Generative AIs for images

[Knower of nothing]

This reminds me of poker. I used to play poker but then more and more people started using poker software. So I was no longer playing against people, I was playing against machines. That took something away from it and made it worse, less interesting. So I stopped playing. Now machines make art, a person didn't paint that picture, a machine made it. And that takes something away from it, it makes it worse and less interesting. These darn machines... they make the world worse and less interesting.

Only AI would see such a trite image as art. It must have been trained on the schlock garbage of Thomas Kinkade. SISO.

This is also just rude and dismissive. The AI didn't pull these visuals from nothing with nothing so you're dunking on human efforts all the same. I'm not a fan of this disingenuous attitude. You don't need to like it, you really don't. But these attitudes can spiral and become the basis of the social norm to look down on machines. I feel it's petty and rooted in human self-absorption. There are legal issues and portfolio-indexing ones, but not artistic ones.

 

[Misery]

*sigh*

This is about to go down the drain, aint it?

Already spiraling, I reckon. Disappointing, really, on this forum of all places.

 

[SusanLR]

I don't like the concept of where AI may be taking us.
I've no love for them either and even despise how smartphones have been pushed onto us, like it or not.

I don't judge the AI artwork just because it's done via AIs.
It is pretty, colorful, fractal, fantasy. It can just be plain pretty, IMO.
Art is visual and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I don't have to like the creator to enjoy the creation.

 

[Forest Cat]

*sigh*

This is about to go down the drain, aint it?

Already spiraling, I reckon. Disappointing, really, on this forum of all places.

So we have to like AI or this thread goes down the drain? I don't really understand that. Some like it, some hate it.

 

[Mr. Stevens]

The feelings you see when you look at man-made art are a mirror of your own. This means AI art can do the same. What you can't do, is show art to an AI and have it reflect feelings at itself.

I don't think that's exactly true. It's more like a conversation. AI doesn't feel like I'm talking to anyone. It's like a view of the world from something that's never been here.

But, to another point, which I think Forest Cat made: I don't want machines making art. Even if they do it well, there is no attraction to me. Especially if they do it well, there is no attraction.

 

[Forest Cat]

I don't think that's exactly true. It's more like a conversation. AI doesn't feel like I'm talking to anyone. It's like a view of the world from something that's never been here.

But, to another point, which I think Forest Cat made: I don't want machines making art. Even if they do it well, there is no attraction to me. Especially if they do it well, there is no attraction.

There's an expression, "Putting your heart and soul into it". AI machines can't do that.

 

[Misery]

So we have to like AI or this thread goes down the drain? I don't really understand that. Some like it, some hate it.

That aint what I was getting at. I suppose clarity is important here: in all honesty I dont really care too much who likes or dislikes it. Though I did think it might be interesting to see a bit of discussion on the topic, thus why my own post was all "what do you guys think?". Though, considering all the screaming I see on... other parts of the Net, I should have simply refrained from encouraging this topic at all. My bad, that was silly of me.

However, more than that, I care about how others are treated and about not having big ridiculous arguements. Particularly on a support forum. The signs started to show. THAT is what I was getting at, so I expressed disappointment and then sat back to observe a bit, since I'm currently feeling very sore from all the bloody drawing/painting lately and cant do much else till that fades. Refresh, refresh, refresh.



Though, at the same time, I cant baby it too much, I guess. My arm, I mean, that's what's sore. Bah. No pain, no gain... Since art is currently on my mind I suppose it's time for some watercolor practice. Or maybe my markers today. Gonna try to learn to paint dogs and animals (eventually, it's gonna take quite awhile, but dagnabit I WILL get there). I could use that time to learn to paint portraits of people, yep, could do that, but... nah, I think I'll pass on that, as that's not interesting to me. Besides, only so much time in the day in any case, I've made my choice on what to shoot for. Cant fire in every direction all at once, after all.

Everyone should just pursue art however they like, I think. I guess that's a good takeaway, today. Besides, I've always liked "draw for yourself, not for others". Maybe that applies too. Not sure.

Now I'm bowing out. Shouldnt have encouraged this topic, definitely not gonna sit and encourage it more. If this goes up in flames, I'll be elsewhere, this time.

 

[Forest Cat]

That aint what I was getting at. I suppose clarity is important here: in all honesty I dont really care too much who likes or dislikes it. Though I did think it might be interesting to see a bit of discussion on the topic, thus why my own post was all "what do you guys think?". Though, considering all the screaming I see on... other parts of the Net, I should have simply refrained from encouraging this topic at all. My bad, that was silly of me.

However, more than that, I care about how others are treated and about not having big ridiculous arguements. Particularly on a support forum. The signs started to show. THAT is what I was getting at, so I expressed disappointment and then sat back to observe a bit, since I'm currently feeling very sore from all the bloody drawing/painting lately and cant do much else till that fades. Refresh, refresh, refresh.



Though, at the same time, I cant baby it too much, I guess. My arm, I mean, that's what's sore. Bah. No pain, no gain... Since art is currently on my mind I suppose it's time for some watercolor practice. Or maybe my markers today. Gonna try to learn to paint dogs and animals (eventually, it's gonna take quite awhile, but dagnabit I WILL get there). I could use that time to learn to paint portraits of people, yep, could do that, but... nah, I think I'll pass on that, as that's not interesting to me. Besides, only so much time in the day in any case, I've made my choice on what to shoot for. Cant fire in every direction all at once, after all.

Everyone should just pursue art however they like, I think. I guess that's a good takeaway, today. Besides, I've always liked "draw for yourself, not for others". Maybe that applies too. Not sure.

Now I'm bowing out. Shouldnt have encouraged this topic, definitely not gonna sit and encourage it more. If this goes up in flames, I'll be elsewhere, this time.

There's no shouting, no one is arguing, no one is treating anyone bad as far as I can see, people just have different opinions. So everything is ok I think.

 

[Slime_Punk]

I'm personally not a fan, but mostly that's due to the fact that I really enjoy the creative process long-game as a hobbyist and I believe that that's where the magic and sorcery is.

I've been using computers, low-level logic, high level code and more for years to help me create generative designs, visual art and even music, but simply having the ability to click a button and generate something ruins it for me entirely. I want to actually spend time on the creative process, even if I'm borrowing a few algorithms from other people in the process, because I can always go deeper and eventually learn my own version of them.

In short, if I just clicked 'generate' instead of spending years on this, I think I'd lose a lot of my life's meaning.

It's going to definitely make people lazier over time, and I'm cool with anything that other people do, because there are no rules in art. With that being said, when they save themselves years of toiling, learning and creating new things by hand, are they going to actually feel fulfilled? We'll see.

 

[Rodafina]

SISO.

What does this mean?

 

[Slime_Punk]

Crap-in, crap-out perhaps? Just a guess, I could be wrong

 

[Rodafina]

I taught my daughter to play poker, blackjack, etc when she was about five or six. As soon as she had a good grasp of patterns and basic math. Not for gambling, but just for family fun.

My mother did this for me, too. It was great. We would play poker for peanuts, using a huge sack of peanuts in their shell. Now we are doing it for the new generation in my family.

 

[Knower of nothing]

I don't think that's exactly true. It's more like a conversation. AI doesn't feel like I'm talking to anyone. It's like a view of the world from something that's never been here.

But, to another point, which I think Forest Cat made: I don't want machines making art. Even if they do it well, there is no attraction to me. Especially if they do it well, there is no attraction.

The only conversation you have is with yourself, using the building blocks supplied by reality. AI speaks through reality just the same. The hang-up here is only in concept, it's not real.
You can't even speak of attraction because art isn't always presented with visible traces of an author. You won't always know who or when or why and I can promise you this will not change your real reaction to the piece. I bet I can fool you into disliking art purely on the idea that AI may have made it when it's not the case. That's not an evaluation of art at all, that's discrimination in its truest definition.

I wasn't missing anything when machines weren't doing art, but algorithms generating visuals, audio and text is only that. Visuals, audio and text. I have seen these bring feelings to people and make them imagine and think. Thus it is already doing everything art does. Art was never so special that it was confined to human ability. Even my cat can sing and the sky can paint. So what if an algorithm writes a dry script or generates uninspired visuals because the commercial models are streamlined to be as inoffensive as possible? It doesn't speak of AI as a whole. Much like the work of one painter doesn't speak of the ability of a paint brush. I get it, people want human stories about human experiences and human pain. But liking one thing should never translate to the downplaying of all else. Please recognize that this is far from the whole of the domain of art.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

You don't need to like it, you really don't. But these attitudes can spiral and become the basis of the social norm to look down on machines.

Art criticism is legitimate, especially when the human input into a system of constrained reaction is little more than paint by numbers. An overreliance on automated systems programmed by coders with a tenuous grasp of reality who force you to think like they do leads to incidents like Air France 447 when automation ceded control to pilots who were not prepared for the high altitude stall the program created, or other killer software like the Boeing MCAS.

 

[velociraptor]

That idea, what do you guys think about it? Is there meaning to that? Or is it just a stamp with no heart to it?

I'm not sure how to answer yet. What I can say is that while I get interesting results from Midjourney, it's too easy. A lot of the thrill of photography for me comes from trying over and over to find that perfect moment. It takes time and skill. Being able to generate a perfect image instantly is like playing a video game in God or Sandbox mode... It gets boring fast. Removing the challenge of creating art removes my interest in doing it myself.

I'm certain that the consumers of art won't care that much in the long run. This is bad news for those who make their living producing it. I already have a friend whose department was laid off this past month. They wrote ad copy for an SEO company. ChatGPT's output is "good enough", lightning fast, and eliminates three salaried positions. Profit!

My wife the teacher looked at Midjourney and immediately realized that she can use it to improve the quality of her online courses. Her division gives teachers zero budget for this sort of thing beyond a crappy Shutterstock subscription, which I suspect is about to get canceled. Stock image agencies are going to take a hit in the next two years - watch the news.

I'm mostly concerned about my daughter who is about to graduate with a degree that has her majoring in marketing. That's some crap timing.

 

[Mr. Stevens]

Art was never so special that it was confined to human ability.

That was never my argument. I would like to see something from another mind. And I question the kind of person who wants to make an artificial mind. The more powerful a sentience we could make, the more prejudiced we will become against real life. That is the story of culture, and the discrimination I am more concerned about. If people just wanted to entertain themselves with art prompts and computer programs, I wouldn't care. That doesn't affect me.

 

[Darkkin]

'Kings built tombs more splendid than the houses of the living and counted the names of their descent dearer than the names of their sons. Childless lords sat in aged halls musing on heraldry or in high cold towers asking questions of the stars. And so the kingdom of Gondor sank into ruin, the line of kings failed, the white tree withered and the rule of Gondor was given over to lesser men.' - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings

It isn't about using tools, it is how we chose to use them. I like playing with the algorithms, seeing what comes out of the outrageous creations I write about.

I cannot create things like those I see in my head, but these generators come very close. It means my words are on track. Fiscally, I cannot afford to commission digital art for my weird worlds, but here's a tool that allows me to put faces to some of these characters I've known for years.

I put in the time on the words, and having a chance to actually see them, it matters. I'm not taking anything from anyone, I'm adding to what I've already created. Do I see the algorithm patterns, yes, is it perfect, no it is human written code, not organic art. Is it an effective tool for what I need it to do, yes.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

I'm certain that the consumers of art won't care that much in the long run.

With everything from Hiroshige to the Lakota art of Jim Yellowhawk, I guess I'm a consumer, however, I will care a lot about crapola stifling experimentation in the fine arts.

 

[velociraptor]

I will care a lot about crapola stifling experimentation in the fine arts.

I'm pretty sure that has been a thing forever. We're just seeing the newest iteration of it.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

I'm pretty sure that has been a thing forever. We're just seeing the newest iteration of it.

Remember Big Eyes? All i could think of was what grotesquely deformed skulls those waifs must have.