- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
I find this li’l guy hilarious for some reason.
To me, thins kinda screams of “I suffered so you should too”. There are good arguments against AI art, but this one doesn’t resonate with me in any capacity.
It is good that AI has made art more accessible. Art is meant for everyone, and anything that makes it more democratic is great.
There have been painters who are blind who made great paintings. People without hands who learned how to paint with their feet.
Art was already accessable to everyone, ai drones say that it wasn’t to feel better.
There are different kinds of accessibility. While I admire people with disabilities who were so dedicated in the pursuit of art, there’s more to it than pure desire.
Art takes gift. It takes a lot of time to make it into talent, skill. It commonly takes a lot of money for the courses, materials, etc. And in the modern world, not everyone can realistically have or afford all that.
When I talk of accessibility, I don’t mean “with a ton of effort, every person can technically become at least a bad artist”. I mean “everyone needs to create, yet not everyone can dedicate their life to it”.
AI art allows us to communicate our visions and ideas, which is to me the most important parts of art overall, without having to grind through art classes. This, in turn, means we can hear and see new voices, ones that previously were never heard.
Art does not take gift. The myth of the naturally talented artist needs to die because that’s never been true. It takes effort, like you said, but it does NOT take courses and classes, especially in the modern world. There’s everything you need to learn right there on the Internet and in books. You just have to try.
And that’s the thing, you used to try and know that it was fun to make stuff, but at some point you wanted to make something that looked good and didn’t have the skill for it, so you gave up instead of having fun with it anyway.
But here’s the thing you forgot: the process. When you draw, you make choices. Where to put sister and brother, there to put the sun, how many windows are in your house, etc. The choices being made while making art are where you actually get creative. That’s where the happy accidents happen or the changes you decide on. It’s where the actual express happens, between wanting the picture and having the picture.
AI eliminates that crucial step. It eliminates choice. It makes those choices for you, cribbing notes off of other people’s choices, not yours.
So no, it doesn’t communicate anyone’s voice. Ai repeats static based off of other people’s voices and choices, not yours.
It’s very sad and somewhat indicative of our society that you only care about the finished product, and not the part that actually nourishes you.
It’s absolutely true. All you have to do is spend any amount of time around someone that has never drawn before that has the talent and you’ll be just devastated at how good they are on their first attempt. Meanwhile, there are plenty of people that have been drawing for a couple decades that never have been able to make it past crude representations.
There are various levels of talent and it’s possible to maybe become a bad artist by grinding, but you cannot become a good artist with a complete lack of visual art talent. I’m not sure why visual artists are unable to see this until you tell them okay so everyone can sing and then they quickly admit. “Okay, not everybody can sing.”
Everyone can sing. Even if they sing badly that’s at least their own voice, and no one is fooled into thinking they are singing when they hit play on their phone, so why think someone’s an artist when they get a computer to make an image?
I’m telling you that “artist talent” is literally just when someone likes drawing enough they keep going even when they aren’t at the level they want to be and they practice it. Anyone can be an artist, and anyone can be a good artist, if they put in the effort to try. Even you.
Absolutely untrue If you don’t have the spark your ceiling is quite low
I have it for other arenas so I’m not making excuses, I know there are people that will never match me on those arts because they don’t have it. People are different and that’s okay but let’s not pretend everyone can do everything because that’s not really true.
If you have the ability to hold a pencil you can do art. I’m not saying everyone can do everything but art is a thing ask humans are capable of making and should be encouraged to do so with their own hands. Or feet or mouths or whatever.
tl;dr - “art” generated by LLMs is ultimately lame and uninspiring. It’s probably never going to inspire people very much. It’s a parlor trick and everyone intrinsically recognizes it. Don’t expect to be taken seriously as a creator if this is your primary tool.
I am skeptical about “never”, but right now I agree that’s true. I expect it to be true for many years to come. That being said, we have seen a lot of improvement (over even the last few months) in AI image quality, composition, and prompt adherence.
In order for an art piece to exist, an artist have to have something to say by said art. Fancy autocomplete is not an entity, it’s an algorithm to generate something looking like something else, and even if it crawls out of the uncanny valley at some point (which I’m not sure is possible), the best case scenario is that it will generate something that looks like some people did at some point. It’s not what art is, and it’s not what people look for in art. This will never change, this is the never in said never.
AGI will create art, but at this point we’re further away from it than we were 10 years ago, or even 50 years ago (and I would argue it’s a goos thing)That’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that it’s going to be increasingly difficult (for the layperson) to tell if a work is by a human or computer. You and I may think there’s some sort of moral superiority in human art, but the average TikTok user doesn’t give a fuck… and they outnumber us greatly.
Your opinion of an average person is overly negative.
Generated shit is the new Muzak, the new Alegria clipart, but done very badly. When a person who doesn’t care about music and doesn’t understand music hears Muzak they don’t think about it at all, that’s kind of almost the point of it. It’s an amalgamation of a corporate default sequence of sounds invented to be approved by a committee. And that’s the best that generators can wish to do, and I suspect there is a fundamental quality to it that will prevent it from being that ever.
That’s the thing about art, intentionality, it’s not that “human art” is somehow superiour, it’s that only human art exists, copying algorithms are doing copies, and even if sometimes it works, you don’t get art without an artist saying you something.
Obviously, people who don’t enjoy art don’t care. But that doesn’t really matter.
I feel like some promises were broken 😂
I feel like some promises were broken 😂
You’re absolutely right!
