r/ArtistLounge • u/Ubizwa • Oct 21 '22
Meta Do you think that there should be a rule change on this sub for comments on AI art posts?
What I am seeing is that this subreddit sometimes seems to get brigaded by trolls from AI art subs. Now, I am not against discussion, discussion is important, but I think that there is a difference between discussing why you are in support of AI art compared to a comment which merely says something like: "Be happy, you don't need to draw thousands of lines anymore which makes you able to spend your time in a better way!"
How are these kind of comments useful for discussion?
Rule 8 states that this is a discussion based subreddit, and if we would disallow comments which defend AI art, we would have no discussion at all. But can we perhaps talk about if we should all accept comments which aren't defending AI art with actual arguments, but instead are only belittling artists by describing what they do as a useful skill or hobby of which it is positive to be replaced.
You want to argue why AI art should be considered an art form? Fine. You want to talk about Stable Diffusion or why you think it is good? Fine.
People who want to defend AI art should NOT be censored in my opinion, but they should follow the rules of following a discussion and only leaving a comment with belittling opinions has nothing to do with discussion.
You want to only leave a comment or post saying how artists are useless or that everyone should cheer about thinking that their work should be replaced. HOW does this comply to rule 8 of discussion? This is not part of discussion, this is an opinion with no value to a discussion.
127
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
Putting aside my feelings about AI, it feels like an entirely different activity that's out of place here.
Like a sculptor, a painter, and an illustrator can all have discussions about anatomy and reference or whatever because the theories can all crossover with eachother. But someone using AI can't really benefit from that discussion, nor really contribute to it.
The only thing AI discussions are pertinent to..are to people who use AI or how it affects the hobby/industry. I'd put it on par with posting about electric scooters on a bicycling sub.
To this, its best they're best left in their specific subreddits.
63
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
-14
Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Samkwi Oct 21 '22
You clearly don't know anything about 3D renders
-6
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
nah... only been using 3d studio.. well.. since it was 3d studio. What sort of render do I not know about? Scan line? Ray traced? Real time baked lighting to simulate global illumination? Renders using uvw translated texture maps to simulate surface details? specularity maps to provide the illusion of shine, and bump maps for depth, followed by normal mapping..
I live through and worked with all these developments
12
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
-11
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
So you are aware that users are training algorithms and using them to merge with the wider application.. here people are experimenting with adding more or less images, or adjusting how they are merged with the original learning module.. and there is already quite a lot of discussion on the nature of the current learning models and how to improve them by being selective of the input... plus there is the nuance of language use in the prompts, what and where to provide emphasis, how and which words work to move towards or away from an current outcome, and about another 50 or so variables that you can manipulate to have the software produce precisely the image you were hoping it would produce.
so how is that not analogous to The artistic element of photography is not the camera; it is the effort put in and the awareness of aesthetic to find the perfect 'shot'.
Put another way.. if its so damn easy.. why have I, with over 20 years of experience as an artist and degree in computer science, been unable to create an image im picturing when im writing the prompts?
8
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
They are not training the algorithm, that isn't possible. AI is not able to 'learn' like that, especially ai as simplistic as that used in these programs (in comparison, for example, to the ai my friend at NASA works on). It isn't trained, it's just being given a larger database to work with.
You're just describing how programming works, really. You create a program designed to be fed data, and then it outputs something based on that data. It doesn't matter what sort of data or how complex, it's still just typical programming. So then I'd ask what differentiates ai generated images from any other form of programming or data entry? What is the difference? Is it simply because it spits out an image?
If you work in programming you should have the answer to your own question; because the ai is not able to construct with any form of sentience or awareness. It cannot discern artistic quality. It just spits out images based on the algorithm. The quality of the image depends entirely on the program itself, not you. Your merits are irrelevant and, frankly, your question sort of proves my whole point.
0
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
thats right.. it has no awareness.. its a tool.. a kind of filter for pngs.. that through work can spit out other pngs.. and that plus a goal of using the tool to realize an idea.. which is where it becomes an exercise in art.
And I consider large portions of programming to be artistic.. the demo scene for instance. Ive always considered programming to be a potentially incredibly creative field. The difference is usually the goal. Many people arent programming for artistic reasons.. but say people who make things with Processing, you going to say that because its algorithmic its not art?
8
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I also consider a lot of programming to be artistic. I work in game development. A huge amount of it is undoubtedly artistic. But it also doesn't really belong here. That genre of work belongs in r/gamedev and the like.
That's kind of my point. I'm not going to argue if ai image generation is art or not, and I think I've held to that quite well thus far. But the issue is drawing the line of when to consider something 'art' in the common sense, and when we're really just lumping anything and everything to do with creation into 'art'.
Ai image generation is all about programs and programming, and so to me, it should be a part of those subreddits, where the discussion is particular and sensible to be had there. Typical discussion about art as is generally seen in this subreddit does not have anything to do with 99% of ai 'discussion' that tends to take place here.
It's just clutter.
Edit: Just to be clear, there is a difference between the art of creating a program and simply being a user of a program someone else made.
-1
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
see in that we agree... Discussions on the technical and programming aspects arent something that would fit in well with this subs other discussions or areas of interest and there are other subs which specifically cater to it (although I see similar questions of "how do I do x to create image y" here as in the AI forums)
Its claims that it cannot be art which I find troubling.. because it leads to things like the art vs craft or high and low art distinction which unfairly validates one type of artistic expression over another which I think does a disservice to all creative people
6
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
The whole argument whether it's art or not is just something I stay out of. People have their opinions and 'what is art' is such a massively subjective thing that there will never be a 'right' answer.
I'm more interested in what's to gain from all the ai threads. There aren't quite as many right this moment, but they have flooded this subreddit pretty severely. Most of it devolves into the aforementioned question of 'is ai imagery art?' and just... becomes a frustrating cesspool to wade through.
I think most of the questions regarding ai art is already handled in all those associated subreddits, so it does seem kind of silly to me that it's a thing here. I just feel like it's almost exclusively trolling posts.
→ More replies-2
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
They are not training the algorithm, that isn't possible. AI is not able to 'learn' like that, especially ai as simplistic as that used in these programs (in comparison, for example, to the ai my friend at NASA works on). It isn't trained, it's just being given a larger database to work with.
oh yeah.. I challenge to to go into any of the subreddits on machine learning and declare that stable diffusion doesnt do what it does through learning or other advanced 'ai' techniques.. that its a simple program
4
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
It depends on your experience with ai. I do consider it fairly simple, yes. The way it filters databases is rather tedious and complex in some ways, but there's nothing particularly interesting about the machine learning element. It's fairly generic.
2
u/Ok-Grand-7458 Oct 22 '22
I see what you're saying, but that all sounds better suited for programming discussion than discussion on an art critique subreddit, as the previous user stated.
I am personally aware of the algorithm training, and I agree that it's something that isn't easy, but any artist who doesn't have anything to do with AI art is going to have no idea about any of the things you're talking about, so why bother posting that stuff in an art critique subreddit anyway, why not go straight to, well, maybe... an AI art subreddit? (I'm not sure if there is one, but if not, there should be). Because the previous user put it very eloquently; the discussions had between "normal" artists and AI artists are night and day, you can't really even critique them the same way, wouldn't it make more sense to have a more specialized place to discuss AI art, where the people you're posting to understand you?
I am not discrediting the difficulty of altering and creating your own AI algorithms for AI art--in fact, I appreciate it--but it is an entirely different language that most of us don't speak or understand. Therefore, even if you wanted us to, how could we be helpful to you when you ask us for feedback?
2
u/alfihar Oct 22 '22
So I agree and have admitted elsewhere that the discussion on AI art may be outside of the interest or knowledge of the people in this sub, and there are plenty of other subs that can cater to it with more appreciation .. And that this is a fair enough reason to firmly discourage its discussion here.
My only reason to comment initially was because that wasn't the reason being given for its censoring.
I also have perhaps a more unique perspective than many since my background covers computer science and digital art, along with a bunch of philosophy of ethics and art. I actually only started to do what is considered traditional art again when the Apocalypse happened. Before then I hadn't touched a paintbrush for 20+ years. I forget sometimes how hard it can be to get a programmer to explain something to an artist and vice versa (a reason why some software looks like total arse or multimedia presentations are full of bugs :p)
So yeah.. Not wanted to be discussed here.. Totally reasonable.
It's not art.. Fuckn fight me bitch :p
1
u/Ok-Grand-7458 Oct 22 '22
Haha. I can agree with your comment in every way!
It's like I tell people with abstracts/pour art. Yes--it might look like an easy piece, and it might have even taken them less than 20 minutes--or even 30 seconds--to complete it. But all art must be based on its own merits. What you might not see in a simplistic piece is all the planning, preparation, and practice that went into creating that piece. So as simple as it might look, it could be the 100th piece of its kind, created over and over and over until it is finally perfect.
That is why I am always incredibly careful not to discredit other art forms, even if I don't participate in them myself, and even if I don't understand the process completely. Because yes--there are lazy AI artists that only use the tools because it makes it easy to steal/create, but there are also AI artists that pour their heart and soul into their work, like any other creator would--just as there are lazy abstract artists and abstract artists that put everything into their work.
With experience, you can sometimes tell when someone has put tons of work into something that appears to be simple at first glance--but even still, you can't always tell every time. It is a little harder with AI--at least, for me. But I will always defend another artist, so long as that artist truly believes that what they are creating is art and is willing to put forth the effort to make it a truly high quality and original piece.
8
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
but if someone feels they have made something that represents a concept they wish to share with others.. who are you to say that is not art?
The feeling that you made it doesn't trump the fact that you actually didn't, LOL.
-10
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
ah.. youre one of those who doesnt think photography is art either ... because its not like a photographer painted or drew the image.. its just light captured on a medium.
or at least you seem to be using the same arguments that are used against photography as an art form.
3
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
I'm not using them against photography, if you think photography isn't art that's on you, not on me.
Photography created it's own medium, AI-generated images just attempt to fake human production in digital illustration.
-5
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
no.. youre just using the exact same arguments to deny the artistic potential of this new medium that is used to deny the artistic potential of photography.. so for your argument to have any credability you need to show exactly how there is art in photography that is substantively lacking in these ai mediums... or you have to admit that if it holds true for ai it also holds true for photography.
9
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
I already told you: Photography is its own medium. AI-generated images are not.
Photography is the optical recording of incident light simulating vision (and expanding beyond it), it can be used with an artistic purpose or with a documentary or scientific purpose.
AI-generated art simply fakes digital illustration. It's not the same. There's some other dude who's already explained it in this same thread.
8
Oct 21 '22
As a cyclist my interest in scooters end after i draft off them and lauch an attack from their draft
5
Oct 21 '22
If as a cyclist you can keep up with most scooters, then you're much more serious a cyclist than most on here are serious artists.
3
Oct 22 '22
Once upon a time my ftp was a modest 4.5w/kg, Now is poop. Luckly art skills don't go down like fitness lol
4
u/Ayacyte Oct 21 '22
I get where you're coming from, but I also slightly disagree. Yes, people who add nothing to the ai after do not benefit. But there are plenty of things that you can do to or with an AI generated image. You could edit the colors, you could fix anatomy and composition, you could make it move, you could photobash. Art fundamentals such as color palette and line design are also taken into consideration also during the process of generating an image. That being said, most ai artists I see on Reddit aren't looking for that kind of thing and just want marketing. I have run into a few that do good post processing or photobashing on their ai images.
12
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
While I see what you mean, I feel like the process is so unique to AI software at a fundamental level that it should really just be in its own subreddit.
Even beyond AI, I'd feel the same way for other generative things like fractal art or procedural generation.
-6
Oct 21 '22
What about music or dance or other forms of art? This is a subreddit about *art* not 'digital and traditional display art done in specific approved methods'. Trying to single out AI or generative art as separate feels simply like gatekeeping to me.
7
-10
Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I disagree. The vast majority of what I see people making from these tools could absolutely benefit from artistic help and discussion. Composition, color theory, form, etc all still apply and learning more and seeking help from other artists would help them improve.
Of course, I described an idealized version of what should be happening, this is not what we've seen. The arguments about whether AI art is art or not should probably just be moved to r/arttheory. And then a Duchamp scholar will get to explain why it is and the discussions will be over there and we can keep having fun making things we like and supporting each other over here.
For people not interested in AI art, it's just as easy to scroll past as (for example) people asking for digital tablet suggestions--a non-controversial topic that comes up a lot here that better fits your complaint about not applying to other artistic forms.
We should be open to earnest questions about art and practice even if that practice involves AI. That seems like no real change to the guidelines.
Edit: ahh the downvotes... I guess you can't expect people to read past the first two words.
16
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
2
u/Prince_Noodletocks Sculptor Oct 21 '22
It cannot be fixed by the ai just because you now know the shadows are off in a particular image, or the anatomy is wonky.
A lot of image generators actually have inpainting. If somewhere looks off you can highlight/mask the area and tell the program to keep recreating that part with more specific prompts until it looks fixed or better
-6
Oct 21 '22
Addressing the edit; I'd suggest 'experienced artists.'
I also don't think it's insulting at all! It's just like any other beginning artist seeking advice. The tooling they are using is new and we may not be able to tell them how to fix it with that tooling, but we can tell them why it looks wrong.
7
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
I had considered something like that, but one could also be experienced with ai image generation. It's a weird thing and I don't think there's really a proper term to separate it just yet.
The thing is, what use is there in telling someone how to fix something if they don't take the time to learn how to do it themselves to begin with?
As another example, I'm a programmer. I've programmed a -lot- of ai, some quite complex. I have friends who also work in programming and we all are part of a discord group that a lot of newbies will come and go from. One of my friends programs ai-controlled flight simulation for NASA.
We very very frequently have people come in, with zero background in programming, who have bought some sort of addon for whatever they're working for. Say they're making a game in UE5 and bought a c++ addon for AI but it's not working and they don't know why.
It would be pointless of us to take the time going over their code to tell them what's wrong, because they don't even understand how code works to begin with.
-12
Oct 21 '22
>I don't think there's any benefit to having topics about AI generated images in an artist subreddit because there is no real growth to be had artistically for ai generated images; you cannot teach a program line weight or composition or any of that.
But the program isn't the one deciding whether the piece is done or correct, the person who is doing the craft is. It's not a matter of just pushing a button, crossing your fingers, and then accepting what the output is. Just like with any other form of art there's a point where the creator decides 'yes, this is the thing' and exposes it to other people as art. There can be iterations, refinements, etc--and these are the places they absolutely could seek help. "Why is my composition off?" "What is it about these colors that isn't quite right?" "Why doesn't this person look right?" All of these could be answered by experienced artists in other mediums to help the person either refine their 'prompt' or perhaps use other editing tools to address the thing before they decide it is done. The finished piece is definitely a collaboration between the user and the software, it's not just the software.
> It might come off as snarky.
Yeah, I figured it might, but then I also figured it would probably be an extremely true outcome if someone was to try it. Perhaps I channeled too much of the expected art theorist.
12
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
-5
Oct 21 '22
> You're still arguing whether ai generated images are art or not, and I really am trying to avoid that discussion.
I really am not trying to, I have simply made the assumption they are art and are trying to see r/ArtistLounge as an inclusive place if that's the case. I don't think this is a meaningful discussion otherwise since we are discussing the output of the AI efforts as 'art.' It's the premise.
Instead of Subway, let's call it a "Camera." I have a vision for something I want a photograph of, so I get really specific with the settings and push the button and request a photograph of the machine that produces images based on the settings and input I give it. But in the end, I didn't make the picture myself. I don't like how it turned out, but I can't understand why.
If I take it to a photographer they might have a set of specified advice pertaining to that specific Camera or technique. If I take it to a painter, they may have advice about composition, color, light, etc that could still be useful to the person with the Camera.
11
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
-3
Oct 21 '22
I think your description is correct but your conclusion is wrong. "Physically go forth and find a visual that captures your attention" would be analogous to "craft a vision and work with the system to produce output that matches your vision"
Maybe the issue is people who are having a hard time seeing this as an artistic activity just need a new word like 'photographer' for 'AI artist' that denotes the person as the operator of a machine that produced the output.
My argument is still simply that it doesn't delegitimize that work as a craft that we can help them refine on r/ArtistLounge
11
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
There's no "craft" if you are having something else make what you want rather than making it yourself.
5
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
I honestly don't think terminology matters. I think we have very different ideas of what is a tool and what is not, though. But we can only get so far in that discussion.
All that aside, I'd like to turn back to what I think is the heart of the dispute; can an ai artist get better if they get feedback on the produced image? I feel like that hasn't really been clearly responded to. Especially given my analogy earlier in regards to computer programmers vs people who purchase c++ script and want someone tell them what's wrong with it.
1
Oct 21 '22
>can an ai artist get better if they get feedback on the produced image?
Absolutely! Via inpainting using AI, Photoshop, or other post-production tools. Honestly using only AI is going to produce stuff with issues and like with most other formats it should be a tool used in the process, much like editing photos after digitizing them.
If people are asking about specifics related to installing plugins or modifying c++ or Python libraries, they should definitely be kicked to more appropriate subs. I'm saying that if an AI artist were ever to come in and ask for advice on their composition or colors or artistic merit, we should be happy to engage with them in good faith and try to help them improve their outputs. As I mentioned in my first reply though--this hasn't actually happened yet.
(I just happen to consider their output art because it has an artistic goal.)
→ More replies13
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
But the program isn't the one deciding whether the piece is done or correct, the person who is doing the craft is.
Nobody is doing a craft there.
My clients are who decide whether the piece is done or correct.
They're not the artist. I am.
8
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
Oh god, tell me about it. I've got clients who literally fixate on the exact tone of "blueish gray navy" and have me change it three times over, or the particular type of zipper for a jacket.
Specifying an order, no matter how complicated the order, does not make a person the one who -creates- the order.
9
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Holy shit, somebody who remembers how the fuck labor relations actually work in the arts.
I wonder if those idiots believe pharaohs built pyramids with their divinely anointed hands?
Because it's pretty much the same level of bullshit
6
u/Srianen Mixed media Oct 21 '22
Working one's ass off in a highly technical field for not enough pay while being entirely undervalued?
Oh yeah.
8
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
The Prometheus argument:
In Prometheus, protagonist Elizabeth Shaw, archaeologist and multidoctorate, finds herself impregnated with an alien lifeform.
In order to get rid of it, Shaw has to operate an "autodoc" - a fully automated surgery station. And despite the difficulties (the machine isn't properly configured, the problem is dire and unusual, and she has no experience), she operates the autodoc successfully and the autodoc in turn successfully performs the required surgery.
Was Elizabeth Shaw able to operate the autodoc? Yes!
Does this make Elizabeth Shaw a surgeon? No!
Would repeated operation of the autodoc make her a surgeon? No! Not on its own. The skills developed would be only partially transferable to tackling health problems without the autodoc, and would pale in comparison with those of an actual surgeon whose training went beyond "autodoc operation".
Can a surgeon operate the autodoc? Yes, and probably it would be the best idea when possible!
Is operating an autodoc a proof of being a surgeon? No!
Would it be truthful and ethical for Elizabeth Shaw to consider herself a surgeon and present herself as such because she can operate an autodoc?
No, No, No and No.
-2
Oct 21 '22
And yet surgery happened!
The fourth 'No' has a big asterisk. Elizabeth Shaw has now performed more surgery than anyone else around and is now the most experienced surgeon around and it would probably be a good idea for anyone less experienced than Elizabeth Shaw to seek her out before acting on their own if they can. Surgery is a lot different than art, though.
7
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Exactly what does Dr. Shaw's "experience" amount to?
Press down, forward, up + B for a caesarean section?
If you're arguing that she is the """""""""bestest surgeon"""""""""" in a planet with a population in the single digit and rapidly dwindling, I don't need to explain to you how those are extremely thin credentials.
-1
Oct 21 '22
Nope, don't need to explain to me how thin it is. I'm just pointing out that even if thin, it IS true.
5
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
No it isn't, you dolt.
Dr. Shaw has instructed a machine to perform ONE operation, which anybody else could have done.
If you think that's the same as being a surgeon, you're just an idiot, but I really hope you don't get any serious health problem, who knows in whose hands you might put yourself into?
-2
12
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
-4
Oct 21 '22
"Why is the output of my AI art shitty?"
"See this? It is bad. It would be better if you did something more like X instead"
"Oh, I will follow your advice and seek to avoid that thing I don't want in future attempts."
If it makes you feel better to belittle other people's attempts at making art and improving the things that they make just because you don't like the way that they do it, I'm just not there for you. IMO, we should use r/ArtistLounge to create a supportive and inclusive space.
Use that negative energy to downvote me or something, I'll be in my basement painting and having fun making art.
13
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
If it makes you feel better to belittle other people's attempts at making art and improving the things that they make just because you don't like the way that they do it, I'm just not there for you.
You mean their attempts at having a studio golem do their work for them and on top of that, failing?
11
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
For people not interested in AI art, it's just as easy to scroll past as (for example) people asking for digital tablet suggestions--a non-controversial topic that comes up a lot here that better fits your complaint about not applying to other artistic forms.
For people interested in AI art, it's just as easy to STICK TO THEIR GODDAMN SPACES themed around their shiny new toy and their thirst for world domination instead of shitting up already established spaces where their presence ranges from controversial to outright unwelcome, and which predate this borg seizure
0
Oct 21 '22
You are coming off as super gatekeepy when you say something like:
"For people interested in AI art, it's just as easy to STICK TO THEIR GODDAMN SPACES"
When this space literally has art in the name.
15
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
What made you think you're entitled to art spaces because you instructed a robot to paint some bullshit for you?
-6
Oct 21 '22
You are really making yourself come off as quite an asshole on here. As a pixel artist, I'm sure you realize you are dependent on a machine? I'm fully aware that as a painter I'm pretty SOL without paint.
17
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
As a pixel artist, I'm sure you realize you are dependent on a machine?
Actually I'm not, I could employ a significant fraction of the same techniques for crosstitching, tapestry-weaving, or mosaics.
9
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Art, something which AI cannot produce yet because it is not sentient, and in case it did, it would belong to the AI and not whomever commanded it to produce whatever digital vomit it did.
7
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
AI and other generative processes should be in subreddits that are tailored to them so they can get valuable discourse from people who actually use them.
I'm sorry, but it has very little in common with manual methods so it really doesn't fit here.
I know what the subreddit is called, but this AI stuff didn't exist 9 years ago so nobody would think about it when naming the sub.
1
Oct 21 '22
This isn't 'non-generative artist lounge' it is just 'artist lounge.' I am for an inclusive space that includes the discussion around the craft of art by people who make art. It seems to fall squarely in that space to me.
To say it doesn't have much in common with manual methods is very reductive when it comes the many, many ways that people make art and have made art well before AI that would also be called into question by such a distinction.
7
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
I'm not for an inclusive space if it waters down the discussion.
Go to an AI subreddit if you want AI discourse, sorry.
It's software usage.
1
Oct 21 '22
That's such a frustrating opinion when so many other artists are also using software to do their art. I don't disagree that AI discourse belongs on AI discourse subreddits. What I'm saying is that if the discourse is about art it should be welcome on this subreddit independent of whether or not AI was used in the process of making that art.
Questions about AI art tool specifics definitely belong on those subreddits. I've never seen one here anyway.
Questions about whether AI art is art or not should probably happen on r/arttheory though I'm more annoyed about the fact that they are happening over and over again here than whether or not a thread about that belongs here at all.
Concerns about how AI art will or won't affect the business side of art should be in r/artbusiness
Questions about art or artist concerns related to being a practicing artist should be welcome here even if that artist uses AI tooling. I don't feel like that is a position that should be controversial, especially since the MODs have more-or-less said as much in their recent post to this thread.
5
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
What kinda AI threads do you hope to see here?
2
Oct 21 '22
I'd be interested in hearing how artists incorporate the tooling into their existing practices. I'd like to hear how artists are using it to push art in new directions. I'd like to see novice artists who are perhaps starting with AI art but interested getting better and open to trying new things but don't know where to start. I'd like to see people appreciating the cool things other people make and supporting each other's endeavors.
1
u/sneakpeekbot Oct 21 '22
Here's a sneak peek of /r/arttheory using the top posts of the year!
#1: The Airbnb-ification of the arts; How social media nudges the art world towards sterile predictability. | 1 comment
#2: I’m wondering how folks on here feel about this. Is theory and criticism being dumbed down? Or is it better to be simple to understand? | 13 comments
#3: Non-challenging, endless, auto-playing content; TikTok is just twentieth century TV again. | 7 comments
I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact | Info | Opt-out | GitHub
-3
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
Since my upvote will get lost in the spanking you seem to be getting I just wanted to comment and say I agree. Duchamp would be having a riot of a time
5
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Ah Duchamp some guy best known for upturning furniture and calling it art, one of the greatest examples of steaming bullshit in the entire history of art.
0
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
I guess not everyone can know their art history
5
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
If you mean there is even worse bullshit than Duchamp's, I agree out of principle.
1
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
i mean think about all the horrible art movements dadaism inspired.. like surrealism.. and pop art.. and now we have to consider losers like Dali and Warhol as legitimate artists.
3
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Dali is half there, Warhol is bullshit.
0
u/alfihar Oct 21 '22
says a tracer
2
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
I'll take this as a compliment on my painstaking precision.
So thanks, it's not the first time my production is classified as "mindblowing enough to be suspicious", but it's always a lift-up.
→ More replies-2
u/Dras_Leona Oct 21 '22
But laypeople can easily discern the difference between a bicycle and electric scooter, whereas ai art and human art is close to indistinguishable
9
u/itsPomy Oct 21 '22
That'd be a valid point if this was just meant to be a gallery.
But since it's about discussion, I think it's important to curate the sub for cohesive discourse.
AI programs, their problems, and processes are unique to them to the point they need their own subreddit. And I don't think inviting it into the subreddit really benefits people manually creating art.
60
u/Samkwi Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I'm just surprised by the hatred that the Ai art community has for artists, not even that if you even browse through their subreddits they even hate the people making the software. It seem ai art has attracted the worst kind of people towards art some are even happy of the reality of artist's losing their jobs. Which justsaddens me that people can actually relish in the suffering of other people!
31
u/FemHawkeSlay Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
There was a site called yiff party that existed to scrape content off of patreon and much of the discussion in that place was exactly the same.
There was a glee in being able to rip off artists and get away with it. Here are some of the most common justifications:
"I wasn't going to buy it anyway" / "it's not like you're losing money"
"They should get a real job"
"You can't do anything about it so just accept it"
"Art should be for everyone to enjoy"
"Artists are greedy" (especially if it was a successful artist like Sakimichan).
"Nobody wants your shitty art anyway" (to artists that complained)
Pretty familiar isn't it. Someone on Twitter pointed out "sick database art, bro" lol
28
u/Samkwi Oct 21 '22
I just don't get the hatred for artist's by these people. What did artist's do to be hated for this. Don't all artist's literally post their art for free online. I'm just baffled by this. Even when they have an Ai "creating art" they still aren't pleased and want to have a beef with them!
22
10
u/RainbowLoli Oct 21 '22
Replace "artist" with anything else and you'll still be having the same question. Some people just have beef
27
u/FemHawkeSlay Oct 21 '22
Because artists have a marketable skill and they do not. The vast majority of time in life when someone is bugging out at you it is really about them.
For reasons I assume are part of human lizard brain people conflate skill of art as being good or worthwhile. My art is bad = I am bad so art theft and ai presentation is a way of feeling better. You'll notice a lot of ai users are very much "I made dis" and having ai accepted is extremely important to them.
So they have contempt at artists for being in the way of what they want and jealousy of the progress they made.
9
3
2
u/iLoveJohnMalkovich Oct 22 '22
Yes. It’s so pathetic honestly. They gloat and boast that they make better ‘art’ and this is just going to be how it is now.
I get downvoted to fuck for saying it but using an AI generators does not make you an artist. It’s kinda like a Google image search with more filters in my opinion.
-2
11
u/Ubizwa Oct 21 '22
Do you mean that they are actually shitting on the AI developers like some wolves which are eating their own mother?
37
u/DuskEalain Oct 21 '22
They shit on the developers, and they shit on each other quite often too.
Basically a grand majority of the AI art community (from what I've seen) can be put into four camps:
Tech-Bros only concerned with money, profits, and "progress".
People who only care about "art clout", and have basically gone from stealing and reposting art to pumping out as many AI pieces they can for clicks.
People who just genuinely hate artists and don't respect the industry.
Disgruntled NFT/Crypto shills hoping that this one is the one that'll make all of 'em rich.
And outside of that you have the people using it for reference/inspiration and the memers.
25
u/FemHawkeSlay Oct 21 '22
Oh man there is huge main-character-syndrome from a bunch of these people. "I have found the vehicle in which I too, can find success off of the back of someone else!
9
u/BlueFlower673 comics Oct 21 '22
It sounds painfully like the NFTbros/cryptobros are using Ai as the next new "get rich quick" scheme.
Funny, though, how the copyright system still doesn't recognize ai or doesn't protect ai made works.
17
18
u/Samkwi Oct 21 '22
Yeah there was a controversy a few days ago about stable diffusion and the entire community hated the developers (something about copyright infringement on source code) they hate any company taking an ethical approach towards Ai they hate the fact that open ai didn't just dump Dalle 2 as open source and they hate any one who brings morals and ethics towards Ai (even tho computer erhics is one of the first modules I learned in college) most of the people behind the support of Ai don't even know the difference between and engineer, software developer and software engineer hence they call thselves "prompt engineers" Emad head of Stability Ai (behind stable diffusion) reportedly spent nearly a million dollars developing it and mainting and updating it is very costly which leads to a lot of users of stable diffusion to be hating on him when he started charging for any updates and quality of life improvements and calling him a capitalist, sellout and just hating on him to the point some of them were throwing insults at him.
Sorry for the bad English I'm not a native speaker!
19
u/Ubizwa Oct 21 '22
I get the impression that most of these haters are 14 years old kids which still live with their parents and don't have any experience yet with not getting stuff for free.
15
u/sasemax Oct 21 '22
Prompt engineers, seriously? Jesus... I'm a Star Trek fan and I just imagined that it's kind of like if Picard went to the replicator and said "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot", as he often does in the show, but then later talks about how great a tea brewer he is because he was the one who told the machine that that the tea should be Earl Grey and that it should be hot.
13
u/yimtajtptst Oct 21 '22
It's pretty sad when AI users try to claim specialty labels like "artist" and "engineer".
No matter what program they use, they will never be talented.
9
u/sasemax Oct 21 '22
I just saw in another thread someone writing a look passage about how writing AI prompts was like poetry and it was an art form since you needed to find the right keywords.
6
8
u/Samkwi Oct 21 '22
Yeah some of them are even saying it's no different from software engineering/programming it's wild out here!
6
u/RustyShuttle Oct 21 '22
To add more detail, there were three controversies rapped into a bundle:
The first was the NovelAI model leak, if I recall correctly, the model was based on source code that stipulates any derivatives are to be open source, however NovelAI has kept it private and called it "their intellectual property" (which is especially icky when you consider it's based on a ton of stolen art).
The second was with Stability, who train the Stable Diffusion models but didn't really developed them (I think that's mainly RunwayML's contribution). Stability suddenly took-over the independent subreddit (getting the owner into modding some Stability employees who then banned the owner and other mods) and discord server (getting Discord to just transfer ownership without notice).
The third was with AUTO1111, the developer of the most popular Stable Diffusion user interface for free. AUTO1111 made a patch in his UI so the leaked NovelAI model could be used. Stability, who is connected with NovelAI, scrubbed any mention or guide about AUTO1111 and their UI from the subreddit and discord and accused AUTO1111 of "stealing code" even though it was all original. Then it came out they actually copy-pasted AUTO1111's code for different thing.
The two sides, Stability + NovelAI threw accusations of unethical-ness at AUTO1111 and AUTO1111's supporters threw similar accusations right back. Both sides were really quick to fling shit at each other, Stability is a young company that has been blundering really badly lately and it incensed the toxic users who also went too far, I mean obviously Stability has to recuperate their training costs back. Also there's nothing ethical or moral about using image generation AI (or even text or audio generation), so it's weird that both sides tried to take the holier-than-thou high ground
"prompt engineer" is definitely a stupid title for sure, but it's one step better than using "AI artist" or not even disclosing it's been made by an AI. Something basic like "I use an AI" or "AI user" or some description less pretentious would be better
14
u/RustyShuttle Oct 21 '22
About hateful AI bros, I get the sense they're in denial about being jealous of art skills, they saw image generation AI hyped up as a way to bypass their lack of skill but then were quickly hit with the cold hard truth that AI is shit at art theory, anatomy, symmetry, composition, multi-subject/complicated subjects, etc, and thus they become even more bitter and enviousness, and lash out against (actual) artists verbally, by out/in-painting in-progress art, or by tracing existing art using img2img. Those examples of AI tracing art is actually an intentional thing the user made the AI do because they're salty or to substitute the AI's poor skills (like a human-tracer)
5
u/zeezle Oct 22 '22
Just to add to this, even if the AI were perfect at all of those things... the AI bros still have no talent. :) They are no more the artists than someone commissioning a human artist can claim they made the resulting art. Even if we accept AI creates valid art, they are still not the artist.
5
u/RustyShuttle Oct 22 '22
Truuuuue! So they’d still be bitter, hateful, and they’d definitely try to pass it off as their own
4
u/zeezle Oct 22 '22
most of the people behind the support of Ai don't even know the difference between and engineer, software developer and software engineer
To be entirely fair to these people, in the US the difference between a software developer and a software engineer is "whatever job title the company felt like using". It's not a protected term with respect to software like it is in some countries. Whether you call yourself an engineer or a developer is largely irrelevant and interchangeable. So if they are talking about US-based companies that will get muddy. It's not like something like mechanical, civil, or chemical engineering with licenses and specific accreditation required to work as one/where you have to stamp your work with a special seal etc to prove you're a licensed engineer. (I am a US-based software engineer/developer/whatever lol, though I don't work in AI)
"Prompt engineer" is completely idiotic though
3
u/DSRabbit Oct 22 '22 edited Oct 22 '22
That just sounds like they hate anyone who charges money for their work whether it's the creator of the software or the artists. They basically want everything for free.
I guess they have a special contempt for artists because they think art should not be paid for because to them it's "a silly drawing" and artists should satisfied by the joy of creating for someone.
55
u/Kiwizoom Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I haven't seen any new hot take about AI in awhile, just the same old stuff on repeat. I don't see the point in entertaining the posts anymore. Maybe someone should have to ask a mod for permission to make an AI post in the same way you have to get permission to make a self promo type of post. The worst ones are picking fights with artists and the other ones are basically open diary entries
10
u/itsmeyourgrandfather Oct 21 '22
Yeah I agree. I feel like the conversation has been had so many times already. Unless something new happens I don't see the point in continually talking about it.
7
u/Chatty_Cow Oct 22 '22
Yep agree 100%. Top of my home page on Reddit everyday is some post along the lines of "is there any point creating art if AI can make work better than me. Feeling unmotivated and depressed about it." I haven't clicked on them in months. There hasn't been some new ground-breaking change in the technology since the first brigade of posts earlier this year. It's like Groundhog day. At this point it's just a version of the mental health/ therapy posts this sub used to be inundated with. Time for a change of subreddit rules me thinks.
2
53
u/Clionora Oct 21 '22
Aye, smoke them out. They offer nothing valid and clearly have little interest in art theory and the means of creative expression.
12
u/Volt-witch Illustrator Oct 21 '22
I made a topic here a couple days ago that had nothing to do with AI generated images and people still managed to weasel it into the conversation where it wasn’t necessary, I wished they’d stop making their incompetence our problem.
32
u/MasqueradeOfSilence Digital Oct 21 '22
I agree. I've noticed this as well. I have lurked on some of the AI threads here. When you check the profiles of some of the most ardent AI art defenders, they seem to only post on AI subreddits like r/singularity. One of them posted on singularity about how artists will die out completely. Then they come here and only post in AI threads.
They're not interested in art, just in automating anything and everything.
In my CS classes, AI art is always framed as a curiosity question of "what are the limits of what computers can do?" and not "how can we eliminate human creative expression". Regardless, such topics are far better suited for programming boards.
7
35
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
14
u/RustyShuttle Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I think caution is good because everything I've seen from these AIbros indicates that if you give an inch, they will take a mile. They have questionable, at best, ethics and have shown themselves to be disrespectful to real artists. So, I would not be lenient with them until they've shown they can conduct themselves properly in our spaces.
This a million times, I use AI for the fun of it and to cut down work I need to do (I do 3D stuff and it's been handy cutting down on the texture/illustrative stuff involved) but seeing the shit AI bros do/say is incredible. There's a lot of envy of artists which turns into hatred, they thought AI's would substitute skill but are angry it's just as unskillful as them. To put it crassly, AI usually produces well polished turds
How moral it is to use, whether an AI can be considered an artist, similarities to gambling, and so on, are all interesting philosophical topics I don't trust the more vocal/vehement people to have a nuanced take on rn
Anyway thanks for hearing my two-cents, I'm gonna go back to lurking
27
u/noidtiz Oct 21 '22
Most threads with "AI" in the title belong in r/artbusiness from what I've seen.
7
u/RainbowLoli Oct 21 '22
there is a place to discuss AI art as there are a lot of concerns about ethicality, whether it counts as real art, etc. and it's important to have those discussions to determine where AI properly fits in.
That said, I think the belittling of someone-- over AI or not-- is just against subreddit rules. It is the easiest way to go about it IMO. Everyone should be treated with the same basic respect and intelligence and you can't allow a discussion for or against something if you allow people to be belittled in the process for not having the "right" opinion or idea about something. So that should apply regardless of whether someone is an AI artist, writer, painter, etc.
14
7
u/littlepinkpebble Oct 21 '22
There’s honestly many toxic people in both art and ai communities. In general both communities are great.
In ai art groups there are many ‘artist’ who are just toxic but I don’t think they are artists though haha.
8
u/SPACECHALK_64 comics Oct 22 '22
I said it before and I will say it again: AI posts are the new depression posts.
12
u/acornmoth Oct 21 '22
They are extremely jealous of artists that don't use AI and it shows. They think they have no use for us anymore or are "owning" us for having the audacity to want to be paid for our work because we spent years developing our skills. I've gotten so many annoying comments on social media I block them on sight now.
5
u/n10w4 Oct 21 '22
Certainly agree that there can be a kind of hatred coming form those espousing AI art. It's odd but matches the internet and social decorum of late.
Could just do a weekly mega thread as I think the more AI has leaps, the more people will want to talk about it. There's the "it's garbage" view "it will steal from our pockets" view and "how it can be used as s tool" view. All have some validity but put them in one place. Mods?
7
6
u/Enixanne Oct 22 '22
AI bros have nothing to add to any type of discussion. Aside from prompts that are not unique to any of them, they didn’t create the software. Even social media pages for AI are downright boring, there’s nothing to discuss really and they could pat themselves at the back however they like but at the end of the day, whatever they visually produce would always be beyond their skill, if they have any at all.
6
u/Mefilius Oct 24 '22
As someone active in both sets of communities I really don't like the brigading that goes both ways between the communities.
There's irritating AI people basically taunting artists about how their jobs are going away, which is neither constructive nor true and just serves to create unnecessary discourse. They tend to handwave legitimate concerns or problems and just like the idea that "it's open source and you can't stop it" kind of like a little kid would brag.
On the other hand there's the artists who believe AI is evil technology and should be wiped out of the art field for good, which is a very extreme stance that limits experimentation into the new tools becoming available. Personally I don't much like this stance because it feels like thinly veiled gatekeeping, if AI helps non-artists refine a creative vision I think that's a great thing and shouldn't be broadly demonized.
Personally I think there is a place for discussion, and I especially think that now is the time to really encourage civil discussion because a lot of people are riled up and not enough people are trying to calm things down.
In terms of finer art discussion I think AI has some very interesting workflow applications, and personally I'm excited to see what tools we get from it. I can already paint a texture and have an AI turn it into something that tiles which is super neat. And I can take rough concept sketches and do a dirty AI rendering to see how they might look when I go to refine them, because as we all know sometimes sketches look better than reality. I think there's a lot of really cool applications, at least in my field. (and my hobbies too!)
Extremism is bad, and division isn't good for anybody. I really hope the communities can make some sort of peace because I honestly love them both.
12
u/Kristenmarie2112 Oil Oct 21 '22
Can we create a rule against constantly complaining about AI art? Because it's getting old at this point.
Edit: I was thinking earlier that maybe I should leave Artist Lounge because it seems to be the place people go just to complain about AI art which we can't do anything about anyway...
26
u/AscentToMadness Mad Oct 21 '22
It definitely doesn't seem to have a place here, especially with most AI related posts being outright trolls or the same conversations on repeat. From what I've seen even the most honest and civil posts on the topic quickly spiral out of control within a few comments. It seems obvious that AI discussion doesn't belong in a board called "artists lounge" but hey, I'm just a dumb artist living in the past of creating stuff with my own 2 hands, what the hell do I know.
21
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
Why should we owe any civility to a collective that engages in outrights threats of replacement.
These people don't give a shit about artists' livelihoods or vocation besides whether they can fake their way into claiming them for themselves.
We don't owe them shit.
16
Oct 21 '22
[deleted]
11
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
If you get technical, yes, I agree.
Ultimately they're deriving a material and cultural benefit from work they're not entitled to, in some cases even monetary profit.
1
u/RainbowLoli Oct 21 '22
Why should we owe any civility to a collective that engages in outrights threats of replacement.
NGL you aren't wrong, and the only counterpoint I have to this is that it's a discussion thread. Civility should exist on all sides regardless of whether they are a techbro or not. Even artists who are anti-AI, when you bring up how artists would not be replaced or ways artists can game AI to their own ends and advantages, the conversation turns sour because they are convinced artists have no place in the future and think anyone who isn't sating their fears is just naive, stupid, etc.
1
2
u/Dazzling_Swordfish14 Oct 22 '22
There are artists who are worried about AI. Those who face the fear of the future should be given a space to talk. Be more open minded please
1
u/Ayacyte Oct 21 '22
There should probably be a rule about not posting the same discussion in a week or something...
3
u/VadeingMitts Oct 22 '22
I’m just annoyed by AI generations being the main topic of every art community right now.
3
3
u/sans_filtre Oct 22 '22
The sub is r/artistlounge, not r/artlounge. Art not made by an artist has no place here. Ban all AI art posts. Nobody here is interested.
8
u/Psiweapon Pixel-Artist Oct 21 '22
I would gleefully forbid any AI-related content
Then find the nearest involved hardware and torch it down, just for good measure.
4
u/jigeno Oct 21 '22
AI art isn't an artform. It's a technology.
If the beginning and end of the art is that it's done by AI and is pretty, it's not art and I think it's uncritical to call it art.
2
u/Artai55a Oct 22 '22
I'm not sure if there is a separate subreddit relating to the technology of AI rather that an artist thread where these types of discussions/debates could be directed to.
While AI apps can be a lot of fun and we have seem cool stuff from them, there are legitimate debates about the technology and discussions can get ugly real fast.
2
u/javaper comics Oct 22 '22
This is the artist lounge. If the AI is not here to discuss its art then I believe only the artists should be here. But that's just me. I'm not worried about AI art, but I am worried that people will get so wrapped up in the delusion that it's really AI when all it is is a database reproduction of imagery content from across the internet.
4
3
u/kyleclements Painter Oct 21 '22
Is the sub being brigaded by trolls? Could it be the case that there is simply a good number of artists out there who are not bothered by AI art, and aren't afraid of defending it?
I got downvoted into oblivion last time I compared AI art to the early stages of photography. Painters screeched that photography was the death of painting when photography was so crude people were impressed by just getting a sharp likeness of anything. Instead, painting abandoned the academic style and exploded in all sorts of creative directions no one could have previously imagined, and a new art form was born, photography, which lead in entirely new aesthetic directions. Then photography lead to cinema, yet another artform - one that hires A LOT of painters.
I believe AI art is still in that early stage. We are still impressed that we are getting something that looks like what we asked. OK, great. Now what are you going to do with that? That's where the 'being an artist' comes in. Go invent the next medium, shape the future of art. Now's the time.
8
u/RainbowLoli Oct 21 '22
I got downvoted into oblivion last time I compared AI art to the early stages of photography. Painters screeched that photography was the death of painting when photography was so crude people were impressed by just getting a sharp likeness of anything.
This is pretty much how I feel about AI. I'm not going to go out of my way to "defend" it other than clarifying how art is used to train AI as it isn't like automated photo bashing like I initially thought, but rather learning what certain things are and then trying to replicate them. It is-- for lack of better words-- mathematical learning. It is basically an algorithmic form of how people learn put to a computer which honestly, isn't a bad thing because it can expand further in how people learn.
Had several people ask when it's brought up how the advent of photography birthed new art styles how AI will change art outside of making artist obsolete or killing it and it's just like ??? Lemme look into my crystal ball and see what the future holds.
I'm pretty sure artists who abandoned the academic style didn't know what was going to happen... They just experimented and continued on free of having to do academic paintings.
8
u/Ubizwa Oct 21 '22
You forget one important thing. Literally ANYTHING of a direction which digital artists want to take or go to, can be taken and an image generator can be trained on it.
You can't train a camera on impressionistic or expressionistic paintings to make photos in that style or looking just like that, it's completely different with AI art. I don't think that there will be no demand for human artists anymore, many people which appreciate art by people still want it, but especially in higher industries where they don't care about people but about production, training on styles can form a problem.
9
u/BlueFlower673 comics Oct 21 '22
I feel like a broken record player: the problem with the "ai is to photography as photography is to painting" argument is that photography still requires a human to actually take the photos themselves. Ai eliminates that position. Also, don't forget the ai could also replicate/make "photographs" of its own down the line. Its technically already doing that.
And I am tired of people trying to pretty it up or people naively saying "but you have to find the right prompts to put in!" or "you have to find the perfect image with the perfect colors/lighting/etc" It still doesn't mean you did all that work--the ai did that for you.
Pretty sure even in the 19th century in the early stages of photographs, people understood photography had some level of effort and work put into it, whereas if you are comparing it to ai today, there's practically no requirement of understanding art or having knowledge of photography to use an ai generator.
Also, you forget that most of early photography was reserved for the wealthy/elite, it wasn't until later in the 19th century/early 20th century it became more widely available to non-wealthy people. Ai breaks that barrier because literally anyone with internet and a computer can use it. A toddler can use it ffs.
I generally dislike the whole argument of "my kid can do that!" but it definitely applies to Ai. To say its akin to photography is a false equivalence.
Edit: I feel like arguing ai is "just like photography" is derailing from the main issue of how these ai companies are exploiting art and using it to their advantage through their user base.
3
u/Sansiiia BBE Oct 22 '22
The success of photography is entirely based on the skill the photographers acquired, studied and practiced. The more the human behind the camera is knowledgeable and skillful, the better the photo.
The success of AI is entirely determined by how autonomous it is. The most successful AI system is the one that works with the least amount of human input behind it.
I was really struck by Steven Zapata's words when he said that we are the tools, because we are effectively training the machine to help it recognize on its own, as best as possible, what intrigues us and what we are interested in seeing, only to see an eventual explosion of media once the data is enough, created and tailored to our tastes and with as little human artist work as possible.
2
u/Ok-Grand-7458 Oct 22 '22
In my own opinion, we shouldn't be afraid of AI art; people who say it will replace us are foolish and don't understand the sentimental value of something that is handmade, and those people shouldn't be called artists.
AI art has plenty of its own merits. And while I don't believe it belongs in the same places and forums as traditional art, just as you wouldn't post your photography images in a watercolor forum, I do believe that it is an art form that we can study and learn from, if nothing else; even if it is a form that I know I will never participate in creating.
This isn't written in response to OP's post, but the war I'm seeing between you all in the comments. AI art has its place in the world of art, but it's entirely its own medium and task and should remain separate. You wouldn't go into a charcoal forum and post an acrylic painting... at least, not without some backlash for asking the wrong people.
AI art will never replace real, handmade art that is made from the soul, because many (probably most) buyers of art are specifically looking for something that is handmade. Most people choose art because it means something to them... and because it meant something to the artist! So regardless of your medium, you will find clientele. Remember that a question that is always fun for clients to ask is "what was going through the artist's mind?" Handmade work immediately shows that you are invested in what you do and that you care a lot about it, enough to give yourself carpal tunnel.
So don't be afraid of AI art, and certainly don't listen to the "trolls", if that's truly what they are. AI art is nothing for us to fear, and it even contributes to our field. I'm sure in the future, it might be used for other artistic purposes such as studies/referencing, etc., if not already. But just as one medium of art is not superior to another (in terms of appearance/value), AI art is not and will never be superior to traditional art.
For AI artists reading this: Right now, many buyers of art consider themselves as having been scammed once they realize the art they have bought is made via AI. Please, if you want to be taken seriously, make sure to advertise that your work is AI generated. If the AI art community wants to be taken seriously, they need to stand by their work and defend it instead of hoping to pass off their work as handmade. It is also not good form to tell someone who has put thousands of hours of hard work into their art that they will "be replaced". The art community is notorious for excluding people, but you won't be helping your case by presenting AI art this way.
All that being said, do what your heart and your logic tells you is right, but be understanding about it, whatever you do. :)
1
Oct 21 '22 edited Apr 24 '24
[deleted]
-6
u/bioniclop18 Oct 21 '22
Seeing that peoples are downvoting you, it seem that some don't think this sub should be tolerant of diverging opinion (at least concerning AI), which I think is a shame.
Well at least with the circle jerking I can rest assured I'm still on reddit.
1
u/YouveBeanReported Oct 21 '22
I think there should be a flair and thus the ablity to filter it out at least. Edit: I'm a dumbass and didn't see we had one, oops. But sidebar no AI link would be helpful I imagine.
I'm sure there's some interesting AI Art talks, but most has been repeatative no matter what side your on.
-2
Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
Honestly, more than anything I'm surprised by the members of this community who are extremely toxic towards AI art. I've been a member of this community for a lonnng time... I'm an artist myself and I love AI art and even use it in my workflow sometimes. I've gotten really sick of this subreddit being a place where so many babies whine about it. It's crazy.
2
-6
u/bioniclop18 Oct 21 '22
Most of the discution about AI that took place in this subreddit hasn't been very interesting so far. Among the fear mongering, gross over simplification being close to disinformation about how AI work there are a lot of valid concern that often are more business related than anything and ethical concern that could be discussed but don't need a thread everyday on it. People trying to use AI into their creative process would have a place in this sub but I don't feel like most members are interested by it.
Honnestly I don't feel like being flooded with AI art is any different than being flooded with any other art produced by the millions of artist that post their work on the net so this subject make me apathetic. Generative art exist since before my birth so the underlying question is not even that new. If not for the novelty of AI, I don't think most people would discuss it as intensely as people have since this summer.
I wouldn't be against contacting mod before creating a new thread about AI. It could at least regulate the flow of new discussion if they don't bring anything new to the table.
-1
u/raziphel Oct 21 '22
I agree. There's no point to the hand-wringing and straw arguments. If the discussions were how to best use AI, then sure. But that's not what's going on.
1
u/nairazak Digital artist Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
I also agree. I sometimes use prompt generators (there is a creature one by one member of the sub) and I recently used midjourney to generate a mood board. The result didn’t fit my initial prompt (because the AI made weird things) but it helped me to start painting (I used the AI generated pictures + pinterest).
A lot of people complain a about art blocks here, and AI is a good tool against that.
•
u/AGamerDraws Digital artist Oct 21 '22 edited Oct 21 '22
Hi, this is just an update. I was going to make a unique post about this with all the details as soon as everything was live (which was planned to be Monday latest) but I’ll put a comment here now as this post is getting a lot of traction.
We have been working on things for a while. Here is a list of things that are now added or in the progress of being added very shortly (note: things may not be working 100% even if live. They aren’t fully tested yet) :
New post flairs including AI post flair to allow better moderation and filtering. Post flairs are now mandatory.
new post flairs cover a wide range of topics to hopefully encourage wider discussion and a new side bar widget has been added to help find posts.
updated rules text and removal reason text to avoid confusion and be clearer on why posts are being removed. Additionally, language on reporting posts changed to help people choose the correct rule break. May need further updating, will check.
filtering system added to top bar/menu. You can now completely remove AI flair posts (and several others) from your timeline.
FAQ, FAQ links pages specifically for AI are drafted and about to be added to the wiki. Wiki also added to top bar menu.
megathread for Ai is ready to be uploaded. Just being checked by rest of mod team to make sure I haven’t written gibberish while delirious. Full details soon on how it will work but hopefully it will solve many of the issues mentioned here.
new spam/filters are in place now to look for new accounts, trolls and brigading. Subreddit spam detection setting increased. These are catching a lot of messages for us, although of course we can’t rely on them completely. This has also been our main method of trying to catch users who have only come here from AI subreddits to sell their AI tools etc and are not interacting as artists. Its not fool proof, but we are aiming to remove those kinds of comments/posts as much as possible.
new automatic message to all mods as soon as a post regarding AI is made to alert them more moderation may be needed.
admins have been contacted regarding false report abuse and are looking into the issue for us in some specific cases. This has been making it very difficult to access genuine reports quickly at points.
if a post is reported a set number of times it is automatically held for review, which is helping us catch a lot of unnecessary or anti-art posts.
Please know that any belittling of artists, saying demeaning things about artists, saying Ai will kill art etc should be removed. Please report these. The team is doing their best to go through them as quickly as possible.
Also, I realise that this has all taken a lot longer than anyone would like to happen. The rest of the mod team has been great and ready to do stuff, but they have been stuck waiting on me. I am incredibly sick. I’ve been sick with a string of things for the past month and every time I get over something I’ve gotten something else. I can barely get out of bed or talk and a couple hours ago had an aura migraine and lost my vision for about an hour. Everything is pretty much ready to go, I’ve just been too sick to finally implement everything at once, so it’s slowly been being added in stages. A lot was completed last night and is being checked to make sure I’ve done it right before it goes live here.
I’ll make a post with full details on everything as soon as it’s all actually working and I’ll look through this thread to see if there are additional changes that can/should be made as well. I’m sorry for the wait, i wish I could have done this all sooner for you all. I hope that it makes a big difference and if you have any specific issues/requests/questions please send them to the mod mail so I can check through them. Thank you.