Go to ground.news/solarsands to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Sign up or subscribe through my link before July 1 for 30% off unlimited access if you support the mission and find it as useful as I do.
What will AI replace? Everything And unless we do it in the stupidest way possible, that's a good thing. People are always afraid of change, but evolution doesn't stop because you're afraid
My art teacher and one of his old students used an AI recently, and had fun with it. They were really impressed at first. Then my teacher got bored. He's the kind of person who appreciates the process more than anything, sees the beauty in it. He often describes working with deliberate strokes, and discovering with amazement that an idea can be expressed through a simple stroke of the charcoal. He told me that working with AI is boring, because working on the composition, the intensity, values, ect, is the real enjoyment of creating art. He didn't talk much about the artists' jobs being at risk. He himself is not in danger, since he teaches people, I don't think he sells much of his own work but I could be wrong. I just think that even an old time artist, who's life is literally art, is confused with the rapid changes this technology brings, and that he doesn't wanna draw early conclusions and possibly introduce a bias to his students.
I think right now my biggest concern with AI is... how fast it can produce believable misinformation, which will be seen and reproduced by the average person
Well people have to become better at thinking, at taking a step back and reflecting. Also AI can be used to spot AI so ofc scary but think it's more about the transition period being messy rather than it being an actual problem once the new status quo has been established.
@florinivan6907 Imagine someone on the internet, (You don't know them they could be anyone who saw your social media and for any reason wanted to do this) who then takes images of you that you posted online and can use them to make AI generated faked images, or even video of you. Imagine provoking an army of these people by maybe saying something on Twitter, Facebook, etc. that they disagreed with.
I'm thinking about all those videos her beautiful That's the president's arguing over a video games and other such meme videos, but also realizing that they're going to get better and better soon. We'll live in a world where it's very hard to tell what's real and what's fake
People kept telling me in high school that I shouldn't go into radiology because AI would replace it. I'm a radiologist now and the AI lung and mammogram nodule finding tools are still far from accurate.
Um there was a point in this video where it showed a comparison of ai generated art (that were a year apart, same prompt too) and the difference is night and day. So in short, its only a matter of time (not much at that either).
"Asking for forgiveness rather than permission" That's a good way to put it. Big companies just do whatever they want, then in case of controversy they just apologise with no tangible consequence, or get a slap on the wrist.
It is better to ask for forgiveness, our copyright and intellectual property laws are Draconian and you have no idea how even the vast majority of art is illegal. Fan art, derivatives, Etc. are all illegal under basically every country's I.P. laws. Andy Warhol has been successfully sued many times, so even "the most creative minds" are infringing on others' I.P. If companies would really respect I.P. we would technologically be stuck in the 1970's.
@@-haclong2366 I get what you mean but like, law and order. I agree there's plenty of garbage laws, but if brazenly breaking laws you think are cumbersome was the MO, society would collapse tomorrow. Also, the solution to this is simply IP reform. For example, instead of having ambiguous rights that might allow for AI harvesting but not fucking fanfiction for 140 years, why not have something like super strong rights - literally illegal to do anything - for say 20 years, than copy rights for another 20, then public domain?
@@-haclong2366 Difference between Andy Warhol’s panting and “AI Art” Andy Warhol: was an a human being with a conscience and he used existing media around him to adapt from to communicate his anti corporate stance on contemporary life at the time. “AI ART”: a program that copypastes images across the internet at a fast pace to produce more accurate images, There’s no ideas, feeling or message being conveyed, hell there is no intelligence behind it either, it’s just a bunch of random sources mashed together to make slop. Also, “if companies would really respect I.P. we would technologically be stuck in the 1970s” This is a very shortsighted statement that has no basis in reality, companies only care about their profits not ingenuity, they rely on government grants and contracts to make their products in the first place lol.
@@Blaze6108 Such a law would not be enforceable, unless the due process of law is abandoned in favor of an inquisitive justice system. Law is complicated for a good reason: to be reasonable, to treat everyone fairly, to restrict freedoms that shouldn't be exercised and unlock shackles that should've never been locked... is the most difficult task man can be given. The modern copyright law is incredibly complicated, unbelievably dated, and as per its text it prohibits that there be shelter for those most in need, and gives ample powers to those who are most powerful. But the legal system of a nation is not an apartment you can move out of, nor a home built for purpose, but a cathedral retrofitted to be a place of residence. It was built over centuries, clearly for purposes other than the ones we wish it would serve, but we can reform it in order to better fit our purposes, keeping useful attriums, refurbishing salvageable attriums, and building new attriums as they are necessary. But to destroy an old attrium is... difficult. You realize just how many things that attrium is structurally integral to, and how many important things are inextricable from it. And your grand plan to make an extremely restrictive copyright law that makes a man a god over his invention and then just unceremoniously drags him back down to earth once he retires is... gonna require us to destroy a lot of attriums. This sort of poor planning is how we ended up in this mess in the first place.
As an artist, all I can really do is watch. AI has flaws now? It'll get better. It's the nature of technology. I've really just accepted the fact that corporations and the average consumer will just choose to use AI because it's cheaper and faster. It makes me sad but there's not a lot we can really do. As we saw from the last video, the people making this aren't interested in money or power, they have an ideal and they'll pursue it regardless. So now just appreciate what we have, draw for yourself.
Something that could be done, as solarsands mentioned, is fighting to make training on art without permission illegal. If this becomes the precedent for ai copyright it will severely slow down and limit the technological progression of ai art, while also making the development of ai art more ethical
@@TheEggDevthis is very bad. First, you are staggering technology that can massively help humanity. Economically, if a job is now done by a machine, it's overall neither good nor bad. It's bad when a person who's job is taken has no income now, but there are ways to deal with that Secondly, several government already allowed using content for training
@@neongooroo while i agree with you that overall, the replacement of ai for jobs is beneficial for the whole of humanity, its not beneficial for those whose jobs it takes. There are ways to adapt, but fundamentally if your job gets taken by ai it significantly alters your life and for a large group of artists it could ruin theirs. It may be an overly emotional response, but as someone with friends in the art world, thinking that the career they dedicated themselves towards could become obsolete is scary. Perhaps having the progression of ai technology slowed (not fully halted however) could allow for society to better adapt to these changes instead of this instant change that will leave many lost. As for your claim on many countries already allowing training on copyrighted material, my point is that we should fight against that. Its because this precedent exists that I believe we should try to change it, for both ethical reasons and the benefit of our human artists
Economical bullshit usually results in the most of common folk suffering. Technological progress will add yet another thing that'll bring a lot of troubles, and we have enough of them for now. We should resolve all the current shit we are facing as a society before making more of them. Just fucking stop and reflect. Slow down your horses.
Sadly, artists in China are losing jobs because corporations started using AI . One artist in a phone interview said they will look for a different job. It truly is heartbreaking.
If your hobby stops being profitable enough to pay your bills you look for a job, it's not heartbreaking, it's natural way of life. The way you think that you're entitled to get paid for pursuing your passion for creating subjective value out of thin air, while most of the people have to work day jobs actually creating objective goods like food or electricity. Make an actual contribution to the society and you're free to spend your free time to make "art".
I dont live off of my art, so im not really intimidated by AI art. in the end, what i love about it is the process. but im starting to get really worried for animators, professional illustrators, designers etc. this shit is getting way too good way too fast
Ai probably can't make animations yet, not until it becomes really advanced. The only sort of animation it can do is put a video into an animated illustration. At that point just make a film. So animators' jobs still aren't at risk at all for the next few years at least
one of the problem is the rules can't keep up fast enough with the advancing Ai and the corp are using this to take advantage of. I don't want to sounds like a doomer but, Creative jobs that's demands more efficiency, will taken by Ai for certain, and that's alarming asf.
I think even the problem with potentially jumping ship to a different career is that we don't know how big of an impact AI will have on those too. Art is just one of the things that will be impacted, but I can't imagine that jobs in finance, admin in general and basically any job that can be handled by someone sitting in front of a computer could eventually be replaced. Unless you job is purely something involving physical labour I could see a future where AI could more or less eliminate it as something a human is required to do. Not going to happen overnight but who know what the next decade will bring. How can you prepare for the unknown?
It is funny that AI is replacing the creative jobs first since it was also stated to be the opposite. But honestly I don’t think AI will replace Creative jobs, it will just become another tool. I think Andrew price (blender guru) puts it best. Things that don’t require an artist eye but are art adjacent have been being phased out for years IK replacing tween frames in 3D being an example.
@@RusticRonnie it is a surprise that art is the first thing AI is going after, out of all things I would have thought that was most difficult to replace. Maybe that's the point though
Even physical labor type jobs are replaceable. Robotics isn't at that level yet but it will improve.
Год назад+1396
People keep forgetting that its not only drawings at risk, musics, voice acting, writings and even coding are also at great risk of being replaced by AI and are suffering the same problem of you having to analyzing it to see if was madr by a person or not, damn imagine being a teacher and having to read your students texts without knowing of they made ot themselves or it was an AI
Reminds me of one day when we were talking with our teacher about AI essays, she said she could usually tell when an AI wrote the essay because of minor issues that a human wouldn’t make. She said that it’s sometimes hard to tell with my writing though, because I write like the AI, even though I’ve never used AI to write any of my essays… I’m not sure what that says about AI, but thought it was interesting
Of course, more often than not, you hear stories of people having their hand written work rejected because the teachers put it into an AI detector which got it wrong, but if you actually read AI work, at the moment, you can tell a lot more accurately than a computer if it was or was not written by a person. Granted, they can go through and edit it to make it more human, but I feel like at the moment, that’s not happening, because the people using AI to write papers are doing so because they’re lazy, they don’t want to do that extra work
eventually movies and video games will too. Hell maybe in the far furture business models and stradegies will. Maybe even farther in the furture humans will have given up any free will they had for our AI gods.
Ah, yes, a computer program will obviously replace live musicians and singers because people are only fans of songs and are incapable of preferring specific muscians/singers. Ha! The most you'll get is ai covers and ai bands, like vocaloids, but there is no chance of ai fully replacing muscians
Год назад+124
@@thelordz33 people used to say the same about drawings, but you're not seeing the full picture, sure famous bands will never be replaced by AI but it's not about them, just like drawings, music's are everywhere too, it's not your Spotify songs, but osts from shows and games, jingles from commercials, elevator music, background music, stock sounds, SFX, all of that is made by people too and all of that can be replaced by AI too in the future unfortunately..
I began to learn how to draw a month ago because of this AI nonsense. Dropped video games almost fully because they began to bore me, and started drawing both traditionally and on a tablet. I was always a fan of art, followed artists for over a decade, and this nonsense motivated me to want to become good at drawing and painting. Maybe it's out of spite for these AI creeps, maybe it's because I now truly realize how important art is for human culture, maybe it's because I have no life and I have nothing else to do with my time, it does not matter. You have to be insane to believe that man made art (the only kind of art) is going anywhere, and that you should suddenly stop drawing for any reason at all other than personal health.
I still hope that humans will not be defeated by machines when it comes to the arts (like: drawings/paintings, writings, music, & etc). I hope that people can still fully express themselves just like in the past and for those who consume, to find works just like the classics of the past also. I'm not all against the AI but as someone who appreciate real art in different fields of art, I find this AI dilemma of replacing artist/creators/writers concerning. Edit: What I also meant with people expressing themselves in art, was that people are also going to make a living out of their art isnt just fair for people who make art for them to earn a living out of it? And isnt unfair for AI to take that away from people? Like Solar Sands also said there will be people who really appreciate art who will support pure human creation and traditional art will not die, it must and should be.
I find the likelihood of ai replacing artists very small. There are already programs that can detect ai text, soon there will be some for ai images if there isn't already. Plus I think laws will be made around the use of ai in art and around ai in general as this technology evolves
@@shadw4701 There are tools to detect AI generated images. Their principal use is to... train better AI models. I think that we all have to come to terms with the idea that it's okay to like human art over AI art just because we do. We don't need to be more technically skilled or better, you can just like it as is.
Keep making art. Just because ai can do it “faster” doesn’t mean your efforts are futile. You are making a tactile product. Ai is confined to the digital realm. We put so much weight on digital assets because we’re constantly looking at our screen devices. All that shit will fade.. there’s a reason why the pyramids are still standing today. It’s a physical fucking object. If anything AI will push us back into the world of the handmade as we will gain real appreciation for it once again
Good thing is that art fundamentals pass from trad to digital media as well. Though mostly digital art is convenient due to its accessibility ( oil painting would cost me a liver at this point ). One medium which will not be affected heavily is definitely tattoooing, and it pays really well. Apart from doing art from yourself, which I consider undoubtful as a statement ( all should NOT stop doing what they like ), a good idea is starting to build a brand through your art. Is it a comic, an animation, a game? Slowly start developing a big project which will be your identity. Nevertheless, have a nice day!
I love art, I'm a graphic designer. And I wish all the best for artists. But we need to stop romanticizing art this much. It's just a product that we are using to manipulate our own emotions. In the future AI will be able to manipulate us successfully through pictures, ads, videos and other media. Artists and designers will lose their jobs, it's inevitable. Сapitalism and your average Joe Schmos don't care if it's done by hand or by a soulless machine.
@@l1p0v of course as a graphic designer you view art through the lens of commercialization especially with comments that reduce art down to a form of emotional manipulation. Because that’s how you graphic designers are trained to use aesthetics as a way to draw consumers into your products. Not all art has the goal to feed on your emotions or coerce you to feel a certain way. Maybe brush up on your art history and you’ll see that art has always been an integral part of human expression, language, communication, etc. Do you really think the cave painters were drawing on walls to manipulate your emotions? Nope. They were describing their livelihood and what they were experiencing in the world. But to even reduce art down to just that is shortsighted. It has many uses and many objectives depending on who’s making it. All my point is that we focus so much on digital art especially in regards to AI, but that stuff isnt going to last because of the ephemeral nature of computerized data itself. It’s almost pointless to invest so much time and energy into it because of that.. I think people will start to realize that if they want their work to stand the test of time they should turn to the handmade as that’s what art has historically always been and for good reason. A well made object can be preserved and/or withstand the nature of the world. AI will not make a lasting impact as the majority of it will disappear once your screens are turned off. Once computers become obsolete, and I’m very certain that is a real possibility, then all digital art is gone with it.
@@analogies I needed to generalize less. Sure, not all art is commercial and not every artist/designer will be unemployed. But the way things are going, society is about to go through big changes. Few will stop to sit down and think about a legacy of our current art that we're leaving for future generations. Until humans figure out how to use AI and other up-and-coming technologies for good, artists gonna focus on how to have enough money to buy food and pay rent.
@@l1p0v the economic landscape for art is always changing and shifting; it’s never on stable ground. Artists have needed to find new avenues to make ends meet many many times throughout history. The important thing is for artists to continue making art they truly believe in. Many artists are feeling dissuaded by the emergence of AI art, and there are definitely many things to worry about I don’t blame them, but it should never be the reason an artist gives up making their work. Even if all the consumers of the world care about is that ai overproduced slop, it should not matter one bit. Making art is still a valid and valuable thing even if only the person who likes it is the person who made it. Never give it up.. it’s the most human thing a person can do
what really annoys me is the number of people who hear about AI art being a problem, then start thinking that its *only* art at risk. Its to the point where many people dont like AI in general because "its coming for artists jobs" No, its threatening almost everyones jobs, almost equally, you only HEAR about the art because its a lot more interesting to talk about, but AI also brings a plethora of its own advantages. It isnt simple, or one dimensional like that and most of the people who have a single opinion for "AI" as one thing often dont know what theyre even talking about.
They talk a lot about art because it's the most complex form of expression to learn, some people must think that art is a gift and I don't know what happened I think these guys wanted to balance the emotions of the artists because they have this "gift" and now this gift belongs to everyone, in the end, I agree with you, art will be one of the only things that AI will steal due to the issue of subjectivity and this area will still be very consumed by humans and in other areas it will impact more and maybe the problem is to vilify it instead of thinking of it as a facilitator for doctors It is professors, engineers, all kinds of areas I wanted the question of helping the population and allowing a system that doesn't throw people out on the street, but a very useful tool for these professionals finally, it has to solve the problems that this technology will bring socially and focus on the improvements of this technology.
People have always lost jobs due to innovation. You are typing this on a computer wich role was once fullfilled by a room of twenty people, but you wouldn't dream of going back to when we didn't have them and this goes for many more things.
I agree, as a person who will soon graduate and teach high school history, I am afraid that very soon within this decade or the next they will make AI programs that will do the teaching it self and thus make online schooling a permanent thing and thus get rid of teachers as they can have AI make class plans and set up work for the students to do. Thus, no need for human teachers. Not to mention all the other white collared and blue collared jobs that will be screwed over by AI/machines when greedy business owners replace us humans with machines just to save a couple of bucks. I predict people will become Neo-Luddite as a result of what is soon to happen (and is happening right now) and either force the government to ban AI or else start a Neo-Luddite Revolution and destroy all types of industry that uses AI technology and set up a society where is only human labor and AI machines are either limited in their use or done away with.
It sounds like the inherit problem is not within AI, but rather a world ran by corporations who value profits more than people. The only way that this problem is going to be solved is not by bashing AI, but rather rebuilding the system from the ground up. Something that, let’s be honest, is not happening any time soon. In the meantime artists and people in general don’t really have much they can do. I know it’s pessimistic, but it’s hard to look at it any other way.
Bingo, expect from building from the ground up, I don't think that will ever happen or that it's necessary (likely chaotic). I'm not educated enough on this subject but would love a solar sand video about it.
Corpos are run by people too, you know Seeking profit is an inherent human desire The system we have is just a result of what we are You can tear it down again and again, but big players will emerge all the same and will build the same system Nothing is going to change, unless we eventually let the AI itself make a better world for everyone
If you're into accelerationism, it could happen soon. If AI starts getting incredibly good incredibly quickly it could put enough pressure out that even the dumbest average person sees the solution.,
I'm now wondering if there'll be a surge in stuff like sculpture or other physical art. It'll certainly take longer for AI to get to that type of recreation, I hope.
Dw stuff like 3D printers are so expensive to the point almost no average consumer is using it.(plus it's quite hard to use and the materials are expensive and some quite toxic) Making a robot that would create this kind of art would be FAR more expensive than commissioning someone, plus it existed for awhile and it doesn't have the impact that Ai art has by far. We're good👍
I have played with AI art for about a month and I had fun with it, but then I lost all interest in it. And when I'm on Instagram's explore page, I'm surprisingly really good at seeing which art is made by AI. I think part of the reason why we enjoy real art is because we can see the beauty of the mind of the other person. There is no such connection when its AI art. It does not make you feel things to the same degree as real art does.
AI isn't your average technological shift, it is a net negative for humans to develop AI. Even someone as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins(RIP) didn't like AI and told us about the inevitable disaster it will cause.
@@al-imranadore1182 ai has infinite potential for good as a superintelligence could increase knowledge of the world exponentially. And of course it has infinite potential for losses too.
@@k_otey All that good in AI comes at the cost of dismal human existence if not downright human extinction, rendering it ABSOLUTELY NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE OF USING IT.
As a photographer, the comparison to photography is vexing to say the least. I think a lot of people who have no real experience with photography like to think of the art as just pointing in the right direction and pressing the shutter, whereas in reality it is the cumulative result of several different processes which can include but are not limited to editing, lighting, and set building. I know 99% of viewers probably aren’t thinking about the analogy through that kind of lens, but since the video covers the idea of your art losing value or respect, it hurt me a little 😭.
Photography is still primarily lazy, but you can create a setting yourself to have an active part in the work. Otherwise, you're just pressing a button and claiming that image as something you made which you didn't. It's a photo. I say that as someone who's done photography before. Sure, you may do a few touch-ups to the image but you didn't plant that tree. You didn't create that rock. You didn't build that bench. etc.
As an amateur photographer, I think it's a very apt analogy, actually. Both photography and AI art drastically cut down the amount of work needed for some kinds of work. If you want to paint a realistic portrait, photography gets the same job done in a tiny fraction of the time and effort. If you're not very picky about the particulars of the result, so does AI. Both photography and AI art are more complex than just clicking a button. In photography you often set up the scene. You may need to wait a long time for the right thing to happen, or to do a lot of tweaking to the scene until it's just right. In AI art you spend a lot of time trying to convince a random algorithm to do the right thing. In both cases you often process and retouch the results.
I don't think that's his message at all. He actually says that photography changed art; it didn't replace it. I feel maybe photorealistic art (like those old portraits) may have fallen out of fashion because we can easily record things now, but in terms of it as an artform, it's just different. I studied traditional art for years, but now I'm at a job that requires product shooting, and I'm shit at it. I respect photography as it is, and I think that's what SolarSands was getting at. I could be wrong though. (not as relevant but didn't film photographers also hate when the digital camera became more accessible? you no longer had to work in a darkroom and develop film, but new challenges arose from digital photography, as you stated. it's interesting how humans can adapt)
@@Hauntaku That's not the point of photography as art and photographers don't claim to have made the subjects in their photos though. We have so many important images thanks to photographers. War photos, for example. Those photographers put themselves in danger sometimes to get those images for the rest of us to see. Sure, your regular photographer might not be doing that, but they take photos that can freeze exact moments objectively, unlike a traditional artist, who is usually subjective (which is what makes it special). I'm curious what kind of photography you did, since I find it somewhat difficult having to find the correct f stops, ISOs, setting up reflectors just right, positioning products/objects, etc. I don't think it's lazy--it's just different.
As someone who wants to do art for a living, my feelings of the possibility of an art career goes back and forth, and it doesn't seem to stop. I'm not extremely “Anti-AI” (and I try to see the positive light with the technology), but I'm stumped for the most part. Who knows what companies will do with it? I mean, industries doesn't have the best rack record of treating employees good. I hope things are worked out well, not just for artist, but other industries at risk of extreme automation. I'm just scared of what I'm doing when I get to the “real world” and if I'll do something I dedicated my life towards.
I'm a hopeful realist. My hope is that artist will follow their true expression instead of settling for an (replaced) art job. I have always considered other options because something could happen at a personal level where I wouldn't be able to make art anymore. The AI art replacing artists simply shines light on this capitalist society we live in. I believe it only has a bit more impact than other auto-replaced jobs because art is supposed to be a magical-human-soul expression, but now a machine is doing it.
Market yourself as a real human with a distinct style who doesn't use any AI. Unfortunately all art on the internet (not offline) might become suspect. Seek out platforms that respect human made art.
Dont let the world crush you, if you do not live the life your own way you will regret it, I am an artist going to art college this year and I dont care anymore about what anyone says to me about being replaced and whatnot, AI will churn out content sludge like Marvel while passionate art will thrive in indie scene
I'm an artist myself. People are so mean lol, I have heard too many times my work is worthless and shit because they can get even better things for free and in seconds from AI, and that they will never pay me or any other artist ever again. Some of them even say they don't need to learn how to draw, because they can get AI to do it for them, and then pretend it's their work while they don't do shit. I'm really worried, to be honest. I had troubles selling my art even before the AI trend, people wanted my artworks to be free or were angry when it took more than one day to complete, and now it's even worse. Most of the time I can't sell anything and I'm only being insulted and laughed at by potential customers who love AI "art" more than actual art that was made by a human from scratch.
People like these are addicted to instant gratification and AI image generation grants it. "[...]they don't need to learn how to draw[...]" they don't want to be intellectually stimulated, challenged and this connects to the addiction to instant gratification. They let machines do the thinking from them, thinking it grants them instant talent, but it just stunts their personal growth. This AI image craze is contributing to cultural homogenisation. Your art has worth, even if it's just to yourself.
AI "art" is still art. Like photography. Sure, the painters of the last century were absolutly furious that they lost their jobs to the automation of art, but the generation after them was perfectly fine with it.
@@darksidegryphon5393 Lile mass produced food, the assembly line, pre frabricazed furniture and clothings, the internet, smartphones, and photography? Or does automation simply improve our lives leaving those behind that can not adapt to the new technological norm?
when you said "find a second source of income" it broke my heart. i knew that ai will forever change the art industry, but hearing that after watching this pretty damn smart video hit different, especially how delicately you put it.
Honestly, it's heartbreaking to hear that all of our time and effort spent on practicing would simply just go to waste and that we should just find another source of income.
@@RealCodreX photography was new form of art. people still got portraits afterwards, because they offer something different. art from an assembly line is not only low quality but also soulless and entirely pointless. when you take both thought and effort to not only learn but also produce art out of art, you're left with a product. you're not left with something that will stick with you for any amount of time, make you think about the world and life differently or help you grow. you're left with something created to make as much money as possible while subduing the brain's need for entertainment. think of new marvel movies or yknow ai art. i appreciate you letting your take be challenged. i have confidence you're smart enough to think about this more afterwards.
Personally, i tried not to worry too much about Ai tech replacing artists when it started rapidly improving a year or two ago, but the more time passes the more i'm worried about how am i gonna provide for myself when i grow up...i'm 17 rn and being a full-time artist/animator have been my dream job since childhood, but with all this Ai stuff going on i feel like very soon my dearest career path is no longer be a possible choice...i also thought "mb teaching art is secure" but with internet and ChatGPT around and with the fact that i suspect less and less people will avoid devoting themselves to drawing i feel like this is a dead end... The only way out i see is finally creating a youtube channel becoming a full-on internet persona asap to have at least some dedicated following until its too late... I'm extremely grateful to you for this enlightning and very thought-provoking video, watching you since some the first deviantart videos :) you never dissapoint
@@Shashu_the_little_Voidling i kind of agree, but if not for Ai i could've just picked smth im passionate about (drawing) and make it my full-time job, but soon with more advanced Ai capabilities its not gonna be an option. So of course im worried about my career if like i said its about drawing as a dream job and my passion for it
It's not even just artists. PLENTY of jobs are at risk right now. Sooner or later AI will catch up with Voice Acting, Music, Surgeons, Manual Labor, whatever you could think of and we'll have to reflect on our economic system. Shit, even the software engineers cynically going off about how art is a useless job or how "if your job can be easily replaced by AI it should" are in for a rude awakening.
Here are a few thoughts: *1. Pursue a higher goal.* Instead of hoping someone to hire you to be an animator to make their animated feature, why don't be the one who hires other people to finish *your* film? I think the reason many artists are afraid is that they just want to be employed, and work in a lower position, instead of trying to achieve a vision of their own. I'm not comparing animators with janitors or anything, but if a janitor just wants to be a janitor for the rest of his life, I believe he should instead pursue something greater, like "I want to clean the entire earth, and make sure everything is beautiful", then make a company to achieve that dream. *2. Companies can replace you, but you can also replace companies* Big companies are not the only one who have access to these AIs, you also can utilize it. If they can replace their entire animation department with one AI, it seems like you can also hire an AI as your animation department. Guess who need these companies now? Nobody. You can make your own army of AIs to take the market share of these companies, and realize your vision as well. *3. Have different sets of skills* Just like in the video, having a diversifying sets of skills is the safest way to make sure you can make a living if nobody needs you in a certain field. Remember, you cannot force someone to give you a job, but if there's a need in the society, they'll call those who have the skills to fix the problem. The bottom line is, we can't rely on others to keep us alive. Begging them to do so is not realistic because not everybody is very kind. Instead, having the vision, and be the one with the power to help others instead of being helped is the right way to navigate this situation. Those are my thoughts! Thanks for reading, friend 💖
I am afraid that by the time I have grown up there will be no use in pursuing my passions. Art is what I do, creating is the reason I live. If I cannot work within art I don't know what I'm supposed to do. I'll have to study something I have no passion for, and work with that my entire life. I don't want to abondon my dream, but at this rate I'll have to. It makes me sad, angry and scared that I might not be able create things for a living. If I do not create I do not fully live. If I do not create, I am dead to myself.
Even before AI, many artists have second job while pursuing art. You cannot create if you're starving and depending on your art to eat is the fastest way to burnout. Follow your passion and look for an existing market that your product will succeed at. Or find out a need within the market that has not been fulfilled and create a product for it. Follow your passion until it creates more revenue than your regular job. Then, you're able to work with your passion full-time. :)
Probably not the best "cheerful" comment, but still I'll try, let me add a little bit of hope, as things are now, we still have no idea of how this technology will be applied in the industry, I mean, what the "standard will be", sure, it sounds great and have huge potential, but still most projections are just that, a guess. Things will be more clear once legislation around this is more defined, meanwhile, big companies are actually pretty careful about using this and never as a "let it do all the work". On another hand, there's also the possibility, that the Ai content get's so invasive and massive, it becomes undesirable, and "human made stuff" becomes trending, some kind of brand, at some point, who knows. Many times some technologies promise to "replace" this or the other thing, like audio/digital books replacing printed books, digital games making physical copies disappear, 3d graphics with 2d games, 3d animation would replace 2d animation... and the list goes on, but that never happened, they just became a side thing or something else. Objectively speaking, and cost efficiency considered, it's cheaper and easier to make a pretty good looking 3d movie than it is to make a Studio Ghibli film, yet we still have both. The technology is promising, but generating a dystopia where it's' impossible to make profit from art is still just a possibility, not a certain future. That said, I find it both enraging and hilarious, that instead of actively trying to solve real world concerns like diseases and climate change, big tech corps are more concerned about partially or completely erasing the human from creative activities (not referring to art exclusively here) while selling it as "democratizing" what was already accesible, it's just... backwards.
AI will not replace you unless your passion is to make backgrounds for visual novels or something, there are fundamental things AI cannot do because computers don't process information the same way humans do. They aren't sentient. Your art will have meaning and a lot of people will recognize that
Great video. If you make a part 3, you might consider exploring how automation has historically impacted industries - like the Luddite movement. How did workers adapt? While not a perfect parallel, as AI art autonomously makes creative choices, the consequences of automation will probably be similar. My views on AI have changed significantly over the last year or so. However, I still believe AI art could usher in a creative renaissance. Some say AI art lacks originality, but I see creations that challenge that notion everyday. Like your weird train-spider thing. I still fully acknowledge that AI art is a bad thing for visual artists' livelihood. I also agree that the models should not use others' work without their permission. Once again, AI poses a very real threat to current artists' income, which is why I'm curious to know what happened during other phases of worker automation throughout history.
They're different kinds of automation. As CGP Grey noted, previous machines were 'mechanical muscles', which still needed human input to function. Things like AI art are 'mechanical brains' and can generate with little human inpitt
I find it interesting people will reference Luddites this way. In a way it's the best accomplishment of the pro-corporate media and education apparatus, to convince us that the Luddites were crazy people standing in the way of progress because the machines were full of satan or whatever the hell. The reality is the Luddites were opposed to automation specifically because- well, hell, it's basically the same reason a lot of artists oppose AI. Not because Machine Bad, Ooga ooga. But because they knew damn well once the corporations could get 10 people to do the work of 100 with the assistance of automation, they'd do it without a second thought and send 90 people to the streets to die. I am not opposed to AI or AI art in the slightest, the technology is interesting and fascinating, and only getting moreso as it improves. But people are like "Oh but it isn't that good, you'll want a real artist to make things" and it's like, are you kidding me? Do you really think that packaging companies give two shits if the stock photo person on their USB cables blister pack has 7 fingers? 99% of corporate runs on "good enough" and the bean counters have been trying to kill of creatives in their departments since spreadsheets were a thing. And whether or not you think it's important for said blister packs to have "human designed backgrounds" isn't the point: the point is *that they do currently,* at time of comment, and that could change extremely rapidly. Graphic design is a job, often an extremely thankless one in larger corpo shops, and if they can eliminate 90 designers and keep like 10 people around to correct the most glaring screwups in Stable Diffiusion's output for prompts for generic products? They'll do it in a heartbeat, and we'll have a groundswell of unemployed designers hitting the streets immediately afterward, looking for jobs that are actively being automated away. In short: I have no issues whatsoever and in fact am quite interested in what these machines are capable of. However, it depresses and scares me to death that everyone in charge of AI, how it will be used, and the people most likely to benefit are the ones who stand to lose the least, and who have shown time and again that they will burn the world, QUITE LITERALLY, for an extra 2% bump in quarterly revenue. That's why AI scares me. Not because ChatGPT is gonna start spewing out terminators, but because the richest and most privileged among us will use it to fuck even more of us even harder with zero concern for the effects of it on our larger society.
I'm a concept artist in the film industry (The Matrix, Alien), and I recently spoke on a panel at the ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency regarding AI art and its impact on artists. We were able to garner a lot of interest from not only ML experts and ethicists, but the ACLU as well, in addition to empathy from those who approached us afterwards to tell us they didn't realize how bad it was, and asked how they could help. In regards to Corridor, a big part of the backlash from my community is the fact that it's normalizing, endorsing, and encouraging this type of thing. They literally built if off of copyrighted screenshots, and while I agree, it's a 'tech demo' of sorts, it's far more damaging than that overall. If Corridor does it, why can't I? They were extremely sloppy, especially when Jake, not long before, had an entire video from his standpoint as a lawyer discussing it. It's tone deaf at best. For people like me specifically, one major problem is the blue sky pre-production period is disappearing. That's when artists are brought in early to tackle the issues and see where to take a film. It's a lot of artists' main bread and butter, and I regret to inform you, I have colleagues already reporting seeing loads of AI generated work on art department walls on big productions that were not produced by them. The jobs are already going. Oh, also, just a small point regarding Photoshop not being able to create the art for you... it does now. Adobe has recently integrated a generative fill tool that will make nearly anything for you in inside your work. Things are moving fast. Anyway, as a fan of the channel, I just wanted to thank you for shining a spotlight on the issue, because we as artists can't yell loud enough on our own, and we need allies like you to help speak for us as well. Your perspective certainly differs from mine, but I think we share similar concerns, and I appreciate your efforts here. Keep up the great work.
> In regards to Corridor, a big part of the backlash from my community is the fact that it's normalizing, endorsing, and encouraging this type of thing. But that is exactly what should be happening. People have to stop the constant fear mongering. The world is not black nor white. Yes some artists and programmers will lose their job because of AI, but at the same time AI allows a programmer and an artist to make a much bigger and better game with less resources than ever. Add in a jobless animator and they could even make a movie. I don't understand people who always either see Utopia or Dystopia. There are risks and chances. And constantly only looking at the bad sides is not good for mental health in general. The anxiety and fear people are getting is much worse than the actual impact of AI once you actually come to terms with it. Corridor Crew just showcased something cool you can do with this new technology and I hope a lot more will follow suit,
@@NorthgateLP Good luck paying the bills to make a decent game, alongside promotion and marketing. You're all wearing blinders when you say that "now you can use these tools to your advantage!!1!". Also good luck, even if you made a polished game with or without AI, to promote it in the sea of "passive-income-generated content" out there. And this applies to everything related to white collar jobs.
@@NorthgateLP "people have to stop the fear mongering" "I hope a lot more will follow suit," The fact you wrote everything above and don't see the disconnect of these two statements is just... So baffling, it could have been written by Chat GPT. The fear mongering IS that people will follow suit. By the tens of thousands. And CC endorsing that is disgusting because they built their careers on appreciating the artistry, while that video encourages destroying it. Got it? Good.
at least in my university course, ML experts also concerns themselves in ethics. you cannot make e.g. a face recognition AI without explaining your dataset and any biases (gender, racial, etc). and the ethical concerns if used e.g. in airport security - appropriate accuracy, whether human review is still required etc. maybe this is a new direction for ML and ML education idk, either way its good that ML experts are concerning themselves about the ethics.
@@watchingperson5357 Having a CS degree, it is undeniable to use a dataset to train a model ( if I remember correct it was with classification implementations back then, like sound classification etc ), without stating its use. These companies act like this because they currently can, but it will fall over in the following years.
Great video! I'm a Visual Development artist, and I pretty much agree with everything you said here. What really hurts to see is not AI producing decent images, it's how it further reveals that too many people couldn't give two sh**s about human labor. I don't mind so much if someone just didn't enjoy art, but to have such a high need for consuming artistic media while having such distain for the humans who make the stuff... it is awful. Not different from how too many people treat "essentail workers" as insignificant and undeserving of a living wage.
So many people are willing to act like karens over a job they know nothing about yet also be vague about the benefits of new technology. They don't even know what those benefits are, yet they're willing to slap a value that's higher than people's livelihoods as if they DO know.
"to have such a high need for consuming artistic media while having such distain for the humans who make the stuff" like people who watch every bit of marvel/star wars slop while complaining about how bad it is and how Hollywood needs to fall? like gamers who buy every $60/$70 lazy cashgrab remake or spend thousands on gachashit while simultaneously shitting on game developers? biting the hand that feeds is the defining characteristic of our current stock of mindless consumer drones. just cynical/critical enough to complain, but too addicted to stop consuming product
@@metalsludge8205 so what you’re saying is, people have a taste for things you think are trash, but they want those things to be better, rather than have something completely different that you personally think is better.
I think people often can't afford to give a shit. You can get almost the same enjoyment you need for much less, you can save money, you can get more, a healthier life. You are the most important person in your life, you will probably not even think about the consequences to other people. It's sad and should be better (UBI?).
I feel like people aren't talking about possibly the biggest factor: open source. You touch on it slightly by mentioning general public opinion/apathy. With big aiart corps, you can potentially deal with them via legislation and litigation, but that is incredibly ineffective against the vast number of normalish people doing their own thing in the wild. That's what makes this truly unstoppable, and I don't really hear many people talking about it. If you do a part 3 in this series, I would love to hear a deep level of insight from you on this aspect of things.
The big issue is that this is the latest clash between "free culture" and "permission culture" - AI art is a huge boon for the former, while there's a lot of people who are mentally in the latter that are loud and upset that they're losing.
Yeah them releasing these models to be open source felt deliberate. I always assumed that it just helped them avoid algorithmic destruction. Since now that the software is everywhere a gouvernement can't force them to destroy their only copy of thr algorithm
@@badreddinekasmi8919 It's also because Emad is very much a proponent of people individually having as much capacity for power as possible, ideologically. I've seen what he's written and he seems very much against power being centralized so it's not simply to prevent SD from being censored but for "anyone."
@@badreddinekasmi8919as an open source developer of scientific code, one important motivation to create open source code is that the code can never be appropriated by some exclusive group. It will live on, despite my personal funding/academic situation.
AI isn't your average technological shift, it is a net negative for humans to develop AI. Even someone as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins(RIP) didn't like AI and told us about the inevitable disaster it will cause.
As a pro artist I am used to 2 sets of customers: Customer 1 pays me an adequate amount of money, is polite, and usually even lets me have lots of artistic freedom. This person values me as an artist and as a person, the product is not the only thing that matters to them. Customer 2 is the type of commissioner to choose the lowest price tier, expects me to treat it like a high-caliber order, is pressuring me, constantly wants changes, tries to control every aspect of the piece, and in worst instances resorts to being fairly mean or impolite. That second customer will, in the future, resort to AI art. There are people who see art as a means to an end (sexual pleasure, game asset, flyer, cover, dnd, insert X art product here) and there are people who love art and cherish the fact that human craft, skill and passion lie behind it (customer 1). Art, music, and writing are the things that, among language and complex communication, sets us apart from animals. It is an innate part of human existence. Expression of oneself through skill, passion, athleticism, art and other ventures is paramount to the development of one's own personality and feeling a sense of self-growth or even reason to live. I find it hard to believe that people will just suddenly stop caring about other human beings, just because it is cheaper to do so. Another point about AI generative art and writing. If you look at pop culture, the likes of Marvel, Disney, etc,... what would be the defining property of these movies and media? They are generic. If AI made any number of Marvel movies, would you notice? Would you care? Would it matter? The amount of artistic expression a game artist or movie artist gets to experience while modeling Assassins Creed Outpost Tower Prop #389 was arguably never that high to begin with. Ai might just generate, what is already generic. With the difference being: Instant access. Do you crave Red Dead Redemption 3, tailored to your likes, to your interests, with your favorite actors, music, setting, and fantastic art and dialogue? Well here you go! Completely for free as well! And another one! And another one! And an- you get the idea. The mass production of, on surface level, high quality, but generic media, is impending. It will be such a mind boggling oversaturation of media that is pretty decent (but generic), that it will eventually implode, fall in on itself. Inflation. it will lose its kick, and maybe, all meaning altogether. From those shambles, people might realize that the tech-dystopia they created was never so bright to begin with. Ai Art is instantly accessible, cheap and easy. Those properties also rob it of any real artistic meaning. Again, mentioned Customer 2 will gladly generate those pieces for themselves, but let's be real, this person hardly and rarely willingly pays an artist anyways. Art will prevail, as will writing and music. AI will surely change a lot, but it won't make humans stop being humans. Unless, of course, Skynet gets activated, then we just well... are screwed! Bottomline, I am very much against AI art, but really only because I think its fairly boring and cynic to just... accept that that is the norm now. It just takes the fun out of art to know that this album cover might be the product of someone practicing for many years, bring passion and love for their medium... or just generated. And visually indistinguishable. Edit: What I didnt mention at all, since it's fairly uncertain what will actually happen, is regulation. Here in Europe some countries already made laws about AI. Japan followed suit recently. The US supreme court ruled AI imagery as not falling under fair use. This is an interesting but incomplete development, hence why I didn't comment on it.
I like art because it is beautiful; I don't really care about its history. Maths art is my favorite; no human hand, ever, except to pick out the procedure. I feel strange.
@@DavidSartor0 if you like making AI art for yourself, fine. Just remember that none of it would be possible if it wasnt for people who actually put in work and passion and tears and lives and sorrows and happiness.
Most art is garbage, the reason why I'm in support of AI art is that 99% of human artists make art that looks like it's AI, the only difference will be that the AI doesn't incessantly whine.
To me Art is about the satisfaction of finishing a piece then looking at it in awe and taking it in that you did that. You put it all the work and it’s something that you’re proud of Something you can go look back on to inspire you once again when you’re feeling doubtful about your own skill.
im also a pro artist and i am also scared. That is fine. But let me ask you, what is the alternative? Live against your own nature? Artists will find a way. Yes, this will be a huge change, a huge cataclysmic event of unimaginable proportions, but humans will not stop being human, as self expression is innately human. And yes, there will also always be a means to an income for artists, it will just change its shape. Dont let the doomer mindset get to you.
As Solar said in this video, there will always be art. I think it will be very difficult for AI to muster any emotion in art as it obviously doesn't have any emotion
@@albert9248 Why does everyone seem so sure that will remain a fact? Call me crazy, but I wouldn't be surprised if AI with consciousness and feelings came to be before the end of this decade.
The reason why artists create art is not and will never be only to get the end product. Practicing anatomy and learning new skills is not boring and time consuming, It is our passion and what gives us joy in life. People do knitting or pottery or any kind of craft in their free time just because the process fills them with joy. And even If you could buy a mass produced piece for a dollar, If someone sells that thing they Made themselfes for 20 bucks, there are still people who rather buy that handmade piece, then the cheap factory thing from china.
Right, but the majority of artists who do art as a job do it for people and corporations who would easily throw them out the second AI becomes just as good at a lower price, and it's not like the average consumer is gonna pick up the slack when that happens.
@@jettspyder People don't realize this, but it will end in a cultural disaster. The only reason we have nice looking things is due to artists personally deciding that their output should be of high quality. Not because of executives dictating them why and how things should look nice.
I find the process of doing art fun but ultimately it’s the product which is what I want. I want to tell a story and if AI can do that then I will support it. This is the reason I have supported it since the GPT-2/1.5 days and still while I am scared for those affected by ai automation, I against the “revert to monke” mentality. Right now I have to rely on my own art capabilities, which are slow and while constantly improved never really good enough, right now AI programs while fantastic in some aspects almost always lack in consistency, they do well with human characters but much else and they can’t handle, but solutions will be found and I really start to question if I will ever do art in the future when AI exist. That’s for future me to decide, though I get that a lot of artists who make a living can’t freely walk away.
I think what it means to be "creative" will change drastically. Right now, you can be as imaginative as you want, but you're not "creative" until you actually put in the work to create something. AI will make it so being imaginative will be enough for most people and most purposes. It's a pretty big paradigm shift in art.
When everyone and their dogs can make AI generated image, AI generated images losses its value. It’ll be a race to the bottom, and companies who look to distinguish themselves will stay away from it like it’s a plague.
AI art is going to make a lot of artists give up and generations of the future not even see the point in picking up a brush. Why make art if a calculator can do it for you? We'll get nothing new, everything will just be regergitated styles we've seen before, and visuals will stagnate. I think the only human made art we'll see going forawrd are physical crafts and whatever currently existing artists decided to make despite AI. There definately will always be human artsist but who will care about them and their works? Will it be impressive? Will it be expressive? Will it matter?
This is a primary concern as an aspiring/budding artist. With AI art growing better and more accessible every day, human art will lose its value, its soul, its meaning. It's that mentality of "why bother learning to draw when AI can do it for you?" that I've already started to encounter and it stresses and alarms me. I've not considered working professionally with art, but even I am getting turned off knowing that to the average observer it will have no worth or meaning.
If AI art is everywhere in the future then any artists who do things different will stand out from the crowd and go to the top. Just look at fast fashion, young people, student still buy fast fashion often because it’s all they can afford, or they want lots of clothes, but those who wants quality will invest in better quality clothing to set them apart, and these are the people who have the money to actually pay the price of a quality pieces. I notice now more and more people I know start to buy handmade clothing, or even tailor make their formal clothes! I used to buy fast fashion but I’ve grown to really dislike the poor quality fabric, generic design and really bad sewing, so I no longer buy them and now save my money to invest in a quality wardrobe. Three will be people who like AI made art for whatever reasons , but at the same time three will be more opportunities for those who offer something very different with their art. Do what you love instead of whatever other people do, you will be able to horn your craft to a higher level and offer art to a different audience than the ones who value ai , it would be an audience that value your craft rather than quick generated images. Don’t be the sheep in a herd, be a hound.
This is incredibly stupid. Did the photography ended art as a whole because people no longer painted landscapes? Did digital art stagnated teaditional art? No. We got a lot of new things since then! Art became even more expressive and diverse than it was at any time in history!! AI is simply what the photography, digital screen and the internet was to those that came before.
As an artist i feel like AI could be very helpful in generating textures or perhaps objects or vehicles that could then be used as reference for a drawing. It should not be used by corporations of by people flooding fanart hashtags taking away views from actual artists
Earning my BA in Graphic Design we were instructed by our professors to not let the computer do the design. They taught us to sketch out ideas in pencil BEFORE going to the computer. The reason was that as soon as you starting using Illustrator or Photoshop tools, those tools would drive you toward a design that would ultimately be more stale and lifeless. I'm a graphic designer, and though I'm wowed by AI art, I can see it usurping many (if not all)aspects of my job ...probably in the next 5 years.
As a computer engineer who is also interested in art, a year ago I could not foresee a future were my main hobbie Was easier to replace by a machine than anything that I had ever done before. Countless of hours learning how to draw only to make them feel worthless really.
Same here brother. CS student and part time artist. Honestly I think what people also fail to see is the mental impact AI has on artists. So many of my friends literally stopped art because AI just shattered any hopes or aspirations they had of becoming professional artists. That includes me honestly, my last piece was a year ago. I've heard about artists falling into depression, having to go back to minimum wage jobs after finally getting some work in the art industry...etc. Hell I've seen actual big names in their respective industries just announce that they will retire from art as a job.
Not exactly worthless, as the so called "AI" is parasitic and completely dependent on humans outputting art. It will never stop being parasitic as long as the core is machine learning based. It's nothing without human art still. But on the other hand it's clearly discouraging and will ruin the jobs of those who work in corporations, as they'd be relegated to fixing AI garbage here and there to make it passable while getting paid for less. If I were an artist, I'd still draw for myself but also feel disgusted with the world at large and would stop posting my stuff on the internet. Let the world enjoy their AI trash.
If its a hobby you shouldn't feel like those hours were wasted, just because a machine is a better calculator than I'll ever be detract from my knowledge of math. If its a job... Ngl artists are kind of fucked
being an artist and all, i hopped on the hating ai bandwagon at first because i mostly do digital art, but now i feel like most of the arguments have devolved and usually only end when somebody is too exhausted to keep coming up with ways to prove their point. i'm only a kid but my wish is to get some sort of graphic designing job, or even a job that involves some sort of creation. i'd settle for something as long as im making enough money to live a happy life. when ai showed up i freaked out, watched the steven zapata video, scrolled on pinterest and applauded myself for finding ai art and saying "this anime girl has 17 fingers on one hand. boo ai art." and now i just dont see the fun anymore. why be so angry at something i cant control? what can i do to improve my art and not feel that all my dreams have been taken away because computers can make art now? i enjoy lots of different arts, so if digital art is completely washed out maybe i wont be done for. thank you solar for being one of those youtubers that dont go insane and only look at one side of the argument. this might just be nonsense because i dont have to worry about jobs, taxes, and bills yet but i will never stop creating :)
@@Aleuse Where is that a mature stance? Instead of adapting we should not let companies replacing us for the sake of their profit, not our profit, they should use AI to make human lives better, not worse for the sake of their own lives (elites). This happens exactly because people accepting this instead of fighting against it.
@@coyotiee7758 That's the problem, we can't, because most people in our world supporting current way of world and system and we as well don't know how to make a different, better world
Interessting. As a traditional artist I once hated on digital "art". Claiming that art on a coumputer screen is soulles and lacks real meaningfull skill. Since almost a decade I switched from landscape painting to pixle art now.
it feels so satisfying to finally come across an individual that sees value in soft but steady counter-arguments in controversial issues, and actively condemns wrathful hatred and bullying. i absolutely despise seeing people from my own side of the fence try to brutally bash our opponents with harmful language; it makes our side seem so barbaric and unjust, and surely the other side that remains somewhat neutral and reserved will seem much more mature in comparison. as always, absolutely wonderful video. you are always on-point and tackle every issue as deftly as you can.
Is there anywhere you've written more about this? I'd like to read more of your words. The rationalists are usually very charitable and kind in their arguments; you probably disagree strongly with most of their opinions, though.
The best solution is to not care and make your art anyways. the value of art is that it offers insight and perspective that only on person has. It is an expression of the self, which an AI lacks. AI can sell the skill, but it will never sell the art.
I felt extremely intimidated and anxious, when my boss proposed trying AI to save the time. My job is to create promotional materials and I have already minimized my efforts by using such tools as canva or stock photos. I feel so useless when thinking about AI and the way it constantly develops. Deep down, I wish the technology never got there, as, personally for me, as impressive as AI art is - it's faceless. I still can paint portraits of people or animals the way I see them and put as much love as I can into my creations, but such things as promotional materials or general concepts by designers are definitely going to be replaced by ai art.
i started my first year studying animation at uni this year, i'd been working for this for a decade only for immediately when starting the course ai art really started becoming a thing. i felt so defeated and i think a lot of the others were too, but i think we all just tried to ignore it. i remember sitting in a concept art class a few months ago and our lecturer was encouraging us to focus on storyboarding and comics, as ai can't do that yet. really just made me think about the reality of all this. i know art jobs aren't the only ones in trouble here, but it's stressful that thats where all the attention is. i feel sorta robbed now. why couldn't i have been born 50 years earlier? maybe i should have studied science instead.
@@Techyena while my original comment was pessimistic of the future, this first year of animation school has probably been the most fun i've ever had. ig try to not think about it and just have fun! that's what i'm trying to do anyways haha. hope it goes well for you!
@sourblue3812 @Techyena its never too late to change, sunken cost fallacy. Ive been going to college for 1 year majoring in art and just recently decided to pursue engineering. and in fact ive never felt happier knowing i would not have to rely on art for a job
I've been to art school before AI exploded and most of my colleagues are not working with art. The way I see it, even if AI does a lot of the artists jobs, it still requires human direction and decisions in order to communicate with other humans. You're in school learning all the important fundamentals that will give you the knowledge necessary to make artistic decisions with intention and purpose. It may be that a lot of the mechanical animation process will be optimized and replaced by technology. But you as an artist still holds the vision and imagination to manipulate the technology. Cheap jobs like those low-budget kids show animations will likely be replaced... but think about the innovative animations that have come out that looks like nothing before. Like love death and robot, spider-verse, etc. I don't believe AI can do that. Look how the animators act and record themselves to create those animations. Most of the creative work is there. Afterwards it's hours and hours of moving the 3D puppet to create 1 to 5 seconds of work. AI could accelerate that. It maybe that animators who only work in betweens or have less impact in the animation will be replaced.
@@tobytowns1 im glad you found something that makes you happy! that's quite a drastic switch though, i hope it wasn't too tricky! but for me, i'm not sure if i ever could be happy not doing art. i think for now, animation is still too tricky for ai to do well, so i'm going to stick with it. but i'm also going to focus on learning some things that aren't as common, like effects animation and creature design :3 think i was in a bad mood earlier, have regained my sense of optimism and hope for a future in art now hehehehe
Like the laws overseas for requiring advertising to show accurate depictions of food, we need laws to require content creators and companies to put disclaimers in there advertising and products if it used any amount of AI software in it, or it instantly loses its copyright or and exclusivity.
Something that feels very funny to me is that AI NEEDS a data pool to pull from in the end. If it takes over everything… who exactly is gonna make its data pool? AI literally needs artists for it to be able to replace them properly. Or else everything AI makes will boil down to the same style and same things very quickly.
Let me tell you a small story The chess AI model stockfish was trained with human games and human players When it got good enough, they started training stockfish with itself Stockfish is virtually unbeatable now. No human can beat it. So, the thing is: When a model is good enough, it can train with data produced by the older version. Just like gpt-5 is being trained with data produced by gpt-4
@@talkysassis chess is more mathematical, though. its a statistical game, art isn't. it's got infinitely more complexities which won't allow AI to self-cannabalise. we're already seeing what happens with things like facebook bots, where the AI is just feeding off of eachother.
@@jellyloabyeah it’s really not the same as chess. Chess has an easy verifiable outcome they can optimize for. Win/loss/stalemate. Art can’t really be optimized. Everyone has different tastes so it would be very difficult.
Once it becomes self sufficient it will create its own pools. Of course there will still be artists left, do not get me wrong here. But does the assembly line still need the carpenter?
This video is the most reasonable argument I've seen in a while. It does make me a bit anxious but also hopeful, if that's possible. Personally, I'll keep making art no matter what. I think artists themselves are far more equipped to use the upcoming AI tools than people too focused on prompting, because having artistic sensibility is a skill too, not just knowing the technical rules of drawing and etc. But that's only if you are open minded (or desperate to keep your job).
12:43 I feel that a lot. And to me, it is surprisingly impressive how we humans can notice AI-generated images, even when displayed small. When I scroll through my Spotify releases, I often see a cover and be like "This feels a lot like AI". I can't confirm if my feelings are right, but just the fact that our mind is so good at pattern recognition, is so impressive! 28:31 This reminds me of the one video, where the creator intentionally had a typo in his title, so that people in the comments would correct him. 5mins into the video, he mentioned that and suddenly you realize that some things might look like error, but are there for a reason. To generate engagement.
Many AI images have kinda weird illumination, but it looks like that AI developers don't see this as a problem. So luckily we will still be able to tell if an image was AI-generated, at least for some of them :)
The thing is, you'll only notice the AI images that have those traits, if it looks exactly like normal art you won't even bother to check if it's AI, pretty sure there's a name for that but I forgot
There's a video that, while having to do nothing with that, had a message that really opened my mind and showed me that most of the time people on the internet don't mean what they say, they just want engagement because that gives them money and/or supports their cause. The video in question is called "Feminist for Clout" by DJ Peach Cobbler (the name is silly but I swear his videos are amazing) and in the video he shows a group of radical right wingers who created internet figures of "Feminists" and "Leftists" to garner lots of attention and engagement so people got angry with them, it doesn't have a lot to do with this case because they did it for political reasons but that's the point, you can do it for whatever you want. The moment you hate click, leave angry comments and open videos, you lose. People on the internet are tricked daily and they don't even realize
@@menjolno Everyone has jobs, buddy. People go to work so they can earn profits for a living (food, a rent, etc.) and it's just very common thing a normal human can do. Instead of whining about capitalism, why not get a job and not wasting time picking up fights on the Internet?
Would love to hear about the impacts of non-art AIs. In my small industry the impact of AI generated code has been instant and massive. And it would be cool to talk about the economic and ethical impacts of more technology oriented AI tools.
it’s interesting to see how things have played out nearly a year later. from what i’ve seen ai use seems to have been lessened, but also is a bit more “normalized,” if that makes sense. you’re bound to see it in some shape or way, no matter how big or small. thankfully, it doesn’t seem that the landscape has been flipped as a whole, but it definitely is not the same as it was before. art is still thriving as generative ai is being used less for art and more for subtler, practical uses, which is probably the best outcome that could come from this. still, it’s continuing in its advances, so if that will cause it to change more and more is up to the future
I’ll tell you art. Buying as much as you can of NVDA in 2018-2021. There was a lot of work and consideration after seeing portfolios of the best clients of Merrill, JPmorgan private bank, and wells fargo advisors for 18 years. I could be wrong but I am not.
Amazing video. As someone who is also against training AI models with copyrighted images without consent, but at the same time an enthusiast of AI tech and tools, I find myself in a bunch of crossroads when talking about this stuff with my artist friends who are outraged by the existence of such a thing. You hit the nail on the head doing a perfect impartial video about this stuff, thank you.
AI can be fascinating BUT it's not going to replace humans. I can tell when something is ai-generated purely by the aesthetic. Ai-generated content is ugly and has no soul.
@@tann_man Maybe the only art AI won't be able to generate are shitty fanart done on lined paper. /jk I do wonder if AI art will get boring over time as it won't have any new material to learn from though. idk how ai works.
I swear you're the only one who makes sense around this whole argument, your videos help me so much understanding what the hell is even going on at this point, between the two sides screaming and yelling at each other. It's the NFT debacle all over again, but 50 times worse (and as you said, this time the outcome will make an actual impact in our society)
❤ Thanks for this video! I’m an environment designer & can recall when photobashing became standard. Older artists who’d been around since before Photoshop consoled me by saying, “Have u ever seen a non-artist try to photo bash?” & “Do u really miss rendering the foliage by hand?” My point is, there will always be a new tech, but it’ll work best in the hands of classically trained artists. Unfortunately, the difference with AI image generators is that there’s so little effort by the user, & it’s unrelated to artistic skill. From what I’ve seen, the merit of results depends mostly on SHEER LUCK (bc u can prompt 5000x & only get a few usable pics) & OTHER ARTIST’S COPYRIGHTED WORK. The best images “made by AI” on social media are being produced by image-to-image generation followed by prompt-based editing. I know bc we’ve used these tools in my studio for quite a while, with our own copyrighted works & licensed stock, of course. Ultimately, US law will likely hold that there is no copyright ownership by a user of an AI image-gen program unless they contribute sufficient artistic input to meet the authorship standard after the AI image is generated. In other words, it’ll be a similar standard as when you photo bash. You will own your epic fantasy landscape if you create it by photobashing lots of pics of organic textures, but not by pasting a collage of AI-generated fantasy landscapes. I feel great empathy for artists who are just starting out, if professionals like me & you are drawing less. I started a mural painting business about 5mo ago, because I’ve always loved to paint big & it’s a unique field that’s in high demand & AI- resistant. My advice for working artists is to do something similarly “non-digital” or start a totally different side hustle, like construction, (wisely) stock investing, delivery, etc. My advice for artists who are in school… if you aren’t independently wealthy, this probably isn’t the safest career path. If I had kids, I’d encourage them to major in accounting, pharmacy, nursing or another area where you get a license to practice &/or you’re performing an in-person service for humans that cannot easily be automated or outsourced abroad ❤
Leave it to Solar Sands to have the most based and nuanced take. With how crazy things are out there, your calm demeanor and reasonable takes are a breath of fresh air. Nice to know there's at least one adult, in this room we call the internet.
There are a couple videos with a similar quality, "like Hello Future Me - The AI Art Apocalypse" (very clickbait title lol), but this is still a dam good video.
@@Hauntaku Since you didn't give an example of him being an "Elon simp," I'm just going to assume you're saying that because he didn't come down on the side of firmly railing against AI art.
Interesting that you use "based", I assume, to mean that it's grounded/lfair. It makes sense but I usually see it used online as slang for controversial/nonconformist.
I appreciate your ability to be realistic about the future of AI art and how it will be here to stay. Like you said, while it’s easy to point out flaws in current models, it’s also easy to see just how insane it is that a computer is able do what it’s done with just a text prompt. I only do art as a hobby while I plan on working as an aerospace engineering, so while obviously I’m hoping for the best for people who make art as a job it’s safe to say I’m going to keep drawing my own content.
My best argument against its use remains pretty simple. In an ideal world, as many people as possible would be able to live doing what they love as possible, without harming others. It's essentially a utilitarian argument. Ai-generated images has the possibility to remove the hundreds of thousands of skilled artists' jobs, leaving them without work and for some, essentially without purpose. For many art is more or less their whole lives, and their creative work is an immense source of meaning, passion, and happiness. Basically _no one_ goes into art for the money after all, there's both higher-paying and easier jobs out there, people do it because they love doing it. To take that ability away? It seems very wrong to me. In that sense, I can't help but see the adaptation of this development as anything but a negative. It threatens to remove people's ability to do what they love, which as many as possible should be able to do. In any case, great video man. Always glad to see reasonable takes on things.
I'm sure many of the preindustrial farmers would have loved to continue owning their own land and raising crops, but it too became financially untenable with tech advancements. If we treated all tech the way you describe to preserve "people doing what they love" modern society and abundance wouldn't exist. I'm afraid this will be yet another head on the chopping block, for good and ill.
@@solisglacies3183 I share your view, things like that have happened in the past too. But I think it’s tragic. It‘s sad that the ways of production that used to be more „fun“ are more and more replaced by production techniques that are more efficient, for the cost of the fun during the process. I‘m thinking of pottery. Nowadays people have to work in cold, boring factories to produce some nice plates that can be sold, instead of doing it the traditional more fun way, which nowadays is primarily a hobby … . At least pottery shows that handmade products will always have a special value and there will at least be a few people who are willing to pay a little bit more for the art 🤷♀️
I see so much concern about artists losing jobs over AI, but most of those jobs are low level factory art. Artists should be pumped for the AI revolution, instead of being paid to be a part of the process, one artist can create so much more on their own. The fact that so many artists feel that same "what's the point?" when they go to create art because of AI advancement is upsetting to me. I will never break a 3 minute mile, write a bestseller, win a grammy, or get a nobel peace prize. The thing is, running keeps me healthier, writing calms my mind, singing brings me joy, and being peaceful prevents my untimely death. An artist will art. If one NEEDS a cash prize, a medal, their name on a top ten list or whatever it may be to create art, they are an opportunist following the path of least resistance. I make AI generated art, and I pay a monthly fee to do so. I don't do it with any idea of making my money back by somehow monetizing my art, I do it for the pleasure of taking an idea and seeing it become real(ish). Producing images for a saturday morning cartoon designed to sell sugar bomb cereal for an hourly wage is not art, it is work.
Since your last video I've gotten my first full time job as a professional artist. Since then I've seen how helpful some of these ai tools can be. It's great for generating quick assets you need for a piece to then place and trace in a job when you cant find exactly what you need. This stuff can be worrying on a larger scale because I've also noticed it in adds more and more but for actual artistic jobs there is an application for these tools that doesn't make what we do obsolete. Also more people want to support actual humans making art than we realize
every time you use AI you are agreeing to be obsolete. After all, you are replacing yourself with it. Also, that job you mention is probably some shitty 5$ scam on a freelance site where you offer "AI services"
@@robo_t its not created to be a tool. When you retouch some image generated by AI you are agreeing to be replaced and that all it takes is for the AI to be just a bit better to replace you fully.
@@j.2512 my job is with a real company in my home town. I work in an office with real people, get paid well, and have solid benefits. My point is ai art generation as a tool has a place in a professional setting that doesn't make the artist "obsolete". In my role, it makes the creation of the art I'm producing for customers faster and more efficient which is great when you have a ton of jobs to get done in a day. Simply using it as a tool isn't agreeing to be obsolete because it makes me better at my job in my current setting. Making me better and faster at what I'm already doing is the opposite of making me obsolete
Honestly it still blows my mind how rapidly fast AI technology grows with each second, since there’s gonna be a point where it will be impossible to find a mistake in what they make.🐱
There is such a spectrum of the WHAT and the WHY in art. I have been drawing since I could hold a pencil and I know artists like me work hard and practice practice practice and even when I was a kid, if I saw another kid using tracing paper, something inside me would balk a little bit at him calling himself an artist. I will always love traditional art more than what computers can do because there is some soul in it that is hard to describe. I remember the same feeling when CGI came out and still maintain that CGI is able to build a fire without the wood. I remember a fellow graphic designer in college saying "Graphic art is the prostitution of art" and I think AI is this to the Nth degree. If we're just trying to get something cool as fast as possible to make more money. But a true artist enjoys the process, the feel of a pencil on paper, the subtle nuances of his own style developing over time. AI will never stop me from doing art, but it may hinder me making money from it.
I know it might seem hard, but never stop drawing, even if you have to get another job, even if it looks like it doesn't matter, do it for your own sake, the joy of creating is something we humans need.
Solid take. You really can't say this is good, or this is bad. It just exists. I've used every kind of ai I can get my hands on. I love it, but making ethical choices is up to the user. And sometimes the temptation is pretty strong.
I guess the only light there is to this situation is that there will always be people who will appreciate real art. Artists working for big companies might not be as common in the future, but at the end of the day, werent artist always mistreated in those environments? Even when they were the only ones who could produce the artwork, i always heard stories abt them being given unrealistic deadlines and being taken for granted, especially animators. The only people who ever trully understood artists were other artists. I hope you all dont lose the motivation to create, so that we can keep the community we have and keep expanding it :)
17:26 This statement is kind of funny if you take in consideration that phtotoshop has added generative fill just a couple of days ago, so that is now literally possible.
The editing at 21:35 was so fucking funny. You gave me just enough time to figure out what the answer would be before hardcutting to a title card with Dark Souls music. I was literally cheering and laughing xD
9:53 they actually ended up changing that doctor who cover to have no AI art in it due to backlash, so at least some companies that try experimenting with AI art may stop using it if there’s enough complaints (also that’s the cover for a doctor who audio drama which literally got released today which is a cool lil’ coincidence)
Yea no I got nothing, I have been somewhat part of the AI-Hate segment of the audience, while not actively shilling out people who do use it I will look at art that is AI-Generated with a less than respectful outlook. You have raised valid points and made me more aware to what this AI art could be. Thank you for that. I still will not like AI Art. I still find it utterly terrifying of a tool and how its seeping into my daily life annoys and frightens me to no end. But at the very least I will hold it to more respect now and view it more than some "fuckers doing shit" as I had before. Fear of unknown crap being an ass all over again.
Please go back to being fully against it as this ai cr*p is also going to impact shows, movies, books, and many other things you enjoy on a day-to-day basis.
I appreciate this honesty haha. I am afraid of AI as a graphic designer and artist, but I know there's little to do in the face of these giants. All I can hope for is a coexistence. Unfortunately, this doesn't always happen. Look at hand animation vs digital. Mainstream animated films aren't really a thing anymore (unless...?). Do we lament those animators' jobs daily? Doubtful. I know a lot of anti-AI people say "you're only okay with it because it isn't happening to you yet" and to some extent, yes. A lot of people are just dumbasses and don't realize that AI is already being used for coding simple things and will only get better, potentially taking over tech jobs. But modern artists don't seem to realize that being replaced by tech has happened over and over in history, and we got on pretty okay thus far.
Yeah, videos like these (ones that disprove a lot of popular beliefs, and advocates for their own "enemy") help bring people back from all the radical stuff. I've seen a lot of videos where artists are freaking out calling it the worst thing ever, or AIbros crapping on artists and defending it with dumb defenses (or things that should really need to be defended). It is really scary, and I am also similarly annoyed that I even have to go through and study images to see if they were made by AI or not.
@@Hauntaku will AI replace generic cash grab films (eg. shitty superhero or action films)? yes. will AI ever be able to create film akin to Interstellar? probably not. I can't see AI being able to create film that really musters emotion deep down considering how emotionless AI is.
You know, being an artist in this time period is very scary, im genuinely horrified that I will be replaced and that my art will be replaced, I want to hope that this is somehow a fad, and that it’ll die out but I don’t think that’s going to happen, and that’s horrifying.
That will only be a thing if people want fake art that is souless. If no one will pay for ai art because of that then it will not be sucessful. Ai art can't be copyrighted also.
@cosmicsvids but the problem with that is how we "know" if it is "soulless" or not. The fact of the matter is most companies won't care if it's soulless or not and nobody would even be able to tell.
It's very unfortunate if you make art for corporations like advertising because no one will care if it's soulful. We already have awful corporate art that are very famous Solarsand's video previously went over
@@cosmicsvids Plenty of people have bought art for the sake of it looking good, and not because it has a soul of any kind. Why do you think we have the meme of corporate art? WikiHow art? Why do you think Thomas Kincaid's stuff is still popular despite the amount of outcry and reviews about his art being mostly soulless and for the sake of milling out shit for money? His stuff looks beautiful, but it was made for the sake of money.
Ai art is like the industrial metal works vs a blacksmith. the blacksmith makes things with soul and often more prettier.. but the industrial metal works can make 50 times as much of the same product with less work required. quality might not be at the same standards, but it will evolve to the a point where it is acceptable.
@@daleglass7349 I'll try to look at it from a different angle: in the 21st century, the idea of NOT using industrial metal works is ludicrous. It is fundamental to our existence as a society and virtually nobody cares or thinks of it as unethical. Is this the future of the AI art debate as well?
even mass produced stuff has soul, someone had to design the copied design, a cookie cutter 90s suburban house still required an architect who somewhat cared about the structure and would be appealing on its own but not in a neighborhood where every house is identical to it, the soullessness comes from the thousands of copies
I wish you touched a bit more the intentionality angle. Elements like shapes choice, composition, story telling are things I see AI art struggle a lot. I'm glad this was a path I decided to go with before AI art appeared but I still feel pretty depressed about the whole situation.
Wonderful video. It's actually insane how just yesterday I was talking on my (digital art) stream about how glad I am to have created a RUclips channel so I can not be "just a digital illustrator" anymore and can make more things with my art, personality and more - exactly like you mentioned. AI is a tool that is here to stay and I WISH people understood it is not the enemy. The enemy is the people who use it in the "degenerate", almost criminal way of gathering thousands/millions of artworks without the artists' permission. I've had my art fed to an AI as "revenge" for calling it "not art" on Twitter (which I personally think it isn't), and that's a big part of what it is at the moment: a bunch of dudes who are thirsty for power and making creatives feel worthless and replaceable. It's a sad reality, but I hope it can evolve into something positive in the future, because it's not going anywhere. Sorry if this sounds confusing, English is not my native language
He talks about having this urge to scrutinize every image to see if he can tell if it's AI or not and sometimes not being able to tell or guessing wrong... And that makes me wonder if that's how boomers felt about trying to discern email scams from valid communications. Will people who were born after this technology cannot be able to tell the difference at a glance?
I once had someone reply to me asserting my comments were AI generated. I actually had to take a minute or so to just stare at that reply and take in its absolute lunacy.
AI art is like asking for a commission from an artist. It is bad because it is the mass production of art, like with many products, as the quantity increases the quality decreases.
This video truly changed my mind, until now I used to have a visceral reaction to AI art, but now I see that it was actually just some kind of warped jealousy. Artistic perfectionism sacarred me in multiple ways, and being enraged at AI art is just a way I found to blame something else instead of myself. I should be supporting artists and fighting for their rights instead of being enraged at pictures online, thank you solar sands.
It's quite fascinating how well this video shows both sides of the arguments that take place online . I appreciate the amount of effort put into researching this topic . At the end of the day , no one can predict what's going to happen next so we just have to learn to adapt and be reasonable with each other .
Thank you, finally someone addressed the real concern with Corridor's video, and not just went "AI is Bad!". I think Mother's Basment video on this topic made situation even worse than it should have been. I hope to see your fruits of labor in the future.
Its seems more like he just completely side-stepped the issue. The Corridor Crew did what most people consider to be the _most_ likely to be unethical: they took a relatively small set of images from one particular source, and fine-tuned a model to replicate that style. So is what they did unethical, or isn't it? If it's not (because they put a lot of extra work in, and let's honest, the result doesn't really have the same style as the source material, its got its own style), then what _is_ unethical? Is doing additional work all it takes to be ethical? That's a pretty low bar.
@@APaleDot What Corridor Crew did can't be replicated by your Average AI bros, it require a ton of knowledge and skills that only can be achieved if you're working at least 10 years in the industry. that's how Dangerous AI can be if it was wielded by real Artists. and Pro Artists can improve AI to its limit your average AI bros and tech bros are stuck with a worthless Jpg that they can't utilize, other than for bragging. i just laughed when AI bros taunting Artists and insulting them, because they're the inferior one, taunting the superior one. all they did was writing a couple of sentence, but they act as if what they did was harder than learning Maya, Blender or Houdini from scratch. for them, writing a couple of sentence for prompt is the hardest thing that they ever did in their life, and they can't comprehend that there are people out there doing things that are harder than what they did AI was nothing, it was dead easy compared to what the artists had to learn, of course those AI bros didn't know, they didn't know any better, nor have any skill to understand. they're the perfect example of Dunning Kruger, incompetent but think that they're awesome. just recall Movies with otherworldly Jawdropping vfx, or a AAA Game that really shatter your expectation. you guessed it, that was created by professional Artists. that was a technical marvel. Art, Programming, and Music combined into one Amateur can't even touch that level of sheer skills. just give those Pro Artists an AI tools, and they'll blow those AI bros into Dust, just like how Corridor Crew did. even their mere Tech Demo already demolish AI Bros. AI is just like the moment where the Titan break the wall in the Attack on Titan. we're screwed, but the Artists also will get stronger and find the way to kill the Titan. your skills won't leave you. it'll enhance you, make you a superhuman
I love watching art process videos. There's a certain zen kinda thing that goes on when you're watching a craftsman work, be that in paint or clay or in digital media. You don't get that with AI art; the robot's only really willing to take a prompt and then spit out a result. Craftsmanship as a performance is just not something that it does or that is even likely to be attempted by an AI. That seems to be a place where human artists will always have an advantage.
I don't understand those who say they have no sympathy for the artists who's jobs are at risk by this. I feel like those that don't care already have a negative view of artists , and that's a shame. Regardless of how you feel, some people are artists because it may be the only job that is accessible to them for various reasons. Not everyone can simply adapt to something new. This goes for every industry at risk for other reasons. Programmer's are at risk for example. If you believe that a person who can't quickly drop everything, all their dreams and their passions, is useless then I don't know how to reason with that. We're all only human. We all need time to change, and to be honest i dont think art should HAVE to change just because some big companies want to make money. Art is so many things and those that say it isnt necessary i think are missing the point. People should be making art. Anyone who is saying good riddance is giving those in power even more control. The people and companies in power are not loyal to anyone but themselves. Anyone who supports them will be left behind eventually.
I remember the whole corridor digital thing, i ended up discussing it with friends and even left my own take, and brought up how the whole film was one of the best popular case of AI animation honestly. Advertised it as AI, talked about how it was done, shown that they filmed, edited, created sounds and etc for the video and just left the animation to the 'AI'. The biggest problem that i pointed out was, they ended up using snip bits of a animated film to intentionally try to mimic the style, *without consent* of the studio/animators that worked on said film. If they fixed that one problem their whole video wouldve been perfectly fine, either by hiring illustrators to create illustrations for the AI to learn off of and replicate, or simply finding artist who consent to their work being used for said project. The whole controversy over their work was hugely blown out of water, and made it harder for anyone to take the whole AI problem serious, its not the fact its AI, its due to the fact it was being trained off of the work of non-consenting artist.
I work for a ad company as freelancer and we just had a webinar over working with AI to save time and money. They said that we can better work with AI than ignoring it as it gonna prevent u from not knowing anything about it and get outgrown by it.
Great video. There are so many legitimate reasons to be critical of AI and its so frustrating to see artists clumsily insulting/making fun of AI art. The theft, the lying, the way it'll hurt smaller artists feels really really bad to see ALREADY and these concerns are only going to get worse as AI tools become more accessible and efficient.
Well, AI is incapable of stealing and lying. And what smaller artists feel is just the realization that automation has not stopped at photography or the assembly line. They are afraid as landscape painters where once the photography took off. But unlike artists back then who invented the surreal and modern art they lack the true ambition and paddion to revolutionize it once more. But automation has made our lifes betrer in the end. Mass produced furniture, food, clothings, ect. ... .
@@RealCodreX you fail to mention or engage with the idea that the automation is ONLY done through scraping millions of pictures with zero accountability in order to train models.
@@JesseBakerH Absolutly braindead take, lol. According to your logic inspiration would be theft. And your example has proofen that you neither understand the topic and neither are willingly to actually engade with it.
As I am much more of a music artist and less so of a drawing artist, a lot of what was described here is pretty eye opening. I'm pretty unaware of how the ai landscape is with music, but I know for a fact that it's not that far behind ai art right now. I sometimes make excuses like "oh well music is harder to copy than art" or "music made by humans is more preferable than to ai generated music" but I begin to realize that it doesn't matter anymore. Although there *is* a difference between art and music, to simply use that difference as an excuse to not worry about it is a bit ignorant. I accept of what the future will look like, and although im a bit hesitant to use ai in my own works, i am a bit excited to see how it might be integrated with the already thriving artistic landscape. I'll remain optimistic about the future to come.
I've seen more musicians who are fine with AI than anything to be honest. Especially ones old enough to remember the napster wars, or who have been around to see the waves of various remix/mashup genres crop up time and time again.
Thank you so much for talking about Corridor's short, I didn't get it at the time but I felt really put off by everyone slamming them, even other creators I respect and follow. As an artist I've been a little at a loss for what the future might look like for me, but their video actually gave me a bit of hope seeing it used as a collaborative tool more than a "do this" machine.
As someone who uses art generators and also commissions art, I really do feel like AI Art will never fully bridge the gap to human expression, even if it'll continue to get better and better at imitation. Even after years of AI Art improving, it is still not hard to tell it apart from the rest, and while many apocalyptically say that this will change, I really don't think so, because of the technology behind it. Since there is no consciousness driving the production of the images, it will never truly lose its weird and random aspects. Of course, someone with photoshop can remedy these shortcomings, but at that point it is no longer 100% AI-made art, but rather transformative through the action of a guided human touch. What artists should be concerned about however, are other artists who flood the market with their convincing-to-the-normal-eye fakes and companies who dont care that quality drops if the profits skyrocket. These are what will devalue an artist's work and make it hard to find jobs. I have in the past, when trying to commission art, come across grifters who attempted to pass off their Midjourney pieces as part of their portfolio, and it made me less inclined to commission art on an open forum tbh, so now I do it only through pms to select artists that I already follow. I doubt im alone in this, and, as such, it is harder to break through as an artist now, unless you have tremendous talent. Since I'm an author, I have had to listen to the doomsday speak of people saying Chat GPT will replace writers, but again, the main problem isn't from the endless stream of mediocre text samples that this chatbot can spit out, but rather companies (like Amazon), who do nothing to prevent impersonations on their platform, such as in the case of Jane Friedman, where poorly-made impersonations done by Chat GPT were left on the site and claimed to be written by her, thus tarnishing her reputation and losing her sales. The main issue I see right now, is laws are too slow to catch up to this burgeoning industry. I do not believe it will delete artist industries, but it will change them, just like any new tool has done in the past.
Even if the industry as a whole might be moving in the direction of AI, I do believe it is ultimately the responsibility of the people to ensure that human-made art is still valued. Even if a lot of companies (especially major ones) will find every excuse possible to underpay artists (as they have done before AI existed), I also believe there are enough people in the ecosystem that will run countermovements to make sure artists around the world don't get shafted. There are and there will be more companies that will rise up to defend the sanctity of human-made art in video games, animation, etc. who will offer fulfilling jobs to those who need them. Why? Because amidst all the cynicism and indifference, there is goodness also. There will be many people (maybe even a majority) who take the path of least resistance, but there will always be others who take the high road in order to help others.
"there will always be others who take the high road in order to help others." Is the "high road" communism or paying for human art? Seems like people abandon their ideology just so that they can dunk on AI
The issue with this is, to a massive sector of the artistic world, it will be impossible to do. So many people make their living in being designers for physical objects, UI, architecture, etc. How can you possibly know if the garbage bin was sketched by a real person or developed by an AI? Does anybody care? Where is the line drawn about what we all have time to check what is and isn't AI generated? Let me put it another way: people already hate advertising. What is the advent of AI in advertising gonna do? Make people hate it... still? In a different way? Will the average consumer even know what they're looking at? The consequences of these questions are tens of thousands of jobs in the design and animation fields. Not choosing to support AI fanart is one thing, but do massive corporations really care, and who/how are we to interject?
@@menjolnoartist realizes that the market for art is already saturated. “Is it I who’s out of touch with the wants of society? No it’s the market who’s wrong.”
@@menjolno I'm speaking of hiring artists. There will be always be people who will be happy to spend money to hire those who feel unappreciated. I also believe there will be a rise in sponsors with programs in place to help artists. Even if a lot of sponsors might look towards development in AI, I am optimistic that there will be a decent amount of money devoted to funding artists and art students amidst the buzz. For example, art education is still a highly lucrative industry and stands to lose money if AI overtakes the market, so I am sure things won't turn out as bad for the artist market as some people envision.
I agree that AI is way more dangerous to artist careers then most realize. I also agree fighting bait and individuals isn't helping. I find myself picking up the pencil and digital pen way less often just like you. However, I hate seeing you having lost faith in the future of the integrity of art at the same level as I have. It really does seem hopeless.
Solid part 2. I do have one major criticism though: The last point you made, about many artists being unreasonable in how they're critiquing stuff created with the help of AI - the tone, the nonsensical arguments, the unwillingness to see 'the other side's' perspective, misses the simple fact that this anger is fueled by existential dread the likes of which is difficult to imagine. It's easy for older, established artists to lay back and either dismiss AI art or praise its accomplishments - they're at the point in their careers where they can *afford* not to care. In contrast, if you spent the last seven years learning to draw or 3d-sculpt at industry-level because that's the job you wanted to pursue, and the very existence of that jobmarket now seems to be threatened, it means you might have to work as cashier in a supermarket instead, and you may never again have the time, the mental energy, the youth required to achieve excellence in another field. You may be stuck doing grueling menial labor for the rest of your life even though you had the skills to add something meaningful to this world. Of course these people are angry, to the point where it makes them irrational. They're afraid, mortified, in shock, going through an existential crisis - just as you and I will be if/when it's our turn.
Yeah I understand that. But that isn't a justification to act like a lunatic to other people. Being in a bad state of mind can help us understand bad behavior but that doesn't mean it is free from criticism.
@@SolarSands Absolutely, there are no excuses for being a hateful person. But your moral appeal to do better rings a bit hollow when you don't give the part of the story where these people's lives are in all likelihood f*d its due. You can't bring the old pro who has nothing to lose as a positive example - people can see right through that. You can't give helpful advice along the lines of 'you're gonna have to diversify' and leave out the harsh truths that a *lot* of artists are simply going to have to give up pursuing art as a career in any capacity and they'll have to settle for doing the thing they love as a hobby. There's a way in which not explicitly saying out loud without being euphemistic about it how bad things really are for these people is insincere. Unless you disagree with my perspective on some fundamental level and think things aren't quite that bad (read: going to be that bad in two years tops), of course. I think the prerequisite for being listened to by the artist crowd - if you agree that their reasons for being in a state of barely concealed panic are real - is to acknowledge the reality they're faced with very explicitly and *then* point out that it's still not going to make anything better for anyone to become embittered.
I'm sorry are you purposefully being dishonest? The part of the story where people's lives and livelihood are ruined because of AI art has been the main thesis of the entire last two AI art videos. How much more explicit do I have to make it that things are on shaky ground? Do I have to make it every other sentence? You're going to latch onto the "old pro" who could obviously have plenty to lose, he likely has tons of connections in the industry, students, art youths. What about all the other people who I cited as positive examples in the replies? What about all the people who agreed with the messaging of the 'old pro's' video? Are they all also just the most secure artists in the world? That's quite a coincidence. I have acknowledged for the past hour of videos that their panic is real and is understandable, but this behavior should be discouraged. I don't go by the principle that bad behavior should not be called out if they are in a bad mental state. There are plenty of Anti-AI people who also are panicking that do not harass people, do not bully people, do not give out death threats for petty nonense. The reality they face is the same. I have given every reason for the artist crowd to listen to my perspective. The abusrd hysterics they have demonstrated is not only just abusive, but actively goes against their own interests. I am not going to pull my punches for a crowd that needs this to be explicitly spelled out.
@@SolarSands I'm not. Look, from the fact that you say that you "don't go by the principle that bad behavior should not be called out if they are in a bad mental state", something I didn't disagree with or criticise, and your need to once again point out just how reprehensible some of the reactions we see from artists are, when that's a completely separate issue from whether your characterization of the situation artists are in is euphemistic, I think you have probably just misread the tone of my post. I think that you're not going to reach artists with your appeal the way you have made it, and I've tried to lay out the reasons why I believe that's the case. Nothing more.
Go to ground.news/solarsands to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Sign up or subscribe through my link before July 1 for 30% off unlimited access if you support the mission and find it as useful as I do.
Ok
Cool
Nah
What about AI art being like commissions?
What will AI replace?
Everything
And unless we do it in the stupidest way possible, that's a good thing.
People are always afraid of change, but evolution doesn't stop because you're afraid
My art teacher and one of his old students used an AI recently, and had fun with it. They were really impressed at first. Then my teacher got bored. He's the kind of person who appreciates the process more than anything, sees the beauty in it. He often describes working with deliberate strokes, and discovering with amazement that an idea can be expressed through a simple stroke of the charcoal.
He told me that working with AI is boring, because working on the composition, the intensity, values, ect, is the real enjoyment of creating art.
He didn't talk much about the artists' jobs being at risk. He himself is not in danger, since he teaches people, I don't think he sells much of his own work but I could be wrong. I just think that even an old time artist, who's life is literally art, is confused with the rapid changes this technology brings, and that he doesn't wanna draw early conclusions and possibly introduce a bias to his students.
That's important to remember when it comes to working in the art world; No matter how bad it gets, theres always teaching
"They were really impressed at first. Then [they] got bored." basically describes my reaction to AI art as a purely hobbyist artist
Problem is that in a capitalistic society, nobody cares about the artists process
Some people care, but most people don't. As explained in this video, art is everywhere and most people don't even care to realise it.
@@dudenamedchris3325 yeah since its inbeded in so many things. Kinda sad that something so awesome is in such an unfortunate position in society.
I think right now my biggest concern with AI is... how fast it can produce believable misinformation, which will be seen and reproduced by the average person
Imagine someone making a video of you commiting a felony. Or the cops tweaking a video showing x kid was actually armed.
Well people have to become better at thinking, at taking a step back and reflecting. Also AI can be used to spot AI so ofc scary but think it's more about the transition period being messy rather than it being an actual problem once the new status quo has been established.
I’m gonna be honest I don’t think we need ais for that
@florinivan6907 Imagine someone on the internet, (You don't know them they could be anyone who saw your social media and for any reason wanted to do this) who then takes images of you that you posted online and can use them to make AI generated faked images, or even video of you. Imagine provoking an army of these people by maybe saying something on Twitter, Facebook, etc. that they disagreed with.
I'm thinking about all those videos her beautiful That's the president's arguing over a video games and other such meme videos, but also realizing that they're going to get better and better soon. We'll live in a world where it's very hard to tell what's real and what's fake
People kept telling me in high school that I shouldn't go into radiology because AI would replace it. I'm a radiologist now and the AI lung and mammogram nodule finding tools are still far from accurate.
People don't know anything about anything.
stop trying justify capitalism. you couldn't have become a whatever that job is without your parent's money
@@menjolno This comment is about how AI didn’t take their job though???
@@menjolno That just isn't true though, plenty of places have quality cheap or free education.
Um there was a point in this video where it showed a comparison of ai generated art (that were a year apart, same prompt too) and the difference is night and day.
So in short, its only a matter of time (not much at that either).
"Asking for forgiveness rather than permission"
That's a good way to put it. Big companies just do whatever they want, then in case of controversy they just apologise with no tangible consequence, or get a slap on the wrist.
It is better to ask for forgiveness, our copyright and intellectual property laws are Draconian and you have no idea how even the vast majority of art is illegal. Fan art, derivatives, Etc. are all illegal under basically every country's I.P. laws. Andy Warhol has been successfully sued many times, so even "the most creative minds" are infringing on others' I.P.
If companies would really respect I.P. we would technologically be stuck in the 1970's.
That's comparing apples to oranges. @@-haclong2366
@@-haclong2366 I get what you mean but like, law and order. I agree there's plenty of garbage laws, but if brazenly breaking laws you think are cumbersome was the MO, society would collapse tomorrow.
Also, the solution to this is simply IP reform. For example, instead of having ambiguous rights that might allow for AI harvesting but not fucking fanfiction for 140 years, why not have something like super strong rights - literally illegal to do anything - for say 20 years, than copy rights for another 20, then public domain?
@@-haclong2366 Difference between Andy Warhol’s panting and “AI Art”
Andy Warhol: was an a human being with a conscience and he used existing media around him to adapt from to communicate his anti corporate stance on contemporary life at the time.
“AI ART”: a program that copypastes images across the internet at a fast pace to produce more accurate images,
There’s no ideas, feeling or message being conveyed, hell there is no intelligence behind it either, it’s just a bunch of random sources mashed together to make slop.
Also, “if companies would really respect I.P. we would technologically be stuck in the 1970s”
This is a very shortsighted statement that has no basis in reality,
companies only care about their profits not ingenuity, they rely on government grants and contracts to make their products in the first place lol.
@@Blaze6108 Such a law would not be enforceable, unless the due process of law is abandoned in favor of an inquisitive justice system. Law is complicated for a good reason: to be reasonable, to treat everyone fairly, to restrict freedoms that shouldn't be exercised and unlock shackles that should've never been locked... is the most difficult task man can be given.
The modern copyright law is incredibly complicated, unbelievably dated, and as per its text it prohibits that there be shelter for those most in need, and gives ample powers to those who are most powerful. But the legal system of a nation is not an apartment you can move out of, nor a home built for purpose, but a cathedral retrofitted to be a place of residence. It was built over centuries, clearly for purposes other than the ones we wish it would serve, but we can reform it in order to better fit our purposes, keeping useful attriums, refurbishing salvageable attriums, and building new attriums as they are necessary.
But to destroy an old attrium is... difficult. You realize just how many things that attrium is structurally integral to, and how many important things are inextricable from it. And your grand plan to make an extremely restrictive copyright law that makes a man a god over his invention and then just unceremoniously drags him back down to earth once he retires is... gonna require us to destroy a lot of attriums. This sort of poor planning is how we ended up in this mess in the first place.
As an artist, all I can really do is watch. AI has flaws now? It'll get better. It's the nature of technology. I've really just accepted the fact that corporations and the average consumer will just choose to use AI because it's cheaper and faster. It makes me sad but there's not a lot we can really do. As we saw from the last video, the people making this aren't interested in money or power, they have an ideal and they'll pursue it regardless. So now just appreciate what we have, draw for yourself.
Something that could be done, as solarsands mentioned, is fighting to make training on art without permission illegal. If this becomes the precedent for ai copyright it will severely slow down and limit the technological progression of ai art, while also making the development of ai art more ethical
@@TheEggDevthis is very bad. First, you are staggering technology that can massively help humanity. Economically, if a job is now done by a machine, it's overall neither good nor bad. It's bad when a person who's job is taken has no income now, but there are ways to deal with that
Secondly, several government already allowed using content for training
@@neongooroo while i agree with you that overall, the replacement of ai for jobs is beneficial for the whole of humanity, its not beneficial for those whose jobs it takes. There are ways to adapt, but fundamentally if your job gets taken by ai it significantly alters your life and for a large group of artists it could ruin theirs. It may be an overly emotional response, but as someone with friends in the art world, thinking that the career they dedicated themselves towards could become obsolete is scary. Perhaps having the progression of ai technology slowed (not fully halted however) could allow for society to better adapt to these changes instead of this instant change that will leave many lost. As for your claim on many countries already allowing training on copyrighted material, my point is that we should fight against that. Its because this precedent exists that I believe we should try to change it, for both ethical reasons and the benefit of our human artists
Economical bullshit usually results in the most of common folk suffering. Technological progress will add yet another thing that'll bring a lot of troubles, and we have enough of them for now. We should resolve all the current shit we are facing as a society before making more of them. Just fucking stop and reflect. Slow down your horses.
😊
Sadly, artists in China are losing jobs because corporations started using AI . One artist in a phone interview said they will look for a different job. It truly is heartbreaking.
That's tragic, I hope they can get out of that hellhole soon.
I feel safer as a graphic designer
If your hobby stops being profitable enough to pay your bills you look for a job, it's not heartbreaking, it's natural way of life. The way you think that you're entitled to get paid for pursuing your passion for creating subjective value out of thin air, while most of the people have to work day jobs actually creating objective goods like food or electricity. Make an actual contribution to the society and you're free to spend your free time to make "art".
Typical chinese company behavior
@@xn4pl Jeez, what a bad take. I can already picture more people like you telling that to doctors once their jobs get replaced by machines too.
I dont live off of my art, so im not really intimidated by AI art. in the end, what i love about it is the process. but im starting to get really worried for animators, professional illustrators, designers etc. this shit is getting way too good way too fast
It's gonna be weird
It's "getting good" because it's targeting the good artists who share their art on the internet.
@@crepooscul I'm sharing my art on the internet too, and it's not good usually, but now I would do it more often mwahahahaha take that machine
Ai probably can't make animations yet, not until it becomes really advanced. The only sort of animation it can do is put a video into an animated illustration. At that point just make a film. So animators' jobs still aren't at risk at all for the next few years at least
one of the problem is the rules can't keep up fast enough with the advancing Ai and the corp are using this to take advantage of. I don't want to sounds like a doomer but, Creative jobs that's demands more efficiency, will taken by Ai for certain, and that's alarming asf.
I think even the problem with potentially jumping ship to a different career is that we don't know how big of an impact AI will have on those too. Art is just one of the things that will be impacted, but I can't imagine that jobs in finance, admin in general and basically any job that can be handled by someone sitting in front of a computer could eventually be replaced.
Unless you job is purely something involving physical labour I could see a future where AI could more or less eliminate it as something a human is required to do. Not going to happen overnight but who know what the next decade will bring. How can you prepare for the unknown?
It is funny that AI is replacing the creative jobs first since it was also stated to be the opposite.
But honestly I don’t think AI will replace Creative jobs, it will just become another tool. I think Andrew price (blender guru) puts it best.
Things that don’t require an artist eye but are art adjacent have been being phased out for years IK replacing tween frames in 3D being an example.
@@RusticRonnie it is a surprise that art is the first thing AI is going after, out of all things I would have thought that was most difficult to replace. Maybe that's the point though
@@BrokenFingerParadiseWell it’s easiest data to steal as artists work involve needing to be seen thus need to post on internet for biggest reach.
@@iZelmon good point
Even physical labor type jobs are replaceable. Robotics isn't at that level yet but it will improve.
People keep forgetting that its not only drawings at risk, musics, voice acting, writings and even coding are also at great risk of being replaced by AI and are suffering the same problem of you having to analyzing it to see if was madr by a person or not, damn imagine being a teacher and having to read your students texts without knowing of they made ot themselves or it was an AI
Reminds me of one day when we were talking with our teacher about AI essays, she said she could usually tell when an AI wrote the essay because of minor issues that a human wouldn’t make. She said that it’s sometimes hard to tell with my writing though, because I write like the AI, even though I’ve never used AI to write any of my essays… I’m not sure what that says about AI, but thought it was interesting
Of course, more often than not, you hear stories of people having their hand written work rejected because the teachers put it into an AI detector which got it wrong, but if you actually read AI work, at the moment, you can tell a lot more accurately than a computer if it was or was not written by a person. Granted, they can go through and edit it to make it more human, but I feel like at the moment, that’s not happening, because the people using AI to write papers are doing so because they’re lazy, they don’t want to do that extra work
eventually movies and video games will too. Hell maybe in the far furture business models and stradegies will. Maybe even farther in the furture humans will have given up any free will they had for our AI gods.
Ah, yes, a computer program will obviously replace live musicians and singers because people are only fans of songs and are incapable of preferring specific muscians/singers.
Ha!
The most you'll get is ai covers and ai bands, like vocaloids, but there is no chance of ai fully replacing muscians
@@thelordz33 people used to say the same about drawings, but you're not seeing the full picture, sure famous bands will never be replaced by AI but it's not about them, just like drawings, music's are everywhere too, it's not your Spotify songs, but osts from shows and games, jingles from commercials, elevator music, background music, stock sounds, SFX, all of that is made by people too and all of that can be replaced by AI too in the future unfortunately..
Honestly, im going to keep doing art, because i like it
*Good.*
W mindset
Exactly. That's the point of it.
Chad
I began to learn how to draw a month ago because of this AI nonsense. Dropped video games almost fully because they began to bore me, and started drawing both traditionally and on a tablet. I was always a fan of art, followed artists for over a decade, and this nonsense motivated me to want to become good at drawing and painting. Maybe it's out of spite for these AI creeps, maybe it's because I now truly realize how important art is for human culture, maybe it's because I have no life and I have nothing else to do with my time, it does not matter. You have to be insane to believe that man made art (the only kind of art) is going anywhere, and that you should suddenly stop drawing for any reason at all other than personal health.
I still hope that humans will not be defeated by machines when it comes to the arts (like: drawings/paintings, writings, music, & etc). I hope that people can still fully express themselves just like in the past and for those who consume, to find works just like the classics of the past also. I'm not all against the AI but as someone who appreciate real art in different fields of art, I find this AI dilemma of replacing artist/creators/writers concerning.
Edit: What I also meant with people expressing themselves in art, was that people are also going to make a living out of their art
isnt just fair for people who make art for them to earn a living out of it? And isnt unfair for AI to take that away from people? Like Solar Sands also said there will be people who really appreciate art who will support pure human creation and traditional art will not die, it must and should be.
I find the likelihood of ai replacing artists very small. There are already programs that can detect ai text, soon there will be some for ai images if there isn't already. Plus I think laws will be made around the use of ai in art and around ai in general as this technology evolves
Ai will help humanity, don't fear innovation.
@@cripplingclaustrophobia Bro’s talking like the singularity before he brutally murders you to ‘Make life better’
@@DwayneTheSquidJohnson fear of it will probably lead us to worse outcomes.
@@shadw4701 There are tools to detect AI generated images. Their principal use is to... train better AI models.
I think that we all have to come to terms with the idea that it's okay to like human art over AI art just because we do. We don't need to be more technically skilled or better, you can just like it as is.
Keep making art. Just because ai can do it “faster” doesn’t mean your efforts are futile. You are making a tactile product. Ai is confined to the digital realm. We put so much weight on digital assets because we’re constantly looking at our screen devices. All that shit will fade.. there’s a reason why the pyramids are still standing today. It’s a physical fucking object. If anything AI will push us back into the world of the handmade as we will gain real appreciation for it once again
Good thing is that art fundamentals pass from trad to digital media as well. Though mostly digital art is convenient due to its accessibility ( oil painting would cost me a liver at this point ). One medium which will not be affected heavily is definitely tattoooing, and it pays really well. Apart from doing art from yourself, which I consider undoubtful as a statement ( all should NOT stop doing what they like ), a good idea is starting to build a brand through your art. Is it a comic, an animation, a game? Slowly start developing a big project which will be your identity. Nevertheless, have a nice day!
I love art, I'm a graphic designer. And I wish all the best for artists. But we need to stop romanticizing art this much. It's just a product that we are using to manipulate our own emotions. In the future AI will be able to manipulate us successfully through pictures, ads, videos and other media. Artists and designers will lose their jobs, it's inevitable. Сapitalism and your average Joe Schmos don't care if it's done by hand or by a soulless machine.
@@l1p0v of course as a graphic designer you view art through the lens of commercialization especially with comments that reduce art down to a form of emotional manipulation. Because that’s how you graphic designers are trained to use aesthetics as a way to draw consumers into your products. Not all art has the goal to feed on your emotions or coerce you to feel a certain way. Maybe brush up on your art history and you’ll see that art has always been an integral part of human expression, language, communication, etc. Do you really think the cave painters were drawing on walls to manipulate your emotions? Nope. They were describing their livelihood and what they were experiencing in the world. But to even reduce art down to just that is shortsighted. It has many uses and many objectives depending on who’s making it. All my point is that we focus so much on digital art especially in regards to AI, but that stuff isnt going to last because of the ephemeral nature of computerized data itself. It’s almost pointless to invest so much time and energy into it because of that.. I think people will start to realize that if they want their work to stand the test of time they should turn to the handmade as that’s what art has historically always been and for good reason. A well made object can be preserved and/or withstand the nature of the world. AI will not make a lasting impact as the majority of it will disappear once your screens are turned off. Once computers become obsolete, and I’m very certain that is a real possibility, then all digital art is gone with it.
@@analogies I needed to generalize less. Sure, not all art is commercial and not every artist/designer will be unemployed.
But the way things are going, society is about to go through big changes. Few will stop to sit down and think about a legacy of our current art that we're leaving for future generations. Until humans figure out how to use AI and other up-and-coming technologies for good, artists gonna focus on how to have enough money to buy food and pay rent.
@@l1p0v the economic landscape for art is always changing and shifting; it’s never on stable ground. Artists have needed to find new avenues to make ends meet many many times throughout history. The important thing is for artists to continue making art they truly believe in. Many artists are feeling dissuaded by the emergence of AI art, and there are definitely many things to worry about I don’t blame them, but it should never be the reason an artist gives up making their work. Even if all the consumers of the world care about is that ai overproduced slop, it should not matter one bit. Making art is still a valid and valuable thing even if only the person who likes it is the person who made it. Never give it up.. it’s the most human thing a person can do
what really annoys me is the number of people who hear about AI art being a problem, then start thinking that its *only* art at risk.
Its to the point where many people dont like AI in general because "its coming for artists jobs"
No, its threatening almost everyones jobs, almost equally, you only HEAR about the art because its a lot more interesting to talk about, but AI also brings a plethora of its own advantages. It isnt simple, or one dimensional like that and most of the people who have a single opinion for "AI" as one thing often dont know what theyre even talking about.
Always blame capitalism. but, when AI comes, capitalism gets defended and start demanding for anarcho-primitism.
Edit: I joined UTTP
They talk a lot about art because it's the most complex form of expression to learn, some people must think that art is a gift and I don't know what happened I think these guys wanted to balance the emotions of the artists because they have this "gift" and now this gift belongs to everyone, in the end, I agree with you, art will be one of the only things that AI will steal due to the issue of subjectivity and this area will still be very consumed by humans and in other areas it will impact more and maybe the problem is to vilify it instead of thinking of it as a facilitator for doctors It is professors, engineers, all kinds of areas I wanted the question of helping the population and allowing a system that doesn't throw people out on the street, but a very useful tool for these professionals finally, it has to solve the problems that this technology will bring socially and focus on the improvements of this technology.
People have always lost jobs due to innovation.
You are typing this on a computer wich role was once fullfilled by a room of twenty people, but you wouldn't dream of going back to when we didn't have them and this goes for many more things.
I agree, as a person who will soon graduate and teach high school history, I am afraid that very soon within this decade or the next they will make AI programs that will do the teaching it self and thus make online schooling a permanent thing and thus get rid of teachers as they can have AI make class plans and set up work for the students to do. Thus, no need for human teachers. Not to mention all the other white collared and blue collared jobs that will be screwed over by AI/machines when greedy business owners replace us humans with machines just to save a couple of bucks. I predict people will become Neo-Luddite as a result of what is soon to happen (and is happening right now) and either force the government to ban AI or else start a Neo-Luddite Revolution and destroy all types of industry that uses AI technology and set up a society where is only human labor and AI machines are either limited in their use or done away with.
@@bryanfongo327 Life isn't so simple, if it was every single invention that conveniences life would be used today.
It sounds like the inherit problem is not within AI, but rather a world ran by corporations who value profits more than people. The only way that this problem is going to be solved is not by bashing AI, but rather rebuilding the system from the ground up. Something that, let’s be honest, is not happening any time soon. In the meantime artists and people in general don’t really have much they can do. I know it’s pessimistic, but it’s hard to look at it any other way.
Bingo, expect from building from the ground up, I don't think that will ever happen or that it's necessary (likely chaotic). I'm not educated enough on this subject but would love a solar sand video about it.
Exactly this
Corpos are run by people too, you know
Seeking profit is an inherent human desire
The system we have is just a result of what we are
You can tear it down again and again, but big players will emerge all the same and will build the same system
Nothing is going to change, unless we eventually let the AI itself make a better world for everyone
If you're into accelerationism, it could happen soon. If AI starts getting incredibly good incredibly quickly it could put enough pressure out that even the dumbest average person sees the solution.,
Lmfao the comment just above yours is a guy bitching about customers complaining about prices 😂😂😂
I'm now wondering if there'll be a surge in stuff like sculpture or other physical art. It'll certainly take longer for AI to get to that type of recreation, I hope.
3D printing is a thing from a while. You can already print in wax and turn it into bronze
yeah, 3d printing and advanced printers exist already so physical art isn't safe either
Return to carving marble, let's go
Dw stuff like 3D printers are so expensive to the point almost no average consumer is using it.(plus it's quite hard to use and the materials are expensive and some quite toxic) Making a robot that would create this kind of art would be FAR more expensive than commissioning someone, plus it existed for awhile and it doesn't have the impact that Ai art has by far. We're good👍
@@fenx987 and they're barely used plus it's been out for awhile and it doesn't have the impact that Ai does
I have played with AI art for about a month and I had fun with it, but then I lost all interest in it. And when I'm on Instagram's explore page, I'm surprisingly really good at seeing which art is made by AI. I think part of the reason why we enjoy real art is because we can see the beauty of the mind of the other person. There is no such connection when its AI art. It does not make you feel things to the same degree as real art does.
It's less impressive to see what a robot can do as opposed to a human.
AI isn't your average technological shift, it is a net negative for humans to develop AI. Even someone as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins(RIP) didn't like AI and told us about the inevitable disaster it will cause.
@@al-imranadore1182 ai has infinite potential for good as a superintelligence could increase knowledge of the world exponentially. And of course it has infinite potential for losses too.
@@k_otey All that good in AI comes at the cost of dismal human existence if not downright human extinction, rendering it ABSOLUTELY NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE OF USING IT.
Mid journeys images can be incredibly emotive. I think I t recently won some pretty big art contest in the US and nobody knew.
As a photographer, the comparison to photography is vexing to say the least. I think a lot of people who have no real experience with photography like to think of the art as just pointing in the right direction and pressing the shutter, whereas in reality it is the cumulative result of several different processes which can include but are not limited to editing, lighting, and set building. I know 99% of viewers probably aren’t thinking about the analogy through that kind of lens, but since the video covers the idea of your art losing value or respect, it hurt me a little 😭.
Photography is still primarily lazy, but you can create a setting yourself to have an active part in the work. Otherwise, you're just pressing a button and claiming that image as something you made which you didn't. It's a photo. I say that as someone who's done photography before. Sure, you may do a few touch-ups to the image but you didn't plant that tree. You didn't create that rock. You didn't build that bench. etc.
As an amateur photographer, I think it's a very apt analogy, actually.
Both photography and AI art drastically cut down the amount of work needed for some kinds of work. If you want to paint a realistic portrait, photography gets the same job done in a tiny fraction of the time and effort. If you're not very picky about the particulars of the result, so does AI.
Both photography and AI art are more complex than just clicking a button. In photography you often set up the scene. You may need to wait a long time for the right thing to happen, or to do a lot of tweaking to the scene until it's just right. In AI art you spend a lot of time trying to convince a random algorithm to do the right thing. In both cases you often process and retouch the results.
I don't think that's his message at all. He actually says that photography changed art; it didn't replace it. I feel maybe photorealistic art (like those old portraits) may have fallen out of fashion because we can easily record things now, but in terms of it as an artform, it's just different. I studied traditional art for years, but now I'm at a job that requires product shooting, and I'm shit at it. I respect photography as it is, and I think that's what SolarSands was getting at. I could be wrong though.
(not as relevant but didn't film photographers also hate when the digital camera became more accessible? you no longer had to work in a darkroom and develop film, but new challenges arose from digital photography, as you stated. it's interesting how humans can adapt)
@@Hauntaku That's not the point of photography as art and photographers don't claim to have made the subjects in their photos though. We have so many important images thanks to photographers. War photos, for example. Those photographers put themselves in danger sometimes to get those images for the rest of us to see. Sure, your regular photographer might not be doing that, but they take photos that can freeze exact moments objectively, unlike a traditional artist, who is usually subjective (which is what makes it special). I'm curious what kind of photography you did, since I find it somewhat difficult having to find the correct f stops, ISOs, setting up reflectors just right, positioning products/objects, etc. I don't think it's lazy--it's just different.
@@daleglass7349 I agree! There's a reason why not everyone with a camera is a photographer lol
As someone who wants to do art for a living, my feelings of the possibility of an art career goes back and forth, and it doesn't seem to stop. I'm not extremely “Anti-AI” (and I try to see the positive light with the technology), but I'm stumped for the most part. Who knows what companies will do with it? I mean, industries doesn't have the best rack record of treating employees good. I hope things are worked out well, not just for artist, but other industries at risk of extreme automation. I'm just scared of what I'm doing when I get to the “real world” and if I'll do something I dedicated my life towards.
I'm a hopeful realist. My hope is that artist will follow their true expression instead of settling for an (replaced) art job.
I have always considered other options because something could happen at a personal level where I wouldn't be able to make art anymore.
The AI art replacing artists simply shines light on this capitalist society we live in.
I believe it only has a bit more impact than other auto-replaced jobs because art is supposed to be a magical-human-soul expression, but now a machine is doing it.
ik what a wonderful fucking time it is to be going into graphic design at 18 years old.
Market yourself as a real human with a distinct style who doesn't use any AI. Unfortunately all art on the internet (not offline) might become suspect.
Seek out platforms that respect human made art.
Dont let the world crush you, if you do not live the life your own way you will regret it, I am an artist going to art college this year and I dont care anymore about what anyone says to me about being replaced and whatnot, AI will churn out content sludge like Marvel while passionate art will thrive in indie scene
Don't do art as a career now. You can keep it a hobby and this AI thing may pass or ... not. You come as a winner either way.
I'm an artist myself.
People are so mean lol, I have heard too many times my work is worthless and shit because they can get even better things for free and in seconds from AI, and that they will never pay me or any other artist ever again.
Some of them even say they don't need to learn how to draw, because they can get AI to do it for them, and then pretend it's their work while they don't do shit.
I'm really worried, to be honest. I had troubles selling my art even before the AI trend, people wanted my artworks to be free or were angry when it took more than one day to complete, and now it's even worse.
Most of the time I can't sell anything and I'm only being insulted and laughed at by potential customers who love AI "art" more than actual art that was made by a human from scratch.
People like these are addicted to instant gratification and AI image generation grants it.
"[...]they don't need to learn how to draw[...]" they don't want to be intellectually stimulated, challenged and this connects to the addiction to instant gratification. They let machines do the thinking from them, thinking it grants them instant talent, but it just stunts their personal growth.
This AI image craze is contributing to cultural homogenisation.
Your art has worth, even if it's just to yourself.
AI "art" is still art.
Like photography. Sure, the painters of the last century were absolutly furious that they lost their jobs to the automation of art, but the generation after them was perfectly fine with it.
@@darksidegryphon5393 Lile mass produced food, the assembly line, pre frabricazed furniture and clothings, the internet, smartphones, and photography?
Or does automation simply improve our lives leaving those behind that can not adapt to the new technological norm?
when you said "find a second source of income" it broke my heart. i knew that ai will forever change the art industry, but hearing that after watching this pretty damn smart video hit different, especially how delicately you put it.
me2,I knew it will change,but I didnt know it is way more complex than I thought
Honestly, it's heartbreaking to hear that all of our time and effort spent on practicing would simply just go to waste and that we should just find another source of income.
Kinda like once the photography or assembly line got rollin'.
@@RealCodreX photography was new form of art. people still got portraits afterwards, because they offer something different. art from an assembly line is not only low quality but also soulless and entirely pointless. when you take both thought and effort to not only learn but also produce art out of art, you're left with a product. you're not left with something that will stick with you for any amount of time, make you think about the world and life differently or help you grow. you're left with something created to make as much money as possible while subduing the brain's need for entertainment. think of new marvel movies or yknow ai art. i appreciate you letting your take be challenged. i have confidence you're smart enough to think about this more afterwards.
Personally, i tried not to worry too much about Ai tech replacing artists when it started rapidly improving a year or two ago, but the more time passes the more i'm worried about how am i gonna provide for myself when i grow up...i'm 17 rn and being a full-time artist/animator have been my dream job since childhood, but with all this Ai stuff going on i feel like very soon my dearest career path is no longer be a possible choice...i also thought "mb teaching art is secure" but with internet and ChatGPT around and with the fact that i suspect less and less people will avoid devoting themselves to drawing i feel like this is a dead end...
The only way out i see is finally creating a youtube channel becoming a full-on internet persona asap to have at least some dedicated following until its too late...
I'm extremely grateful to you for this enlightning and very thought-provoking video, watching you since some the first deviantart videos :) you never dissapoint
See, that's the thing. You're worried for your career, not your own love of making art. The problem is capitalism, not AI itself existing
@@Shashu_the_little_Voidling i'm mad about both and yes it will stop me making art
@@Shashu_the_little_Voidling i kind of agree, but if not for Ai i could've just picked smth im passionate about (drawing) and make it my full-time job, but soon with more advanced Ai capabilities its not gonna be an option. So of course im worried about my career if like i said its about drawing as a dream job and my passion for it
It's not even just artists. PLENTY of jobs are at risk right now. Sooner or later AI will catch up with Voice Acting, Music, Surgeons, Manual Labor, whatever you could think of and we'll have to reflect on our economic system. Shit, even the software engineers cynically going off about how art is a useless job or how "if your job can be easily replaced by AI it should" are in for a rude awakening.
Here are a few thoughts:
*1. Pursue a higher goal.*
Instead of hoping someone to hire you to be an animator to make their animated feature, why don't be the one who hires other people to finish *your* film? I think the reason many artists are afraid is that they just want to be employed, and work in a lower position, instead of trying to achieve a vision of their own.
I'm not comparing animators with janitors or anything, but if a janitor just wants to be a janitor for the rest of his life, I believe he should instead pursue something greater, like "I want to clean the entire earth, and make sure everything is beautiful", then make a company to achieve that dream.
*2. Companies can replace you, but you can also replace companies*
Big companies are not the only one who have access to these AIs, you also can utilize it. If they can replace their entire animation department with one AI, it seems like you can also hire an AI as your animation department. Guess who need these companies now? Nobody. You can make your own army of AIs to take the market share of these companies, and realize your vision as well.
*3. Have different sets of skills*
Just like in the video, having a diversifying sets of skills is the safest way to make sure you can make a living if nobody needs you in a certain field. Remember, you cannot force someone to give you a job, but if there's a need in the society, they'll call those who have the skills to fix the problem.
The bottom line is, we can't rely on others to keep us alive. Begging them to do so is not realistic because not everybody is very kind. Instead, having the vision, and be the one with the power to help others instead of being helped is the right way to navigate this situation.
Those are my thoughts! Thanks for reading, friend 💖
I am afraid that by the time I have grown up there will be no use in pursuing my passions. Art is what I do, creating is the reason I live. If I cannot work within art I don't know what I'm supposed to do. I'll have to study something I have no passion for, and work with that my entire life. I don't want to abondon my dream, but at this rate I'll have to.
It makes me sad, angry and scared that I might not be able create things for a living. If I do not create I do not fully live. If I do not create, I am dead to myself.
Even before AI, many artists have second job while pursuing art. You cannot create if you're starving and depending on your art to eat is the fastest way to burnout. Follow your passion and look for an existing market that your product will succeed at. Or find out a need within the market that has not been fulfilled and create a product for it.
Follow your passion until it creates more revenue than your regular job. Then, you're able to work with your passion full-time. :)
Probably not the best "cheerful" comment, but still I'll try, let me add a little bit of hope, as things are now, we still have no idea of how this technology will be applied in the industry, I mean, what the "standard will be", sure, it sounds great and have huge potential, but still most projections are just that, a guess. Things will be more clear once legislation around this is more defined, meanwhile, big companies are actually pretty careful about using this and never as a "let it do all the work". On another hand, there's also the possibility, that the Ai content get's so invasive and massive, it becomes undesirable, and "human made stuff" becomes trending, some kind of brand, at some point, who knows.
Many times some technologies promise to "replace" this or the other thing, like audio/digital books replacing printed books, digital games making physical copies disappear, 3d graphics with 2d games, 3d animation would replace 2d animation... and the list goes on, but that never happened, they just became a side thing or something else. Objectively speaking, and cost efficiency considered, it's cheaper and easier to make a pretty good looking 3d movie than it is to make a Studio Ghibli film, yet we still have both. The technology is promising, but generating a dystopia where it's' impossible to make profit from art is still just a possibility, not a certain future.
That said, I find it both enraging and hilarious, that instead of actively trying to solve real world concerns like diseases and climate change, big tech corps are more concerned about partially or completely erasing the human from creative activities (not referring to art exclusively here) while selling it as "democratizing" what was already accesible, it's just... backwards.
AI will not replace you unless your passion is to make backgrounds for visual novels or something, there are fundamental things AI cannot do because computers don't process information the same way humans do. They aren't sentient. Your art will have meaning and a lot of people will recognize that
nothing you make will ever be just like anything ever made by anyone else, human or ai, because youre you fr
@@Stervelar Thank you for writing this. It really does mean a lot, and I feel like I have a better perspective of things now
Great video. If you make a part 3, you might consider exploring how automation has historically impacted industries - like the Luddite movement. How did workers adapt? While not a perfect parallel, as AI art autonomously makes creative choices, the consequences of automation will probably be similar. My views on AI have changed significantly over the last year or so. However, I still believe AI art could usher in a creative renaissance. Some say AI art lacks originality, but I see creations that challenge that notion everyday. Like your weird train-spider thing. I still fully acknowledge that AI art is a bad thing for visual artists' livelihood. I also agree that the models should not use others' work without their permission. Once again, AI poses a very real threat to current artists' income, which is why I'm curious to know what happened during other phases of worker automation throughout history.
"AI cannot be copyrighted therefore it cannot be original" Thanks for the cyclic reasoning.
They're different kinds of automation. As CGP Grey noted, previous machines were 'mechanical muscles', which still needed human input to function. Things like AI art are 'mechanical brains' and can generate with little human inpitt
I find it interesting people will reference Luddites this way. In a way it's the best accomplishment of the pro-corporate media and education apparatus, to convince us that the Luddites were crazy people standing in the way of progress because the machines were full of satan or whatever the hell.
The reality is the Luddites were opposed to automation specifically because- well, hell, it's basically the same reason a lot of artists oppose AI. Not because Machine Bad, Ooga ooga. But because they knew damn well once the corporations could get 10 people to do the work of 100 with the assistance of automation, they'd do it without a second thought and send 90 people to the streets to die. I am not opposed to AI or AI art in the slightest, the technology is interesting and fascinating, and only getting moreso as it improves.
But people are like "Oh but it isn't that good, you'll want a real artist to make things" and it's like, are you kidding me? Do you really think that packaging companies give two shits if the stock photo person on their USB cables blister pack has 7 fingers? 99% of corporate runs on "good enough" and the bean counters have been trying to kill of creatives in their departments since spreadsheets were a thing. And whether or not you think it's important for said blister packs to have "human designed backgrounds" isn't the point: the point is *that they do currently,* at time of comment, and that could change extremely rapidly. Graphic design is a job, often an extremely thankless one in larger corpo shops, and if they can eliminate 90 designers and keep like 10 people around to correct the most glaring screwups in Stable Diffiusion's output for prompts for generic products? They'll do it in a heartbeat, and we'll have a groundswell of unemployed designers hitting the streets immediately afterward, looking for jobs that are actively being automated away.
In short: I have no issues whatsoever and in fact am quite interested in what these machines are capable of. However, it depresses and scares me to death that everyone in charge of AI, how it will be used, and the people most likely to benefit are the ones who stand to lose the least, and who have shown time and again that they will burn the world, QUITE LITERALLY, for an extra 2% bump in quarterly revenue. That's why AI scares me. Not because ChatGPT is gonna start spewing out terminators, but because the richest and most privileged among us will use it to fuck even more of us even harder with zero concern for the effects of it on our larger society.
Reminds me of when cars became a new thing and horse-drawn carriage businesses tried to get them banned/restricted.
@@kingofcards9The horses weren't paid though...
I'm a concept artist in the film industry (The Matrix, Alien), and I recently spoke on a panel at the ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency regarding AI art and its impact on artists. We were able to garner a lot of interest from not only ML experts and ethicists, but the ACLU as well, in addition to empathy from those who approached us afterwards to tell us they didn't realize how bad it was, and asked how they could help.
In regards to Corridor, a big part of the backlash from my community is the fact that it's normalizing, endorsing, and encouraging this type of thing. They literally built if off of copyrighted screenshots, and while I agree, it's a 'tech demo' of sorts, it's far more damaging than that overall. If Corridor does it, why can't I? They were extremely sloppy, especially when Jake, not long before, had an entire video from his standpoint as a lawyer discussing it. It's tone deaf at best.
For people like me specifically, one major problem is the blue sky pre-production period is disappearing. That's when artists are brought in early to tackle the issues and see where to take a film. It's a lot of artists' main bread and butter, and I regret to inform you, I have colleagues already reporting seeing loads of AI generated work on art department walls on big productions that were not produced by them. The jobs are already going.
Oh, also, just a small point regarding Photoshop not being able to create the art for you... it does now. Adobe has recently integrated a generative fill tool that will make nearly anything for you in inside your work. Things are moving fast.
Anyway, as a fan of the channel, I just wanted to thank you for shining a spotlight on the issue, because we as artists can't yell loud enough on our own, and we need allies like you to help speak for us as well. Your perspective certainly differs from mine, but I think we share similar concerns, and I appreciate your efforts here.
Keep up the great work.
> In regards to Corridor, a big part of the backlash from my community is the fact that it's normalizing, endorsing, and encouraging this type of thing.
But that is exactly what should be happening. People have to stop the constant fear mongering. The world is not black nor white. Yes some artists and programmers will lose their job because of AI, but at the same time AI allows a programmer and an artist to make a much bigger and better game with less resources than ever. Add in a jobless animator and they could even make a movie. I don't understand people who always either see Utopia or Dystopia. There are risks and chances. And constantly only looking at the bad sides is not good for mental health in general. The anxiety and fear people are getting is much worse than the actual impact of AI once you actually come to terms with it.
Corridor Crew just showcased something cool you can do with this new technology and I hope a lot more will follow suit,
@@NorthgateLP Good luck paying the bills to make a decent game, alongside promotion and marketing. You're all wearing blinders when you say that "now you can use these tools to your advantage!!1!". Also good luck, even if you made a polished game with or without AI, to promote it in the sea of "passive-income-generated content" out there. And this applies to everything related to white collar jobs.
@@NorthgateLP "people have to stop the fear mongering"
"I hope a lot more will follow suit,"
The fact you wrote everything above and don't see the disconnect of these two statements is just... So baffling, it could have been written by Chat GPT.
The fear mongering IS that people will follow suit. By the tens of thousands. And CC endorsing that is disgusting because they built their careers on appreciating the artistry, while that video encourages destroying it.
Got it?
Good.
at least in my university course, ML experts also concerns themselves in ethics. you cannot make e.g. a face recognition AI without explaining your dataset and any biases (gender, racial, etc). and the ethical concerns if used e.g. in airport security - appropriate accuracy, whether human review is still required etc. maybe this is a new direction for ML and ML education idk, either way its good that ML experts are concerning themselves about the ethics.
@@watchingperson5357 Having a CS degree, it is undeniable to use a dataset to train a model ( if I remember correct it was with classification implementations back then, like sound classification etc ), without stating its use. These companies act like this because they currently can, but it will fall over in the following years.
Great video! I'm a Visual Development artist, and I pretty much agree with everything you said here.
What really hurts to see is not AI producing decent images, it's how it further reveals that too many people couldn't give two sh**s about human labor. I don't mind so much if someone just didn't enjoy art, but to have such a high need for consuming artistic media while having such distain for the humans who make the stuff... it is awful. Not different from how too many people treat "essentail workers" as insignificant and undeserving of a living wage.
So many people are willing to act like karens over a job they know nothing about yet also be vague about the benefits of new technology. They don't even know what those benefits are, yet they're willing to slap a value that's higher than people's livelihoods as if they DO know.
This is so well said!
"to have such a high need for consuming artistic media while having such distain for the humans who make the stuff"
like people who watch every bit of marvel/star wars slop while complaining about how bad it is and how Hollywood needs to fall? like gamers who buy every $60/$70 lazy cashgrab remake or spend thousands on gachashit while simultaneously shitting on game developers? biting the hand that feeds is the defining characteristic of our current stock of mindless consumer drones. just cynical/critical enough to complain, but too addicted to stop consuming product
@@metalsludge8205 so what you’re saying is, people have a taste for things you think are trash, but they want those things to be better, rather than have something completely different that you personally think is better.
I think people often can't afford to give a shit. You can get almost the same enjoyment you need for much less, you can save money, you can get more, a healthier life. You are the most important person in your life, you will probably not even think about the consequences to other people. It's sad and should be better (UBI?).
I feel like people aren't talking about possibly the biggest factor: open source. You touch on it slightly by mentioning general public opinion/apathy. With big aiart corps, you can potentially deal with them via legislation and litigation, but that is incredibly ineffective against the vast number of normalish people doing their own thing in the wild. That's what makes this truly unstoppable, and I don't really hear many people talking about it. If you do a part 3 in this series, I would love to hear a deep level of insight from you on this aspect of things.
The big issue is that this is the latest clash between "free culture" and "permission culture" - AI art is a huge boon for the former, while there's a lot of people who are mentally in the latter that are loud and upset that they're losing.
Yeah them releasing these models to be open source felt deliberate. I always assumed that it just helped them avoid algorithmic destruction. Since now that the software is everywhere a gouvernement can't force them to destroy their only copy of thr algorithm
@@badreddinekasmi8919 It's also because Emad is very much a proponent of people individually having as much capacity for power as possible, ideologically. I've seen what he's written and he seems very much against power being centralized so it's not simply to prevent SD from being censored but for "anyone."
@@badreddinekasmi8919as an open source developer of scientific code, one important motivation to create open source code is that the code can never be appropriated by some exclusive group. It will live on, despite my personal funding/academic situation.
AI isn't your average technological shift, it is a net negative for humans to develop AI. Even someone as brilliant as Stephen Hawkins(RIP) didn't like AI and told us about the inevitable disaster it will cause.
As a pro artist I am used to 2 sets of customers: Customer 1 pays me an adequate amount of money, is polite, and usually even lets me have lots of artistic freedom. This person values me as an artist and as a person, the product is not the only thing that matters to them. Customer 2 is the type of commissioner to choose the lowest price tier, expects me to treat it like a high-caliber order, is pressuring me, constantly wants changes, tries to control every aspect of the piece, and in worst instances resorts to being fairly mean or impolite.
That second customer will, in the future, resort to AI art. There are people who see art as a means to an end (sexual pleasure, game asset, flyer, cover, dnd, insert X art product here) and there are people who love art and cherish the fact that human craft, skill and passion lie behind it (customer 1). Art, music, and writing are the things that, among language and complex communication, sets us apart from animals. It is an innate part of human existence. Expression of oneself through skill, passion, athleticism, art and other ventures is paramount to the development of one's own personality and feeling a sense of self-growth or even reason to live. I find it hard to believe that people will just suddenly stop caring about other human beings, just because it is cheaper to do so.
Another point about AI generative art and writing. If you look at pop culture, the likes of Marvel, Disney, etc,... what would be the defining property of these movies and media? They are generic. If AI made any number of Marvel movies, would you notice? Would you care? Would it matter? The amount of artistic expression a game artist or movie artist gets to experience while modeling Assassins Creed Outpost Tower Prop #389 was arguably never that high to begin with.
Ai might just generate, what is already generic. With the difference being: Instant access.
Do you crave Red Dead Redemption 3, tailored to your likes, to your interests, with your favorite actors, music, setting, and fantastic art and dialogue? Well here you go! Completely for free as well! And another one! And another one! And an- you get the idea. The mass production of, on surface level, high quality, but generic media, is impending. It will be such a mind boggling oversaturation of media that is pretty decent (but generic), that it will eventually implode, fall in on itself. Inflation. it will lose its kick, and maybe, all meaning altogether. From those shambles, people might realize that the tech-dystopia they created was never so bright to begin with.
Ai Art is instantly accessible, cheap and easy. Those properties also rob it of any real artistic meaning. Again, mentioned Customer 2 will gladly generate those pieces for themselves, but let's be real, this person hardly and rarely willingly pays an artist anyways. Art will prevail, as will writing and music. AI will surely change a lot, but it won't make humans stop being humans. Unless, of course, Skynet gets activated, then we just well... are screwed! Bottomline, I am very much against AI art, but really only because I think its fairly boring and cynic to just... accept that that is the norm now. It just takes the fun out of art to know that this album cover might be the product of someone practicing for many years, bring passion and love for their medium... or just generated. And visually indistinguishable.
Edit: What I didnt mention at all, since it's fairly uncertain what will actually happen, is regulation. Here in Europe some countries already made laws about AI. Japan followed suit recently. The US supreme court ruled AI imagery as not falling under fair use. This is an interesting but incomplete development, hence why I didn't comment on it.
I like art because it is beautiful; I don't really care about its history. Maths art is my favorite; no human hand, ever, except to pick out the procedure.
I feel strange.
@@DavidSartor0 if you like making AI art for yourself, fine. Just remember that none of it would be possible if it wasnt for people who actually put in work and passion and tears and lives and sorrows and happiness.
@@the_Googie I agree.
@@DavidSartor0 hey NPC
Most art is garbage, the reason why I'm in support of AI art is that 99% of human artists make art that looks like it's AI, the only difference will be that the AI doesn't incessantly whine.
To me
Art is about the satisfaction of finishing a piece then looking at it in awe and taking it in that you did that. You put it all the work and it’s something that you’re proud of
Something you can go look back on to inspire you once again when you’re feeling doubtful about your own skill.
As an aspiring artist, this makes me so deeply, soul-crushingly sad. I genuinely don't know what to do with my life without art.
If you passionate about making art you’ll find a way to make it work for you. Don’t let these doomers and twitter hysterics get you down.
If you love art, you don't care about what others are making.
im also a pro artist and i am also scared. That is fine. But let me ask you, what is the alternative? Live against your own nature? Artists will find a way. Yes, this will be a huge change, a huge cataclysmic event of unimaginable proportions, but humans will not stop being human, as self expression is innately human. And yes, there will also always be a means to an income for artists, it will just change its shape. Dont let the doomer mindset get to you.
As Solar said in this video, there will always be art. I think it will be very difficult for AI to muster any emotion in art as it obviously doesn't have any emotion
@@albert9248 Why does everyone seem so sure that will remain a fact? Call me crazy, but I wouldn't be surprised if AI with consciousness and feelings came to be before the end of this decade.
Always glad to hear someone level-headed and normal talk about this issue
Ikr? It's as if to convince a party, you need to be! Dang it Twitter..!🤦♂
The reason why artists create art is not and will never be only to get the end product. Practicing anatomy and learning new skills is not boring and time consuming, It is our passion and what gives us joy in life. People do knitting or pottery or any kind of craft in their free time just because the process fills them with joy. And even If you could buy a mass produced piece for a dollar, If someone sells that thing they Made themselfes for 20 bucks, there are still people who rather buy that handmade piece, then the cheap factory thing from china.
Right, but the majority of artists who do art as a job do it for people and corporations who would easily throw them out the second AI becomes just as good at a lower price, and it's not like the average consumer is gonna pick up the slack when that happens.
@@jettspyder People don't realize this, but it will end in a cultural disaster. The only reason we have nice looking things is due to artists personally deciding that their output should be of high quality. Not because of executives dictating them why and how things should look nice.
@@jettspyder Most potters and weavers used to work for big factories until those jobs were automated by computers.
I wanna see you eat and drink anatomy skills
I find the process of doing art fun but ultimately it’s the product which is what I want. I want to tell a story and if AI can do that then I will support it. This is the reason I have supported it since the GPT-2/1.5 days and still while I am scared for those affected by ai automation, I against the “revert to monke” mentality. Right now I have to rely on my own art capabilities, which are slow and while constantly improved never really good enough, right now AI programs while fantastic in some aspects almost always lack in consistency, they do well with human characters but much else and they can’t handle, but solutions will be found and I really start to question if I will ever do art in the future when AI exist. That’s for future me to decide, though I get that a lot of artists who make a living can’t freely walk away.
I think what it means to be "creative" will change drastically. Right now, you can be as imaginative as you want, but you're not "creative" until you actually put in the work to create something. AI will make it so being imaginative will be enough for most people and most purposes. It's a pretty big paradigm shift in art.
When everyone and their dogs can make AI generated image, AI generated images losses its value. It’ll be a race to the bottom, and companies who look to distinguish themselves will stay away from it like it’s a plague.
Kinda like photography and landscape painting
AI art is going to make a lot of artists give up and generations of the future not even see the point in picking up a brush. Why make art if a calculator can do it for you? We'll get nothing new, everything will just be regergitated styles we've seen before, and visuals will stagnate. I think the only human made art we'll see going forawrd are physical crafts and whatever currently existing artists decided to make despite AI. There definately will always be human artsist but who will care about them and their works? Will it be impressive? Will it be expressive? Will it matter?
This is a primary concern as an aspiring/budding artist. With AI art growing better and more accessible every day, human art will lose its value, its soul, its meaning. It's that mentality of "why bother learning to draw when AI can do it for you?" that I've already started to encounter and it stresses and alarms me. I've not considered working professionally with art, but even I am getting turned off knowing that to the average observer it will have no worth or meaning.
If AI art is everywhere in the future then any artists who do things different will stand out from the crowd and go to the top. Just look at fast fashion, young people, student still buy fast fashion often because it’s all they can afford, or they want lots of clothes, but those who wants quality will invest in better quality clothing to set them apart, and these are the people who have the money to actually pay the price of a quality pieces. I notice now more and more people I know start to buy handmade clothing, or even tailor make their formal clothes! I used to buy fast fashion but I’ve grown to really dislike the poor quality fabric, generic design and really bad sewing, so I no longer buy them and now save my money to invest in a quality wardrobe. Three will be people who like AI made art for whatever reasons , but at the same time three will be more opportunities for those who offer something very different with their art. Do what you love instead of whatever other people do, you will be able to horn your craft to a higher level and offer art to a different audience than the ones who value ai , it would be an audience that value your craft rather than quick generated images. Don’t be the sheep in a herd, be a hound.
@@rayquazadinosaur3732 A lot of ai art has astoundingly lower quality than human art and lacks many of it's traits.
This is incredibly stupid.
Did the photography ended art as a whole because people no longer painted landscapes? Did digital art stagnated teaditional art?
No.
We got a lot of new things since then!
Art became even more expressive and diverse than it was at any time in history!!
AI is simply what the photography, digital screen and the internet was to those that came before.
As an artist i feel like AI could be very helpful in generating textures or perhaps objects or vehicles that could then be used as reference for a drawing. It should not be used by corporations of by people flooding fanart hashtags taking away views from actual artists
Earning my BA in Graphic Design we were instructed by our professors to not let the computer do the design. They taught us to sketch out ideas in pencil BEFORE going to the computer. The reason was that as soon as you starting using Illustrator or Photoshop tools, those tools would drive you toward a design that would ultimately be more stale and lifeless. I'm a graphic designer, and though I'm wowed by AI art, I can see it usurping many (if not all)aspects of my job ...probably in the next 5 years.
As a computer engineer who is also interested in art, a year ago I could not foresee a future were my main hobbie Was easier to replace by a machine than anything that I had ever done before. Countless of hours learning how to draw only to make them feel worthless really.
Same here brother. CS student and part time artist. Honestly I think what people also fail to see is the mental impact AI has on artists. So many of my friends literally stopped art because AI just shattered any hopes or aspirations they had of becoming professional artists. That includes me honestly, my last piece was a year ago.
I've heard about artists falling into depression, having to go back to minimum wage jobs after finally getting some work in the art industry...etc. Hell I've seen actual big names in their respective industries just announce that they will retire from art as a job.
Not exactly worthless, as the so called "AI" is parasitic and completely dependent on humans outputting art. It will never stop being parasitic as long as the core is machine learning based. It's nothing without human art still. But on the other hand it's clearly discouraging and will ruin the jobs of those who work in corporations, as they'd be relegated to fixing AI garbage here and there to make it passable while getting paid for less. If I were an artist, I'd still draw for myself but also feel disgusted with the world at large and would stop posting my stuff on the internet. Let the world enjoy their AI trash.
As a software dev who is also interested in art. I'm disappointed that GPT hasn't replaced me yet so I can give up coding and spend more time drawing
If its a hobby you shouldn't feel like those hours were wasted, just because a machine is a better calculator than I'll ever be detract from my knowledge of math. If its a job... Ngl artists are kind of fucked
this is the same thing the crafts had to go though during the industrial revolution and many other professions during the rise of the internet.
being an artist and all, i hopped on the hating ai bandwagon at first because i mostly do digital art, but now i feel like most of the arguments have devolved and usually only end when somebody is too exhausted to keep coming up with ways to prove their point. i'm only a kid but my wish is to get some sort of graphic designing job, or even a job that involves some sort of creation. i'd settle for something as long as im making enough money to live a happy life. when ai showed up i freaked out, watched the steven zapata video, scrolled on pinterest and applauded myself for finding ai art and saying "this anime girl has 17 fingers on one hand. boo ai art." and now i just dont see the fun anymore. why be so angry at something i cant control? what can i do to improve my art and not feel that all my dreams have been taken away because computers can make art now? i enjoy lots of different arts, so if digital art is completely washed out maybe i wont be done for. thank you solar for being one of those youtubers that dont go insane and only look at one side of the argument. this might just be nonsense because i dont have to worry about jobs, taxes, and bills yet but i will never stop creating :)
I'm not a kid (finishing graphic design university) but I completely agree with you. Let's continue to create even as the world burns ❤️
@@Aleuse Where is that a mature stance? Instead of adapting we should not let companies replacing us for the sake of their profit, not our profit, they should use AI to make human lives better, not worse for the sake of their own lives (elites). This happens exactly because people accepting this instead of fighting against it.
@@CamelliaFlingert Exactly, I agree with you. Do you have any thoughts about how we could fight against it, though?
@@coyotiee7758 That's the problem, we can't, because most people in our world supporting current way of world and system and we as well don't know how to make a different, better world
Interessting. As a traditional artist I once hated on digital "art". Claiming that art on a coumputer screen is soulles and lacks real meaningfull skill.
Since almost a decade I switched from landscape painting to pixle art now.
it feels so satisfying to finally come across an individual that sees value in soft but steady counter-arguments in controversial issues, and actively condemns wrathful hatred and bullying. i absolutely despise seeing people from my own side of the fence try to brutally bash our opponents with harmful language; it makes our side seem so barbaric and unjust, and surely the other side that remains somewhat neutral and reserved will seem much more mature in comparison.
as always, absolutely wonderful video. you are always on-point and tackle every issue as deftly as you can.
Is there anywhere you've written more about this? I'd like to read more of your words.
The rationalists are usually very charitable and kind in their arguments; you probably disagree strongly with most of their opinions, though.
The best solution is to not care and make your art anyways.
the value of art is that it offers insight and perspective that only on person has. It is an expression of the self, which an AI lacks.
AI can sell the skill, but it will never sell the art.
Art is the expression of the viewer. Make your art anyways, but never assume someone else will care about it!
ah yes, just make your own arts for free. Tell that to millions of professional artists who are hired to work on art.
Please explain how I'm supposed to pay rent or buy groceries with "passion"
Problem is that the average consumer is not going to care about what AI art lacks.
@@SpoopySquid If you only make art for money then you shouldn't be making art at all
I felt extremely intimidated and anxious, when my boss proposed trying AI to save the time. My job is to create promotional materials and I have already minimized my efforts by using such tools as canva or stock photos. I feel so useless when thinking about AI and the way it constantly develops. Deep down, I wish the technology never got there, as, personally for me, as impressive as AI art is - it's faceless. I still can paint portraits of people or animals the way I see them and put as much love as I can into my creations, but such things as promotional materials or general concepts by designers are definitely going to be replaced by ai art.
Concepts are not going to be replaced as ai is thougtless and a client cant get what they want out of it
You’re making me feel anxious too. Imagine having your job slowly replaced by another lifeless machine.
i started my first year studying animation at uni this year, i'd been working for this for a decade only for immediately when starting the course ai art really started becoming a thing. i felt so defeated and i think a lot of the others were too, but i think we all just tried to ignore it. i remember sitting in a concept art class a few months ago and our lecturer was encouraging us to focus on storyboarding and comics, as ai can't do that yet. really just made me think about the reality of all this. i know art jobs aren't the only ones in trouble here, but it's stressful that thats where all the attention is. i feel sorta robbed now. why couldn't i have been born 50 years earlier? maybe i should have studied science instead.
I’m going into my first year of art school, I feel you :((
@@Techyena while my original comment was pessimistic of the future, this first year of animation school has probably been the most fun i've ever had. ig try to not think about it and just have fun! that's what i'm trying to do anyways haha. hope it goes well for you!
@sourblue3812 @Techyena its never too late to change, sunken cost fallacy. Ive been going to college for 1 year majoring in art and just recently decided to pursue engineering. and in fact ive never felt happier knowing i would not have to rely on art for a job
I've been to art school before AI exploded and most of my colleagues are not working with art.
The way I see it, even if AI does a lot of the artists jobs, it still requires human direction and decisions in order to communicate with other humans.
You're in school learning all the important fundamentals that will give you the knowledge necessary to make artistic decisions with intention and purpose. It may be that a lot of the mechanical animation process will be optimized and replaced by technology. But you as an artist still holds the vision and imagination to manipulate the technology.
Cheap jobs like those low-budget kids show animations will likely be replaced... but think about the innovative animations that have come out that looks like nothing before. Like love death and robot, spider-verse, etc. I don't believe AI can do that.
Look how the animators act and record themselves to create those animations. Most of the creative work is there. Afterwards it's hours and hours of moving the 3D puppet to create 1 to 5 seconds of work.
AI could accelerate that.
It maybe that animators who only work in betweens or have less impact in the animation will be replaced.
@@tobytowns1 im glad you found something that makes you happy! that's quite a drastic switch though, i hope it wasn't too tricky!
but for me, i'm not sure if i ever could be happy not doing art. i think for now, animation is still too tricky for ai to do well, so i'm going to stick with it. but i'm also going to focus on learning some things that aren't as common, like effects animation and creature design :3
think i was in a bad mood earlier, have regained my sense of optimism and hope for a future in art now hehehehe
Like the laws overseas for requiring advertising to show accurate depictions of food, we need laws to require content creators and companies to put disclaimers in there advertising and products if it used any amount of AI software in it, or it instantly loses its copyright or and exclusivity.
Babe wake up, new Solar Sands video dropped
I'm up I'm up
Something that feels very funny to me is that AI NEEDS a data pool to pull from in the end. If it takes over everything… who exactly is gonna make its data pool?
AI literally needs artists for it to be able to replace them properly. Or else everything AI makes will boil down to the same style and same things very quickly.
Let me tell you a small story
The chess AI model stockfish was trained with human games and human players
When it got good enough, they started training stockfish with itself
Stockfish is virtually unbeatable now. No human can beat it.
So, the thing is: When a model is good enough, it can train with data produced by the older version. Just like gpt-5 is being trained with data produced by gpt-4
@@talkysassis chess is more mathematical, though. its a statistical game, art isn't. it's got infinitely more complexities which won't allow AI to self-cannabalise. we're already seeing what happens with things like facebook bots, where the AI is just feeding off of eachother.
@@jellyloabyeah it’s really not the same as chess. Chess has an easy verifiable outcome they can optimize for. Win/loss/stalemate. Art can’t really be optimized. Everyone has different tastes so it would be very difficult.
@@talkysassis The difference there is that chess has a very specific objective: Obtaining a checkmate. Art does not have an objective in this way.
Once it becomes self sufficient it will create its own pools.
Of course there will still be artists left, do not get me wrong here.
But does the assembly line still need the carpenter?
This video is the most reasonable argument I've seen in a while. It does make me a bit anxious but also hopeful, if that's possible.
Personally, I'll keep making art no matter what. I think artists themselves are far more equipped to use the upcoming AI tools than people too focused on prompting, because having artistic sensibility is a skill too, not just knowing the technical rules of drawing and etc. But that's only if you are open minded (or desperate to keep your job).
12:43 I feel that a lot. And to me, it is surprisingly impressive how we humans can notice AI-generated images, even when displayed small. When I scroll through my Spotify releases, I often see a cover and be like "This feels a lot like AI". I can't confirm if my feelings are right, but just the fact that our mind is so good at pattern recognition, is so impressive!
28:31 This reminds me of the one video, where the creator intentionally had a typo in his title, so that people in the comments would correct him. 5mins into the video, he mentioned that and suddenly you realize that some things might look like error, but are there for a reason. To generate engagement.
Many AI images have kinda weird illumination, but it looks like that AI developers don't see this as a problem. So luckily we will still be able to tell if an image was AI-generated, at least for some of them :)
The thing is, you'll only notice the AI images that have those traits, if it looks exactly like normal art you won't even bother to check if it's AI, pretty sure there's a name for that but I forgot
There's a video that, while having to do nothing with that, had a message that really opened my mind and showed me that most of the time people on the internet don't mean what they say, they just want engagement because that gives them money and/or supports their cause. The video in question is called "Feminist for Clout" by DJ Peach Cobbler (the name is silly but I swear his videos are amazing) and in the video he shows a group of radical right wingers who created internet figures of "Feminists" and "Leftists" to garner lots of attention and engagement so people got angry with them, it doesn't have a lot to do with this case because they did it for political reasons but that's the point, you can do it for whatever you want. The moment you hate click, leave angry comments and open videos, you lose. People on the internet are tricked daily and they don't even realize
Being replaced by an Artificial Intelligence to take your job sounds like this is something that came straight out of a _Black Mirror_ episode.
"job" why are you defending capitalism. seems like all people become capitalists after hearing about AI
@@menjolno that's a lot of hooks in the water
@@menjolno Everyone has jobs, buddy. People go to work so they can earn profits for a living (food, a rent, etc.) and it's just very common thing a normal human can do. Instead of whining about capitalism, why not get a job and not wasting time picking up fights on the Internet?
People like you are the problem whose understanding of these things aren't beyond the fiction they watched online.
Or the very first Kurt Vonnegut novel.
21:23 i confidently said "Corporate Art!"
did not expect the real answer
I did too
I thought it was gonna be nft
Would love to hear about the impacts of non-art AIs. In my small industry the impact of AI generated code has been instant and massive. And it would be cool to talk about the economic and ethical impacts of more technology oriented AI tools.
it’s interesting to see how things have played out nearly a year later. from what i’ve seen ai use seems to have been lessened, but also is a bit more “normalized,” if that makes sense. you’re bound to see it in some shape or way, no matter how big or small. thankfully, it doesn’t seem that the landscape has been flipped as a whole, but it definitely is not the same as it was before. art is still thriving as generative ai is being used less for art and more for subtler, practical uses, which is probably the best outcome that could come from this. still, it’s continuing in its advances, so if that will cause it to change more and more is up to the future
We need to wait and see how the landscape teansforms once AI art will get better and catch up more wind.
Bruh you are becoming the new Vsauce with these videos and I’m all here for it
I’ll tell you art. Buying as much as you can of NVDA in 2018-2021. There was a lot of work and consideration after seeing portfolios of the best clients of Merrill, JPmorgan private bank, and wells fargo advisors for 18 years. I could be wrong but I am not.
SEC and NASD already attempted to cook me over innocent (and good advice) but everyone knows they are fundamentally pikers that walk at the bell 🔔
Amazing video. As someone who is also against training AI models with copyrighted images without consent, but at the same time an enthusiast of AI tech and tools, I find myself in a bunch of crossroads when talking about this stuff with my artist friends who are outraged by the existence of such a thing. You hit the nail on the head doing a perfect impartial video about this stuff, thank you.
IP is fake faulty concept. Always has been
AI can be fascinating BUT it's not going to replace humans. I can tell when something is ai-generated purely by the aesthetic. Ai-generated content is ugly and has no soul.
@@Hauntaku You can tell for now... most human generated art is equally ugly. It's over for artcels
@@tann_man Maybe the only art AI won't be able to generate are shitty fanart done on lined paper. /jk I do wonder if AI art will get boring over time as it won't have any new material to learn from though. idk how ai works.
@@tann_man just 2 more weeks! trust the plan...
"You can't make art if you're actually starving." Quote of the year.
find a job and then do your art in your free time
I swear you're the only one who makes sense around this whole argument, your videos help me so much understanding what the hell is even going on at this point, between the two sides screaming and yelling at each other. It's the NFT debacle all over again, but 50 times worse (and as you said, this time the outcome will make an actual impact in our society)
Wait can a robot master or even a reploid create art?
❤ Thanks for this video! I’m an environment designer & can recall when photobashing became standard. Older artists who’d been around since before Photoshop consoled me by saying, “Have u ever seen a non-artist try to photo bash?” & “Do u really miss rendering the foliage by hand?” My point is, there will always be a new tech, but it’ll work best in the hands of classically trained artists.
Unfortunately, the difference with AI image generators is that there’s so little effort by the user, & it’s unrelated to artistic skill. From what I’ve seen, the merit of results depends mostly on SHEER LUCK (bc u can prompt 5000x & only get a few usable pics) & OTHER ARTIST’S COPYRIGHTED WORK. The best images “made by AI” on social media are being produced by image-to-image generation followed by prompt-based editing. I know bc we’ve used these tools in my studio for quite a while, with our own copyrighted works & licensed stock, of course.
Ultimately, US law will likely hold that there is no copyright ownership by a user of an AI image-gen program unless they contribute sufficient artistic input to meet the authorship standard after the AI image is generated. In other words, it’ll be a similar standard as when you photo bash. You will own your epic fantasy landscape if you create it by photobashing lots of pics of organic textures, but not by pasting a collage of AI-generated fantasy landscapes.
I feel great empathy for artists who are just starting out, if professionals like me & you are drawing less. I started a mural painting business about 5mo ago, because I’ve always loved to paint big & it’s a unique field that’s in high demand & AI- resistant. My advice for working artists is to do something similarly “non-digital” or start a totally different side hustle, like construction, (wisely) stock investing, delivery, etc. My advice for artists who are in school… if you aren’t independently wealthy, this probably isn’t the safest career path. If I had kids, I’d encourage them to major in accounting, pharmacy, nursing or another area where you get a license to practice &/or you’re performing an in-person service for humans that cannot easily be automated or outsourced abroad ❤
Barely 1 AM, and solar sands is already handing out an existential crisis like candy
Yes, it is 1 AM here
Lol that's funny it's like almost 10 pm here so it's okayer
Leave it to Solar Sands to have the most based and nuanced take. With how crazy things are out there, your calm demeanor and reasonable takes are a breath of fresh air. Nice to know there's at least one adult, in this room we call the internet.
Solar Sands is an Elon simp
There are a couple videos with a similar quality, "like Hello Future Me - The AI Art Apocalypse" (very clickbait title lol), but this is still a dam good video.
@@Hauntaku
Since you didn't give an example of him being an "Elon simp," I'm just going to assume you're saying that because he didn't come down on the side of firmly railing against AI art.
@@Hauntaku el(on)aborate
Interesting that you use "based", I assume, to mean that it's grounded/lfair. It makes sense but I usually see it used online as slang for controversial/nonconformist.
moral of the story: delete twitter
I appreciate your ability to be realistic about the future of AI art and how it will be here to stay. Like you said, while it’s easy to point out flaws in current models, it’s also easy to see just how insane it is that a computer is able do what it’s done with just a text prompt.
I only do art as a hobby while I plan on working as an aerospace engineering, so while obviously I’m hoping for the best for people who make art as a job it’s safe to say I’m going to keep drawing my own content.
My best argument against its use remains pretty simple.
In an ideal world, as many people as possible would be able to live doing what they love as possible, without harming others. It's essentially a utilitarian argument.
Ai-generated images has the possibility to remove the hundreds of thousands of skilled artists' jobs, leaving them without work and for some, essentially without purpose. For many art is more or less their whole lives, and their creative work is an immense source of meaning, passion, and happiness.
Basically _no one_ goes into art for the money after all, there's both higher-paying and easier jobs out there, people do it because they love doing it. To take that ability away? It seems very wrong to me.
In that sense, I can't help but see the adaptation of this development as anything but a negative. It threatens to remove people's ability to do what they love, which as many as possible should be able to do.
In any case, great video man. Always glad to see reasonable takes on things.
I'm sure many of the preindustrial farmers would have loved to continue owning their own land and raising crops, but it too became financially untenable with tech advancements. If we treated all tech the way you describe to preserve "people doing what they love" modern society and abundance wouldn't exist. I'm afraid this will be yet another head on the chopping block, for good and ill.
@@solisglacies3183 I share your view, things like that have happened in the past too. But I think it’s tragic. It‘s sad that the ways of production that used to be more „fun“ are more and more replaced by production techniques that are more efficient, for the cost of the fun during the process. I‘m thinking of pottery. Nowadays people have to work in cold, boring factories to produce some nice plates that can be sold, instead of doing it the traditional more fun way, which nowadays is primarily a hobby … . At least pottery shows that handmade products will always have a special value and there will at least be a few people who are willing to pay a little bit more for the art 🤷♀️
I see so much concern about artists losing jobs over AI, but most of those jobs are low level factory art. Artists should be pumped for the AI revolution, instead of being paid to be a part of the process, one artist can create so much more on their own.
The fact that so many artists feel that same "what's the point?" when they go to create art because of AI advancement is upsetting to me. I will never break a 3 minute mile, write a bestseller, win a grammy, or get a nobel peace prize. The thing is, running keeps me healthier, writing calms my mind, singing brings me joy, and being peaceful prevents my untimely death. An artist will art. If one NEEDS a cash prize, a medal, their name on a top ten list or whatever it may be to create art, they are an opportunist following the path of least resistance. I make AI generated art, and I pay a monthly fee to do so. I don't do it with any idea of making my money back by somehow monetizing my art, I do it for the pleasure of taking an idea and seeing it become real(ish).
Producing images for a saturday morning cartoon designed to sell sugar bomb cereal for an hourly wage is not art, it is work.
Since your last video I've gotten my first full time job as a professional artist. Since then I've seen how helpful some of these ai tools can be. It's great for generating quick assets you need for a piece to then place and trace in a job when you cant find exactly what you need. This stuff can be worrying on a larger scale because I've also noticed it in adds more and more but for actual artistic jobs there is an application for these tools that doesn't make what we do obsolete.
Also more people want to support actual humans making art than we realize
All for using it as a tool, not for using it to replace the jobs or the artists entirely
the point is that you still need the skills to make good, impressionable artpiece and having a magical button wont instantly do that for you
every time you use AI you are agreeing to be obsolete. After all, you are replacing yourself with it.
Also, that job you mention is probably some shitty 5$ scam on a freelance site where you offer "AI services"
@@robo_t its not created to be a tool. When you retouch some image generated by AI you are agreeing to be replaced and that all it takes is for the AI to be just a bit better to replace you fully.
@@j.2512 my job is with a real company in my home town. I work in an office with real people, get paid well, and have solid benefits. My point is ai art generation as a tool has a place in a professional setting that doesn't make the artist "obsolete".
In my role, it makes the creation of the art I'm producing for customers faster and more efficient which is great when you have a ton of jobs to get done in a day. Simply using it as a tool isn't agreeing to be obsolete because it makes me better at my job in my current setting. Making me better and faster at what I'm already doing is the opposite of making me obsolete
“Art for art sake, money for god sake,” realest scentence I’ve heard in my entire life
Old french quote: l´art pour l´art !
Honestly it still blows my mind how rapidly fast AI technology grows with each second, since there’s gonna be a point where it will be impossible to find a mistake in what they make.🐱
It is mind blowing because economists and Malthusianism cannot imagine growth outside of capitalism.
@@menjolnohow old are you?
@@Vageta1999 about the average age of an anti-capitalist:
5 mouths.
@@kingofcards9 I can't tell if "5 mouths" is a pun or not. If it is, it's probably very funny.
@@kingofcards9 so they evolved to gain the trait of 5 mouthes?
There is such a spectrum of the WHAT and the WHY in art. I have been drawing since I could hold a pencil and I know artists like me work hard and practice practice practice and even when I was a kid, if I saw another kid using tracing paper, something inside me would balk a little bit at him calling himself an artist. I will always love traditional art more than what computers can do because there is some soul in it that is hard to describe. I remember the same feeling when CGI came out and still maintain that CGI is able to build a fire without the wood. I remember a fellow graphic designer in college saying "Graphic art is the prostitution of art" and I think AI is this to the Nth degree. If we're just trying to get something cool as fast as possible to make more money. But a true artist enjoys the process, the feel of a pencil on paper, the subtle nuances of his own style developing over time. AI will never stop me from doing art, but it may hinder me making money from it.
I know it might seem hard, but never stop drawing, even if you have to get another job, even if it looks like it doesn't matter, do it for your own sake, the joy of creating is something we humans need.
Solid take. You really can't say this is good, or this is bad. It just exists. I've used every kind of ai I can get my hands on. I love it, but making ethical choices is up to the user. And sometimes the temptation is pretty strong.
I guess the only light there is to this situation is that there will always be people who will appreciate real art. Artists working for big companies might not be as common in the future, but at the end of the day, werent artist always mistreated in those environments? Even when they were the only ones who could produce the artwork, i always heard stories abt them being given unrealistic deadlines and being taken for granted, especially animators. The only people who ever trully understood artists were other artists. I hope you all dont lose the motivation to create, so that we can keep the community we have and keep expanding it :)
It's gonna be 0.000000000001% of people population, if not just 0
17:26 This statement is kind of funny if you take in consideration that phtotoshop has added generative fill just a couple of days ago, so that is now literally possible.
You went from making deviantart freakshows to making some of the best video essays on youtube. Thats a glowup if ive ever seen it
The editing at 21:35 was so fucking funny. You gave me just enough time to figure out what the answer would be before hardcutting to a title card with Dark Souls music. I was literally cheering and laughing xD
9:53 they actually ended up changing that doctor who cover to have no AI art in it due to backlash, so at least some companies that try experimenting with AI art may stop using it if there’s enough complaints (also that’s the cover for a doctor who audio drama which literally got released today which is a cool lil’ coincidence)
I just want people to be honest on whether they used ai or not, especially if they are selling the art.
Yea no I got nothing, I have been somewhat part of the AI-Hate segment of the audience, while not actively shilling out people who do use it I will look at art that is AI-Generated with a less than respectful outlook. You have raised valid points and made me more aware to what this AI art could be. Thank you for that.
I still will not like AI Art. I still find it utterly terrifying of a tool and how its seeping into my daily life annoys and frightens me to no end. But at the very least I will hold it to more respect now and view it more than some "fuckers doing shit" as I had before.
Fear of unknown crap being an ass all over again.
Please go back to being fully against it as this ai cr*p is also going to impact shows, movies, books, and many other things you enjoy on a day-to-day basis.
I appreciate this honesty haha. I am afraid of AI as a graphic designer and artist, but I know there's little to do in the face of these giants. All I can hope for is a coexistence. Unfortunately, this doesn't always happen. Look at hand animation vs digital. Mainstream animated films aren't really a thing anymore (unless...?). Do we lament those animators' jobs daily? Doubtful.
I know a lot of anti-AI people say "you're only okay with it because it isn't happening to you yet" and to some extent, yes. A lot of people are just dumbasses and don't realize that AI is already being used for coding simple things and will only get better, potentially taking over tech jobs. But modern artists don't seem to realize that being replaced by tech has happened over and over in history, and we got on pretty okay thus far.
Yeah, videos like these (ones that disprove a lot of popular beliefs, and advocates for their own "enemy") help bring people back from all the radical stuff. I've seen a lot of videos where artists are freaking out calling it the worst thing ever, or AIbros crapping on artists and defending it with dumb defenses (or things that should really need to be defended).
It is really scary, and I am also similarly annoyed that I even have to go through and study images to see if they were made by AI or not.
based! fuck AI art
@@Hauntaku will AI replace generic cash grab films (eg. shitty superhero or action films)? yes. will AI ever be able to create film akin to Interstellar? probably not. I can't see AI being able to create film that really musters emotion deep down considering how emotionless AI is.
You know, being an artist in this time period is very scary, im genuinely horrified that I will be replaced and that my art will be replaced, I want to hope that this is somehow a fad, and that it’ll die out but I don’t think that’s going to happen, and that’s horrifying.
That will only be a thing if people want fake art that is souless. If no one will pay for ai art because of that then it will not be sucessful. Ai art can't be copyrighted also.
@cosmicsvids but the problem with that is how we "know" if it is "soulless" or not. The fact of the matter is most companies won't care if it's soulless or not and nobody would even be able to tell.
It's very unfortunate if you make art for corporations like advertising because no one will care if it's soulful. We already have awful corporate art that are very famous Solarsand's video previously went over
@@cosmicsvids Plenty of people have bought art for the sake of it looking good, and not because it has a soul of any kind. Why do you think we have the meme of corporate art? WikiHow art? Why do you think Thomas Kincaid's stuff is still popular despite the amount of outcry and reviews about his art being mostly soulless and for the sake of milling out shit for money? His stuff looks beautiful, but it was made for the sake of money.
It can die out, obviously not entirely but it is possible for it to lose relevance and the main thing to remain human, never give up
Ai art is like the industrial metal works vs a blacksmith. the blacksmith makes things with soul and often more prettier.. but the industrial metal works can make 50 times as much of the same product with less work required. quality might not be at the same standards, but it will evolve to the a point where it is acceptable.
Maybe in a physical sense, but I don't see too much ethical debate about the existence of a metal works.
@@grahamreece519 Because blacksmiths lost the argument centuries ago. Luddites used to be a thing.
@@daleglass7349 I'll try to look at it from a different angle: in the 21st century, the idea of NOT using industrial metal works is ludicrous. It is fundamental to our existence as a society and virtually nobody cares or thinks of it as unethical. Is this the future of the AI art debate as well?
@@grahamreece519because it displaced millions of workers
even mass produced stuff has soul, someone had to design the copied design, a cookie cutter 90s suburban house still required an architect who somewhat cared about the structure and would be appealing on its own but not in a neighborhood where every house is identical to it, the soullessness comes from the thousands of copies
I wish you touched a bit more the intentionality angle. Elements like shapes choice, composition, story telling are things I see AI art struggle a lot. I'm glad this was a path I decided to go with before AI art appeared but I still feel pretty depressed about the whole situation.
"I still feel" is blamed on AI and not capitalism.
@@menjolnoAI isn't exactly blameless, considering its sheer power allows it to heavily abuse the worst parts of capitalism.
Wonderful video. It's actually insane how just yesterday I was talking on my (digital art) stream about how glad I am to have created a RUclips channel so I can not be "just a digital illustrator" anymore and can make more things with my art, personality and more - exactly like you mentioned. AI is a tool that is here to stay and I WISH people understood it is not the enemy. The enemy is the people who use it in the "degenerate", almost criminal way of gathering thousands/millions of artworks without the artists' permission. I've had my art fed to an AI as "revenge" for calling it "not art" on Twitter (which I personally think it isn't), and that's a big part of what it is at the moment: a bunch of dudes who are thirsty for power and making creatives feel worthless and replaceable. It's a sad reality, but I hope it can evolve into something positive in the future, because it's not going anywhere.
Sorry if this sounds confusing, English is not my native language
Nah your english was perfect, dont worry about it
He talks about having this urge to scrutinize every image to see if he can tell if it's AI or not and sometimes not being able to tell or guessing wrong... And that makes me wonder if that's how boomers felt about trying to discern email scams from valid communications. Will people who were born after this technology cannot be able to tell the difference at a glance?
I think yes that “digital art” and “ai art” will evolve and diverge in unique ways
I once had someone reply to me asserting my comments were AI generated. I actually had to take a minute or so to just stare at that reply and take in its absolute lunacy.
Im coming🏢🏢✈
A likely story...
... from a bot!
Good to see you away from modding your Discord. I might be more active on your server once June is over.
@@Luh_katkat i rate this joke 9 out of 11
@@xleph2525 Uh.. who might you be?
AI art is like asking for a commission from an artist. It is bad because it is the mass production of art, like with many products, as the quantity increases the quality decreases.
This video truly changed my mind, until now I used to have a visceral reaction to AI art, but now I see that it was actually just some kind of warped jealousy. Artistic perfectionism sacarred me in multiple ways, and being enraged at AI art is just a way I found to blame something else instead of myself. I should be supporting artists and fighting for their rights instead of being enraged at pictures online, thank you solar sands.
hey thank you. I've also been really bitter about more successful artists. Thanks for this comment. A lot of people need this
@@penpendoggo good to see that people relate to my experience :)
@@p4t091so youre pro ai now 🤡
@@jxxxxx44 No. I'm still strongly anti AI, just stopped being that irrational about it.
An anti with self-awareness??
It's quite fascinating how well this video shows both sides of the arguments that take place online . I appreciate the amount of effort put into researching this topic .
At the end of the day , no one can predict what's going to happen next so we just have to learn to adapt and be reasonable with each other .
Thank you, finally someone addressed the real concern with Corridor's video, and not just went "AI is Bad!".
I think Mother's Basment video on this topic made situation even worse than it should have been.
I hope to see your fruits of labor in the future.
Its seems more like he just completely side-stepped the issue. The Corridor Crew did what most people consider to be the _most_ likely to be unethical: they took a relatively small set of images from one particular source, and fine-tuned a model to replicate that style. So is what they did unethical, or isn't it? If it's not (because they put a lot of extra work in, and let's honest, the result doesn't really have the same style as the source material, its got its own style), then what _is_ unethical?
Is doing additional work all it takes to be ethical? That's a pretty low bar.
@@APaleDot What Corridor Crew did can't be replicated by your Average AI bros,
it require a ton of knowledge and skills that only can be achieved if you're working at least 10 years in the industry.
that's how Dangerous AI can be if it was wielded by real Artists.
and Pro Artists can improve AI to its limit
your average AI bros and tech bros are stuck with a worthless Jpg that they can't utilize, other than for bragging.
i just laughed when AI bros taunting Artists and insulting them,
because they're the inferior one, taunting the superior one.
all they did was writing a couple of sentence, but they act as if what they did was harder
than learning Maya, Blender or Houdini from scratch.
for them, writing a couple of sentence for prompt is the hardest thing that they ever did in their life,
and they can't comprehend that there are people out there doing things that are harder than what they did
AI was nothing, it was dead easy compared to what the artists had to learn,
of course those AI bros didn't know, they didn't know any better, nor have any skill to understand.
they're the perfect example of Dunning Kruger, incompetent but think that they're awesome.
just recall Movies with otherworldly Jawdropping vfx, or a AAA Game that really shatter your expectation.
you guessed it, that was created by professional Artists.
that was a technical marvel. Art, Programming, and Music combined into one
Amateur can't even touch that level of sheer skills.
just give those Pro Artists an AI tools, and they'll blow those AI bros into Dust,
just like how Corridor Crew did.
even their mere Tech Demo already demolish AI Bros.
AI is just like the moment where the Titan break the wall in the Attack on Titan.
we're screwed, but the Artists also will get stronger and find the way to kill the Titan.
your skills won't leave you. it'll enhance you, make you a superhuman
I love watching art process videos. There's a certain zen kinda thing that goes on when you're watching a craftsman work, be that in paint or clay or in digital media. You don't get that with AI art; the robot's only really willing to take a prompt and then spit out a result. Craftsmanship as a performance is just not something that it does or that is even likely to be attempted by an AI. That seems to be a place where human artists will always have an advantage.
I don't understand those who say they have no sympathy for the artists who's jobs are at risk by this. I feel like those that don't care already have a negative view of artists , and that's a shame. Regardless of how you feel, some people are artists because it may be the only job that is accessible to them for various reasons. Not everyone can simply adapt to something new. This goes for every industry at risk for other reasons. Programmer's are at risk for example. If you believe that a person who can't quickly drop everything, all their dreams and their passions, is useless then I don't know how to reason with that. We're all only human. We all need time to change, and to be honest i dont think art should HAVE to change just because some big companies want to make money. Art is so many things and those that say it isnt necessary i think are missing the point. People should be making art. Anyone who is saying good riddance is giving those in power even more control. The people and companies in power are not loyal to anyone but themselves. Anyone who supports them will be left behind eventually.
I remember the whole corridor digital thing, i ended up discussing it with friends and even left my own take, and brought up how the whole film was one of the best popular case of AI animation honestly. Advertised it as AI, talked about how it was done, shown that they filmed, edited, created sounds and etc for the video and just left the animation to the 'AI'.
The biggest problem that i pointed out was, they ended up using snip bits of a animated film to intentionally try to mimic the style, *without consent* of the studio/animators that worked on said film. If they fixed that one problem their whole video wouldve been perfectly fine, either by hiring illustrators to create illustrations for the AI to learn off of and replicate, or simply finding artist who consent to their work being used for said project.
The whole controversy over their work was hugely blown out of water, and made it harder for anyone to take the whole AI problem serious, its not the fact its AI, its due to the fact it was being trained off of the work of non-consenting artist.
RIP ted kaczynski, gone when we needed him the most
He was a real one
"Photoshop don't create content by itself"
Aged like milk
This video gives recognition, support, and maybe even closure to emotions that I didn't even know I still had
I work for a ad company as freelancer and we just had a webinar over working with AI to save time and money. They said that we can better work with AI than ignoring it as it gonna prevent u from not knowing anything about it and get outgrown by it.
Great video. There are so many legitimate reasons to be critical of AI and its so frustrating to see artists clumsily insulting/making fun of AI art. The theft, the lying, the way it'll hurt smaller artists feels really really bad to see ALREADY and these concerns are only going to get worse as AI tools become more accessible and efficient.
Well, AI is incapable of stealing and lying.
And what smaller artists feel is just the realization that automation has not stopped at photography or the assembly line. They are afraid as landscape painters where once the photography took off. But unlike artists back then who invented the surreal and modern art they lack the true ambition and paddion to revolutionize it once more.
But automation has made our lifes betrer in the end. Mass produced furniture, food, clothings, ect. ... .
@@RealCodreX by this logic guns are incapable of hurting and killing lol. Absolutely braindead take
@@RealCodreX you fail to mention or engage with the idea that the automation is ONLY done through scraping millions of pictures with zero accountability in order to train models.
@@JesseBakerH Absolutly braindead take, lol. According to your logic inspiration would be theft.
And your example has proofen that you neither understand the topic and neither are willingly to actually engade with it.
As I am much more of a music artist and less so of a drawing artist, a lot of what was described here is pretty eye opening. I'm pretty unaware of how the ai landscape is with music, but I know for a fact that it's not that far behind ai art right now. I sometimes make excuses like "oh well music is harder to copy than art" or "music made by humans is more preferable than to ai generated music" but I begin to realize that it doesn't matter anymore. Although there *is* a difference between art and music, to simply use that difference as an excuse to not worry about it is a bit ignorant. I accept of what the future will look like, and although im a bit hesitant to use ai in my own works, i am a bit excited to see how it might be integrated with the already thriving artistic landscape. I'll remain optimistic about the future to come.
I've seen more musicians who are fine with AI than anything to be honest. Especially ones old enough to remember the napster wars, or who have been around to see the waves of various remix/mashup genres crop up time and time again.
if you want a good video on ai art in music I suggest looking at mic the snares one, it brought up some pretty interesting points
Thank you so much for talking about Corridor's short, I didn't get it at the time but I felt really put off by everyone slamming them, even other creators I respect and follow. As an artist I've been a little at a loss for what the future might look like for me, but their video actually gave me a bit of hope seeing it used as a collaborative tool more than a "do this" machine.
That corridor video is the reason I deleted Twitter. The discussion around it was just so toxic it felt like I couldn't escape it
As someone who uses art generators and also commissions art, I really do feel like AI Art will never fully bridge the gap to human expression, even if it'll continue to get better and better at imitation. Even after years of AI Art improving, it is still not hard to tell it apart from the rest, and while many apocalyptically say that this will change, I really don't think so, because of the technology behind it. Since there is no consciousness driving the production of the images, it will never truly lose its weird and random aspects. Of course, someone with photoshop can remedy these shortcomings, but at that point it is no longer 100% AI-made art, but rather transformative through the action of a guided human touch.
What artists should be concerned about however, are other artists who flood the market with their convincing-to-the-normal-eye fakes and companies who dont care that quality drops if the profits skyrocket. These are what will devalue an artist's work and make it hard to find jobs. I have in the past, when trying to commission art, come across grifters who attempted to pass off their Midjourney pieces as part of their portfolio, and it made me less inclined to commission art on an open forum tbh, so now I do it only through pms to select artists that I already follow. I doubt im alone in this, and, as such, it is harder to break through as an artist now, unless you have tremendous talent.
Since I'm an author, I have had to listen to the doomsday speak of people saying Chat GPT will replace writers, but again, the main problem isn't from the endless stream of mediocre text samples that this chatbot can spit out, but rather companies (like Amazon), who do nothing to prevent impersonations on their platform, such as in the case of Jane Friedman, where poorly-made impersonations done by Chat GPT were left on the site and claimed to be written by her, thus tarnishing her reputation and losing her sales.
The main issue I see right now, is laws are too slow to catch up to this burgeoning industry. I do not believe it will delete artist industries, but it will change them, just like any new tool has done in the past.
Even if the industry as a whole might be moving in the direction of AI, I do believe it is ultimately the responsibility of the people to ensure that human-made art is still valued. Even if a lot of companies (especially major ones) will find every excuse possible to underpay artists (as they have done before AI existed), I also believe there are enough people in the ecosystem that will run countermovements to make sure artists around the world don't get shafted.
There are and there will be more companies that will rise up to defend the sanctity of human-made art in video games, animation, etc. who will offer fulfilling jobs to those who need them. Why? Because amidst all the cynicism and indifference, there is goodness also. There will be many people (maybe even a majority) who take the path of least resistance, but there will always be others who take the high road in order to help others.
"there will always be others who take the high road in order to help others."
Is the "high road" communism or paying for human art? Seems like people abandon their ideology just so that they can dunk on AI
The issue with this is, to a massive sector of the artistic world, it will be impossible to do. So many people make their living in being designers for physical objects, UI, architecture, etc. How can you possibly know if the garbage bin was sketched by a real person or developed by an AI? Does anybody care? Where is the line drawn about what we all have time to check what is and isn't AI generated?
Let me put it another way: people already hate advertising. What is the advent of AI in advertising gonna do? Make people hate it... still? In a different way? Will the average consumer even know what they're looking at? The consequences of these questions are tens of thousands of jobs in the design and animation fields. Not choosing to support AI fanart is one thing, but do massive corporations really care, and who/how are we to interject?
@@menjolno dude you’re in every comments replies crying about capitalism and shit with the worst political takes
@@menjolnoartist realizes that the market for art is already saturated. “Is it I who’s out of touch with the wants of society? No it’s the market who’s wrong.”
@@menjolno I'm speaking of hiring artists. There will be always be people who will be happy to spend money to hire those who feel unappreciated. I also believe there will be a rise in sponsors with programs in place to help artists. Even if a lot of sponsors might look towards development in AI, I am optimistic that there will be a decent amount of money devoted to funding artists and art students amidst the buzz. For example, art education is still a highly lucrative industry and stands to lose money if AI overtakes the market, so I am sure things won't turn out as bad for the artist market as some people envision.
I agree that AI is way more dangerous to artist careers then most realize. I also agree fighting bait and individuals isn't helping. I find myself picking up the pencil and digital pen way less often just like you. However, I hate seeing you having lost faith in the future of the integrity of art at the same level as I have. It really does seem hopeless.
Solid part 2.
I do have one major criticism though: The last point you made, about many artists being unreasonable in how they're critiquing stuff created with the help of AI - the tone, the nonsensical arguments, the unwillingness to see 'the other side's' perspective, misses the simple fact that this anger is fueled by existential dread the likes of which is difficult to imagine.
It's easy for older, established artists to lay back and either dismiss AI art or praise its accomplishments - they're at the point in their careers where they can *afford* not to care.
In contrast, if you spent the last seven years learning to draw or 3d-sculpt at industry-level because that's the job you wanted to pursue, and the very existence of that jobmarket now seems to be threatened, it means you might have to work as cashier in a supermarket instead, and you may never again have the time, the mental energy, the youth required to achieve excellence in another field. You may be stuck doing grueling menial labor for the rest of your life even though you had the skills to add something meaningful to this world.
Of course these people are angry, to the point where it makes them irrational. They're afraid, mortified, in shock, going through an existential crisis - just as you and I will be if/when it's our turn.
Yeah I understand that. But that isn't a justification to act like a lunatic to other people. Being in a bad state of mind can help us understand bad behavior but that doesn't mean it is free from criticism.
@@SolarSands Absolutely, there are no excuses for being a hateful person. But your moral appeal to do better rings a bit hollow when you don't give the part of the story where these people's lives are in all likelihood f*d its due.
You can't bring the old pro who has nothing to lose as a positive example - people can see right through that.
You can't give helpful advice along the lines of 'you're gonna have to diversify' and leave out the harsh truths that a *lot* of artists are simply going to have to give up pursuing art as a career in any capacity and they'll have to settle for doing the thing they love as a hobby.
There's a way in which not explicitly saying out loud without being euphemistic about it how bad things really are for these people is insincere. Unless you disagree with my perspective on some fundamental level and think things aren't quite that bad (read: going to be that bad in two years tops), of course. I think the prerequisite for being listened to by the artist crowd - if you agree that their reasons for being in a state of barely concealed panic are real - is to acknowledge the reality they're faced with very explicitly and *then* point out that it's still not going to make anything better for anyone to become embittered.
I'm sorry are you purposefully being dishonest? The part of the story where people's lives and livelihood are ruined because of AI art has been the main thesis of the entire last two AI art videos. How much more explicit do I have to make it that things are on shaky ground? Do I have to make it every other sentence? You're going to latch onto the "old pro" who could obviously have plenty to lose, he likely has tons of connections in the industry, students, art youths. What about all the other people who I cited as positive examples in the replies? What about all the people who agreed with the messaging of the 'old pro's' video? Are they all also just the most secure artists in the world? That's quite a coincidence. I have acknowledged for the past hour of videos that their panic is real and is understandable, but this behavior should be discouraged. I don't go by the principle that bad behavior should not be called out if they are in a bad mental state. There are plenty of Anti-AI people who also are panicking that do not harass people, do not bully people, do not give out death threats for petty nonense. The reality they face is the same. I have given every reason for the artist crowd to listen to my perspective. The abusrd hysterics they have demonstrated is not only just abusive, but actively goes against their own interests. I am not going to pull my punches for a crowd that needs this to be explicitly spelled out.
@@SolarSands I'm not.
Look, from the fact that you say that you "don't go by the principle that bad behavior should not be called out if they are in a bad mental state", something I didn't disagree with or criticise, and your need to once again point out just how reprehensible some of the reactions we see from artists are, when that's a completely separate issue from whether your characterization of the situation artists are in is euphemistic, I think you have probably just misread the tone of my post.
I think that you're not going to reach artists with your appeal the way you have made it, and I've tried to lay out the reasons why I believe that's the case. Nothing more.