Oh yeah, don’t go bullying anyone mentioned in the video, that’S MY JOB!!!!!! To those wondering why im more harsh on ai here than in the first vid, its because the lack of self-awareness to think your glorified googled image is worthy of winning money thats lameeeee as faaaak to me. Like if you have self awareness and just generate bs for fun, i couldnt care less. Entering contests not meant for ai, selling ai commissions and scamming people is different.
I agree. Ai shouldn't be about monetary gain. At least until the stuff gets sorted with how AI art gets it's references from. I would enjoy just dicking around with it maybe having a profile pic if I like it enough. But I wouldn't claim it to be mine. It's really sad when people trick others into thinking they "made" AI the same way regular art is made.
I feel like all they thought was "wow this looks unique". Yeah it's called AI image generation, it ALL looks like that, they'll get bored once they've seen it for the millionth time.
@@moonguy456it did happen, the photo was called “Flamin-gone” taken by Astray, it was a photo of a flamingo in Aruba that was scratching itself in a way that it made it look headless. The photo won 3rd place and got the people’s Choice award in the AI competition. After he heard that the piece won, he informed the organizers that it was an actual photograph. He got disqualified the next day
Ikr. Isn’t that such a stupid concept? Human beings are meant to make art, not be stuck in a soulless job, and instead of making AIs do the soulless jobs, AI is making fucking art FOR us. It’s ludicrous and honestly so annoying.
@@TheBloxOfFruits Capitalism has fuck all to do with this. There's no system under which you get to sit around doing art all day and being a burden on everyone else.
The fact that the person who won the ai contest using an actual photo stayed humble with what they did. He has the guts to say what AI tech bros wouldn't dare to say even in their dreams. I really wish more talented artists would do things like that. Give the AI people a taste of their own medicine with cheating their way to the top.
Id rather admire bad art made by a 12yo than an AI piece by someone who doesn't even edit or paint over their generations. (Edit: when I mean "bad art made by 12yo" I mean it still has passion behind it, and that's endearing even if you know there are issues with the art. Artists can use AI and still apply passion in their work. But there is nothing to appreciate from people writing prompts and competing with actual drawn art)
i'd really rather AI was just cut from their process altogether they might "fix" it and maybe the person generating does actually have skill to work independently from it but they're still pumping out slop for the sake of it instead of investing time to make meaningful pieces people who work over AI still have weird or boring posing and expression incongruous settings or elements and no artstyle of their own (to change such core parts of the picture, they may as well just make their own piece, but saving time is the point)
@@Sandvichman. The problem is lack of any solid boundry. What counts as AI? Will me getting better saturation of the picture I took count? Drawing anything digitaly, because most of the functions in Photoshop or whatever can be considered AI? Just the generated pictures? If so, what about having text like chatGPT help you in any way? It's too large of a topic and problem for easy solution. Someone could just redraw what they generate, and what then? How can you prove it, if they did fix the typical AI problems while redrawing or tracing?
That's basically what every tech bro does for every new tech. Crypto, get rich. NFT's, get rich. AI bros are just a different flavor of tech bros. A lot of them think companies will pay them well to write prompts to generate art. Which is very delusional. since they're a different type of tech bro, they're going to ride this hype train until it inevitably crashes, as AI is expensive to maintain and companies are realizing that and pulling away. Because money is the incentive and AI lowers profits.
Even the adverts for these machines are often PROMOTING their use for deception. I saw one recently where the guy was using an image identifier to learn about birds: Only the adverts scenario was that he was LYING to his girlfriend that he knew what they were by whispering to the identifier behind her back, to impress her. Heck I think identifiers are a cool af tool to help learn about things, you didnt even need to frame this as deception. "Hey, lets ask the AI what bird this is?" But it wasnt.
@@OsirusHandle On the topic of insidious ads, I saw one that literally tried to paint AI generated imagery as this fun, wholesome thing for families to do together. There's just something inherently disgusting about seeing a mother type up some nonsense prompt based on what her very young daughter is saying instead of just... Giving the kid some crayons and letting her draw it herself. You know, that thing little kids ARE KNOWN FOR. So not only is AI being used as an excuse for non-artists to never try practicing, but it's also seemingly being used in an attempt to prevent a new generation of artists from even existing by introducing children to AI at the earliest age possible before they have a chance to discover or develop their own skills.
While I don't doubt the AI allegations on that guy, I don't trust those AI detectors either. I've had several people claim my art is AI with those. Luckily I keep all my PSD files which I can show the layers including the still existent sketch. Show your WIP's artists, as you get better you are bound to deal with this eventually.
8:40 i'm so tired of competitions only ever seeming to prize realistic art, no matter if it's fake and made with a few sentences. com on, that one made of words was much worthier imo
as someone with a cartoony art style who has entered competitions in hs: i was the only one of my peers to not get an award bc my art was never realistic. it’s sadly how art competitions are
@@stanwee It's because non Artists associate skill to realism. They don't realise that copying whether it be from life or another artists photo is just that, unless they are adding or making significant improvements to lighting and colour, it doesn't take much creative investment to replicate an image that already exists. The average art observer doesn't known any of this.
i think the best example i can think of for this, is to imagine a runner. this runner has trained for years, having good and bad days with training, hard ships, and maybe even set backs, but after all that training and hard work they are ready to run that race and win the gold!.....just for some guy who brought some high tech shoes that make him run faster to beat them.
Funny enough, I found a video on _precisely_ that topic -- Nike developed a pair of shoes with a thick heel cushion and stiff midsole which reduced the impact of running by like 4% -- which isn't strictly "running faster" but reducing the fatigue over time ("running longer", if you will). And when finish times in actual Olympic events are often decided by narrow margins or photo finishes, suddenly that 4% difference may dictate who gets a medal and who does not. The Olympic Committee responded by prescribing regulations for shoe construction.
@Nobodye56 You're the one who thinks it stops at "type a few words, get picture", which is an incorrect assumption and a complete intelligence failure on your part.
it's not even faster shoes, it's a freaking portal machine that feeds off of everyone else's hard work! You put in 0% effort, have an idea that you don't refine or brainstorm, and a machine vomits out an amalgamation of everyone else's work, then you claim you made art.
Being an ai "artist" is like saying you're a pro skater but you're on wires and a bunch of real pros are holding you steady while you tell them you're doing most of the work.
@Brandon82967 look, if you'd like to admit you're lazy with no talent and need other people who actually got off their azz and put the time and effort into getting good at something for your "art" to even exist, that's fine. You can do that. But we don't respect you.
@@Brandon82967 Potographers do basically almost all the work themselves. They choose the composition, angle and etc with their own hands. Tech bros just request what they want to the AI by typing afew words
Isn't it ironic how the music video for an album about the human experience, about death and the anxities that come with the world, is entirely AI? It pisses me off because, as a creative writer, i love PF's lyrics and themes, and even the weaker songs had an all human input. So it is just insulting to the musicians, the other contestants, and the audience to use AI, it is so disingenuous. And saying that typing keywords into an AI generator is "creative writing" is genuinely braindead. Creative writing is putting your personal experiences, characters and events into a story. If the story is bad, it at least has much more heart than what an AI can make, specially when your creative writing work is a deformed AI image. An example of this is Aphex's video for Come To Daddy, it is a wonderfully bizzare video, but it is human. Human bizareness is leagues better than AI beauty, because our art has that fragment of us inside of it. But yeah, that was my rant, great video as always Wowza! #TeamGilmour
What's actually braindead, is mangling definition of "creative" to what you want it to be. Getting stupid AI to do what you want takes some imagination, while how the fuck did you even connect personal stuff to creativity.
@@blueblaze27 yeah maybe that wasnt the best example, but his other musoc videos, mostly with chris cunningham are completely non AI, and they are amazing.
Related to the Pink Floyd contest and musicians using AI art: One of my favourite bands recently announced they were releasing a new album this year. I was so excited, and I saw their album cover and I thought it was so cool and went looking for the artist. But then, I learned that it was AI generated (now that I look at it, there a few weird things about the image), and I was just so disappointed. The lead singer of the band says that he was just scrolling on instagram and liked the image and wanted to use it (which is true, the ai image comes from another account, it wasn't generated by the band thankfully). But I don't understand, because if he was set on using that image specifically, he could have paid a real artist to draw something inspired by the AI image!.... And I know he can afford to pay a real artist and he has worked with real artists for years. And, the cherry on top is that this is a band that has strong anti-capitalism themes in their songs. I'm just extremely disappointed that a music artist would support AI that steals visual artists' work. But I've been seeing this more and more; musicians using AI. It's like they don't appreciate visual arts? and think visual artists are replaceable? I wonder how they would feel if this was happening to music and people were taking jobs from musicians to use AI music?
Since you mentioned it, AI music does in fact exist, but it is so horribly basic that only a small fraction of people actually like it. It gets put on Spotify and other music streaming services typically under generic names like "Music for Studying" or "Music for Relaxing". It's really boring baseline stuff, and if a real musician had made it people would probably trash them for having out no effort in.
its not working well though. it takes thousands of hours to get good at art and even then they cant make a good animation in a short length of time. This limits the scope of projects and makes it hard for busy people to learn how to make art. AI changes that
When people are like “ai let’s people without for drawing talent express their artistic ideas” but just learn man there are so many tutorials out there, it just takes some dedication
Even if you want to use AI for art, you will still need experience as an artist to actually make anything good with it. That's why most AI stuff you see still suck. Passionless art will always lack soul, as cheesy as it sounds
That and AI takes away the majority of creative choices someone could make if they just learned. Non-artists don’t realize that art isn’t just about subject and style. It’s also about line, light, color palette, shapes, the list goes on. But they don’t even learn what they’re missing.
Fun fact: AI art checkers have an absurd amount of false positives because all AI art is based on other existing art, so if you draw anything even remotely similar to the style of AI, you'll get a 99.9% positive even if you fully drew it by hand. Yay!
Another Fun Fact: AI Bros flooded the internet with so many AI Images that they started cannibilazing themselves bc they "steal" AI Images accidentally to generate AI Images, making them worse over time without intervention
@@zema9401 as much as id like to believe it, there has been multiple research coming out stating the opposite, microsoft's generative ai actually made better results while its dataset is majorly consisted of ai images, you could avoid the collapse of the model by simply including few "real" images on top of dozens of ai images.
We need an art movement where artists create a very specific style and not allow a single piece to be posted without going through one of those anti ai generator filters that makes the image unusable. Therefore an unreplicatable aesthetic which the ai bros can only replicate if they learn how to make themself manually in order to get clean pics to train on, which we know is their weakness.
@randomtinypotatocried serious? That's another level of stupidity. If they think ai art is just as valid then why are they trying to trick people into thinking it's real. That's basically a confession that they know their "creations" are worthless if people know how it's made.
OH YEAH! I remember seeing the one story about the real photo submission into that ai art contest a while back and wasn’t expecting to see it again today! I think it’s hilarious and if he ever feels bad about it I hope it doesn’t stay don’t because they’re no shame in tricking those who think art and photography can be mimicked….. Also TY for drawing my girl Cassie! She’s adorable!! (I’m mace, hi :] )
It might work if you send them directly the sheet of paper or the canvas, but not with a photo of the piece 😅 But yeah, it would solve a lot of things!
17:00 my take is that if you want to make an image... dont rely on a computer cobbling it together for you. Just draw it. It wont be good. But that's ok. You want to express yourself. That's the point. It doesnt need to look like it does in your head, heck, what makes you think the AI will do that? Just do your best. And that's all it is. It doesnt have to be perfect.
@@Brandon82967 Why do you need to get good? And time? We all have the same 24 hours in a day, if you want to spend 8 of those hours doomscrolling you cant complain that you dont have the time for art. I just finished Steal Like an Artist by Austin Kleon, one of the things that was mentioned near the end is that it is often what artists leave out that is the most interesting. What does AI leave out? Nothing. If it leaves anything out its due to a random number, not a concept. Look, im not saying AI image generation has no uses whatsoever, but to act like it replaces artistry is just... factually incorrect. A real artist wont be satisfied with the raw output, because they didnt make it.
@@Brandon82967 Why do sometimes very bad art get popular? That's exactly why. It doesn't have to look aesthetically pleasing to be good. Sometimes art looking too realistic can even make it uglier. Bad art is great because it's still art. AI? That's not art, that's just a collage, a computer-made image. That's not art at all.
You always make such cozy and entertaining videos, I hope you get a lot more traction in the future. Your voice is easy to listen to and your artstyle is cute. Keep up the good work :)
I remember going to an art gallery and seeing a massive room full of person sized human skulls, it left me speechless and even the memory of it still does now. In the next room they had a video detailing the process behind the skulls and the massive amount of effort used to create them all (there were a lot) just made it that much more impactful. Sure if someone spent years creating enough artworks from their own skills and brains, coded their own neural network, fed that all the artworks they had spent years making themselves just for this project to the neural network to generate one image for a statement that would leave an impact but I wonder if it would have been anywhere near comparable to the room of giant skulls
I found out today that in Poland there was an artistic competition for a mascot (Skiing and other sports) and the winner was the work clearly made in AI, when they found out, they withdrew this fact, so well, Poland is everyday life
I believe that Żabka's poster competition's winner was also made by AI. While I don't have definitive proof, it has so many mistakes it's hard to believe it was made by a competent graphic artist.
I just spent 20 minutes watching funny raccoon that appeared in my recommended explain AI imagery in art contests... And I can safely say it was worth every second. I like this funny raccoon
@@berrymint6384 I dont like the AI bros either, but sorry to break it to you, the companies have long been replacing artists and graphics designers before generative ai existed. Ai is just the new symptom. Before they used soulless paid templates instead of hiring a designer, especially in web design.
In a way, I petty AI art defenders because they sound like they want to have a skill and be good at something, but they haven’t discovered what it is and use AI art as coping.
Nah, I have enough skills as it is already in coding, software design, game design, running ttrpg campaign that my players love along with writing entire worlds for them. I don't want to waste time making pretty pictures when I can just ask an AI to make them for me.
This reminds me too much of a recent scandel that went around the Warhammer scene not long ago. For context, Games Workshop, the creators of Warhammer and all it's spinoff miniature games, hosts a painting contest each year called the Golden Demon. There's a bunch of different categories you can enter in, a lot of super well painted pieces are put on display, and even the pieces that don't win are still amazing works of art. One of the categories is dioramas, and they're one of the biggest draws of the entire contest, and one lucky person in the diorama category will win The Slayer Sword, which is an actual sword, for the best diorama. The winner of the sword this year was a guy named Niel Hollis, who's model diorama was a really nice space elf guy riding a dinosaur, standing on a nice rocky plinth base with a paper backdrop of a jungle behind him. But then people started to take a look at the paper backdrop, and noticed it looked weird. Turns out it was AI generated, and it sparked a big controversy. Even though the focus is the model, it does feel a bit like cheating to have part of your piece be AI, like you couldn't even use a stock photo of a jungle.
it sincerely bothers me when people say 'image generation gives unskilled people the ability to do art' so fucking much YOU CAN DO ART YOU CAN DO ART *YOU CAN DO ART YOU CAN DO ART* RIGHT NOW, you can do art, everybody, literally everybody without limit on their abilities or skill, *CAN DO ART* 'oh but it doesn't look as high fidelity as i want' yeah join the fkn club, you will never get rid of that at any stage in your artistic journey to suggest that the fidelity and craftsmanship of art is the real barrier between non-artists and artists is so fucking wrong and twisted and it makes me so fucking angry and sad, because you literally can do art and it will be precisely as valuable as any other artist's work so long as it comes from something real inside of you what you're REALLY saying is 'now i, as an unskilled artist, can trick people into paying me money for images i generated' which is so fkn pathetic and corruptive to art as a human concept (as distinguished from its efficacy in generating capital which, shocker, was the real problem the whole time)
even the names 'ai art' and 'ai artists' are disrespectful to the concept of art and artists as a whole. 100% agree that the argument you mentioned is invalid and just really fucking stupid. if you want to make art so much, pick up a pencil and learn. it might take time, but i can guarantee that whatever they produce will look infinitely better than artificial slop. i'm also much more willing to support a technically average piece of human art than a pretty-looking ai image.
@@love--dive yeah that makes total sense, though i personally wouldn't even ask somebody to 'learn' how to do art i consider it *innately doable* as is, when i say 'you can do art' i mean that every person is intrinsically artistic, and that it is valuable regardless of their mastery of any given craft--same as you said with 'i'm also much more willing to support a technically average piece of human art than a pretty-looking ai image'
AI Art should get you immediately disqualified and never be allowed to enter another competition ever again that's how bad of a punishment these jerks deserve..
That's why I don't bother with contests of any kind. I don't have anything to prove to anyone and the only reason I'd even consider participating in one is if winning it would give me prestige and would be actually beneficial for me. There's always going to be someone better than me, even if limited to just humans, so why bother comparing your art to some machine?
I've been lately getting into making weird art after years of doing more realistic work. It's been kinda freeing. I hate the fact tech companies are trying so hard to have AI replace artists just to appease the shareholders
I swear the only reason I would see people supporting AI art is if they aren't a artist or they just want to make money. I do not see any in-between because there is none.
Wild guess, it maybe the person making these submissions pulled a Dr. Frankenstein and stitched together other people’s art, then passed it through an AI filter? That might explain some of the oddities.
I can dislike an artist, a very specific artist who made the chicago bean and is basically a sellout. I don't like his art, it is superficial and serves the purpose of "rich people art that means mostly nothing" but still, it has 100% more heart than AI images and 200% more effort, this is really telling because this artist in specific seems to hate the general concept of art, a free thing everyone can do.
its not free. it takes thousands of hours to get good at it, which prevents busy people from learning. that's why people say AI democratizes art. also if its so soulless, how did it win so many competitions? even the flamingo photo got third place, so two AI images beat it
@@Brandon82967 AI doesn't "democratize" art. The machine is doing all or most of the work. If someone commissions a painting from me, they aren't considered the artist- I am. AI "prompters" are just taking credit for something their machine made. It's incredibly disingenuous. And frankly, prompters seem to know this because they often lie about using AI. There's nothing impressive about using an AI program.
@@thenewapelles6448so are they photographers artists? The camera does all the work after all And I think it’s fair to hide if you use AI since they’ll get harassed about it so often
Its funny because nobody could enter an art contest by commissioning an art piece from somebody else and then passing it as their own. So why does AI images count. The people didnt make the AI pictures they just asked the AI to make it. If you go to mcdonalds and order a big mac you cant say you made it
The thing Ive noticed about AI is not that the technology itself is abusive, but that it reflects the dominantly abusive uses we have for it by design because our economic system froths at the mouth to abuse anything that's unregulated for profit.
If a person who uses AI to create images by giving it prompts is called an "AI Artist" Then a person who uses Humans to create images by telling them what they want them to make should be called a "Human Artist".
@@love--dive I disagree Tbh. I don't think AI creations are on the same level as the skills to draw sculpt etc. but to say using ai takes no skill at all would be a lie. People act as if it's "Just writing a prompt", but if you try using ai for anything more precise than "generic tree" the AI will constantly refuse to follow the orders unless you construct the words properly. Although I do not see a lot of applications for Image AI other than: Memes; Certain concept arts; Placeholder graphics; and I believe it can be justified to use it for small scale free projects, like it was used for images in the game Frosttrain.
I remember that card! Isn't it from the very first pokemon cards ever made? Also I honestly can't remember if I had the Charizard card or not. I feel like I did, but I don't remember.
WOOW are you from Latvia by any chance? The Sub Scriptum- Mūsu Vasara is in latvian. The country is too small for animated commissions from there to be common.🤔 Also this makes me very happy that something from my country was included😍
I have drawn stuff since I was a kid, however I've never seriously attempted to to learn how to draw. That changed thanks to AI, actually. I recently bought a drawing tablet and I'm starting a free drawing course with the objective of actually learning how to draw stuff I like in a way that makes them justice, and it's all because around two or three months ago I got into AI image generation. I've always been generally negative towards AI generation, but somehow I found a Telegram bot that allowed me to make furry AI images. And I GOBBLED. THAT. SH*T. UP. I was generating pictures of my favorite characters one after the other, not noticing the imperfections at first, staying up at night generating them and sharing them to an AI group. I even bought a GPU to generate images locally. Eventually I started to notice the imperfections of AI images, and started spending more and more time attempting to fix the small details that I did absolutely notice and was uncomfortable with. Eventually I realized that I was spending up to three hours on a single image, and by that point I was like "Why am I even doing this? I'd be better off actually learning to draw digitally." And that's how I ended up buying a drawing tablet and decided to learn how to draw. I still haven't done any drawings with my new tablet but I hope that eventually, I can make art at the level that I was just merely emulating with AI.
No one is taking away your hobby. No one is going to stop you from drawing. You people are butthurt because you will lose easy money, it was never about the hobby.
@ fym?? This isn’t just “about money”. Sure, artists are afraid of losing the jobs they genuinely love that shouldn’t even be replaced in the first place, but it’s not just that - AI is also stealing our art and creative ideas, creating mush out of it. AI is profiting off of artists who even draw for FUN; it’s basically ruining the creative industry. Even if you don’t profit off your work, AI can and will steal from it.
My mother creates ai chatbots and images. It's scary, I'm happy shes happy with her hobby but it just makes me uncomfy. I want to go back to pregnant obama kissing sonic, real art. But im afraid drawing our opposers pregnant wont work for long, if ai learns that too...
AI is not a bad thing in it of itself. Its jsut the ethics and were is placed that is bad. But with the proper rights and respect AND organization AI can be the innovative tool that AI bros claim it to be
@@fabiofanf3e813Yeah ai is a tool, it's a neutral force. It's unfortunate in the hands of selfish individuals that want to steal artists work or make photos/videos of strangers. It's a neutral tool wielded by a negative group
it can be visually appealing, definitely, but it's not art in any form of the word. art is literally defined as "the expression of human creative skill and imagination", of which ai possesses neither. it shouldn't be entered into art competitions, let alone win them.
@@love--dive then it sounds like a outdated definition because it was from a time humans were believed to be the only one's that could make art. seriosly words are not inmutable things, they change (for better or worse)
@@Joyscp999 “art” is not one of those words. unlike many words, art describes a concept rather than a tangible object or quality, which is in fact immutable.
The Pink floyd music videos remind me of Starset's music video for the song degenerate. With that song and music video being about this very topic, and similar ones. But instead of random images. They hired artists make strange and surreal art then sent it the an ai thing to animate it. It's SUPER cursed looking, but in a way I can appreciate for it's message.
HOLY SHIT WOWZA DOG LIKES PINK FLOYD LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 🤘🤘🤘 Edit: personally I like both waters and gilmour, waters is an excellent writer, composer and bassist, but he really was in the wrong with his egoistical behavior towards fans and bandmates. One of my fav PF albums is WYWH because all of the band is in stunning synergy. Animals and the Wall are very good, but the final cut has a lot of flaws, but so do the gilmour albums. So I would choose Richard Wright
I kinda appreciate you bringing up how people have treated art recently. It feels like the modern branding route where artists can make slop (like the lights) yet it gains value because their name is next to it. That’s why I’m not shocked AI art is becoming a thing because it’s basically the same thing. If stacking 12 buckets of sand is art, then why not typing “sandcastle” on a computer?
I like the concept of modern computer models as a technology, How it is used though, oof. Its like inventing fire and the first though its "how to use it for warcrimes" instead of "how to cook food". Not saying that AI is like fire, way less important. I think we should call it "AI image generation", since no art is involved in basic prompting. I think that AI image generation could be art, either in the Marcel Duchamp interpretation, where everything is art if it is presented as such, with an underlying story to tell. Or it can be art if it is processed, a part of something bigger or with a unique spin on it. If someone where to set out to make an artwork deliberately random, by training a model on all AI images found on the internet for example, and then training a new model on its output, etc. the unique means to getting there and the story surrounding it could be made into a work of art. TLDR: AI image gen is not art, however it is a tool that could be used elsewhere.
i hope this new rise in AI ""art"" will eventually lead to even more creativity around the world, not directly from the AI, but in spite of it. so many talented artists are discouraged right now by AI gen "art" and it hurts (i myself am also an artist and i've nearly given up on my career), but its a fact that AI will never replace human creativity. everyone will get tired of the same AI slop over and over and inevitably seek out new types of art! now that AI can generate fully detailed pieces by copying existing creator's work, all we can do is try our best to protect our artwork from being fed into the AI
As an artist it has taught me INTENSE disdain for my fellow human. I agree with you and hope it'll lead to better things but I seriously didn't know what levels of dripping, vile disgust I could feel for other random people until this shit came along. There's a lot of people in the world that don't deserve to see any art or enjoy games or movies in the first place, I'll leave it at that.
@@0plush absolutely same for me, ive been enraged seeing the way people brush off concerns with "let people have fun" way. its hard not to get mad at these people!! i want to try to give some hope to artists seeing this, but its so difficult when its so out of our control. like..even though its fascinating how far technology has come, that will never excuse stealing others work!! its so devastating how many people will contribute to feeding the AI on purpose despite knowing how bad this will be for artists. i hope someday more people will realize this before its too late, but it doesn't seem like us artists on a good path right now 😔 praying for some kind of artistic renaissance lmao..or just for more people to open their eyes at least
@@himbofrog just one question, what is preventing people from doing art beyond just, wanting to get paid?because you sound like that really is the only reason for doing art, for the job. which is not that bad but if you can only do art for the job and not just do art for doing art, then that sounds strange for me. yeah you are in all your life decisions to create art and sell it for money, still, what prevents you from just creating art?
Makes you wonder what the end-goal for this is, several generations in the future. A complete rejection of Art as a concept? The same images recycled for centuries with anything different being censored to prevent damage to the algorithms? Maybe even future critics claiming that Art didn't really exist until we had AI? It'd make for a good dystopian show but I wouldn't want it to actually happen.
I don’t think it matters that AI art doesn’t technically have an artist. Art is just anything made by humans to get a reaction. “Fountain” 1917 was made on a factory line, no different than thousands of other urinals. “Fountain” is art because of the context in which its viewed. If AI generated images are intended to get a reaction, then they are art. AI art has inspired massive reactions inside and outside the art community. It doesn’t matter what you or I think, AI artwork is the most influential art form right now.
That’s a good point as far as conceptual art goes though I’d argue the specific examples I discussed are influential in the most shallow way. Like I said in the video, seemingly the most interesting thing about AI is that it’s AI, I don’t really see people ever discuss what is beyond that. (At least at the moment) If the artists bothered to put it in more interesting concepts, I would enjoy it a lot more, as there are plenty conceptual artists who do similar things and create interesting commentary. I would find it pretty lame if people displayed basic ready-mades in skill-based sculpture competitions. tbh “fountain” being displayed in a contest was literally just a dadaist prank. Duchamp was a very mysterious character with interesting ideas but I doubt he took himself as seriously as the conceptual artists who came after him.
As someone who likes drawing (I wouldn’t call myself a full on artist) it gives me complete whiplash seeing the camera being the instrument of the human voice this time around, considering that before it’s own invention created a similar crisis to what Gen ai is doing now.
Just a heads up: The Build Mode music track used towards the end of this video originates from the original The Sims base game, not The Sims 2 as stated in this video's description. That said, The Sims 2 Seasons Expansion Pack _did_ bring back The Sims Build Mode tracks, along with proper titles. (The track used in this video being titled Celestial Bungalow.) 🙂 Based taste by the way, I bloody _love_ the Build Mode tracks of The Sims! 🧡
this feels sooo frustating tbh, i hate how they think they're actual artists just because they can make a Pc generate some image AI drawings are already a huge thing to many crypto bros, and now they're trying to start "making music" because learning a instrument is oh so hard
So few people generating AI images actually think they're artists. A bunch of people say they are purely to troll this community because of how much it hyperfixates on that aspect
Team Roger! 🗿my pink floyd obsession has lessened since I was a teenager, but I'll always hold their music close to my heart. I must have listened to the wall over 100 times. Seeing all the soulless pink floyd ai art irritates me so much, especially when there are so many talented fan artists out there doing fantastic work
thanks for this video. Such good insight and humor. Coming from in between the animation field and the generative media stuff, I truly distaste the ai tech bros trying to push the "democratization of creativity" without even caring about any art whatsoever. AI slop is overwhelming all of us these years but I truly hope that your final statement comes true, that much weirder and low end art is going to get big as a counter movement!
May I add that it’s also very bad for the environment too, gen AI requires so much electricity and power resulting in electronic waste also emitting green house gasses. The only Ai that should even be here is for medical stuff. This is just wasteful 😢
Oh yeah, don’t go bullying anyone mentioned in the video, that’S MY JOB!!!!!!
To those wondering why im more harsh on ai here than in the first vid, its because the lack of self-awareness to think your glorified googled image is worthy of winning money thats lameeeee as faaaak to me. Like if you have self awareness and just generate bs for fun, i couldnt care less. Entering contests not meant for ai, selling ai commissions and scamming people is different.
I agree. Ai shouldn't be about monetary gain. At least until the stuff gets sorted with how AI art gets it's references from. I would enjoy just dicking around with it maybe having a profile pic if I like it enough. But I wouldn't claim it to be mine. It's really sad when people trick others into thinking they "made" AI the same way regular art is made.
ok.... NOT!!!
“Don’t bully anyone!” *bullies someone*
i am going to bully the shit outta ai bros idgaf
It's understandable, that Pink Floyd music video contest winner made me angry too and I'm big fan of AI
That pink floyd contest winner actually pisses me off omg.
I feel like all they thought was "wow this looks unique". Yeah it's called AI image generation, it ALL looks like that, they'll get bored once they've seen it for the millionth time.
That means that the art was extremely successful in its goal of provoking a reaction in its viewer.
I hate it damn
you know what pissed me off? That shit is still up. They're _proud_ of selecting that shit.
@@DustyHoney"art"
Ai winning art contest
"I sleep 😴"
Actual art/photo winning in an ai contest
"Sorry but you're disqualified"
This actually hurts, because it's exactly what would happen.
It actually did!!! Exactly that@@moonguy456
@@moonguy456 it did lol
@@moonguy456 Why wouldn't they be disqualified for breaking a rule?
@@moonguy456it did happen, the photo was called “Flamin-gone” taken by Astray, it was a photo of a flamingo in Aruba that was scratching itself in a way that it made it look headless. The photo won 3rd place and got the people’s Choice award in the AI competition. After he heard that the piece won, he informed the organizers that it was an actual photograph. He got disqualified the next day
ai could never make tails get trolled
yes
yes
Yes
Fr
*get’s
i remember that one quote thats kinda like "i wanted AI to do my job so i can do art, now AI does art and im stuck at my job"
Silly capitalism, Am I right? Tsk tsk tsk
Ikr. Isn’t that such a stupid concept? Human beings are meant to make art, not be stuck in a soulless job, and instead of making AIs do the soulless jobs, AI is making fucking art FOR us. It’s ludicrous and honestly so annoying.
@@TheBloxOfFruits Capitalism has fuck all to do with this. There's no system under which you get to sit around doing art all day and being a burden on everyone else.
@@chickennuggetpaw No, human beings are meant to survive and fuck and multiply.
We all gonna be working at FedEx as package handlers soon
The fact that the person who won the ai contest using an actual photo stayed humble with what they did. He has the guts to say what AI tech bros wouldn't dare to say even in their dreams.
I really wish more talented artists would do things like that. Give the AI people a taste of their own medicine with cheating their way to the top.
bro he lost and got third place, which means two AI artworks are better than a real photo
Id rather admire bad art made by a 12yo than an AI piece by someone who doesn't even edit or paint over their generations.
(Edit: when I mean "bad art made by 12yo" I mean it still has passion behind it, and that's endearing even if you know there are issues with the art. Artists can use AI and still apply passion in their work. But there is nothing to appreciate from people writing prompts and competing with actual drawn art)
i'd really rather AI was just cut from their process altogether
they might "fix" it
and maybe the person generating does actually have skill to work independently from it
but they're still pumping out slop for the sake of it instead of investing time to make meaningful pieces
people who work over AI still have weird or boring posing and expression
incongruous settings or elements
and no artstyle of their own (to change such core parts of the picture, they may as well just make their own piece, but saving time is the point)
A kindergartner’s drawing is 1000x better than any ai art
Browsing ArtFight these days just to see some actual art made by children.
@@Sandvichman. Yeah AI art just looks utterly soulless
@@Sandvichman. The problem is lack of any solid boundry. What counts as AI? Will me getting better saturation of the picture I took count? Drawing anything digitaly, because most of the functions in Photoshop or whatever can be considered AI? Just the generated pictures? If so, what about having text like chatGPT help you in any way?
It's too large of a topic and problem for easy solution. Someone could just redraw what they generate, and what then? How can you prove it, if they did fix the typical AI problems while redrawing or tracing?
Obviously I haven't even finished the video yet but I hope she mentions the one where a real artist won in an ai contest
YESS IT WAS THERE
SHEEE DID!!!
Interesting that I heard nothing about that! I feel like all news is only rage bait now.
They did, but sadly the person not only one 3rd place, but they were disqualified as well.
That hurts so much.
@@moonguy456I mean it’s an AI art contest, not a real art contest.
You can always draw them pregnant, they can not
Perfect.
now draw them giving birth 😈
Miku's advice is making few people insane
now draw them buying bread
@@asdfhsfdtehaednow draw them cutting down forests….
It is kinda telling that AI's main use currently is hustling and grifting
That's basically what every tech bro does for every new tech. Crypto, get rich. NFT's, get rich. AI bros are just a different flavor of tech bros. A lot of them think companies will pay them well to write prompts to generate art. Which is very delusional.
since they're a different type of tech bro, they're going to ride this hype train until it inevitably crashes, as AI is expensive to maintain and companies are realizing that and pulling away. Because money is the incentive and AI lowers profits.
Even the adverts for these machines are often PROMOTING their use for deception. I saw one recently where the guy was using an image identifier to learn about birds: Only the adverts scenario was that he was LYING to his girlfriend that he knew what they were by whispering to the identifier behind her back, to impress her.
Heck I think identifiers are a cool af tool to help learn about things, you didnt even need to frame this as deception. "Hey, lets ask the AI what bird this is?" But it wasnt.
@@OsirusHandle On the topic of insidious ads, I saw one that literally tried to paint AI generated imagery as this fun, wholesome thing for families to do together. There's just something inherently disgusting about seeing a mother type up some nonsense prompt based on what her very young daughter is saying instead of just... Giving the kid some crayons and letting her draw it herself. You know, that thing little kids ARE KNOWN FOR. So not only is AI being used as an excuse for non-artists to never try practicing, but it's also seemingly being used in an attempt to prevent a new generation of artists from even existing by introducing children to AI at the earliest age possible before they have a chance to discover or develop their own skills.
@@OsirusHandleI saw that one, it’s so baffling lol
@@dorkish Researchers have already made AI much cheaper. most of the money is going into research anyway, not just servicing existing demand
While I don't doubt the AI allegations on that guy, I don't trust those AI detectors either. I've had several people claim my art is AI with those. Luckily I keep all my PSD files which I can show the layers including the still existent sketch. Show your WIP's artists, as you get better you are bound to deal with this eventually.
Let's use AI to detect AI ART WOW SUCH AMAZING IDEA CONGRATULATIONS
Yea like even some famous paintings those ai checkers will claim to be ai
Wowza dawg please, wowza my dawg, for I am but a wee peasant with no wowza to my name, yet only a dawg remains in my possesion.
Is your pfp from that one square pumpkin movie?
i miss the old wowza, straight from the go wowza
@@Moxalotl12wasnt he called stanley the square pumpkin? That thing was an actual fever dream
"The only journey you went on was Midjourney" is such a raw line.
8:40 i'm so tired of competitions only ever seeming to prize realistic art, no matter if it's fake and made with a few sentences. com on, that one made of words was much worthier imo
as someone with a cartoony art style who has entered competitions in hs: i was the only one of my peers to not get an award bc my art was never realistic. it’s sadly how art competitions are
@@stanwee It's because non Artists associate skill to realism. They don't realise that copying whether it be from life or another artists photo is just that, unless they are adding or making significant improvements to lighting and colour, it doesn't take much creative investment to replicate an image that already exists.
The average art observer doesn't known any of this.
i think the best example i can think of for this, is to imagine a runner. this runner has trained for years, having good and bad days with training, hard ships, and maybe even set backs, but after all that training and hard work they are ready to run that race and win the gold!.....just for some guy who brought some high tech shoes that make him run faster to beat them.
Funny enough, I found a video on _precisely_ that topic -- Nike developed a pair of shoes with a thick heel cushion and stiff midsole which reduced the impact of running by like 4% -- which isn't strictly "running faster" but reducing the fatigue over time ("running longer", if you will). And when finish times in actual Olympic events are often decided by narrow margins or photo finishes, suddenly that 4% difference may dictate who gets a medal and who does not. The Olympic Committee responded by prescribing regulations for shoe construction.
Both people still need to run. What a great point you made. Not.
@Nobodye56 You're the one who thinks it stops at "type a few words, get picture", which is an incorrect assumption and a complete intelligence failure on your part.
it's not even faster shoes, it's a freaking portal machine that feeds off of everyone else's hard work! You put in 0% effort, have an idea that you don't refine or brainstorm, and a machine vomits out an amalgamation of everyone else's work, then you claim you made art.
Jsut Imagen this: he’s training all the time with a horse to be come a messenger, only for cars to replace him, are you gonna complain here then???
Im mad at the girl with the pearl earing contest, for the corn not winning.
They choose over a soulless no effort ai picture over a corn
Screw them
This but with the capybara one :(
Being an ai "artist" is like saying you're a pro skater but you're on wires and a bunch of real pros are holding you steady while you tell them you're doing most of the work.
its a tool like a camera. a photographer doesnt have to know how to draw to be an artist
@Brandon82967 look, if you'd like to admit you're lazy with no talent and need other people who actually got off their azz and put the time and effort into getting good at something for your "art" to even exist, that's fine. You can do that. But we don't respect you.
@@Brandon82967 Potographers do basically almost all the work themselves. They choose the composition, angle and etc with their own hands.
Tech bros just request what they want to the AI by typing afew words
@@Karo-AUTTP-UTTD AI artists can do the same with tools like control net, comfyUI, loras, IPAdapter, IC-Light, and plenty more
@@Brandon82967are you unironically defending ai image generation?
Isn't it ironic how the music video for an album about the human experience, about death and the anxities that come with the world, is entirely AI?
It pisses me off because, as a creative writer, i love PF's lyrics and themes, and even the weaker songs had an all human input. So it is just insulting to the musicians, the other contestants, and the audience to use AI, it is so disingenuous.
And saying that typing keywords into an AI generator is "creative writing" is genuinely braindead. Creative writing is putting your personal experiences, characters and events into a story. If the story is bad, it at least has much more heart than what an AI can make, specially when your creative writing work is a deformed AI image.
An example of this is Aphex's video for Come To Daddy, it is a wonderfully bizzare video, but it is human. Human bizareness is leagues better than AI beauty, because our art has that fragment of us inside of it.
But yeah, that was my rant, great video as always Wowza!
#TeamGilmour
What's actually braindead, is mangling definition of "creative" to what you want it to be.
Getting stupid AI to do what you want takes some imagination, while how the fuck did you even connect personal stuff to creativity.
@@ERRR0RR oh yeah, because if i tell the waiter what extra ingredients you want is the same as making your meal
didn't aphex's music video have ai assistants? its in the video description
@@blueblaze27 yeah maybe that wasnt the best example, but his other musoc videos, mostly with chris cunningham are completely non AI, and they are amazing.
@@IrizGMD photographers dont make their photos. cameras do. but they're still artists
6:02 Wow, AI Phihbia sure seems to be a problem 💀
amphibia
edit: googling amphibia just sent me to wondering why the furry community was trending on twitter
Related to the Pink Floyd contest and musicians using AI art:
One of my favourite bands recently announced they were releasing a new album this year. I was so excited, and I saw their album cover and I thought it was so cool and went looking for the artist. But then, I learned that it was AI generated (now that I look at it, there a few weird things about the image), and I was just so disappointed. The lead singer of the band says that he was just scrolling on instagram and liked the image and wanted to use it (which is true, the ai image comes from another account, it wasn't generated by the band thankfully). But I don't understand, because if he was set on using that image specifically, he could have paid a real artist to draw something inspired by the AI image!.... And I know he can afford to pay a real artist and he has worked with real artists for years. And, the cherry on top is that this is a band that has strong anti-capitalism themes in their songs.
I'm just extremely disappointed that a music artist would support AI that steals visual artists' work.
But I've been seeing this more and more; musicians using AI. It's like they don't appreciate visual arts? and think visual artists are replaceable? I wonder how they would feel if this was happening to music and people were taking jobs from musicians to use AI music?
@@fish-fy5sh is it The Voidz by any chance?
@@IrizGMD yeah
@@IrizGMD the voidz? yikes
That's hilliraous, because orchestrions are going to steal musician's jobs.
Since you mentioned it, AI music does in fact exist, but it is so horribly basic that only a small fraction of people actually like it. It gets put on Spotify and other music streaming services typically under generic names like "Music for Studying" or "Music for Relaxing". It's really boring baseline stuff, and if a real musician had made it people would probably trash them for having out no effort in.
Techbros will see something that’s functioning perfectly fine and go “I wonder how I can make this worse so I can call myself an “innovator””
They see dollar signs
@@l-l they see a chance at validation without effort (or just working on their insecurities lol)
its not working well though. it takes thousands of hours to get good at art and even then they cant make a good animation in a short length of time. This limits the scope of projects and makes it hard for busy people to learn how to make art. AI changes that
@@l-l AI art cant even be copyrighted lol. it's not for profit
@@spacebassist or maybe people just like making cool art
Rats > ai
Agree
Rabies virus > AI
rat sized dogs or dog sized rats
@@anomalousanimates both
🐀👍
When people are like “ai let’s people without for drawing talent express their artistic ideas” but just learn man there are so many tutorials out there, it just takes some dedication
Even if you want to use AI for art, you will still need experience as an artist to actually make anything good with it. That's why most AI stuff you see still suck. Passionless art will always lack soul, as cheesy as it sounds
The true value of art isn't the end result, not exclusively -- it's the process you use along the way.
That and AI takes away the majority of creative choices someone could make if they just learned. Non-artists don’t realize that art isn’t just about subject and style. It’s also about line, light, color palette, shapes, the list goes on. But they don’t even learn what they’re missing.
yOU LITERALLY CAN not EXPRESS PROPERLY IF you do not do it YOURSELF
(sorry caps)
fuck no. Some people can't. Just like there are some people who can never sing for shit or do other things.
Fun fact: AI art checkers have an absurd amount of false positives because all AI art is based on other existing art, so if you draw anything even remotely similar to the style of AI, you'll get a 99.9% positive even if you fully drew it by hand. Yay!
Another Fun Fact: AI Bros flooded the internet with so many AI Images that they started cannibilazing themselves bc they "steal" AI Images accidentally to generate AI Images, making them worse over time without intervention
Fun fact: I've submitted multiple AI images to these checkers and none of them worked, they're basically useless.
@@zema9401 as much as id like to believe it, there has been multiple research coming out stating the opposite, microsoft's generative ai actually made better results while its dataset is majorly consisted of ai images, you could avoid the collapse of the model by simply including few "real" images on top of dozens of ai images.
@@zema9401 not true. AI can train on AI generated data just fine as long as its filtered for quality
AI is not a style, it has ability to make ALL styles
We need an art movement where artists create a very specific style and not allow a single piece to be posted without going through one of those anti ai generator filters that makes the image unusable.
Therefore an unreplicatable aesthetic which the ai bros can only replicate if they learn how to make themself manually in order to get clean pics to train on, which we know is their weakness.
The filter pretty much dosent work. But i like the idea
Filters suck, just record a speedpaint or smth
@@P4w3Sadly AI bros are faking speed painting AI images
@randomtinypotatocried serious? That's another level of stupidity. If they think ai art is just as valid then why are they trying to trick people into thinking it's real. That's basically a confession that they know their "creations" are worthless if people know how it's made.
@@maxinefinnfoxen Because the people who are trying to trick you aren't "AI bros", they're pretending not to be. Fuckin easy answer, god damn.
OH YEAH!
I remember seeing the one story about the real photo submission into that ai art contest a while back and wasn’t expecting to see it again today!
I think it’s hilarious and if he ever feels bad about it I hope it doesn’t stay don’t because they’re no shame in tricking those who think art and photography can be mimicked…..
Also TY for drawing my girl Cassie! She’s adorable!! (I’m mace, hi :] )
it won third place lol
Hi mace
Shrimp Jesus is freaky
What if Jesus was Shrimpy and called Shrimpy Jesus
When Jesus said there would be false Christs and imitations of him, I didn’t think it would get THIS weird
now imagine scorpion poor african kid
𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓴𝔂
Funfact! One of these developers for ai art said Creative jobs shouldnt exist!
no, she said that jobs that can be automated by AI shouldn't exist so people will be freed to do other things
@@Brandon82967
What's the difference between those two
@@Brandon82967 Which is stupid
@@-Rockstar_Molty985- why
Easiest fix? Make the contest's art medium traditional art. AI bros can't lift a paintbrush to save their lives.
It might work if you send them directly the sheet of paper or the canvas, but not with a photo of the piece 😅
But yeah, it would solve a lot of things!
Or WIP requirements show work being done.
Actual painters do use AI for inspiration, actually.
@@Ramie0Cat This. Being required to send in a file showing the layers makes it literally impossible for AI to slip in.
@@Sonchikas1there’s a difference between ai art as references and submitting AI art
I have never seen a better drawing of a raccoon since Rigby from Regular Show, hope you reach 100k soon
Artists: "years of academy training wasted."
Stolen, not wasted.
Lol it's their art that's literally feeding the AI, if they stop making art the AI stagnates.
@@lespectator4962 the existing data plus synthetic data is more than enough
@@skylordianandy2644 stolen implies something was taken away
@@Brandon82967 Have you heard of the term "AI inbreeding"?
17:00 my take is that if you want to make an image... dont rely on a computer cobbling it together for you. Just draw it. It wont be good. But that's ok. You want to express yourself. That's the point. It doesnt need to look like it does in your head, heck, what makes you think the AI will do that? Just do your best. And that's all it is. It doesnt have to be perfect.
it takes thousands of hours to get good at art. busy people don't have that kind of time. that's why people say AI democratizes art
@@Brandon82967 Why do you need to get good? And time? We all have the same 24 hours in a day, if you want to spend 8 of those hours doomscrolling you cant complain that you dont have the time for art.
I just finished Steal Like an Artist by Austin Kleon, one of the things that was mentioned near the end is that it is often what artists leave out that is the most interesting.
What does AI leave out?
Nothing. If it leaves anything out its due to a random number, not a concept.
Look, im not saying AI image generation has no uses whatsoever, but to act like it replaces artistry is just... factually incorrect. A real artist wont be satisfied with the raw output, because they didnt make it.
@@Brandon82967 Why do sometimes very bad art get popular? That's exactly why. It doesn't have to look aesthetically pleasing to be good. Sometimes art looking too realistic can even make it uglier. Bad art is great because it's still art. AI? That's not art, that's just a collage, a computer-made image. That's not art at all.
Imagine somebody enters an AI art contest and wins with a human-made entry. Giant L-shaped trojan horse for tech bros.
it got third place lol
The fact that AI Art is called Art in the first place is madness.
this truly wowzas my dawgs
the wowzas fandom is going bonkers over this video
You always make such cozy and entertaining videos, I hope you get a lot more traction in the future. Your voice is easy to listen to and your artstyle is cute. Keep up the good work :)
Thank you so much, that really means a lot :)
I remember going to an art gallery and seeing a massive room full of person sized human skulls, it left me speechless and even the memory of it still does now. In the next room they had a video detailing the process behind the skulls and the massive amount of effort used to create them all (there were a lot) just made it that much more impactful. Sure if someone spent years creating enough artworks from their own skills and brains, coded their own neural network, fed that all the artworks they had spent years making themselves just for this project to the neural network to generate one image for a statement that would leave an impact but I wonder if it would have been anywhere near comparable to the room of giant skulls
Your racoon is SO CUTE, my heart can't contain the cuteness.
Whenever I see that Vemeer painting I think of the Fake Animal Crossing version with the star earring
I found out today that in Poland there was an artistic competition for a mascot (Skiing and other sports) and the winner was the work clearly made in AI, when they found out, they withdrew this fact, so well, Poland is everyday life
I’m a bit confused, did they get disqualified?
@@elizabethbilyeu3031 After people's reaction, yes, because they didn't realize it was AI, and it's funnier because the mascot won
I believe that Żabka's poster competition's winner was also made by AI. While I don't have definitive proof, it has so many mistakes it's hard to believe it was made by a competent graphic artist.
For those who want to know the name of the flamingo photograph its called : F L A M I N G O N E
2:34 RIP Shelley Duvall. Died the day before upload. I know it's unrelated, but came to my mind seeing that.
the mystery dungeon music on the pokemon segment was a cherry on top ❤️
The AI art duality:
AI is at the same time easy and accesible, but you also need mad skills to write stuff on a search bar.
my favorite piece of weird art is those 12 horses in an art gallery bc he just put them in a room and i think thats great👍
The ppl who use ai justification be like
“it’s technically an art because it takes creativity to write out the prompt!!!”
yes, a good idea is a major part of art. that's what movie/TV show directors do
I just spent 20 minutes watching funny raccoon that appeared in my recommended explain AI imagery in art contests...
And I can safely say it was worth every second.
I like this funny raccoon
AI is interesting for helping to workshop or rapidly visualize ideas. I prefer hoomanz or raccoons to do the final work though. Team Gilmour.
I have a feeling that this statement will age poorly. AI is genuinely just a tool, it doesn’t make art on its own.
it doe snot "help" it stels jobs from artists
Workplaces need to hire LIVING BEINGS to do their work
@@berrymint6384 I dont like the AI bros either, but sorry to break it to you, the companies have long been replacing artists and graphics designers before generative ai existed. Ai is just the new symptom. Before they used soulless paid templates instead of hiring a designer, especially in web design.
In a way, I petty AI art defenders because they sound like they want to have a skill and be good at something, but they haven’t discovered what it is and use AI art as coping.
Alot of those people are just grifters flocking to the new tech buzzword as a get rich quick scheme after even they realized NFTs were a sinking ship.
Nah, I have enough skills as it is already in coding, software design, game design, running ttrpg campaign that my players love along with writing entire worlds for them.
I don't want to waste time making pretty pictures when I can just ask an AI to make them for me.
This reminds me too much of a recent scandel that went around the Warhammer scene not long ago. For context, Games Workshop, the creators of Warhammer and all it's spinoff miniature games, hosts a painting contest each year called the Golden Demon. There's a bunch of different categories you can enter in, a lot of super well painted pieces are put on display, and even the pieces that don't win are still amazing works of art. One of the categories is dioramas, and they're one of the biggest draws of the entire contest, and one lucky person in the diorama category will win The Slayer Sword, which is an actual sword, for the best diorama. The winner of the sword this year was a guy named Niel Hollis, who's model diorama was a really nice space elf guy riding a dinosaur, standing on a nice rocky plinth base with a paper backdrop of a jungle behind him. But then people started to take a look at the paper backdrop, and noticed it looked weird. Turns out it was AI generated, and it sparked a big controversy. Even though the focus is the model, it does feel a bit like cheating to have part of your piece be AI, like you couldn't even use a stock photo of a jungle.
it sincerely bothers me when people say 'image generation gives unskilled people the ability to do art' so fucking much
YOU CAN DO ART YOU CAN DO ART *YOU CAN DO ART YOU CAN DO ART*
RIGHT NOW, you can do art, everybody, literally everybody without limit on their abilities or skill, *CAN DO ART*
'oh but it doesn't look as high fidelity as i want' yeah join the fkn club, you will never get rid of that at any stage in your artistic journey
to suggest that the fidelity and craftsmanship of art is the real barrier between non-artists and artists is so fucking wrong and twisted and it makes me so fucking angry and sad, because you literally can do art and it will be precisely as valuable as any other artist's work so long as it comes from something real inside of you
what you're REALLY saying is 'now i, as an unskilled artist, can trick people into paying me money for images i generated' which is so fkn pathetic and corruptive to art as a human concept (as distinguished from its efficacy in generating capital which, shocker, was the real problem the whole time)
even the names 'ai art' and 'ai artists' are disrespectful to the concept of art and artists as a whole. 100% agree that the argument you mentioned is invalid and just really fucking stupid. if you want to make art so much, pick up a pencil and learn. it might take time, but i can guarantee that whatever they produce will look infinitely better than artificial slop. i'm also much more willing to support a technically average piece of human art than a pretty-looking ai image.
@@love--dive yeah that makes total sense, though i personally wouldn't even ask somebody to 'learn' how to do art
i consider it *innately doable* as is, when i say 'you can do art' i mean that every person is intrinsically artistic, and that it is valuable regardless of their mastery of any given craft--same as you said with 'i'm also much more willing to support a technically average piece of human art than a pretty-looking ai image'
AI Art should get you immediately disqualified and never be allowed to enter another competition ever again
that's how bad of a punishment these jerks deserve..
That's why I don't bother with contests of any kind. I don't have anything to prove to anyone and the only reason I'd even consider participating in one is if winning it would give me prestige and would be actually beneficial for me.
There's always going to be someone better than me, even if limited to just humans, so why bother comparing your art to some machine?
1:49 as A kid I had a really cryptic mew card and it was so cool.
I've been lately getting into making weird art after years of doing more realistic work. It's been kinda freeing. I hate the fact tech companies are trying so hard to have AI replace artists just to appease the shareholders
I swear the only reason I would see people supporting AI art is if they aren't a artist or they just want to make money. I do not see any in-between because there is none.
Most of it is just a grift. Its the new get rich quick scheme for techbros now even they realized NFTs are ass.
Bjork, Brian Eno, and King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard have used it
@@Brandon82967this is the first time ive heard King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard get mentioned outside of my discord social circle
Wild guess, it maybe the person making these submissions pulled a Dr. Frankenstein and stitched together other people’s art, then passed it through an AI filter? That might explain some of the oddities.
*looking at the pen* pick it up.
I can dislike an artist, a very specific artist who made the chicago bean and is basically a sellout. I don't like his art, it is superficial and serves the purpose of "rich people art that means mostly nothing" but still, it has 100% more heart than AI images and 200% more effort, this is really telling because this artist in specific seems to hate the general concept of art, a free thing everyone can do.
its not free. it takes thousands of hours to get good at it, which prevents busy people from learning. that's why people say AI democratizes art.
also if its so soulless, how did it win so many competitions? even the flamingo photo got third place, so two AI images beat it
@@Brandon82967 AI doesn't "democratize" art. The machine is doing all or most of the work. If someone commissions a painting from me, they aren't considered the artist- I am. AI "prompters" are just taking credit for something their machine made. It's incredibly disingenuous. And frankly, prompters seem to know this because they often lie about using AI. There's nothing impressive about using an AI program.
@@thenewapelles6448so are they photographers artists? The camera does all the work after all
And I think it’s fair to hide if you use AI since they’ll get harassed about it so often
If the camera does all the work, why do you even need AI? Just buy a nice camera and start winning!
@@Brandon82967 and I condone harassing AI prompters
Its funny because nobody could enter an art contest by commissioning an art piece from somebody else and then passing it as their own. So why does AI images count. The people didnt make the AI pictures they just asked the AI to make it. If you go to mcdonalds and order a big mac you cant say you made it
The thing Ive noticed about AI is not that the technology itself is abusive, but that it reflects the dominantly abusive uses we have for it by design because our economic system froths at the mouth to abuse anything that's unregulated for profit.
at the very least we still have physical art we can all put our back on for at least a couple years if ai art takes over
10:15 finally, FINALLY SOMEONE WHO ACKNOWLEDGES THE ANY COLOR YOU LIKE THING
I finally understand all those Pikachu art tweets I saw a week or two ago. I had no idea what people were complaining about.
If a person who uses AI to create images by giving it prompts is called an "AI Artist"
Then a person who uses Humans to create images by telling them what they want them to make should be called a "Human Artist".
people who draw, paint, carve, etc. their own images should be called artists.
people who use ai to create images should be called fools.
@@love--dive I disagree Tbh. I don't think AI creations are on the same level as the skills to draw sculpt etc. but to say using ai takes no skill at all would be a lie.
People act as if it's "Just writing a prompt", but if you try using ai for anything more precise than "generic tree" the AI will constantly refuse to follow the orders unless you construct the words properly.
Although I do not see a lot of applications for Image AI other than: Memes; Certain concept arts; Placeholder graphics; and I believe it can be justified to use it for small scale free projects, like it was used for images in the game Frosttrain.
1:49 Fat Pikachu best Pikachu
Two other cards are weirdly cute as well, especially that trainer card
I remember that card! Isn't it from the very first pokemon cards ever made?
Also I honestly can't remember if I had the Charizard card or not. I feel like I did, but I don't remember.
The algorithm brought me here, stayed for the laughs. Thanks for making an infuriating topic so hilarious. Great job 👏🏼 👏🏼👏🏼
my crappy drawings i did when i was 5 years old has more effort and creativity then ai prompts
Ai, tracing, and submitting more than allowed
peasant has been banned from the artists guild
WOOW are you from Latvia by any chance? The Sub Scriptum- Mūsu Vasara is in latvian. The country is too small for animated commissions from there to be common.🤔 Also this makes me very happy that something from my country was included😍
I have drawn stuff since I was a kid, however I've never seriously attempted to to learn how to draw. That changed thanks to AI, actually. I recently bought a drawing tablet and I'm starting a free drawing course with the objective of actually learning how to draw stuff I like in a way that makes them justice, and it's all because around two or three months ago I got into AI image generation.
I've always been generally negative towards AI generation, but somehow I found a Telegram bot that allowed me to make furry AI images. And I GOBBLED. THAT. SH*T. UP. I was generating pictures of my favorite characters one after the other, not noticing the imperfections at first, staying up at night generating them and sharing them to an AI group. I even bought a GPU to generate images locally. Eventually I started to notice the imperfections of AI images, and started spending more and more time attempting to fix the small details that I did absolutely notice and was uncomfortable with. Eventually I realized that I was spending up to three hours on a single image, and by that point I was like "Why am I even doing this? I'd be better off actually learning to draw digitally." And that's how I ended up buying a drawing tablet and decided to learn how to draw. I still haven't done any drawings with my new tablet but I hope that eventually, I can make art at the level that I was just merely emulating with AI.
AI was meant to take all of our boring, dangerous jobs. Not our hobbies.
No one is taking away your hobby. No one is going to stop you from drawing.
You people are butthurt because you will lose easy money, it was never about the hobby.
@ fym?? This isn’t just “about money”. Sure, artists are afraid of losing the jobs they genuinely love that shouldn’t even be replaced in the first place, but it’s not just that - AI is also stealing our art and creative ideas, creating mush out of it. AI is profiting off of artists who even draw for FUN; it’s basically ruining the creative industry. Even if you don’t profit off your work, AI can and will steal from it.
@ you get my gist?
anytime I see ai art I just tell them to pick up a pen
My mother creates ai chatbots and images. It's scary, I'm happy shes happy with her hobby but it just makes me uncomfy. I want to go back to pregnant obama kissing sonic, real art. But im afraid drawing our opposers pregnant wont work for long, if ai learns that too...
AI is not a bad thing in it of itself.
Its jsut the ethics and were is placed that is bad. But with the proper rights and respect AND organization AI can be the innovative tool that AI bros claim it to be
@@fabiofanf3e813 thats pretty real
@@fabiofanf3e813Yeah ai is a tool, it's a neutral force. It's unfortunate in the hands of selfish individuals that want to steal artists work or make photos/videos of strangers. It's a neutral tool wielded by a negative group
@@fabiofanf3e813 people learn from other artists all the time even without permission. nothing wrong with that. so why is it only bad when AI does it?
Plot twist I got an ad for an AI animation generator on this video. ...
All I'm gonna say is: if it wins competitions, it's clearly not unappealing.
it can be visually appealing, definitely, but it's not art in any form of the word. art is literally defined as "the expression of human creative skill and imagination", of which ai possesses neither. it shouldn't be entered into art competitions, let alone win them.
@@love--dive then it sounds like a outdated definition because it was from a time humans were believed to be the only one's that could make art.
seriosly words are not inmutable things, they change (for better or worse)
@@Joyscp999 “art” is not one of those words. unlike many words, art describes a concept rather than a tangible object or quality, which is in fact immutable.
The Pink floyd music videos remind me of Starset's music video for the song degenerate. With that song and music video being about this very topic, and similar ones.
But instead of random images. They hired artists make strange and surreal art then sent it the an ai thing to animate it. It's SUPER cursed looking, but in a way I can appreciate for it's message.
We live in the worst time line bro
I think what it really shows us is that art is measured by quality markers and AI is really good at imitating those quality markers.
just a sidenote, 1:49 grimer looking like a luigis mansion ghost
There are sometimes videos that I really like and will for some reason rewatch like a favourite movie
This is one of them
HOLY SHIT WOWZA DOG LIKES PINK FLOYD LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 🤘🤘🤘
Edit: personally I like both waters and gilmour, waters is an excellent writer, composer and bassist, but he really was in the wrong with his egoistical behavior towards fans and bandmates. One of my fav PF albums is WYWH because all of the band is in stunning synergy. Animals and the Wall are very good, but the final cut has a lot of flaws, but so do the gilmour albums. So I would choose Richard Wright
I kinda appreciate you bringing up how people have treated art recently. It feels like the modern branding route where artists can make slop (like the lights) yet it gains value because their name is next to it. That’s why I’m not shocked AI art is becoming a thing because it’s basically the same thing. If stacking 12 buckets of sand is art, then why not typing “sandcastle” on a computer?
QUEEN AND PINKFLOYD SPECIAL INTEREST MENTION??
Team waters btw ✊
I like the concept of modern computer models as a technology,
How it is used though, oof. Its like inventing fire and the first though its "how to use it for warcrimes" instead of "how to cook food". Not saying that AI is like fire, way less important.
I think we should call it "AI image generation", since no art is involved in basic prompting.
I think that AI image generation could be art, either in the Marcel Duchamp interpretation, where everything is art if it is presented as such, with an underlying story to tell. Or it can be art if it is processed, a part of something bigger or with a unique spin on it. If someone where to set out to make an artwork deliberately random, by training a model on all AI images found on the internet for example, and then training a new model on its output, etc. the unique means to getting there and the story surrounding it could be made into a work of art.
TLDR: AI image gen is not art, however it is a tool that could be used elsewhere.
i hope this new rise in AI ""art"" will eventually lead to even more creativity around the world, not directly from the AI, but in spite of it. so many talented artists are discouraged right now by AI gen "art" and it hurts (i myself am also an artist and i've nearly given up on my career), but its a fact that AI will never replace human creativity. everyone will get tired of the same AI slop over and over and inevitably seek out new types of art! now that AI can generate fully detailed pieces by copying existing creator's work, all we can do is try our best to protect our artwork from being fed into the AI
As an artist it has taught me INTENSE disdain for my fellow human. I agree with you and hope it'll lead to better things but I seriously didn't know what levels of dripping, vile disgust I could feel for other random people until this shit came along. There's a lot of people in the world that don't deserve to see any art or enjoy games or movies in the first place, I'll leave it at that.
@@0plush absolutely same for me, ive been enraged seeing the way people brush off concerns with "let people have fun" way. its hard not to get mad at these people!! i want to try to give some hope to artists seeing this, but its so difficult when its so out of our control. like..even though its fascinating how far technology has come, that will never excuse stealing others work!! its so devastating how many people will contribute to feeding the AI on purpose despite knowing how bad this will be for artists. i hope someday more people will realize this before its too late, but it doesn't seem like us artists on a good path right now 😔 praying for some kind of artistic renaissance lmao..or just for more people to open their eyes at least
I think you are also forgetting that technology does not remain stagnant and they are constantly improving.
@@himbofrog just one question, what is preventing people from doing art beyond just, wanting to get paid?because you sound like that really is the only reason for doing art, for the job.
which is not that bad but if you can only do art for the job and not just do art for doing art, then that sounds strange for me.
yeah you are in all your life decisions to create art and sell it for money, still, what prevents you from just creating art?
Makes you wonder what the end-goal for this is, several generations in the future. A complete rejection of Art as a concept? The same images recycled for centuries with anything different being censored to prevent damage to the algorithms? Maybe even future critics claiming that Art didn't really exist until we had AI?
It'd make for a good dystopian show but I wouldn't want it to actually happen.
I don’t think it matters that AI art doesn’t technically have an artist. Art is just anything made by humans to get a reaction. “Fountain” 1917 was made on a factory line, no different than thousands of other urinals. “Fountain” is art because of the context in which its viewed. If AI generated images are intended to get a reaction, then they are art. AI art has inspired massive reactions inside and outside the art community. It doesn’t matter what you or I think, AI artwork is the most influential art form right now.
That’s a good point as far as conceptual art goes though I’d argue the specific examples I discussed are influential in the most shallow way. Like I said in the video, seemingly the most interesting thing about AI is that it’s AI, I don’t really see people ever discuss what is beyond that. (At least at the moment) If the artists bothered to put it in more interesting concepts, I would enjoy it a lot more, as there are plenty conceptual artists who do similar things and create interesting commentary. I would find it pretty lame if people displayed basic ready-mades in skill-based sculpture competitions. tbh “fountain” being displayed in a contest was literally just a dadaist prank. Duchamp was a very mysterious character with interesting ideas but I doubt he took himself as seriously as the conceptual artists who came after him.
If you sink in deeper, people hosting art contests and allowing AI art in it could be a sign of money laundering
no wonder its called MIDjourney lmao
The ad that played right before this video being about AI is sooo 😭 AI should just be banned forever, man.
Wowza posted day saved
99% of competitions were always shit
As someone who likes drawing (I wouldn’t call myself a full on artist) it gives me complete whiplash seeing the camera being the instrument of the human voice this time around, considering that before it’s own invention created a similar crisis to what Gen ai is doing now.
Just a heads up: The Build Mode music track used towards the end of this video originates from the original The Sims base game, not The Sims 2 as stated in this video's description. That said, The Sims 2 Seasons Expansion Pack _did_ bring back The Sims Build Mode tracks, along with proper titles. (The track used in this video being titled Celestial Bungalow.) 🙂
Based taste by the way, I bloody _love_ the Build Mode tracks of The Sims! 🧡
this feels sooo frustating tbh, i hate how they think they're actual artists just because they can make a Pc generate some image
AI drawings are already a huge thing to many crypto bros, and now they're trying to start "making music" because learning a instrument is oh so hard
So few people generating AI images actually think they're artists. A bunch of people say they are purely to troll this community because of how much it hyperfixates on that aspect
it is hard. it takes a long time to get good at music so busy people wont be able to do it. that's why people say AI democratizes art
Team Roger! 🗿my pink floyd obsession has lessened since I was a teenager, but I'll always hold their music close to my heart. I must have listened to the wall over 100 times. Seeing all the soulless pink floyd ai art irritates me so much, especially when there are so many talented fan artists out there doing fantastic work
There was a contest in Poland for a mascot
Ai won ;-;
thanks for this video. Such good insight and humor.
Coming from in between the animation field and the generative media stuff, I truly distaste the ai tech bros trying to push the "democratization of creativity" without even caring about any art whatsoever. AI slop is overwhelming all of us these years but I truly hope that your final statement comes true, that much weirder and low end art is going to get big as a counter movement!
What even was the point of ai generated imagery why did we even make it
May I add that it’s also very bad for the environment too, gen AI requires so much electricity and power resulting in electronic waste also emitting green house gasses. The only Ai that should even be here is for medical stuff. This is just wasteful 😢
budget cuts for companies
@Nobodye56 like why not make a robot doctor or smth that actually benifits humanity not computer that can make image
@@Thecoolguy310so it’s ok for doctors to lose their jobs but not artists?
@Nobodye56art does not separate us from animals. What separates us from animals is our intelligence.