machine really does become capable of creating something new from observation and imagination, then it is no longer a mere machine, and a new ethics problem has been made.)
So then shouldn't it be incapable of truly replacing artists? I know it can't, but investors and tech bros and capitalists believe the opposite because they don't care about art, they care about profit. If left unchecked, unopposed, AI art will destroy a lot of careers for current and prospective artists in a time where it's already so hard to make the dream real. Already many artists are reporting a sharp decline in commissions.
As for accessibility - it's not worth it given all these drawbacks when there are other ways to make art accessible. Free art programs for anyone to use regardless of skill. Dollmakers so people can visualize their characters and bring them to life in a way. Anything like that is far better than AI art that you don't even make, only provide inputs for a machine to create something it can never understand. If a non artist makes something, even using assets from someone who willingly provided them, it means a lot more.
edit: And inspiration is something I'm seeing too - but really? Inspiration? What can something AI generated give you that whatever it scraped can't? All the other sources of inspiration we've used for as long as we've been humans, are those not better in every way anyways? If I want inspiration for fashion design, for instance, I can pick a source and derive meaning from it. For example, maybe I want to make an entire fashion line inspired by venomous animals - I know what venomous animals are, I know examples of them, I know what meaning they have been given in culture and what is interesting about their appearances to me. A machine doesn't. If I give it a prompt about this it won't provide something as interesting as if I just went out and looked at pictures myself.
Frankly, I really wish this AI generated stuff just stuck to using images from the public domain and were just used to make ugly but really funny prompts. It's gone way too far, way too fast. Thankfully I think AI art isn't protected by copyright, which is a rare W for U.S copyright law.
I think it's funny especially if you throw in some public domain images but should not be allowed to post on any art only site and claimed as "art" nor sold either due to the fact its not hand made or done by a real person
I think it's funny especially if you throw in some public domain images but should not be allowed to post on any art only site and claimed as "art" nor sold either due to the fact its not hand made or done by a real person
|Ello I'm Awoken, She/her, FR+8, I am a bunch of lizards in a coat, Profile dragon|
