Why Be An Artist When There's AI? - Draftsmen S4E01

Comments · 1.8K

• DR

  @Draftsmen · 3 years ago · pinned

  What are some of your concerns or hopes for the future of AI art?

  283

• DE

  @Dexter01992 · 3 years ago

  The day someone asks me "Why do you still draw by hand when AI generated images exist?" I will just reply "Why have a walk in the park when we have cars?"

  377

• KO

  @Kost3k · 3 years ago

  Since Draftsmen has ended, I can only assume this entire episode has been generated by AI.

  1K

• DU

  @dungeontales8117 · 3 years ago

  &quot;Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.&quot;<br><br>Frank Herbert, Dune<br><br>The future is a terrifying prospect. Finding where I fit in as the machine gods are born is my daily anxiety.

  796

• AG

  @Agiranto · 3 years ago

  when the world needed them most they came back

  230

• YA

  @Yatukih_001 · 3 years ago

  I´m gonna be an artist whether or not there is an AI, and nobody can tell me otherwise.Thanks for your video man! Regards from Ásgeir in Iceland.

  780

• ST

  @StevenZapataArt · 3 years ago

  I think you should definitely have Karla Ortiz on to discuss further! And maybe me too or whatever...

  628

• MF

  @mf-- · 3 years ago (edited)

  As emphasized by Steven Zapata mentioned in his video regarding AI, the developers are implementing copyrighted works in an image generating AI because they know visual artists will not defend themselves. The music version does not incorporate copyrighted works because the music industry has a stronger history of defending itself. The AI generators are denoising tools taken to the extreme. They can only come into focus by tracing existing works. It might be many or one image but it can only trace.

  666

• GO

  @gorxela8982 · 3 years ago

  I think that all A.I. products (not only art) sould have a watermark of sorts that says &quot;This product was made with A.I.&quot; This watermark should be included in the source code of the A.I. like Azimov&apos;s Laws.

  248

• SL

  @sleeplesshead602 · 3 years ago

  People who mostly love AI are also the people who are not familiar with creative industry. I agree that part when people who are not in the industry said it improves life, but for those who are in it, heavily affected. This conversation really refresh my mind to see both sides from artists themselves. Quite scary because it&apos;s like playing with lion cub. We never knew how it grows bcs it&apos;s wild.

  20

• XI

  @xizorx4 · 3 years ago (edited)

  All the talks about ethics, morals, authenticity, the &quot;human touch&quot; or potential uses as a tool miss out on one very simple fact - a huge percentage of clients and corporations won&apos;t care about any of that and the &quot;good enough&quot; factor.<br><br><br>If they can pay 25$ per month and generate hundreds of images on a given topic *daily*, they won&apos;t give a crap about paying an artist hundreds of dollars to produce one such image in a few weeks or more. One of those hundreds of images will be Good Enough™ and that&apos;s what matters. <br><br><br>Most artists who say not to worry and that it won&apos;t affect as much as it seems are already successful and established. Yeah, they won&apos;t be affected much. But I think that sadly a lot of low- and mid-level jobs will be reduced SEVERELY by AI creating &quot;good enough&quot; images for clients who, to be blunt, often lack any sort of finer taste or knowledge of the nuanced points of art or the process of creation. <br><br><br>In terms of creating art for personal enjoyment, growth or as a hobby - sure, it&apos;s a tool. But in terms of doing paid commissions as a mid-level artist that&apos;s in rather considerable danger.

  681

• SW

  @SW-lw6mt · 3 years ago

  I tried Midjourney in beta and almost all prompts had a name of an artist whose style people wanted to generate art from - namely artists like Craig Mullins.

  19