Unbelievable Artist Wins Competition Using Fake Art - Here's How!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2022
- Mohammed Agbadi talking about the fake art that won an art competition and took the entire bag 💰💰💰
Join the Discord ; / discord
follow me:
▶ Instagram: / mohammedagbadi
▶ Twitter: / mohammedagbadi
This a commentary video on the twitter art community, art drama, white washing, art commentary art rant, and fixing art 
Кино
do you think ai is art is valid?
It's like an insult to us artists who have spent years practicing. I don't like it.
I think it's really up to the context
Only as a tool not as replacement
enter it in things like brush stroke predictors, stuff to make tools so much better and concept generation/inspiration!
No, because its cheapening the actual act of making art and being able to take credit for what the AI made. Edit: if you have to compare it to when PS or some other tool that still requires skill and knowledge to use, then its just boiling down you not wanting to put effort into progressing your skills as an artist or not understanding that you have to put time and effort to do so. Having an AI take that out of the process and just being able to select whats good, isnt art, its pure laziness.
I think it is. But hiding that fact and winning a contest is not
AI cannot create from nothing. It uses thousands of other artists work and frankensteins it together into something that matches a given prompt. The human provided the prompt and several thousand humans provided the actual source images. The AI just put it together. Im not saying it isnt cheating in this context but I dont think an AI will ever make art at least completely unassisted by a real person.
you forget that human artists are much the same. we cannot create a piece of art without influence either.
(Edit: This comment is misguided, I won't delete it so that i can make this edit, but know that I already see that it was pretty bad of a take.)
true, but...would you equate the amount of time it generally takes to create an illustration to the amount of time it would hypothetically take to generate an image using ai?
@@MohammedAgbadi You misunderstand. Using AI for this competition was definitely what I would call cheating. What I was saying is that AI can't create art. That scene in detroit become human where the android paints a beautiful picture just wont happen unless that exact picture already exists and every brush stroke was planned out like in 3d printing.
@@battleframestudios8989 ohhh...I see what you mean my bad
@@Spookatz. Good point. But in both cases of a human referencing the art they've seen and an AI doing that... a human is involved in the process either way. The AI doesnt know what good art is. It needs to be told and shown by a person.
I am deeply concerned about the future of art. I was under the impression that art would be one of the last things to be touched by automation, but this software is frightening.
these softwares have taken it next level. just search ai art on tiktok.
Agree, like I knew it was possible but I always thought it wouldn't be as good as a person.. yet as more jobs are replaced by automation are we not making humans obsolete?
Humans will be poor, jobless but have an abundance of crap made by machines..
@@Yukosan13 if this reaches a certain point we'd have to abandon capitalism entirely, to be fair
Capitalism continues its murder of culture by attacking the independent artist
@@Yukosan13 and only the people in charge of these tech companies will be getting any revenue.
Can you imagine something like: "well yeah, he plagiarized the work, but he took hours looking at the artist gallery to choose the best image to copy, and he deleted the watermark too, I mean, he invested as much time on it as any other artist." I guess they really put the 'artist' in 'con artist.'
It *is* a new piece of art that did not exist before. No renaissance painter painted images of people looking through sci-fi portals.
@@revlarmilion9574 they didn’t use an ai to do all the work for them either. Looking at a picture to see which one you like better isn’t work or art 🥱
This! That's the main thing many people fail to understand about these generators, no matter how good or bad they are at generating a finished usable piece without further human input beyond the prompts. The art theft is real already without having these shitty apps helping people blur the lines between stolen art and original art. I'm currently testing a few to write an article on the topic and so far, I have detected what seem to be residual pixel information from watermarks on several pieces so it's definitely plagiarism and art theft.
@@revlarmilion9574 imagine commissioning another artist to win a prize for you. It's still not your art.
@@meownover1973 ikr, it's very shitty... I have no problem if someone created Ai art but what I have a problem with is them calling themselves artists and putting their Ai generated "art" in competitions made for people who actually put in more work than just "creative thinking"
It's like ordering a customized dish from a restaurant and taking it to a local food competition just to microwave it and then call yourself a chef among the other competitiors
In my opinion, if AI-generated art is to be considered art, then the AI is the artist, not the person giving the AI prompts.
lmaooo ong
this is like someone commissioning art and then saying it's theirs cos they came up with the idea.
@@pieflower6419 literally!!!
You are incorrect. The AI software corresponds to the paint brush. It’s just a tool. An advanced tool. But a tool.
@@BrianReplies it does not correspond to the paint brush. The paintbrush is not self-producing an entire work.
Alright, so if we're allowing AI to assist "artists" with competitions, we should absolutely allow the same kind of machine intervention in every other competitive field there is. Put footballers in Tanks. Put sprinters on motorbikes and arm shot-putters with a catapult. Whats the problem?
That sounds pretty cool, not gonna lie.
@@revlarmilion9574 imagine the carnage! Beautiful xD
great point but omg imagine if we had that irl XD
Okay but like, why does this sound like something I’d watch 💀
But I see your point. :)
Holy shit YES
Someone made this comparison on twitter. "AI art and human art is like doing foot race. Humans walk while AI is using a car. Now does that sound fair?"
oops lmaoo
Probably the smartest thing that has came out of Twitter in a while
But tbh it's not even that. It's like the competition was to build a tower, and the artists build theirs ground up. Meanwhile, this guy just slid a pre-made tower over to where everyone was working and called it his. That's why this is infuriating. Not that AI art exists, but that it was weaponized for personal gain
Even worse, it's like ordering a custom dish from a restaurant and taking it to a local cooking competition just to microwave it, then call yourself a chef😑
I don't think so, I think AI could only get as smart as us(this might differ from person to person), the fact that AI need some sort of library to create new images, is a limitation in imagination
The """artist""" said "I'm not going to apologize for it. I won, and I didn't break any rules."
There should be a rule stating you have to have actually made the art, not just use an AI. Crazy that it has to come to this.
AI art is becoming more and more of a plague.
Edit: He also said "This isn’t going to stop.” and “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost."
This guy is a bit of a pos.
What he essentially did was commissioned artwork. Describe what he wanted and the A.I. made it. Then he entered it in a contest as if it was made by him.
Oh wow, sounds like an actually shitty person. "I didn't break any rules" yeah, only because AI generated art is such a brand fucking new thing that the people who set up competitions like this wouldn't even have considered the possibility of people submitting a piece that was generated by a computer program rather than specifically crafted by a real human being.
Also if art is dead it's because assholes like these have actively slaughtered it
He certainly is. I would love to give him a piece of my mind.
... He made a third party to create the art for him.
Technically you can say the art belongs to the A.I and he can't submit it becasue he didn't make it, he just made the A. I that made it.
Bit like claiming your kids art as your own.
My problem with this guy is that fact that he says “ai won, humans lost” so that gives him an excuse to do such a thing? Some people paint because they love painting. They do it because it makes them happy, and by entering ai art into a competition AND WINNING, you are ruining the chance for a real artist to experience the joy of winning
If this is legal then art school prices need to drop ASAP!
lmaooo!!!!
The reason why i am big pissed about this is, because the guy who "fine tuned" his A.I. generated piece never had to go through the process of learning how to draw something in the first place. Lets just assume he actually had spent as much time on it, than other competitors, he still didn't need to invest the years and years of practice the others had to. He didn't have to go through the process of figuring out, why some things work together, how colours interact with each other, how to perform the movements necessary to create the lines you want, how to create depth on a 2 dimensional surface and how to trick your brain to perceive that depth while working on the piece, so you don't trip over your own feet. I'd even argue he didn't even need to have a base picture in his head, but only words. Like he might have thought "oh yea, rennaisance!" and didn't have to do any thinking about, what really defined the rennaisance, the AI did that for him.
Exactly. But watch people be like, "gOoD aRt dOeSn'T hAvE tO tAke a LoNG TiMe tO dO". "tAkiNg A loNg tImE dOeSn'T mEaN yOUr A bEtTeR arTiSt".
Which is usually true but that only applies to human vs. humans. Using AI art when other people aren't is cheating. Kind of like how tracing and acting like you actually achieved something is also wrong.
@@ClearAbyss Well to that argument you can counter: "We are not talking, wether or not the art is good. "
@@varileztradragonsong4603 but we definitely are since this is an art competition lol
"Fine tune" i guess he just generated a shit ton of images.
@@lumenx7499 No, we aren't. We're talking if the artwork submitted should be considered made by the person who submitted it. Which it should not. He didn't make the art. He commissioned the art then passed it off as his own work.
This man really said: 'Alexa, make good art.'
lmaooo fr fr
XD
It's an art form of it's own, so it belongs specifically in AI generated art competitions. And if this type of art starts draining work from concept artists and designers because it's cheaper and way faster it should not be allowed to use actual peoples art without paying royalties for it first- this AI isn't pulling these images out of it's ass, it's using a shit ton of already existing art.
At this point the AI is creating a transformative work, since none of its sources are exact enough to be considered ripped directly. They’re coming from thousands of places. So it would be really difficult to prove it used your work.
I think this is a fantastic compromise, actually. As much as I hate AI altogether and would prefer they were banned from general art competitions, I think its safe to guess that if we dont provide them some way to share and express their creations (read: amalgamations of content stolen from creators without their consent) then they will continue to find ways to sneak into art competitions.
A lot of the things that would keep AI artists out of competitions would also make it less accessible to other artists.
Record the process? *What if the files get corrupted?* Show preliminary sketches? *What if the early sketches are misplaced or thrown away by someone else at home?*
It's better to just give them a platform where they can be judged based on the fact they are manipulating AI since the factors for judging would be fundamentally different.
I think it'd be cool if there was just drawn art and ai competition art. While general art is more about the process,ai art should be about producing the most nice art but rather showing how well someone can manipulate ai
@@2fortsmostwanted While the created work can be considered transformative, can we copyright art styles? Because I can use Dall-E 2 to render an image using the art style of an artist like Van Gogh. I think his art style is unique enough that it can be considered his "property" but again can we copyright art styles?
@@techwizpc4484 i don’t think so?
I definitely blame the judges for not asking the important questions, like "What programs did you use?", or "Can you explain your process?". Just answering those questions (even with the most vaguest answers) should have tipped them off that he did not actually create the piece. He should have been disqualified. There should have been some kind of consequence, like being banned from all future art competitions in the area.
Just because there wasn't a rule specifically stating that ai programs cannot be used, doesn't mean what he did wasn't shady and an outright lie about his talents, skill and experience. I bet he was sweating bullets the entire time hoping he wouldn't get caught, and his competitors must be pissed! I know I would be!
Also, selling prints of art made by ai for $750 is absolutely outrageous and such a slap to the face. You can see his head swelling at this point. The AUDACITY of this man burns me up to no end.
Same
As far as I know, he mentioned Midjourney. The judges probably didn't know what it is. And still - he didn't break any rule if there is no rule for using AI. You can not change the rules afterward because you do not like the result. You just can make new ones for the future.
I totaly understand why people are upset, but I think it's just funny. He took his chances to use a new tool and he got away with it.
It's ridiculous to make such a fuzz about it. It won't happen again.
@@Candy_McK there should be rules about using known digital art apps.
@@AnnthemofArt Of course, but Midjourney wasn't a big thing at the time. It was very new and just in Beta. I guess they didn't know it.
@@Candy_McK So it’s just ridiculous to make a fuzz the first time anything happens? I hate you
AI art should be in a separate category period
exactly!!
Prompt generated A.I. art should be treated as commissioned art.
Using AI art and claiming it as your work is like showing up at a math exam with a calculator and insisting you did all the math yourself. It's ridiculous!
People try to defend it with the whole "when the photo camera was invented people were-" bs. But photos and hand drawn images are completely different. They rarely mix with each other. There's either a fine arts competition. Or there is a photo competition. If you showed up to a painting competition with a photography, you'd get thrown out immediately. Not the right category bruh! It should be the same for AI art. If it's made by a program, it doesn't fit in a standard art competition. You being able to type a couple of key words doesn't make you skilled in art. A 5 y/o can type the same words and get the same image generated. Heck. My cats could accidentally step on my keyboard and get some masterpieces made! Now that's a way to make your cat into an Instagram celebrity. Mr. Fluffs got such talent!
@@K000Hall true...but we just have to adapt cse this is here to stay unfortunately
@@kylelee5966 Unfortunately so.
Putting AI generated art into an art competition is like putting a self-driving car into a high-level horse race. The person sitting in the front seat of the car doesn't even know how to drive, but all the people on horseback need to practice years and years and have a good understanding of how to handle a horse to even get a tiny chance of winning the race. They might get the same result of "ooo, look at how fast they are," from the audience, but the self-driving car takes away the most valuable part of the race: the skill and passion that the human is working to win, and the horse that has been training for years to get higher speeds.
Even though I know that hardly anyone has ever cared about the livelihood of artists considering our poor treatment in the industry and online, I probably shouldn't be surprised, but with the attitude that a lot of non-artists are taking towards AI generated art, it feels like my passion as an artist is being turned into a tech-bro's joke. It's sad and insulting.
They should just do what chess competitions have done and say that any level of engaging with AI help is cheating. Though now that also becomes tricky since a lot of digital art already involves lower level ai like the brushes and effects.
It's messed up that they won, but even then, I'm not really worried about AI taking over all art. I know it would be a good tool for references and people would even prefer of a real person making their art vs a computer, but I'm pretty sure it would be small time people. Corporations on the other hand...
Corporation will definitely capitalize on this Ai Art
Ewww CORPORATION
I hate to break it to you buy corporations are way more likely to think 'we can just get an AI to do all our visuals!' than the average commissioner.
@@spencem5883 thats what the comment is stating.
Unfortunately it's probably something we're all going to have to get used to. Some of the AI stuff I've seen on Instagram has been incredible. As an artist myself it's quite worrying. Luckily for me I work on style guides which have to be very consistent and precise.
For artists that do book covers, posters and even concept art though, it could be even more worrying as clients aren't overly interested in the process, and only interested in the time and costs, which could end up cheaper than an actual artist.
On one hand I'm totally amazed at what the AI has been putting out, and on the other I don't like the idea of it one bit 😐
From a fans point of view though, it's no different to musicians like Machine Gun Kelly being really popular, but is also autotuned the crap out of because he can't actually sing.
The fan at the end of the day doesn't care at all.
But bro.... The artist carrier.... its gonna go vanish if the AI takes over
it's absolutely ridiculous how the ai is able to adapt to multiple art styles and merge them together synergistically and create something incredible. i searched up ai art on tiktok and was blown away no kidding
wrong buddy, we do not have to let this happen, today you acept a program creates art, tomorrow you'll be fired from work, we are no longer creating tools to help people, we are creatin tools to replace people. You say you work in style guides which have to be very consistent and precise... wait for it, this can be programed as well. there is a machine for everything you can imagine, and thats a problem
@@diegoaguilar6675 it's not about if artists are accepting of it or not though, it's about consumers/clients and most of the time they aren't interested as long as the picture looks good
Well, photography became more accessible with time yet people still hire photographers. AI art imo will not replace artists but instead be an alternative for people who cannot afford an artist, just like how I will use my phone camera if I can't afford a photographer. Art done by an artist is a luxury at the end of the day, so people will pay. You may lose some clients, but I would think those who settle for the AI art probably wouldn't be willing to pay for artists in the first place.
Simple; AI images should also be considered Art, they just need to be put in another art category because AI art is more about how good can you describe your ideas to the computer than making the image themselves
i want to burn their servers down
Sooooo basically what you're describing is a creative writing contest. 💀
pretty much my thoughts too!
True! But in the end you are only the author of the idea, the author of the art is an AI
@@tommasoperono8671 yes! That's pretty much it, so you still did something AI is not magic, it's a tool like any other, if I give you a very expensive camera, but you don't know how to take good photos it will still look bad
It's a kick in the face to actual artists to win 1st place with an image that possibly took 5-10 words and 1 minute of machine time to render. I've been working with midjourney, and while it can generate amazing stuff, when you're looking for something specific, it falls flat. It can't do hands worth crap, and usually adds extra arms and fingers. The facial features are often crooked and deformed. You can never get the exact pose you want. And getting the same character from frame to frame is impossible without using a celebrity's face. We still need artists to touch up the results. Other than the touchup process, it's not "creating", it's more like art directing a monkey over Discord. I'm laughing over the idea that he did the "hard work" of pushing "send" over and over.
For now, every artist should become familiar with this tech and evaluate whether they can use it to benefit their workflow, because it's never going away, and it's rapidly improving.
dudes acting like 3 weeks typing some words equals to YEARS of practicing art
like broo!!!! i been learning art since 2010
someone else has definitely worded this better than me, but the thing about AI art is that it takes images of already existing art to create new images. so, what’s the copyright for this? do the artists that own the images the AI generator takes retain ownership when it creates art from their art?
it’s doubly shitty when people claim they made art just by typing in a prompt, because as mentioned above, you are literally stealing art from real artists that the AI generator takes samples from. just a new kind of art theft smh
wow. i'm sure they'll claim to have a way to compensate the artists whose work they used in creating the ai systems, and serve as references for the ai to learn from, but just making a wild guess, we all know it all probably never happen
The AI isn't taking samples, really. That was my first assumption as well, but it turns out it's trained on the images and doesn't ever need to reference them again. This means that it's essentially like it looked at a painting once, except with a perfect memory. It creates images from a random noisemap, not a collage.
You’re wrong on this one. The AI does pretty much the same thing human artists do to learn. It looks at images and imitates them, there is no stealing involved.
@@noobatredstone3001 thing is that the artists weren’t told their art was going to be used this way. These coders took trillions of images that actual artists created without their consent and fed it into their machine so it could copy their style and then hit a couple *random* options on modulators to simulate creativity. These machines can make an almost exact copy of an artists style and through the company- sell it to tons of people. I, personally, think that’s awful.
@@lumenx7499 so you would react the same way to a human copying a style?
Also this is like having a computer write a novel for you, you change the name of a character and submit it. Then suddenly you win 1st place over authors that actually wrote their works from their own ideas.
In this case, you won't even be able to prove how it's done. But - really - if a writer isn't better than an AI, he doesn't deserve to win anything.
@@Candy_McK It’s not necessarily only about being better - but about misrepresenting the product as your own work, rather than something externally created that you decided to turn in.
Of course, you might be thinking about the poorly-made AI stories (setting a low bar that if you fail, you truly wouldn’t have won without the AI product being entered), and honestly, I’m sure AI writing isn’t near the quality good human writers achieve - but there’s already short poem stuff being generated that rivals human-written poetry.
If the AI made something and not you, the AI is entitled to the prize. It’s like saying between a novel author and their publisher, that the publisher wrote the novel because they chose to share it to people.
@@leori-7477 and who’s to say that AI won’t evolve enough to write books? It’s not just visual artists who are at stake here. Music industry in danger as well, heads up to them. Hope AI will get canceled somehow bcs we are heading to the dystopia
In my honest opinion, ai art can be used for inspiration and reference. I'm a character artist myself, but I also really want to get started on backgrounds and scenes between characters. I made a few ai pieces to help me practice. But That's all. Just because you wrote "something something" in ai and it created a picture for you, you won't instantly become an artist. I see this as a tool for artists and nothing more. Ai art can be good. But seeing this in the news, just shows that good things can be used badly
While I agree that AI art can be used for inspiration and reference (some of them are really beautiful) I fear that corporations will use them as a significantly cheaper alternative to artists who is much more expensive and demanding. With enough time, digital art as a livelihood might become a thing of the past for many.
@@cookiejoe5564and corporations have that right. Digital artists took jobs away from traditional artists and poster makers and nobody cared. Why should we care about these people now?
@@itsgonnabeanaurfromme People like you are the main reason why artists are looked down upon. Nobody "didn't care" about Digital Artists replacing Traditional Artists from the past, sure it did replace the majority of advertisements like signs and billboards, but that did NOT "took their jobs away" the trad industry is still very prominent till this day. Dgital Art became another way to express art. It didnt invalidate the skills learned by Traditional Artists either as the foundations are still applicable if you want to have a decent output.
The difference with AI and Digital Artists is that not only it invalidates the decades of experience of the artists, but they use the artwork MADE by these artists to create content.
You're right about Corporations still having that right,business is business after all, but that's an ignorant way of seeing things
Artists already have a bad habit of undermining the value of themselves and their work. Breaking that mindset is very recent for a lot of artists. Now there will be people undervaluing artists and the effort they’ve put into their craft because an AI can make it cheaper and faster. The thing is, it can’t act on its own, and it’s taking art from so many real artists. We still need to figure out the fair use and ethical side of this. This is its own art form and absolutely should not have any place in a competition with regular art. It’s not even like this dude photobashed and created art with his own image in mind. He typed in a prompt and picked the product he liked the most. I guess I would use the word disrespectful. It feels disrespectful to put AI art and regular art on the same plane. All that said, I don’t think AI art will kill art. We have control over whether that happens or not.
When I was younger and first getting into taking commissions (not as a serious job thing, but wanting to/excited to be able to make my own money off my art) I unfortunately got taken advantage of by someone asking for a commission - I gave them a price (a pretty low one, just $8 for a painted bust portrait of a dragon character that took me at least 1 1/2 hours) but they said it was ‘too high’ and that they could ‘get something the same for $3’. Me, having a mindset of ‘any profit is cooler than no profit’ offered to take $3 for the whole thing.
If people do the same thing on a wider scale, devaluing artists by saying ‘well I could make something just as good with AI but for free, so let me commission you for $1 please’, that……. would be so awful.
@@leori-7477 imo I don't think people will even bother commissiong artists anymore
Why because you can't compete with it???
@@user-pf9jv1fl2n yeah
@@leori-7477 traditional artists were devalued when digital artists came and took their jobs making stuff that only takes hours when an actual painter, illustrator, or printmaker would take days. This is just full circle when the work is only pixels.
on second thought now, art competitions will need to state that no ai artwork is permitted (which should be obvious as it's not your work that's getting submitted) and that's quite sad.
There's always gotta be that one person who takes advantage of the rules just to have new rules created 🤦♀
@@screamingladybug6006 fr 😔gots ppl all confused like "why is that a rule isn't that just common sense" but then u realise common sense isn't all that common anymore.
@@juju-df6nr the judges are also at fault for letting this slide. He should have been disqualified and the prize money should have been taken away. His competitors weren’t given the same advantages to make it a fair competition. I’m also repulsed by his “big head” behaviour after winning. He’s honestly the worst kind of “artist” and doesn’t deserve this win.
@@screamingladybug6006 ^^^^ it's a shame the money will get wasted, it could've helped a real artist sm. and yeah totally agree the judges should've done something but i assume they never experienced this before so are unsure as what to do? not an excuse ofc but yk.
@@juju-df6nr they’re probably just embarrassed they got played so they’re trying to play it off as a non-issue lol. To say they’d STILL choose his “work” over the others even after knowing the truth, I’m sure they didn’t take this competition seriously and didn’t even ask him any questions.
The thing about AI "artists" is that you're ultimately letting the tool dictate your image, which is the artist's job, not the tool's. What this person did is like asking a photographer for a set of photos of whatever subject and then picking the best ones or the ones they liked best, they didn't have any real control over the final image.
Also, there's a reason people don't compete against AIs, (take chess, for example) the whole point of the competition is the human measure of skill among OTHER HUMANS, as well as the human enjoyment of it.
Actually no, most people imagination and creativity are gotten or inspired from previous artworks, just like A.I. You can make the A.I give out what you want by describing by using other images that fit your style. It doesn't "dictate" the work.
Buy yeah, it takes no skill
@@e65666 That's not what I'm talking about at all, though. What I'm saying is that they ultimately have no control over how the final image turns out which is... kinda your job as the artist.
sounds to me that the AI won the competition, not the "Artist". where's MidJourney's $300? The poor robot's getting taken advantage of here!
lmaooo some one in my comments said jarvis out here winning competitions.
smh it took one pixel off my drawing wheres my money🙄
I was gonna say that too!
What I say: I joined an art competition using *digital* art!
What my parents hear:
LMAO
ai art is like you studying for weeks to pass a test and you fail it but someone who didn’t even study got 100%
damn exactly
Got 100% after copying multiple other people's answers more like it.
I almost never studied for tests and got decent grades a lot of times, even on my ACTs. Having a good memory isn't akin to cheating.
my non-original 2 cents in this debacle is: the person who submitted the work for the contest did it unethically anyway. Their claim is that they fed the A.I. 1000s of prompts before they got the finalized piece and that's why /they/ deserved the win. If they had hired an artist (and gave them the same prompts) and then submitted the finalized artwork, it's still cheating because it's NOT their work. Doesn't matter if a machine drew it or a human artist, that person didn't do the work.
You’re kidding, right? If I load paint into a bucket, tie the bucket to my garage rafters, poke a hole in it and gave it a push letting it drain in the canvas below…who created the artwork? Me…or the bucket? The person who got the physical system started or the system (bucket) itself?
@@BrianReplies the fucking bucket brian
@bird nuanced thinking clearly is not your thing. So I will leave you to yourself.
I don't care how good AI is at art. It will never draw a perfect booba like human artist.
lmaooo nah you can count on that lmao
Now it does..
how's your life now?
I agree, it should have its own category
But even thats generous tbh💀
lmaoooo ai gotta leave
Man took Fake it till you Make it literally
But do you know who's better than using AI to win an art competition, my man Mohammed
aye less gooooo!!!! might have to turn myself to an ai and get in on this wave
@@MohammedAgbadi lol fr, Jarvis out here beating people at Art competitions, we can't be havin that level of diss
@@johnmivule-novabow8143 LMAOO 🤣🤣🤣😭🤣✨ boutta take the damn plug out.
@@MohammedAgbadi Do you know what the next step already is? To train the AI on your own artstyle. I just can't do it because you need a GPU with at least 12 GB VRAM.
This is... Really not helping the anxiety, where i already feel i'm too awful to get good, and now anyone can do better, with just an AI...
and they don't even have to be good, they just need to press a few buttons and literally an insane image comes out
You cant think of it like that, those people cant be better than you at art if theyre not making art, yes, there will be and already are, delusional assholes who will use these new AIs and call themselves artists, tag their posts as digital paintings and digital art. But chances are, they are not, just like someone who commissioned a piece of art, they are not the artist. Best case scenario the AI "is", in this case the dev team, the artist, if you can categorize programming as a form of art.
Finding these pages on Instagram and reading comments of people admiring AI generated works with comments like "I wish i could paint like you" or something of the sort makes me sad. The page owners dont even respond to them, they know well what they are doing and dont have the guts to be transparent with these people, they just see the thousands of likes and roll with it. They do respond to questions like "Who is the artist" and tag themselves in the response like the clowns they are.
Same 😔🤝
Tbh stuff like this is the reason I'm thinking of quitting art
@@MohammedAgbadi I want to be a 2D animator, like the old Disney stuff, but this makes the future look really dull for the industry.
dont worry about it, just keep do your art
In Art History, we were learning about how technology always challenges artists. Artists were praised for making realistic art and when photographs came, they had 2 options. If you chose to take photos, you would try to find interesting subject matter OR assemble the figures of the photo. If you stuck to painting, then you would stray away from realism. This cycle keeps happening with tech (think digital art and watercolor).
I think the difference is like mans said: you should have a hand in it. It's not about originality.
To take a photo back then was annoying and took good conditions. Even now, in photography classes, you still need to learn color correction, perspective, etc.
This can't even be considered traditional digital art...I know that term sounds contradictory lol.
AI art can and should exist...but I think the prompts should also be submitted...in AI specific competitions.
It's crazy that we live in a time where hand drawn digital art can now be considered "traditional" haha
It’s not just the art competition we’re worrying about over here. There are whole jobs at stake. There are passions and dreams at stake because “AI will always be better.”
This is worrying because this cannot and should not be tolerated at all! This is the first big example I’ve seen of something like this and if there isn’t necessary steps taken to make sure stuff like this doesn’t happen again, it will KEEP HAPPENING.
I’m applying for an art scholarship to help fund my study abroad classes, and the ones who get the scholarship are chosen based off how well and unique their art is. If someone uses AI to generate art then upload that to the scholarship and wins, that’s a big problem and I would consider it cheating because IT IS NOT THEIR ART! It’s a collage of other peoples art to resemble something else.
It just genuinely hurts and worries me to see something like this.
Ai art and artist art can coexist together but be categorised into different categories. Obviously this will impact artists for their training, time and immense effort. I'm also very uncertain for the future of artists I myself like to draw. I suppose ai can be a tool to visualise and inspiration. I hope artists will be appreciated and payed reasonable amounts for their art in the future.
It’s unlikely, aside from famous artists, animators, digital artists, designers, etc probably doesn’t get paid a decent amount of money for their work unless it’s famous.
This would be true if AI generators and by extension their users (I don't want to call them artists at this point) weren't sitting here stealing existing work from other people to make these photomontages (that's what these are) which then get through a series of automated filters which distort some of the elements to make it harder to spot the stolen bits and pieces. When/if AI generators only use public domain images or your own existing work (your own photos or sketches) this will be a different story. Until tgen, nope!
@@DieezahArts > *(that's what these are)*
I am not sure that is correct, albeit off of a limited understanding of the technology.
The only good thing about ai art is that most of the majority of them are gonna be average people who can't draw a circle and are gonna use it for business purposes or to make funny images.
But tbh as long as we can draw, the effort we put into an art piece will always be gratifying than typing "The Simpsons, award winning image, famous artist" into an ai generator and selling it for 100 dollars.
These AIs are using thousands of artworks made by real people and mixing them together to create new images and it is very unfair. As stated in the video, the artists and photographers who created the images originally won't gain anything every time an AI uses an image of them to create another. I really want a video about this, I want several videos about this. How can this not be treated as copyright theft?
> *and mixing them together to create new images*
That's not how this works at all, in that the actual image generation requires no existing image data.
My biggest problem isn't even that it was made by AI; it's that this person basically just commissioned a painting and asked for hundreds of revisions and had the audacity to say that they're the artist and worked hard for it! You did hardly anything!
I spent so many years to get good and while I'm able to live comfortably off of my hardwork, this stuff is scary af and I've already considered training for a new career. I think this will ultimately hurt the freelance industry. I could add ai to my workflow but im already feeling burnt out using all the other short cuts in the name of efficiency. Super not wanting to work for a corporation either, too old for that stress and low pay in my country
edit: and if you weren't already concerned, give this tech another couple years. lol
This makes me wish i was born before because if this replace artist, i won't even have a chance to work at least a bit on this
Now it's an issue lol, never saw people saying things like this when other careers were taken over by machines and ai
I think that as a beginner artist, ai art is pretty cool. It shouldn't be allowed to enter in competitions where people manually make art, but I think that having a separate category for just ai stuff would be pretty nice.
Same. For now we just try to keep the playing field fair. Glad I'm still a student and don't have a specific goal as an artist yet. I get to see this all play out and just focus on my own thing while figuring out the best way to adapt.
I like hearing from beginner artists about AI art! I personally don't know if I'd still be where I am today as an artist if AI art existed to this degree a decade ago, so it's heartwarming to hear that beginner artists are still encouraged to make their own art. :>
I spent 8 years in art school......and now have been replaced by ai? Now i feel even worse about my work ngl
sigh! now look what they done did!!
did it get better throughout this year?
@@tacitozetticci9308 honestly....worse 🤣 i work full time retail so cant even make much art. My comic has become a chore i cant wait to finish and things like Instagram are still promoting ai and satire over real art. A year ago ai was distinguishable from art, but not so much now....which is scary
Ah yes, another day of artists getting screwed over and our futures looking more doomed. Cause we didn’t have enough of that 😍
literally!!
What's it going to take for people to respect us? Something has to happen.
@@edorasmarauder5761 definitely, but what is it gonna be?
@@nuclearpancake3683 1. Judges should do a closer inspection of the artwork or ask about the creative process.
2. Make this AI art its own category.
@@edorasmarauder5761 It’s called dying. It’s fucked up isn’t it? Our career choices are mocked and belittled in our lives, but suddenly its a masterpiece, a triumph, and an example of human tenacity once we die. What a roundabout way to tell us to off ourselves.
Like no wonder artists are mad, its not entirely about being art snobs and being (rightfully) angry someone claims to be an artist by using A.I., after all these years of being scorned and told ‘get a real job’, they feel like they’ve finally found a way to validate all those horrible things said to a lot of artists, because ‘A.I. art is good enough’.
I don’t really like AI. For me when the art piece has been done by someone who takes effort and patience to get better at art, the art piece has (I call it) a soul. Like someone made this with their hands and using creativity and even if there are some mistakes, it’s not bad. But seeing as someone improves at art , fixing their mistakes, making cooler drawings , using different mediums you see that the person’s enjoying what they are doing. For me an art piece can tell a story which a person has came up with, so you kind of can explore a bit of the artist’s world of imagination and ideas. And AI just generates stuff that should always look perfect and you can’t see the progress. So you can’t really follow them on their art journey. Yeah .
A.I. generated can be used for concepting, composition and color studies. But it shouldn't be used as the end product.
I absolutely agree. Great comment.
Back in the early 20th century the post modernists felt that when a competition was done…no reference to the artist should be allowed. Because knowing the artists could change your perception of the art and they felt the art should stand on its “own legs”. You view the art by itself with no outside information and decide if it’s good…or not. Perhaps we should use this system instead.
The soul does not exist. You cannot tell the difference between human made and AI made images.
An art piece does not always tell a story. Sometimes it's just a commission of a portrait or some furry shit that makes ugly chibis that people make for money. Sometimes it's just a landscape or abstract garbage. Way to coin soul though.
Soo… that means that if I comissioned a artist to make me an illustration, gave them lots of points of reference to work with to craft my line of thought for this piece, payed them for their work and now this work of art is my property and displayed this in the contest, it would still be fair game if I won? After all, even though I didn’t make the art, it was still my idea, it was still my line of thought and references used to make this work…
My point is, although it’s a really gorgeous piece, there was no technique involved in the author’s part, they didn’t make the piece. They just directed the program on what they intended and the AI generated based on what was handed to it. I don’t think it should be in the same category of digital art, since is quite unfair to the people who had to use their knowledge and technique in art to create their piece.
Just create a separate category and everyone wins (sorry for the thesis).
This is just being an ideas guys anybody can be an ideas. They're not the ones making their idea into something amazing, the AI is. It's really confusing how they could think their artist. I think AI art is art but the prompters are not artist
You would be mostly correct if... If the AI generators were only pulling from human knowledge as we humans do, to reproduce techniques and build a new original piece in these existing styles FROM SCRATCH or in the very least from the user's own existing bases (existing rough sketches, personal pictures, photos...). But that's not how this wotks. They're lifting content (some of it falling under the legal protection of international intellectual property laws) without permission or acknowledgement, mishmash them before shoving the result into what's basically an app filter component to further try to hide where the bits and pieces were stolen from.
For info I know AI Tools output will be CC0 so you can't own it
The flaw in your logic is that you are comparing the AI to an actual person with a mind. It’s is not that. It is just software. Advanced software. Nothing more. It’s like a bucket. Put paint in bucked, suspend from rope to rafters, place canvas underneath, punch hole in bucket…give a push. The bucket puts the paint on canvas. Is the bucket the artist? Or the guy deploying that system? If you say that the guy is the artists…well…the guy “pushing” the AI is doing the same thing. The AI software is just a fancy, high tech bucket.
@@BrianReplies The person using a digital pencil can draw to a similar level on paper too. Art skills come from the person, not the tool, unlike AI programs.
Honestly I agree with others saying to put it in a specific category. As a artist, I think AI art is really neat, but its in its own specific category. No, what made me angry was how he’s selling said pieces for $750-$700. WHAT?! He’s essentially pressing a button and making money. Thats not fair at all. What if these people even believe he was selling actually digital paintings he made? Its fine if its like being mentioned he made it with AI, but considering this guy said “art is dead and AI won”, I’m pretty sure hes just a major pos and wants a quick buck. Absolute jerk.
There is a way to tell if an image was made in midjourney. All its images seem really grainy and if you look close at human characters in them their features are undefined and vague. Overall its images can be quite vague leaving you not exactly sure what you're looking at.
As a beginner artist I was terrified at first, but after thinking a bit about it, I understand that it's someting that happens every decade. Yes, the tings are changing, but that's how it is.
The only problem that I have with AI is that people who use it pretend that it's a hard work to while what they actually do is typing prompts and maximum it can take for such art to be created is 5 min. I know there's people who actually edit it, but that's not the majority
I'm and digital artist and daughter of a programmer and doctor in robotics, so let me explain: tuning is not easy. An AI has no mind, it's more like a logical than an abstract one. It's like talking to a child: if you ask them how many fruits are, they could tell you "2" (because you have 2 types of fruit, even if you have 5 fruits in total). The answer, never the less, it's correct. But it's not what you expected.
That's an AI. And that's the problem, they do EXACTLY what you say, not what you want. Fine-tuning it's knowing how to speak with an AI. And AI are liked kids, so they react differently and kinda similar with each other.
Thing is, fine-tuning will become a real job in a future, because it's necessary
@@runotaisho4600 tuning is still not a skill. Put your heart at peace.
Abstract artists who shoot a canvas with a paintball gun then sell it for tens of thousands of dollars….they are not doing “hard” work. But their art is worth….tens of thousands. The “hardness” of creating art does not determine its value. Some dude taped a banana to a dang wall and sold the piece for hundreds of thousands. I don’t think that was very hard.
@@crios8307 ?
I've already seen accounts posting Ai art and pretending like they made it themselves. So I took it upon myseld to warn my friends for people like this
Can we stop calling it “art” and “image” instead? It isn’t art. It’s just being fed a prompt, unless you made the program it requires no soul or effort.
oops!
Yep
True
It is still art to me to be honest, anything that looks good is considered art. Its not AI who is at fault.
My town has a local art fest too. One year I remember someone won first place using an image they stole and drew over - when I reported it to the judges they said they didn't care about the theft because he "drew over it and made it his own". I was mad on behalf of the person whose image he stole and will never know he made 300 bucks off them.
It doesnt surprise me here that the judges took the same stance.
What gets me about the argument that he still put in work by having to sort through the results and spent weeks getting it right (i.e fine tuning the prompts, organizing the results, etc) but none of those skills are artistic. He essentially won an art contest by being a data analyst.
It's like they're trivializing the blood sweet and tears of the people who actually made an effort learning
It was only a matter of time before something like this would happen. Kinda sad 😕
too sad, especially for the other contestants who didn't make it.
Ah yes, me a struggling artist, spends years learning how to learn and improve art but now ANYONE can simply type a prompt into an AI online generator 💀
It takes minimal effort, and makes me feel pathetic as I take a few days to months to even complete some pieces.
Art is dead. Game over man game over.
Dang! This actually happened? This is quite concerning if people will be using AI work for more other things. and succeed.. 😬
yikes!!!!!!
I saw someone trying to get away with using ai art for art requests, but other folks spotted it pretty quick. Sometimes something wrong with the hands, glitching/smudging, stuff like that.
@@ParsureArts thats incredibly concerning ! im glad that person has been caught
I've already seen account posting Ai art and pretending like they made it themselves smh
@@aninamated3984 thats just dirty. and also concerning because us artists have to deal with these guys while they get credit for work that they didnt even do! its horrible.
I was hoping you would talk about it! :>
i finally did!!
Damn typing words is such a hard thing to do, do yall even know how hard to fight procrastination? He must have stopped in every letters he typed to take some break due to exhaustion! Cut this poor man some slack will yall.
Someone said that this was like buying a store bought cake and claiming you made it- I’d say that’s pretty accurate
I remember when people were saying that digital art wasn't real art because a computer was used, like the artist didn't put in the work to create the piece. I feel like that argument was a bit ahead of it's time.
I know this is very random but if I had a dollar for everytime someone said, "Stop doing art, it's haram.", i would be a millionaire
heard that alot when i was growing up.
@@MohammedAgbadi My experience is totally diffrent, my parents are supportive instead
Really? I’m not Muslim, why is it considered haram? If you don’t mind answering.
@@eraba661 my parents are also very supportive. Its just other people and relatives keep on saying art is haram and i shouldnt be doing it lol
@@Iotuseater I’m not sure why it’s considered haram. It’s probably not actually haram and is just a myth. I’m not very religious😅
One thing that comforts me is that by nature AI is compiling from extant source material. When companies and clients want something really new, it’s hard for an AI to provide.
Saying you’re an “Ai artist” is like saying you’re an olympic sprinter because you have a driver’s license. You got from point a to b faster than everyone else, but the machine did all the hard work. At best, you’re at an art curator.
I love the Fashion Designer point because it put how stupid this idea is into perspective
It’s like giving one person competing in a marathon a motorcycle
If you think about it.. ai art is kinda just like looking through Pinterest. It’s just searching for what you’re looking for until you get what you’re happy with. I take weeks finding amazing references and when I find good ones I take what I want from each and make it into one art. But I still redraw everything on my own. That person had ai put it all together.
The people saying that making AI art is as hard as making the art by yourself, is the same people thay would say playing through the fire and flames in guitar hero is as hard as playing the real guitar
"you're an artist, and i'm not and i'm telling you you're overreacting" basically this whole drama really
I feel bad for the artists that didn't use AI for their art
Edit: Also what AI gonna give me a image of Rouge the Bat in a particular style I like?
if they had known they probably would have...to level the playing field
It really depends on each person's definition of art, but to me personally I can't call that fake art. I do find it absolutely worrying how fast it is growing, not only on the graphical aspect but on the writing too. Many AIs have been developed with the sole purpose of assisting and/or writing out entire paragraphs or pages of text with little input. I'd like to consider myself both an artist and a writer, even if far from professional and far from good enough to reach that level, but the tech-geek part of me just loves how all that sounds.
Clearly we are looking in one of the "Robots are taking over our jobs!" kind of scenarios, and that in of itself is unearthly disturbing. We are in the final stretch of 2022 STILL and yet there are food places fully automated, in some cases drone deliveries, and now both writing and paintings being fully automated and done absurdly fast, faster than a human could ever do. It's both astonishing and, again, worrying.
I still think it's art, though. Mostly because you can feel things looking at it. Not from a human source, sure, but there IS some truth to it. There is the amalgam of an ungodly amount of samples of galleries and galleries of art as well as the code a programmer spent an inconceivable amount of time working on just to achieve that level of complexity. In my eyes, you can still look at it, say it's pretty, say you feel emotionally, conceptually, intelectually or spiritually captivated by it to some degree and there is a sound enough reason for that to happen, therefore, to me, it is art.
I absolutely do NOT think it should be permissable in an obviously limitated human competition to use automated process in order to create a piece. Even if it could be argued the human created the concept, several paragraphs of prompt (which they didn't, most likely) and heavily modified the resulting image, the resulting argument would be either comparable to exploiting and cheating the system at worst or tracing - which is still cheating - at best.
Still, we'd have to see where this all goes, to be honest. I doubted it would reach the point of worry and possibility any time soon, but if it does come to the point where automatons and AIs are covering up the majority if not the totality of working space, which in some countries is little to none, then we would have to seriously invest time, effort and money into a solution, and do it ASAP. I don't think it'll reach that point anytime "too" soon, though, but it's something to think about.
As an artist who primarily does digital work, this whole situation just *really* pisses me off. It feels a lot like if I where to commission another artist for a piece and then enter that. As has been reiterated by others here, AI work takes hardly any skill to get pieces that good. I've been learning how to draw since I was 7, and I'm *still* nowhere *near* that good. If I where one of those other contestants, I'd probably be restraining the urge to find this guy's house and do some illegal activities for the sake of revenge. Human-made art isn't dead, but I'll be damned if people like him aren't actively trying to kill it.
I did not need to be questioning my self-worth as at artist at 3am, but thank you anyway Mohammed 😊💗💗💗💗💗
(I did enjoy the vid anyway lmao)
loool i'm so sorry but theres no time! we have to know where we stand hahhaa lmao
@@MohammedAgbadi Fr tho, it's super important for artists to know what we're up against atm!! Bless u for spreading the word, legit I've seen this comp and wouldn't have known the difference if you hadn't posted this vid. It's very scary bro :/
The equivalent of letting somebody else make the work for him and crediting himself as a creator
The judges not changing their opinion after knowing its AI is art school in a nutshell lmao
AI art has a place in the art world.
But once it's being called "My Painting" it crosses the line.
He didn't do it on his own .
The power of an AI is like a thousand people.
I think the AI should get the prize because the AI was the artist making lots of paintings for the human to pick from .
This is like a modern day, “Fountain,” by Duchamp, except instead of effortlessly flipping a urinal and calling that art, we have effortlessly typing keywords into a art maker. Yeesh, less effort can make good looking art from a robot, Im kinda scared and upset for the artists putting sweat and tears into their art.
There's an archery competition. 17 contestants bring their own bows with all sorts of makes and materials. Everyone is in agreement that some bows are better than others but still require a great deal of skill from the user. The 18th contestant uses a laser-guided drone that he bought online which shoots arrows perfectly at the target and proceeds to congratulate himself.
So this topic is really important for me as a doctoral student right now because I’ve really heavily researched a lot of the foundations of what makes something artwork. AI goes against my findings, and that’s why I’ve made a few videos about it on my channel. If you’d ever be interested in teaming up to talk about it, let me know! Either way, great conversation!
No true artist will ever feel validated to themselves for AI art if they do this. There is no honor in that and they know it
Was waiting for this one
yassss i finally got around to making it, had it on my lists for a while now
I have to say, the music you choose just makes your videos the cherry on top 😂👌🏻
I like how the person said his effort is hard work because he generated hundreds of images. I downloaded a local version of stable diffusion to see how easy it was. All you do is type your prompt, add a lot of words like 8k and beautiful then you write the name of famous artist and in 20 mins you can generate thousands of images that look more impressive than 99 percent of artists
As an artist, who has also tried AI art, I do think AI art is Art, and its beautiful. But that said, it takes practically 0 work, training, or effort whatosever. In future competitions they should put it into a completely different category. This guy just broke the rules before the rule was even created.
Happy to see someone talks about this. It's making me so mad, people worked hours to make the art piece they presented, he just entered words into an evolved search engine who combined images. And he's a pos, saying that "Art is dead. A.I. has won". Not an ounce of respect for artists. Also, people compare it to when photography was invented, but it's not the same at all. Photography was about being able to capture reality as it is, which make it more realist than a painting and was scary for portraits' painters but it didn't have a goal to replace them, but A.I. is about not going through an artist, because people don't want to pay artists now. Painters were respected when photography came around, now people barely want to pay the designer for their logo or the concept artist they commissioned, whatever their experiences are.
Edit: I just realized that the A.I. is doing the same thing that I had to do in Art School for one of the classes 💀The exercise was to create a new "art piece" on photoshop while using pictures and art pieces we could found, and there would be other criteria has the year went on, like texture or a Renaissance look... This was an exercise to make us more accustomed to the program and develop our creativity. All the time, we were told multiple that, unless we only used "free" images (not literally free, but y'all understand), that this was still STEALING and we should NEVER post or use what we did during the exercise because it wasn't ours. As the year went on, we only could use "free" images to teach us to respect people works.
I wish I should found your channel the last two year.I wasted the last two year with wrong learning. Now I found who should I learn with.Your videos were exactly what I needed
I honestly think that ai art is going to become its own genre of art, but the actual artist will not be overcome. People are still amazed BY the fact that a human can make such amazing art with their hands. Everyone had the same worries about digital art a while ago. I remember being told if I draw on a tablet, and not with charcoal on paper or something, im not a real artist. But the technology eventually has settled into a nice place within art and became a valid tool. I think the same thing is going to happen with ai art. I think that some people might use it, some people might draw with a tablet, some people might use paints and pastels, but one of the most beautiful things about art is how diverse it is and how your allowed to use whatever tools and supplies you want to use, and it may not be art to one person, but its probably art to another person. thats the beauty of art. it can be whatever. people are allowed to hate it or love it. I think that there definitely is going to be a shift in the art world in terms of where the jobs are, but thats nothing new, and ai isnt going to be the only thing that could lead to big leaps and changes in the art world.
8:44 "I'm not an artist."
Yep, found the problem.
ETA: Not saying you have to be an artist to know how much time creating actual art takes. Not just drawing and painting but also writing, photography, singing, playing instruments, all forms of art. But anyone who is involved in any sort of creative pursuit knows how much time it takes to learn a skill and again, to utilize it to create art that people like. AI generated art doesn't involve any process that actual artists (mainly talking about drawing and painting artists, but applies to almost all, if not all, artists) utilize to create art. Well, it does involve half a process, and that is to choose among options for a given prompt. For artists, it's choosing references and from initial sketches, for AI 'artists' it's choosing from paintings already generated, if they are not lazy enough to do that.
Also, not just saying all artists are against AI generated art. Some use it for references and all that. Some may even be okay with it winning competitions. But its certainly a very small amount of them.
Great video! Well explained. It takes years to achieve acceptable line work.
As a young artist who uses paper and pen and pencils it took me 5+ years to get good and decent enough to get a compliment like "nice" or "good job" or "wow" ( Im still learning colour theory and shadows and saturation with the few supplies I have ) seeing a guy just type and few words into a computer and get an award infuriated me I think he should have gone to an ai art competition instead in my opinion
"Having an eye for a good piece" is not the same as "Having a skill to make a good piece"
And yes, human artist also referencing another human artist on their learning process. But they make it their own style in the end. If not then they just copying which is plagiarism.
Also don't forget what AI can really capable of: Searching and scanning and learning from hundred/thousand of image in so little time. That alone already make all artist in the world in disadvantage.
It's up to you to create an AI art and sell it or just keep it (because it's still art, no doubt about it). But don't use it to compete with another human artist. It's so disrespectful.
I support using all digital tools available. I can also see how this software might be helpful for artists. But it's extremely unfair and insulting to artists who spend years learning shapes, forms, lighting, colour theory etc. And the people using these software to enter art competitions (and winning somehow?) are really shitty for purposely doing these things. Artists are always underpaid anyway, why steal from them? I believe the only rule in art is to not steal (taking inspiration is fine) but the way people keep disrespecting art, it makes me scared of the future.
I think this might also be a good thing. It will show us more possibilities of what art is capable of. Real artists will get inspiration from such random mashes of AI art and try to compete. I do not think they should compete in the same categories but it might lvl up the game a little and push people even more to be creative.
While the AI picture in question is impressive, it did _take_ from skilled artists who went through the effort of honing their technique and skill, and mashed it together to 'call it their own'. I find it interesting, but AI Art should just be in AI Art category by itself if they're going to continue to allow this. I highly doubt they're going to backstep from taking from other artist's database, which is annoying in itself. Money wins in the end. -_-
I can't wait to see the collab video with Kelsey, she's awesome!
More cons than pros to this AI in my opinion first of all I'll say this, art and any other creative job are some of the most human job's there are, one of the things about being human is our creativity and anyone who picked a job in the creative field did so most likely because its a job that they strived for and they love what they do. I always thought that we should only create AI for the jobs that most of us don't really enjoy doing like working cash registers and the like and to me creating AI that does the Jobs that we actually strive for and get fulfillment out of isn't driving society forward at all, all they did when creating these AI is make a portion of the populous feel obsolete for profit for the select few and now anyone can claim to be an "artist" by typing in a prompt. Part of what made my journey through my artistic career fulfilling are the milestones and obstacles I overcame to create new artwork and see how my skills have developed and anyone who ONLY uses AI to create art will never understand that and personally I wouldn't consider them an artist. Furthermore this will probably devalue the industry where commissions are concerned and make it difficult to charge a certain amount for anything, why pay an artist to do an album cover for you when you can type in a prompt for free and get the work instantly. Don't want to sound overly pessimistic here sure there are pros to this, I can definitely see it as a useful tool for generating quick ideas for artists but honestly absolutely no one asked for this and I know that society is about innovation and progress but what's the point if it's at our own expense and even if you somehow change job fields how long before AI takes that too. I don't believe it will replace artists, not by a long shot but I do believe this will limit certain income streams for artists. Fortunately I've used it and it has a lot of glaring flaws particularly with faces and anatomy, I guess that's due to how it splices things together some structures dont really make sense even though it can produce a pretty picture at times.To summarize it's just an unnecessary creation to me but I'm open to hearing other people's perspectives on this
Sometimes it can feel like the other stuff is just too easy for the coders. They aren’t trying to make peoples lives better, they’re either trying to make a huge profit or they’re trying to conquer what makes us human. There are AI’s that could legitimately help people that need to be created yet they focus on the one that could put millions of people out of business, makes no sense.
@@lumenx7499 I blame capitalism
great discussion i love the special stage music at one point lmao
ahhahahah thank you!!! i loved that stage haha
First time here. Very good video, iteresting topic, nice RUclipsr and... I loved when you "let the sink in"!🤣👍
What a twisted mindset needs to have this person to present an ai generated image when they know (because its obvious) they’re disrespecting the years of efforts of the other contestants.Writing a few words and clicking a button sounds reeeeaaaally difficult ,right? Even a little kid could literally do that and they would still get a decent image because ai is stealing artworks from thousands of artists.
honestly i feel like soon ai is gonna be able to write whole books or even novels, or at least at some point in the next few years which would also strip away the purpose of writers with ai replacing them. really scary how ai and robots are slowly replacing basically everything.
There's already some books out there written with things such as AI Dungeon. I believe.