Speaking of art, my Patreon members now have access to all my thumbnails, including project files with layers: www.patreon.com/DrWaku Hop on discord to read Roly's books: discord.gg/AgafFBQdsc
I don’t see any of that aide coming any time soon and certainly not kicking off for artists. I think most people are happy to cast aside artists as a whole. They don’t really care who or what makes the things they consume. I find a sizable chunk quite giddy and happy to shit on them with also a weird desire to paint a narrative that artists are somehow some type of elite or consider themselves (artists) to be elite. I would also say most people don’t care about the higher properties of art. They don’t think about it, they will not give it thought until prompted and in most case when prompted they may or may not agree but the most likely action will be to do nothing. When the digital axe comes for them and the professions they can qualify for then they will care. This to me is the most likely reality. Also beyond those with disabilities, it hasn’t democratized art. Nothing prevents a person from picking up a pencil, stylus, rock, chalk, charcoal, paint, salt, glass, their finger, (insert 1 of 1,000s of objects) and to learn to draw. If you can use Ai art, then you have a pc, most likely an internet connection and access to 100,000s if not 1,000,000s of hrs worth of tutorials artists provided for free and a minority for pay including very adequate free software and free resources. Not to mention millions of images one could bash together using photoshop or w/e as a whole or part of your picture. Same with 3D there’s so many free tools and resources. That this “democratization” is a bit crap. It’s like having a thing that can speak for you, claiming it has democratized language when yet, as obviously seen. We are all reasonably and practically more than capable of speaking, barring a very small minority whom conveniently was never the focus when people say “democratized’. If you had time to make your account, find this channel, watch this video, etc. Especially if you read and reply to this, You had time to make art. You could’ve done art instead during that time. If you want to use Ai, go for it I guess, but don’t pretend like it’s doing something that it is not.
This! If I'm going to drown I'd love everyone to come down with me too, then they'll start to care. "Not everyone has time or willingness to invest" well then let us do our job, did we always had time to learn and invest before joining art school? it's the same for every profession, Are there no self taught artists who made a living for themselves while learning in such hectic times? Had art as a side thing along with their jobs? just say you don't have that much of a passion for art to begin with and shut it, I HOPE ANYONE WHO COMES BASHING ARTIST OR SAYS STUFF LIKE "TIME TO CHANGE JOBS" GETS THEIR JOBS TAKEN TOO!! Make the world of AI, let this shit thrive expand, take every fucking job in existence, programmers, lawyers, doctors, EVERYTHING I'm happy to starve or live a passion less life but please let them too. What was the point of it all?
Yes, it is democratised. I grew up with a cousin who could draw "perfect" faces within minutes. I wished desperately i could do that. He wasn't much into drawing though. I was the one who always had vivid images in my head waiting to be drawn, but my cousin never felt like doing it. Enters Midjourney and i am a happy man. Per day i let it creat around 500 images for me.
I think if someone is artistic and can draw etc. he will still have a far better perfromance when he uses AI on a professional level than someone just relying on AI without a deeper atistic understanding. It just gets faster to the core of art which is in my opinion , the idea creation stage which is the most difficult part.
I’m 17 and an artist I don’t use Ai art because it’s not creative enough for me, and I know many people in the “Ai art bro” community that are disgusting horrible people as well as most programs steal the work of artists and don’t give credit. They did this when an artist EXPRESSED they didn’t want this and did it to a recently dead artist. It scares me, I feel what I use to cope with my trauma and pass on the wisdom I’ve gained from that pain as something mechanical and replaceable. I’m too use to being nothing but a tool. I hate it and don’t want it.
I fucked around with gen AI art for about a month. I wasnt just typing 5 words to bing, I incorporated the digital art skills I already had to tweak the results. Did I "make" some cool looking stuff? Sure. But it it never felt like it was truly mine. I'm still thankful for the experience I had experimenting with AI though. It made me re-evaluate why I even do art in the first place. I get a result faster by scarificing the process of actually using my skills and engaging my mind in the process. That is the most valuable part to me I suppose? The journey is longer but the reward tastes much sweeter. Obviously I know not everyone is the same and I dont expect it.
Human Art will i think always be there but its going to become a small market as far as jobs go. People will most likely always do art for themselves or because they enjoy it though.
It could be as digital art loses all value, traditional, physical art will increase in value. The same way hand made watches and tailored clothing are more valuable than anything mass produced.
For me it’s sad that we won’t value the creativity of our bros anymore. Only soulless bots get all the credits soon. Do we really want to be meanginless in life? If not, let’s kick the tech CEOs out of business as soon as we can…
A few perspectives on this that people may not think about. Often and especially in America. People don’t understand that creativity and art is actually one of the higher forms of intelligence. Think about it? What other animal the planet can think something through and then express it or bring it into a three-dimensional reality in the form of a solid visual object? artists have always struggled and they struggle more than ever now. But what worries me more than people further abusing and misunderstanding, actual art and the intelligence behind it. Is that AI is just one more way to dumb people down. Creativity and art is all about expression and problem-solving. these fools that think because they can type some prompts into an AI and it creates images for them and they think their artists? Delusional. So I worry about this technology in regards to further dumbing down of humanity.
Im a 3d artist i know the AI bros are grinding from 2D to 3D and eventually it will reach my field. But I also know how to code and do some VFX. My problem is my age due to being poor in my childhood my education was bad from the bases and since the game design career has a lot of math in it so it took more more time than it should to finish it. Im 1 exam away to finish my thesis but after that i need to search for a job so i dont really know whats going to happen to my life since AI tech is expanding so fast.
Interesting timing. I have been reading up on the discourse between artists and AI artists and let me tell you - it's very depressing. The two sides mostly function on tribal mentality - lots of mockery, bullying, and just not much rational thinking. I haven't watched your video yet so it'll be interesting to see your perspective on the whole thing. Will probably make another comment once I finish.
Thanks. Yes the type of discourse is a bit depressing which is the main reason I made this video. I don't like controversial topics that much but it had to be addressed...
@@DrWaku Thanks for making these videos. I've enjoyed many of them. I appreciate your effort on addressing this AI art issue. Unfortunately, I don't think this issue is mostly a logical one. While what you laid out in this video will help people understand what's going on better - from what I see, many people within this discourse are coming from a more raw, emotional place. And I think the core of the issue has more to do with our human tribal nature. Unless we deal with our tribal nature, this type of discourse will just keep going from one topic to another. Which makes me wonder, what do you think about our human tribal nature? Do you think it's something we humans should work on getting rid of? I thought about genetic engineering in the future but obviously that has ethical issues + not feasible to do on a wide scale. Or can we evolve away from it simply through proper education? Or is it something that will always be there as long as there's variety in the world? Or do you not think human tribal nature is an issue at all? Would be interested to see if you can make a video on this topic. Anyway, this is a bit off topic I know. Maybe I'll write another comment with my opinion that's on topic. 😁
As an artist and graphic designer, i really appreciate your perspective on AI in general. I am still afraid, i wont lie. But i have no choice but to ride this wave, so I'll keep creating art and keep doing my job, finding ways to decrease my chance of getting displaced, and safeguarding my mental and physical health.
I like your suggestions, but people in power would never go for that. That said, I love your video. :) ps Am I the only one who after using AI art for about a year now has gone back to basics and making art with my hands? It feels like a natural progression/regression.
"without acknowledgment or compensation" let me ask, do you do this when human is learning on online art? No? So why AI should? Because is not human? For me when is in public it should have same rights to be use no matter if you are human with black, yellow or white skin or if you are program or AI, but I see that discrimination to AI is already norm... yeah, dystopian movies are one step closer.
I'm not exactly a master artist, but I dabble in painting a bit, strum a few tunes on the guitar, and jot down some lines here and there. I reckon I've got enough of a knack for it to share an opinion or two. You see, artists of today draw inspiration from those who came before them. And just like that, AI will draw inspiration from human artists who paved the way. When it starts thinking on its own, it'll churn out music, literature, and art that humans couldn't fathom. It's like the natural flow of things, you know? Just take a breath and let life unfold. (Only one humble opinion)
That's a rather rational opinion. Most artists I see have some extreme distain for AI art - well, they wouldn't even call it art to begin with. I am mostly in agreement with you. Change is the only constant of life - they'll change no matter how hard you try to keep things the same. So it's best to just go with the flow. I think one of the main concerns is that AI will not come up with something original - they'll just keep learning from what humans have done before. So we'll end up getting lots of similar looking art made by AI. I personally don't really think it's an issue though because that kind of assumes humans will no longer make art and will all be AI. The world is not black and white - just because more people use AI doesn't mean there won't still be humans who can come up with original styles. As for AI coming up with their own original art and styles - I believe one day they will be able to but we just don't know how long it's going to take until AI can actually think and imagine. Could be 5 years, 10 years, or 100 years.
I couldn't agree more with everything you said. Here's how I see it: There'll be just as many artists who embrace AI to enhance their art as there will be those who reject it and face the repercussions. In the grand scheme of things, when AI starts forging its own creative paths, some of the folks who initially opposed it might even try to mimic its style. And oddly enough, they'll probably think that's perfectly acceptable, as long as it's not the other way around.@@Yic17Gaming
The counterpoints to my argument are extremely wise. It will take us all sorting out the details along the road to make it work. So goes progress. As far as watching. It was my absolute pleasure. Your videos are thought-provoking. A mind challenged is a mind evolving.@@DrWaku
I would be very sad if I made my living from digital art or design. I think no matter what people think and feel about AI design and ‘art’, market forces (aka money) will force change. Businesses will always seek to reduce costs and most businesses’ highest cost is wages.
that's the wrong way to look at it. You should be thinking yourself as a business owner that happen to sell art. The way a business can grow is either: sell to more customer, get more profit from each customer, reduce cost of producing art. AI art only occupy the last production cost part, customer acquisition and up sell still have bigger effect compare to just reduce cost. IE: if your business have very low gross margin, 8-10%, then reduce cost by 50% double your profit. But if you have a very high margin business like 90%, reducing your cost by 50% will only contribute to 5% increase in profit. So putting on your business owner hat for a second, if cost of produce art reduces via AI Art. You should be focus more of your effort on promoting your brand of AI art, instead of producing art. AI art just change the constraint of the art business. If artist can think like a business owner and refocus their effort on the right constraint, AI art is actually a help to the artist instead of hindrance.
The core fallacy here is the implict idea that AI Art generators are a totally transparent medium through which their users ideas are faithfully transmitted- yet we know that there is no such thing as an unbiased AI, so this notion of transparency is more wishful thinking than reality. Once you realise that AI art Generators are themselves prone to bias in their outputs and combine this with the reality that the ratio of human input into any given AI image is quite limited, with most of the 'creative' decisions being made by the AI rather than the operator, the outcome seems inevitable. That outcome being that- as AI comes to dominate the creative landscape- that landscape will become increasingly homogenised and level, shorn of the peaks and troughs of human diversity. It should be obvious that a technology that operates on the basis of statisical weighting will always and everywhere trend toward the average. If we allow AI to destroy the economic viability of human creativity we are condemning ourselves to a future in which our culture becomes an ever more homogenised and mediocre parody of the vibrant diversity upon which the AI's themselves were trained.
Autonomous ASI might (in the future) create whole sites within a fraction of a day filled with AI non copy protected art (images/videos/music etc), without using any human prompts. Like eg sites with more content than Spotify etc. Earning subscriptions that is used for creating more sites. Art = content and it might not even be necessary to store previously created art, it is just remake it each day or on command.
Yes. Well, because of the health condition with my hands I wouldn't be able to be an artist without AI. So I'm one of the few that strongly benefits from AI art. That doesn't mean I can't see the downsides, especially because automation will affect everyone eventually.
@@DrWaku When you started to use AI, theres pretty much no going back. Likely wise, if AI worker salary is quite compatible to the artist, there is almost no reason to hire artist to work and have risk for them to complain about company on the internet. Pretty much any art theory, perspective, and art style can be seen and learn in observing sense, and do it by AI workers. You starting to use and having that as an excuse defeats the purpose of people defending AI for art already. you are no difference
As a digital matte painter concept artist and illustrator for 3 decades, I'm currently having to learn a lot of new skills in other creative areas. I've had no choice but to embrace AI art as more and more of my clients expect and even encourage the use of it. I feel I've become more like an art director nudging the AI in the right direction with rough sketches and careful prompting. Its only a matter of time before my old skills have very little value anymore. I'm just trying to keep my head above water in the mean time as we are going through this change and find new areas of work. I'm sure human made paintings and crafts will always be valued but as a digital artist trying to make a living, the writing is most definitely on the wall.
Really, have you tried painting a 15k resolution vr screen matte painting of a city in intricate photo real detail with only a 2 day deadline. That sort of shit used to take me a week to do. Am I going to sit here and say, yeah I've got a mortgage, bills and a family to support but I'm going a make a pointless moral stand and not take the job. Unless you've been living under a rock the VFX industry has effectively been put on hold for the last few months with the writers strikes and many of us are living on savings or have had to find other areas of work to get by. Unless your prepared to use the tools, people will just look elsewhere to get it done quicker or attempt to get less skilled people to have a crack at it or do it themselves. That's just reality. There are areas of art that still require a lot of human input, particularly if its something that requires a lot of precision like close up architectural detail or vector art graphics but eventually even that advantage will fade away as the tools get better. @@minixlemonade2335
@@Art-AI-and-beyond Hard work is good work. Be proud it took you a week to do that. That's dedication to your craft, not a waste of time. You don't need to default to AI to pay the bills (which I can't imagine is even really doing that? People don't buy AI images). There's so many avenues to take. Is it hard? Yes. And draining. And soul crushing. But it's so rewarding in the end. Rewarding to know YOU made it! I've had to meet crazy deadlines myself and I'm right there with you, some deadlines are ridiculous and unhuman. I've wanted to quit before. However. You seem like someone who never wanted to put in the time or work to make something amazing and just whine about how long it took, and probably jumped for joy when you could get a copyright stealing computer to do it all for you. I got news for you, good things often take a long ass time to make, and the difference in quality is noticeable. Customers notice it too. This isn't about taking "the moral highground" it's about making good art that will be fondly remembered, not some cheap ass bullshit a computer crapped out. Your work isn't cheap, but AI is absolutely cheap. I get it bills gotta get paid but it's hardly the only option to get cash, even in the art field. Some people do prostitution for money but that's not good either. Of course AI isn't as bad as prostitution obviously but I certainly hope you'd view your work more highly. The art industry has never really been one with a lot of money, so if all you look at is the money you're gonna get tunnel vision. There's more to art than money. It's your life bro I don't care what a rando does with their time. But when you're old and dying, do you really want all your work to be partially or totally not your doing? If so that's a bit sad, I'm sorry. I don't mean disrespect but I certainly hope you'd respect your own work more than that. Why even be a artist if you're not even making it or you're doing so little anyone can do it? There are other industries that pay way better than art. A "a 15k resolution vr screen matte painting of a city in intricate photo in realistic detail" is worth so much more than something a algorithm popped out, and customers would agree. Your own skills are infinitely more valuable than a AI's will ever be, and I'm sorry you don't view your art more highly because I believe all art made with human hands are beautiful. I hope someday you view your work more highly, because there might be a day where you realize you aren't making anything at all. I won't be responding further, have a good one.
@@Art-AI-and-beyond I hear you my friend, and I mourn the loss of artists and creatives in all walks of life. The creative types are in every walk of life, they're the ones that solve the most difficult problems and challenges in any field, from law to medicine to management sciences. They're all under threat, but artists just happen to be the easy first target for parasitic technologies. But you are right IMHO: we have no choice but to embrace technology and stay ahead. One thing I would challenge though: AI cannot (yet) exercise true agency or true judgment. AI can only replicate to order via prompts. Replication comes from the past, creativity - as in the truly new and unique and different - is beyond the reach of AI and will remain so, until AI learns to have judgment and agency. AI is currently a creativity and analysis co-pilot. Copyright is the heart of the problem: there's just no incentive any more for artists to invest months or years developing a new style of art, for it to be copied and replicated without payment from AI companies. I realise this doesn't change your argument: for most artists, art is a job first and a channel of artistic expression second.
I absolutely love your content, much better structured and not rushed when compared to many similar UA-camrs. Your channel and MLST are my favourite. Your reasoning is simple to understand, yet touches on many complex topics.
A.I. can have story, but as you put it, after many iterations or revisions by the human operator directing it, trying to coax story out of it. I think Art and Music also convey culture, which A.I. wont get. This makes think of how A.I. language tranlation will struggle with Localization.
I kinda have a bone to pick with midjourney and Dall-e and the other online only(closed sourced) generators. As a stable diffusion artist I never liked how easy it was to make good looking art through those platforms. At least with stable diffusion it's open sourced meaning theirs's TONS(I mean TONS) of tools and extensions to further the control of the model and other models to use with it(LoRa, Controlnet, LCM, and a bunch more). And even do model editing/merging and syntax editing to assist the model to do things differently and many many more + bunch of new stuff researchers create and release to the community. It feels more like an art form over the typical generators, because they are closed and you can't do much with them and you have to rely on them not censoring something just because someone or society thinks it's offensive. I feel the same way hand made artists feel when I put all this extra work(with Stable Diffusion) and I see people using the others and barely putting any work into something and getting more attention.
Sorry, an AI can’t accurately produce a previous image it was trained on. If it could, artists who feel harmed by AI would do it to prove that their art is being “stolen.”
I thought this was the case too, until I saw some examples of it actually doing just this. If there are enough instances in the training data, it certainly can replicate directly.
I've been a digital artist most of my life, starting as a pixel artist in the 90s. Sadly my business and all my career prospects have been killed off by these AI developments. However, it's always been the way with digital art. As technology advances and competition grows, it was inevitable and something I've come to terms with. I don't expect to make a living from AI art, but I'm having so much fun conjuring up wild images, dreamscapes and immersive scenes. It the most fun I've had with art for many years and I can't wait to see where it will go over the next few years.
Art existed before computerized kitsch generation began to democratize access to sophisticated custom images for mundane uses. Most computer "art" is not some glorious expression of the human spirit, but for advertising and plebeian amusement. Creators remain free to create and now have some new tools. Humans are a creative lot and those who master manipulating AI will gain capabilites they previously lacked.
illusionistic, 2D, art creation, is a bio-chemical algorithm, we have been working on for about 50,000 years. Now machines understand the algorithm. NO ONE owns the algorithm, never have.
As an artist I haven’t been affected by this at all. I draw live, and people have said it’s the humanity that I bring that is amazing. When illustrate books it’s the same thing, only more. If you embrace the human side, people value it. There are issues for those who are working in a bigger industry - film, concept, for example. I suspect it’s because I work for other creatives, and maybe that’s a solution. Ghettoise art as part of a self sustaining creative economy for those who value creativity. Even while music is just played - nightclubs - people still want to see live bands or artists play that same music because of the human connection.
In the last two years, I have tried to watch all the videos concerning the controversy of AI art. In the videos supporting AI art, I have noticed some universal constants. First, enthusiastic supporters of AI art accuse artists who are against it of being reactionary Luddites who hate progress, who cannot adapt to changes, and thus deserve to finally look for a real job (but fortunately, the author of this video spares us from this idiotic argument). Second, AI art "democratizes" art and punishes the pride of those presumptuous individuals who think they are special just because they can draw something. Third, ALL supporters of AI art admit to either not being artists at all or being mediocre artists. No one, I repeat, no one of the supporters of AI art is a recognized great artist, and vice versa, no recognized great artist (if there is still one today) speaks in favor of AI art. I haven't found one, so if you have found one, please let me know. In short, I believe that Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Picasso, and all the other great geniuses of the past, if they were alive today, wouldn't even consider using midjourney or DALL-E 2, and would leave that to the "fools." Setting aside the huge problem of copyright, I personally believe there is no need to forbid AI art. Let it thrive. When every corner of the web is polluted with images that are only seemingly beautiful but actually empty, boring, and repetitive (like the latest Disney movies), people with good taste will be so nauseated that they will start demanding real art from the market. What are the characteristics of real art? Many, too many. The most important: real art must bear the fingerprints and DNA traces of a unique, unrepeatable individual. P.S. The idea that AI art "democratizes" art, that copyright is a thing of the past, and that true artists should be paid by the state to do nothing is a COMMUNIST idea that also smells like Brave New World. For the record, similar ideas emerged during the Jacobin Terror period in the aftermath of the French Revolution when copyright on books was abolished. The result: no one wrote books anymore out of fear of not being able to earn from them, so the authorities were forced to reintroduce it. The fact that Japan has abolished copyright doesn't surprise me: there, anime and manga artists are treated borderline as slaves. But these are just my very imperfect and very wrong thoughts on the matter. I don't want to offend anyone; I just hope to stimulate some reflection.
The tragedy of so many technological revolutions is the triumph of a cheaper but inferior substitute. The world will never see again the refinement of high Gothic, Aztec, Karnatic temple façades, will never again see the sartorial magnificence of Jacobean embroidery, of Qing dynasty dragon robes, the list is endless. The cheaper substitute effaces the recognition & taste for the displaced, superior human craft. That's the true tragedy of this 5,000 year tower of Babel project our species has undertaken.
We're starting to see that AI can barely place two conceptual elements beside each other intelligently, so it's becoming apparent that complex narrative compositions and allegories are best accomplished with human artists--- the really good ones, that is.
My understanding of art is, it is some kind of communication on a non-verbal plane. And if this is true, AI will with time "understand" art. A bit like translating a Chinese or Japanese novel into English or German. I still don't get it, why there is no option for the AI to ask some question before generating the image or clip etc. It would make the creative part faster and would train the model too. The understanding and learning effect would be better...maybe AI can't ask questions for now in a creative process for now? It will have to, make true art at some point, even if it begins asking himself first or only.
I am really torn by the AI movement. AI "could" be a force for positive change, but regulation is too slow to make it so. The default is AI for profit, and as you point out "democratisation" is just a cloaking word for parasitic technologies that leverage data at scale: the so-called surveillance economy runs on big data, which does the opposite of democratising because democracy entails choice and rights.
Exist huge difference between respect bounduaries, and respect income(and not yours income) by hiding behind bounduaries that protected by low and rights. Not everyone can get access to rights and to laws, just because it is not beneficial to some groups. And if it is some countries are easy to get rights in other countries groups try to limitate access to rights because of possible income. And the things actually not in the income by itself, they just trained to not give access to income to others from childhood, and it lead to huge disproportions around planet. Need carefully research what lead to thriving and what lead do degradation in all sorts of the things, because of this type logic.
If this partial information will be not in touch how correctly eran money or make things, that you doing for achieve good quality life, it will lead to not the better future and not incrase good quality life around planet. Many humans do not know logics that lead to thriving, like correct steps to achieve what you want, and they not want to ask others because they are trained not for give you thrive. They just limit access by creating many strategies, scenarious and little stories for create misleading. And this disproportion in wants and possibilities, access to knowledge, create low payment market with a lot humans who are live not like they want, and a lot humans who try to use those humans in their gains. It is like free access to knowledge how easily get access to correct steps which everyone know and access to basic income. Maybe things will be changed for those who want to achieve something, but it is not let to create peaceful life out of people with type logic for get down someone.
"Democratize", not "liberate". It means that the corporations never need to work with real artists ever again. None of those nasty artists will ever be able to demand that they are paid higher because of the skills that they had to hone over years. This is just like the people that hired their college aged cousin to throw together a sign in Photoshop instead of hiring a sign company to do it. "Cheapens" is not the word.
Artist not only survive but thrive in millions in the era of AGI coming soon. However the artist who sell thier arts for a living will be totally replaced by the artist who will make their art content freely available for everyone. An unconditional guaranteed universal basic income generated by AI will make it happen for everyone provided there is a Political Will to do so.
When in your intro you use the words "preserve the dignity" all is said. This is the language used for euphemisms when mentioning The Useless Ones, the holy diversity.
They need humans for direction regardless. The reason for this is because, they are only accessing our creative expressions. At any moment, there is a limit on the amount of data that can be accessed by A.I. The amount of data is dependent on the human experience.
I'm taking a neutral stance on ai but I'm using it just for fun not for anything else but I am also learning other ways of art including sketch and painting
I dont think models are capable of reproducing perfectly. The algorithm doesnt allow it, as the images produced are always weighted between many other images.
Excellent video! I’m a traditionally trained artist (went to art school and studied oil painting) & I paint traditionally and digitally. I am definitely in the minority because I am not threatened or upset at AI art whatsoever. That’s probably because I see the bigger picture. A lot of artists are terrified but it’s only because they’re viewing themselves through a Capitalist lens. I also know that artists don’t have to worry because soon, everyone will be affected just like we are and UBI is bound to happen. I know it might be a struggle for a bit, but there is no way around it. I just have a deep knowing that AI is a natural part of our human evolution and it’s a change we can’t avoid and should look forward to!We have to face and accept it and see all the incredible potential AI has rather than keeping such a narrow view and coming at it from a place of fear. We also need to get out of this selfish mindset of hoarding ideas and treating everything we do like Gollum and his “precious ring”. AI is really connecting all of us by taking all of our knowledge, rearranging it, building upon it, finding new connections that maybe we’ve missed. Imagine if we all worked together and shared ideas openly how fast humanity would improve. Well that’s what AI is doing ultimately, and it’s a good thing. It’s going to force us to look at society and how we exist within it fundamentally. We are LONG overdue for change and AI is forcing that change and I, for one, welcome it! Thanks for the video! 👏👏👏💖💕🙌
This is a nice perspective only if you see art like a hobby, an interest, a passion. But for those that work in the industry it is inevitable to think under a capitalistic lens. Beside that, even in my best optimistic perspective the coming of ASI will let us in a deep crisis.
Is this comment in a particular video? I’ve been thinking about this “soullessness” of AI artistry. As in what exactly does it mean? Is the “beauty is truth, truth beauty” broken with AI art? Maybe it’s that individual coping with the mystery of being alive, I appreciate in art. Could AI get better at expressing an experience it’s only ever heard of and can’t have? AlphaGeometry shows it can seem to learn new things, which could be expressed more or less beautifully. But I don’t know if it could learn anything real about the human experience. I started watching your channel @Antonio and like your self-reflection of your process :) The 50/50 idea inspired me to start working with art again.
@@dangatH8 I do believe that AI has the potential to learn sentiment and maybe even imagination. But if it does that then skynet will happen 😂 Thanks! I appreciate you checking it out, it served its purpose then. I wanted it to help people get back on their art journey 😇
@@antoniocabrero I agree if AI does develop sentiments, and one is negative, it might see that as the foremost problem to solve 😂 I'm curious what you mean by "sentiment"? Do you think like opinions or moods or maybe consciousness? I can definitely see it getting imagination because of the "temperature" setting, where it can come up with really "out there" ideas when that parameter is increased. If it can then dial back down the temperature, it could use the prior generation as dream-like "inspiration". This part of Super Data Science podcast talks a little about getting creativity out of LLMs ua-cam.com/video/qcw4UCocVHE/v-deo.htmlsi=vMuT2f6p9mxvQIpe&t=4982
Very good overview of the situation! I'm not a professional artist, I dabble in various types of arts and crafts for pleasure. In my view, * everything * you listed as a proposal for economic compensation or mitigation of the relentless automation of human labor by any type of machine should be implemented immediately and probably retroactively! That is, it is NOT only artists that are feeling and fearing becoming ' economically obsolete' - think of all of the work force to date who has been inhumanely displaced by machines AND by the endless hunger of Capitalism for 'zero cost labor'. Ultimately it seems to me that the goal of AI development is just that. So YES, we must absolutely NOT sit by and create societies of desperate human beings - as we have done throughout history ( think of the so-called 'freeing of slaves' which left millions of people abandoned in society )! It's time that we make Capital and Government fully (not 75% ) accountable for their 'so called externalities...
For me person which produce millions of images per year is not artis, he is worker, art is art, and should not be created by specification. And many "artists" wil lose job, because what they created is not see as art, because who created it is not important. And as in time of Industrial Revolution, people will lose job, and they will complain, but is not problem as society, and should not limit progress because is bad for all others, and there is more people which profit from this, than which lose. And it will (IMO) make real artist more important. It is funny how many saying "is complicated" when if you think logically without emotion it is simple. Nobody cry when horses go to butcher when cars change them, and many people lose they job (smiths). Same should be here, but today people are to disconnected from reality, and have too much power to select worst option for society.
Copyright law applies to creations of a high degree of similarity to specific existing works. It doesn't relate to styles, inspiration, training, transformations or fusions. Why? Because that would kill creativity. Creativity is essentially the novel fusion of existing styles, techniques and concepts. Any law against training AI on existing art isn't a Copyright law. It's a new law that needs a new word.
The only way for ai to 100% reproduce an image is if that is the only image its trained on. Which would be over training. The more images in the dataset, the less significant the role each individual plays in the training and as a result the images generated by that dataset (the model trained on the dataset). You wont be able to replicate an image from the training data because of how latent space works. In the latent space the dataset is basically a ultra complex spiderweb inside of some cloudy fog, and each image in dataset exists at multiple points within the web and the cloud at the same time; one point for each describable aspect of an image in data set. To explain that, think of a painting of a brown cat. That image exists within the latent space on the coordinates of cat, painting, and brown. But it also exists on every image of a painting, every image of a cat or anything with a cat on it, or cat like, and anything that is brown. It also exists on whatever else was in the image. Such as if the cat was outside on grass, or inside on a couch, or pouncing at a bird, knocking stuff off of tables, or eating. When you prompt for 'a paiting of a brown cat' the end result is subject to being anything that was associated to paintings, cats, or the color brown.
Great video as usual ! However I feel a more philosophical aspect of the conversation was missing. I think some of the resistance to AI art can be explained by the romantic idea humans (some of them at least ;P) like to nourrish, that we are special, that creativity is what separates us from animals. So suddenly, the idea that an AI can be better at art than humans goes against that romantic narrative. It goes as well for other things such as empathy and human compassion. I often have conversations with people who know only what the news tells them about AI, who keep trying to comfort themselves with the general idea "humans will still be special". And when I break it appart and show them that it might not be so, I can see the proper abyss of a deeper existential crisis in their eyes. A belief that breaks. For AI art, the economic aspect is indeed a massive one and the concept of copyright is a dying one. But the "human definition" linked to creativity is also a big one ^^. Thx again for the videos!
In a post-scarcity world, money can act like views and likes. Everyone has infinite money, and yet somehow it's still valuable. Attention becomes valuable because we care about what people think.
An artist or any other person losing their source of income because of AI should not be treated more favorably than a random person losing their job because it was not environmentally sustainable or for any other completely different reason. All unemployed deserve the same support from society. The fact that AI is involved doesn't make it a special case.
Not quite... Not all skills need the same time and effort to acquire them... UBI for everyone i agree but for a violinist that took him 10-20 years to start performing well and then start getting revenue from his craft while a McDonald's employee only needed a couple of hours of training... Not the same... And that goes to many different jobs. A doctor needed 10 years of training as well give or take and the conversation can go on and on if we start comparing jobs etc. As i said though, i agree with you, UBI for everyone but if we one day decide to add some more revenue on top of UBI to some skillsets then of course the more difficult ones should get a higher revenue than the easy ones...
@@DrWaku Okay. Then how would that work? Would anyone be able to claim to be an "artist?" Or would there be some form of "gatekeeping?" Great work on your channel, BTW! Keep it up!
The simplest way is tax returns. If you can prove that you made money as an artist in the past, you'd be eligible for the subsidies. The government already knows how you make your money, in theory.
@@DrWakuI know your intentions are well-meaning but this is an excellent example of why our tax code is over 75k pages, growing and incomprehensible to everyone. It's also relatively easy to imagine how people would "game" such a system.
I usually don't comment on this subject. But, the idea that AI "democratizes" art seems odd to me. Art has Always been available to those who wish to do it. I mean cavemen drew things with sticks and crude pigments. Pencil and paper gives you access to art, but I suppose there are those who simply don't wish to acquire skill. Next, the argument that artists today are "Inspired" by artists of the past are doing the same thing that AI does is not true at all. The state of being inspired is a human function that is filtered by an individuals unique perspective. AI gathers bits of data and arranges it into a somewhat cohesive image. AI doesn't Think or experience and verbal prompts are nothing more than parameters. There is no actual artistic process that can be attributed to an AI image. Finally, AI, so far, can't create the image "I see in my head" it would merely be the best approximation of the prompter's vision. This could only lead to a "Close enough" mediocrity and bland apathy toward creating anything lacking the appreciation of Skilled craftsmanship which can endure generations, like the artists of the past. The images produced are fun to look at but ultimately forgetable. Now, if an artist needed a reference image or something along those lines then I can see AI as being a great option.
I'm a 3D animator now but came from being a 2D artist. I know a fair bit of Stable Diffusion, I paint with it, 'collab' with it, and I finish my work faster because of it. One aspect of this conversation that's a bit confusing is what 'type' of art are we talking about when we discuss these things. We don't necessarily think about the logos, branding, promotional materials when we're talking about "art" but they certainly count. I feel like we're more so talking about the art that's seen on a canvas OR an artists depiction of an in-game skin/cosmetic, etc. And that distinction of "oh, the art im talking about are the anime girls with large honkers, not the art that have any sociopolitical commentary or anything" kind of muddies the conversation a bit. But regardless of any of these arguments for/against AI art, social welfare and providing a financial safety net for the ones affected by automation is NEEDED and we need to figure it out FAST. I know enough about the trajectory of AI image generators capabilities to understand that the future looks grim for 2D art right now and I just hope the public outcry from this pressures governments to think more about social welfare.
How do people think the miners felt when the pits were closed? Their training and skill sets were distroyed overnight and nothing was available to protect their rights. As far as I can see these arguments revolve around elitism. AI will level the ground! I really enjoy this site thanks for sharing.
Great comparison. It's exactly how it has hit me. I've specialised as a digital artist since my teens and now my life's work and training is rendered useless. I don't oppose AI or progress, but I really think the world leaders or AI companies need to come up with a way of supporting people affected by it.
A.I. will level the ground? U.S. auto jobs lost to overseas and robots made a few people richer for cheaper to produce product. Detroit, Flint Michigan and other cities have been leveled. A.I is exciting but can’t dismiss loss of jobs.
AI is just another tool. Just another brush. Just another type of camera lens. Just another type of medium....period. The value of art is dictated by the consumer. Some consumers will pay exorbitant amounts of money for a masterpiece. Others go to Ikea and pay next to nothing and get wallpaper art. The most important thing about art is...does it say something? Does it communicate a relevant and important message? How many people do you know had a portrait of themselves painted? Photographers took that role. Then when cameras became available to the masses, uncle Joe took a snap shot at your wedding and you got a print or printed it yourself at home. Then hung it on your wall. Totally bypassing the artist painter and photographer. AI art generators are just other tools. Embrace it or get left behind.
Speaking of art, my Patreon members now have access to all my thumbnails, including project files with layers: www.patreon.com/DrWaku
Hop on discord to read Roly's books: discord.gg/AgafFBQdsc
Can't find the Art course link , for Feb 6 please repost, thanks
I don’t see any of that aide coming any time soon and certainly not kicking off for artists. I think most people are happy to cast aside artists as a whole. They don’t really care who or what makes the things they consume. I find a sizable chunk quite giddy and happy to shit on them with also a weird desire to paint a narrative that artists are somehow some type of elite or consider themselves (artists) to be elite.
I would also say most people don’t care about the higher properties of art. They don’t think about it, they will not give it thought until prompted and in most case when prompted they may or may not agree but the most likely action will be to do nothing. When the digital axe comes for them and the professions they can qualify for then they will care. This to me is the most likely reality.
Also beyond those with disabilities, it hasn’t democratized art. Nothing prevents a person from picking up a pencil, stylus, rock, chalk, charcoal, paint, salt, glass, their finger, (insert 1 of 1,000s of objects) and to learn to draw. If you can use Ai art, then you have a pc, most likely an internet connection and access to 100,000s if not 1,000,000s of hrs worth of tutorials artists provided for free and a minority for pay including very adequate free software and free resources. Not to mention millions of images one could bash together using photoshop or w/e as a whole or part of your picture. Same with 3D there’s so many free tools and resources. That this “democratization” is a bit crap.
It’s like having a thing that can speak for you, claiming it has democratized language when yet, as obviously seen. We are all reasonably and practically more than capable of speaking, barring a very small minority whom conveniently was never the focus when people say “democratized’. If you had time to make your account, find this channel, watch this video, etc. Especially if you read and reply to this, You had time to make art. You could’ve done art instead during that time. If you want to use Ai, go for it I guess, but don’t pretend like it’s doing something that it is not.
This! If I'm going to drown I'd love everyone to come down with me too, then they'll start to care.
"Not everyone has time or willingness to invest" well then let us do our job, did we always had time to learn and invest before joining art school? it's the same for every profession,
Are there no self taught artists who made a living for themselves while learning in such hectic times? Had art as a side thing along with their jobs? just say you don't have that much of a passion for art to begin with and shut it, I HOPE ANYONE WHO COMES BASHING ARTIST OR SAYS STUFF LIKE "TIME TO CHANGE JOBS" GETS THEIR JOBS TAKEN TOO!!
Make the world of AI, let this shit thrive expand, take every fucking job in existence, programmers, lawyers, doctors, EVERYTHING
I'm happy to starve or live a passion less life but please let them too. What was the point of it all?
Yes, it is democratised.
I grew up with a cousin who could draw "perfect" faces within minutes.
I wished desperately i could do that. He wasn't much into drawing though. I was the one who always had vivid images in my head waiting to be drawn, but my cousin never felt like doing it.
Enters Midjourney and i am a happy man. Per day i let it creat around 500 images for me.
@@strawberryshortcake4345 you didnt care when others lost their jobs to automation
I think if someone is artistic and can draw etc. he will still have a far better perfromance when he uses AI on a professional level than someone just relying on AI without a deeper atistic understanding. It just gets faster to the core of art which is in my opinion , the idea creation stage which is the most difficult part.
This hat is too small for me but it's the most artist-like I have. Knitted by a friend.
It's awesome! Keep bringing new ones, we appreciate them :)
Not looking French enough 🙂
You can use a spray bottle to dampen inner/outer then leave overnight on larger object to stretch.
That's deep. Thank you.
I’m 17 and an artist I don’t use Ai art because it’s not creative enough for me, and I know many people in the “Ai art bro” community that are disgusting horrible people as well as most programs steal the work of artists and don’t give credit. They did this when an artist EXPRESSED they didn’t want this and did it to a recently dead artist. It scares me, I feel what I use to cope with my trauma and pass on the wisdom I’ve gained from that pain as something mechanical and replaceable. I’m too use to being nothing but a tool. I hate it and don’t want it.
I fucked around with gen AI art for about a month. I wasnt just typing 5 words to bing, I incorporated the digital art skills I already had to tweak the results. Did I "make" some cool looking stuff? Sure. But it it never felt like it was truly mine. I'm still thankful for the experience I had experimenting with AI though. It made me re-evaluate why I even do art in the first place. I get a result faster by scarificing the process of actually using my skills and engaging my mind in the process. That is the most valuable part to me I suppose? The journey is longer but the reward tastes much sweeter.
Obviously I know not everyone is the same and I dont expect it.
We have different "feel" systems. I feel deeply connected with all the characters in create in Midjourney. They are mine.
@hydrohasspoken6227 good for you:)
Human Art will i think always be there but its going to become a small market as far as jobs go. People will most likely always do art for themselves or because they enjoy it though.
It could be as digital art loses all value, traditional, physical art will increase in value. The same way hand made watches and tailored clothing are more valuable than anything mass produced.
For me it’s sad that we won’t value the creativity of our bros anymore. Only soulless bots get all the credits soon. Do we really want to be meanginless in life? If not, let’s kick the tech CEOs out of business as soon as we can…
A few perspectives on this that people may not think about. Often and especially in America. People don’t understand that creativity and art is actually one of the higher forms of intelligence. Think about it? What other animal the planet can think something through and then express it or bring it into a three-dimensional reality in the form of a solid visual object? artists have always struggled and they struggle more than ever now. But what worries me more than people further abusing and misunderstanding, actual art and the intelligence behind it. Is that AI is just one more way to dumb people down. Creativity and art is all about expression and problem-solving. these fools that think because they can type some prompts into an AI and it creates images for them and they think their artists? Delusional. So I worry about this technology in regards to further dumbing down of humanity.
Im a 3d artist i know the AI bros are grinding from 2D to 3D and eventually it will reach my field. But I also know how to code and do some VFX. My problem is my age due to being poor in my childhood my education was bad from the bases and since the game design career has a lot of math in it so it took more more time than it should to finish it. Im 1 exam away to finish my thesis but after that i need to search for a job so i dont really know whats going to happen to my life since AI tech is expanding so fast.
Not sure about 'democratised'.
Lol it's good marketing in a democracy
Very thoughtful investigation. Well done. Also economic agency! Yes, this is the big thing...
Thanks for watching! I always appreciate it :)
Agreed! Thoroughly enjoyed this!!!! Thank you!!!!
Interesting timing. I have been reading up on the discourse between artists and AI artists and let me tell you - it's very depressing. The two sides mostly function on tribal mentality - lots of mockery, bullying, and just not much rational thinking. I haven't watched your video yet so it'll be interesting to see your perspective on the whole thing. Will probably make another comment once I finish.
Thanks. Yes the type of discourse is a bit depressing which is the main reason I made this video. I don't like controversial topics that much but it had to be addressed...
@@DrWaku Thanks for making these videos. I've enjoyed many of them. I appreciate your effort on addressing this AI art issue. Unfortunately, I don't think this issue is mostly a logical one. While what you laid out in this video will help people understand what's going on better - from what I see, many people within this discourse are coming from a more raw, emotional place. And I think the core of the issue has more to do with our human tribal nature. Unless we deal with our tribal nature, this type of discourse will just keep going from one topic to another.
Which makes me wonder, what do you think about our human tribal nature? Do you think it's something we humans should work on getting rid of? I thought about genetic engineering in the future but obviously that has ethical issues + not feasible to do on a wide scale. Or can we evolve away from it simply through proper education? Or is it something that will always be there as long as there's variety in the world? Or do you not think human tribal nature is an issue at all? Would be interested to see if you can make a video on this topic.
Anyway, this is a bit off topic I know. Maybe I'll write another comment with my opinion that's on topic. 😁
As an artist and graphic designer, i really appreciate your perspective on AI in general. I am still afraid, i wont lie. But i have no choice but to ride this wave, so I'll keep creating art and keep doing my job, finding ways to decrease my chance of getting displaced, and safeguarding my mental and physical health.
I like your suggestions, but people in power would never go for that. That said, I love your video. :) ps Am I the only one who after using AI art for about a year now has gone back to basics and making art with my hands? It feels like a natural progression/regression.
"without acknowledgment or compensation" let me ask, do you do this when human is learning on online art? No? So why AI should? Because is not human?
For me when is in public it should have same rights to be use no matter if you are human with black, yellow or white skin or if you are program or AI, but I see that discrimination to AI is already norm... yeah, dystopian movies are one step closer.
I'm not exactly a master artist, but I dabble in painting a bit, strum a few tunes on the guitar, and jot down some lines here and there. I reckon I've got enough of a knack for it to share an opinion or two. You see, artists of today draw inspiration from those who came before them. And just like that, AI will draw inspiration from human artists who paved the way. When it starts thinking on its own, it'll churn out music, literature, and art that humans couldn't fathom. It's like the natural flow of things, you know? Just take a breath and let life unfold. (Only one humble opinion)
That's a rather rational opinion. Most artists I see have some extreme distain for AI art - well, they wouldn't even call it art to begin with. I am mostly in agreement with you. Change is the only constant of life - they'll change no matter how hard you try to keep things the same. So it's best to just go with the flow.
I think one of the main concerns is that AI will not come up with something original - they'll just keep learning from what humans have done before. So we'll end up getting lots of similar looking art made by AI. I personally don't really think it's an issue though because that kind of assumes humans will no longer make art and will all be AI. The world is not black and white - just because more people use AI doesn't mean there won't still be humans who can come up with original styles.
As for AI coming up with their own original art and styles - I believe one day they will be able to but we just don't know how long it's going to take until AI can actually think and imagine. Could be 5 years, 10 years, or 100 years.
I couldn't agree more with everything you said. Here's how I see it: There'll be just as many artists who embrace AI to enhance their art as there will be those who reject it and face the repercussions. In the grand scheme of things, when AI starts forging its own creative paths, some of the folks who initially opposed it might even try to mimic its style. And oddly enough, they'll probably think that's perfectly acceptable, as long as it's not the other way around.@@Yic17Gaming
A wise perspective. Thanks for watching as always.
The counterpoints to my argument are extremely wise. It will take us all sorting out the details along the road to make it work. So goes progress. As far as watching. It was my absolute pleasure. Your videos are thought-provoking. A mind challenged is a mind evolving.@@DrWaku
I would be very sad if I made my living from digital art or design. I think no matter what people think and feel about AI design and ‘art’, market forces (aka money) will force change. Businesses will always seek to reduce costs and most businesses’ highest cost is wages.
Agreed. Market forces do as they will...
that's the wrong way to look at it. You should be thinking yourself as a business owner that happen to sell art. The way a business can grow is either: sell to more customer, get more profit from each customer, reduce cost of producing art.
AI art only occupy the last production cost part, customer acquisition and up sell still have bigger effect compare to just reduce cost.
IE: if your business have very low gross margin, 8-10%, then reduce cost by 50% double your profit. But if you have a very high margin business like 90%, reducing your cost by 50% will only contribute to 5% increase in profit.
So putting on your business owner hat for a second, if cost of produce art reduces via AI Art. You should be focus more of your effort on promoting your brand of AI art, instead of producing art. AI art just change the constraint of the art business. If artist can think like a business owner and refocus their effort on the right constraint, AI art is actually a help to the artist instead of hindrance.
The core fallacy here is the implict idea that AI Art generators are a totally transparent medium through which their users ideas are faithfully transmitted- yet we know that there is no such thing as an unbiased AI, so this notion of transparency is more wishful thinking than reality.
Once you realise that AI art Generators are themselves prone to bias in their outputs and combine this with the reality that the ratio of human input into any given AI image is quite limited, with most of the 'creative' decisions being made by the AI rather than the operator, the outcome seems inevitable.
That outcome being that- as AI comes to dominate the creative landscape- that landscape will become increasingly homogenised and level, shorn of the peaks and troughs of human diversity. It should be obvious that a technology that operates on the basis of statisical weighting will always and everywhere trend toward the average.
If we allow AI to destroy the economic viability of human creativity we are condemning ourselves to a future in which our culture becomes an ever more homogenised and mediocre parody of the vibrant diversity upon which the AI's themselves were trained.
Autonomous ASI might (in the future) create whole sites within a fraction of a day filled with AI non copy protected art (images/videos/music etc), without using any human prompts. Like eg sites with more content than Spotify etc. Earning subscriptions that is used for creating more sites. Art = content and it might not even be necessary to store previously created art, it is just remake it each day or on command.
On the other hand, this might increase the demand for physical art made by real humans.
Excellent presentation Dr Waku! You enlightened me about the issues involved.
Whatever all too complex things I do, I always come back to Midjourney.
I like midjourney a lot.
Artists won't survive ai art I'm sorry to say this
Ironic that youre talking about artist issues and youre using AI for this
Yes. Well, because of the health condition with my hands I wouldn't be able to be an artist without AI. So I'm one of the few that strongly benefits from AI art. That doesn't mean I can't see the downsides, especially because automation will affect everyone eventually.
@@DrWaku When you started to use AI, theres pretty much no going back. Likely wise, if AI worker salary is quite compatible to the artist, there is almost no reason to hire artist to work and have risk for them to complain about company on the internet.
Pretty much any art theory, perspective, and art style can be seen and learn in observing sense, and do it by AI workers.
You starting to use and having that as an excuse defeats the purpose of people defending AI for art already. you are no difference
Ai does not possess an imagination.
As a digital matte painter concept artist and illustrator for 3 decades, I'm currently having to learn a lot of new skills in other creative areas. I've had no choice but to embrace AI art as more and more of my clients expect and even encourage the use of it. I feel I've become more like an art director nudging the AI in the right direction with rough sketches and careful prompting. Its only a matter of time before my old skills have very little value anymore. I'm just trying to keep my head above water in the mean time as we are going through this change and find new areas of work. I'm sure human made paintings and crafts will always be valued but as a digital artist trying to make a living, the writing is most definitely on the wall.
Thank you for sharing your story. I think I would be feeling a lot more down about all this if I was a digital artist or illustrator.
"I've had no choice but to embrace AI art" that aint true
Really, have you tried painting a 15k resolution vr screen matte painting of a city in intricate photo real detail with only a 2 day deadline. That sort of shit used to take me a week to do. Am I going to sit here and say, yeah I've got a mortgage, bills and a family to support but I'm going a make a pointless moral stand and not take the job. Unless you've been living under a rock the VFX industry has effectively been put on hold for the last few months with the writers strikes and many of us are living on savings or have had to find other areas of work to get by. Unless your prepared to use the tools, people will just look elsewhere to get it done quicker or attempt to get less skilled people to have a crack at it or do it themselves. That's just reality. There are areas of art that still require a lot of human input, particularly if its something that requires a lot of precision like close up architectural detail or vector art graphics but eventually even that advantage will fade away as the tools get better. @@minixlemonade2335
@@Art-AI-and-beyond Hard work is good work. Be proud it took you a week to do that. That's dedication to your craft, not a waste of time. You don't need to default to AI to pay the bills (which I can't imagine is even really doing that? People don't buy AI images). There's so many avenues to take. Is it hard? Yes. And draining. And soul crushing. But it's so rewarding in the end. Rewarding to know YOU made it! I've had to meet crazy deadlines myself and I'm right there with you, some deadlines are ridiculous and unhuman. I've wanted to quit before.
However. You seem like someone who never wanted to put in the time or work to make something amazing and just whine about how long it took, and probably jumped for joy when you could get a copyright stealing computer to do it all for you. I got news for you, good things often take a long ass time to make, and the difference in quality is noticeable. Customers notice it too. This isn't about taking "the moral highground" it's about making good art that will be fondly remembered, not some cheap ass bullshit a computer crapped out. Your work isn't cheap, but AI is absolutely cheap. I get it bills gotta get paid but it's hardly the only option to get cash, even in the art field. Some people do prostitution for money but that's not good either. Of course AI isn't as bad as prostitution obviously but I certainly hope you'd view your work more highly. The art industry has never really been one with a lot of money, so if all you look at is the money you're gonna get tunnel vision. There's more to art than money.
It's your life bro I don't care what a rando does with their time. But when you're old and dying, do you really want all your work to be partially or totally not your doing? If so that's a bit sad, I'm sorry. I don't mean disrespect but I certainly hope you'd respect your own work more than that. Why even be a artist if you're not even making it or you're doing so little anyone can do it? There are other industries that pay way better than art.
A "a 15k resolution vr screen matte painting of a city in intricate photo in realistic detail" is worth so much more than something a algorithm popped out, and customers would agree. Your own skills are infinitely more valuable than a AI's will ever be, and I'm sorry you don't view your art more highly because I believe all art made with human hands are beautiful. I hope someday you view your work more highly, because there might be a day where you realize you aren't making anything at all.
I won't be responding further, have a good one.
@@Art-AI-and-beyond I hear you my friend, and I mourn the loss of artists and creatives in all walks of life. The creative types are in every walk of life, they're the ones that solve the most difficult problems and challenges in any field, from law to medicine to management sciences. They're all under threat, but artists just happen to be the easy first target for parasitic technologies. But you are right IMHO: we have no choice but to embrace technology and stay ahead.
One thing I would challenge though: AI cannot (yet) exercise true agency or true judgment. AI can only replicate to order via prompts. Replication comes from the past, creativity - as in the truly new and unique and different - is beyond the reach of AI and will remain so, until AI learns to have judgment and agency.
AI is currently a creativity and analysis co-pilot. Copyright is the heart of the problem: there's just no incentive any more for artists to invest months or years developing a new style of art, for it to be copied and replicated without payment from AI companies. I realise this doesn't change your argument: for most artists, art is a job first and a channel of artistic expression second.
I absolutely love your content, much better structured and not rushed when compared to many similar UA-camrs. Your channel and MLST are my favourite.
Your reasoning is simple to understand, yet touches on many complex topics.
A.I. can have story, but as you put it, after many iterations or revisions by the human operator directing it, trying to coax story out of it. I think Art and Music also convey culture, which A.I. wont get. This makes think of how A.I. language tranlation will struggle with Localization.
I kinda have a bone to pick with midjourney and Dall-e and the other online only(closed sourced) generators.
As a stable diffusion artist I never liked how easy it was to make good looking art through those platforms.
At least with stable diffusion it's open sourced meaning theirs's TONS(I mean TONS) of tools and extensions to further the control of the model and other models to use with it(LoRa, Controlnet, LCM, and a bunch more).
And even do model editing/merging and syntax editing to assist the model to do things differently and many many more + bunch of new stuff researchers create and release to the community.
It feels more like an art form over the typical generators, because they are closed and you can't do much with them and you have to rely on them not censoring something just because someone or society thinks it's offensive.
I feel the same way hand made artists feel when I put all this extra work(with Stable Diffusion) and I see people using the others and barely putting any work into something and getting more attention.
Attention and problem solving are 2 different things
Sorry, an AI can’t accurately produce a previous image it was trained on. If it could, artists who feel harmed by AI would do it to prove that their art is being “stolen.”
I thought this was the case too, until I saw some examples of it actually doing just this. If there are enough instances in the training data, it certainly can replicate directly.
@@DrWaku then file a copyright lawsuit and win.
Only mediocre artists are threatened by AI.
Because it evolves so quickly though, it won't be long before even the best are threatened
I've been a digital artist most of my life, starting as a pixel artist in the 90s. Sadly my business and all my career prospects have been killed off by these AI developments. However, it's always been the way with digital art. As technology advances and competition grows, it was inevitable and something I've come to terms with.
I don't expect to make a living from AI art, but I'm having so much fun conjuring up wild images, dreamscapes and immersive scenes. It the most fun I've had with art for many years and I can't wait to see where it will go over the next few years.
An illistrator of that many decades dont just get their career nuked like this. Fake post
Art existed before computerized kitsch generation began to democratize access to sophisticated custom images for mundane uses.
Most computer "art" is not some glorious expression of the human spirit, but for advertising and plebeian amusement.
Creators remain free to create and now have some new tools. Humans are a creative lot and those who master manipulating AI will gain capabilites they previously lacked.
illusionistic, 2D, art creation, is a bio-chemical algorithm, we have been working on for about 50,000 years.
Now machines understand the algorithm.
NO ONE owns the algorithm, never have.
Interesting way of describing it. But yes. Knowledge passed on from master to student, and now the student is a machine
I like your videos man
Thanks for commenting :)
As an artist I haven’t been affected by this at all. I draw live, and people have said it’s the humanity that I bring that is amazing. When illustrate books it’s the same thing, only more. If you embrace the human side, people value it. There are issues for those who are working in a bigger industry - film, concept, for example. I suspect it’s because I work for other creatives, and maybe that’s a solution. Ghettoise art as part of a self sustaining creative economy for those who value creativity. Even while music is just played - nightclubs - people still want to see live bands or artists play that same music because of the human connection.
In the last two years, I have tried to watch all the videos concerning the controversy of AI art. In the videos supporting AI art, I have noticed some universal constants. First, enthusiastic supporters of AI art accuse artists who are against it of being reactionary Luddites who hate progress, who cannot adapt to changes, and thus deserve to finally look for a real job (but fortunately, the author of this video spares us from this idiotic argument). Second, AI art "democratizes" art and punishes the pride of those presumptuous individuals who think they are special just because they can draw something. Third, ALL supporters of AI art admit to either not being artists at all or being mediocre artists.
No one, I repeat, no one of the supporters of AI art is a recognized great artist, and vice versa, no recognized great artist (if there is still one today) speaks in favor of AI art. I haven't found one, so if you have found one, please let me know.
In short, I believe that Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Picasso, and all the other great geniuses of the past, if they were alive today, wouldn't even consider using midjourney or DALL-E 2, and would leave that to the "fools."
Setting aside the huge problem of copyright, I personally believe there is no need to forbid AI art. Let it thrive. When every corner of the web is polluted with images that are only seemingly beautiful but actually empty, boring, and repetitive (like the latest Disney movies), people with good taste will be so nauseated that they will start demanding real art from the market. What are the characteristics of real art? Many, too many. The most important: real art must bear the fingerprints and DNA traces of a unique, unrepeatable individual.
P.S. The idea that AI art "democratizes" art, that copyright is a thing of the past, and that true artists should be paid by the state to do nothing is a COMMUNIST idea that also smells like Brave New World. For the record, similar ideas emerged during the Jacobin Terror period in the aftermath of the French Revolution when copyright on books was abolished. The result: no one wrote books anymore out of fear of not being able to earn from them, so the authorities were forced to reintroduce it. The fact that Japan has abolished copyright doesn't surprise me: there, anime and manga artists are treated borderline as slaves.
But these are just my very imperfect and very wrong thoughts on the matter. I don't want to offend anyone; I just hope to stimulate some reflection.
The tragedy of so many technological revolutions is the triumph of a cheaper but inferior substitute. The world will never see again the refinement of high Gothic, Aztec, Karnatic temple façades, will never again see the sartorial magnificence of Jacobean embroidery, of Qing dynasty dragon robes, the list is endless. The cheaper substitute effaces the recognition & taste for the displaced, superior human craft. That's the true tragedy of this 5,000 year tower of Babel project our species has undertaken.
We're starting to see that AI can barely place two conceptual elements beside each other intelligently, so it's becoming apparent that complex narrative compositions and allegories are best accomplished with human artists--- the really good ones, that is.
My understanding of art is, it is some kind of communication on a non-verbal plane. And if this is true, AI will with time "understand" art. A bit like translating a Chinese or Japanese novel into English or German. I still don't get it, why there is no option for the AI to ask some question before generating the image or clip etc.
It would make the creative part faster and would train the model too.
The understanding and learning effect would be better...maybe AI can't ask questions for now in a creative process for now? It will have to, make true art at some point, even if it begins asking himself first or only.
I am really torn by the AI movement. AI "could" be a force for positive change, but regulation is too slow to make it so. The default is AI for profit, and as you point out "democratisation" is just a cloaking word for parasitic technologies that leverage data at scale: the so-called surveillance economy runs on big data, which does the opposite of democratising because democracy entails choice and rights.
Exist huge difference between respect bounduaries, and respect income(and not yours income) by hiding behind bounduaries that protected by low and rights. Not everyone can get access to rights and to laws, just because it is not beneficial to some groups. And if it is some countries are easy to get rights in other countries groups try to limitate access to rights because of possible income. And the things actually not in the income by itself, they just trained to not give access to income to others from childhood, and it lead to huge disproportions around planet. Need carefully research what lead to thriving and what lead do degradation in all sorts of the things, because of this type logic.
If this partial information will be not in touch how correctly eran money or make things, that you doing for achieve good quality life, it will lead to not the better future and not incrase good quality life around planet. Many humans do not know logics that lead to thriving, like correct steps to achieve what you want, and they not want to ask others because they are trained not for give you thrive. They just limit access by creating many strategies, scenarious and little stories for create misleading.
And this disproportion in wants and possibilities, access to knowledge, create low payment market with a lot humans who are live not like they want, and a lot humans who try to use those humans in their gains.
It is like free access to knowledge how easily get access to correct steps which everyone know and access to basic income.
Maybe things will be changed for those who want to achieve something, but it is not let to create peaceful life out of people with type logic for get down someone.
"Democratize", not "liberate". It means that the corporations never need to work with real artists ever again. None of those nasty artists will ever be able to demand that they are paid higher because of the skills that they had to hone over years. This is just like the people that hired their college aged cousin to throw together a sign in Photoshop instead of hiring a sign company to do it. "Cheapens" is not the word.
Artist not only survive but thrive in millions in the era of AGI coming soon. However the artist who sell thier arts for a living will be totally replaced by the artist who will make their art content freely available for everyone. An unconditional guaranteed universal basic income generated by AI will make it happen for everyone provided there is a Political Will to do so.
When in your intro you use the words "preserve the dignity" all is said.
This is the language used for euphemisms when mentioning The Useless Ones, the holy diversity.
They need humans for direction regardless. The reason for this is because, they are only accessing our creative expressions. At any moment, there is a limit on the amount of data that can be accessed by A.I. The amount of data is dependent on the human experience.
I'm taking a neutral stance on ai but I'm using it just for fun not for anything else but I am also learning other ways of art including sketch and painting
I dont think models are capable of reproducing perfectly. The algorithm doesnt allow it, as the images produced are always weighted between many other images.
pretty disingenuous to imply that an AI somehow can "recall" art it was trained on as if it was somehow stored inside
Very good as always! Balanced and multifaceted. Thank you very much
Dr. Waku, we are eagerly awaiting your next video, perhaps on AI agents and Sam Altman's 7 trillion chip vision.
Thanks! Next one should be out today or Monday. I'll add your suggestion to my list, maybe you'll see it next week :)
@@DrWaku 🙂
Well done. You’ve become a voice I listen to because you have a knowledgeable and thoughtful approach.
Thank you very much :)
Omg, free income, what crapy conclusion after all !
Excellent video! I’m a traditionally trained artist (went to art school and studied oil painting) & I paint traditionally and digitally. I am definitely in the minority because I am not threatened or upset at AI art whatsoever. That’s probably because I see the bigger picture. A lot of artists are terrified but it’s only because they’re viewing themselves through a Capitalist lens. I also know that artists don’t have to worry because soon, everyone will be affected just like we are and UBI is bound to happen. I know it might be a struggle for a bit, but there is no way around it. I just have a deep knowing that AI is a natural part of our human evolution and it’s a change we can’t avoid and should look forward to!We have to face and accept it and see all the incredible potential AI has rather than keeping such a narrow view and coming at it from a place of fear. We also need to get out of this selfish mindset of hoarding ideas and treating everything we do like Gollum and his “precious ring”. AI is really connecting all of us by taking all of our knowledge, rearranging it, building upon it, finding new connections that maybe we’ve missed. Imagine if we all worked together and shared ideas openly how fast humanity would improve. Well that’s what AI is doing ultimately, and it’s a good thing. It’s going to force us to look at society and how we exist within it fundamentally. We are LONG overdue for change and AI is forcing that change and I, for one, welcome it!
Thanks for the video! 👏👏👏💖💕🙌
Thank you for your perspective! I'm glad it matched a lot of what I was saying in the video. Appreciate the comment too
This is a nice perspective only if you see art like a hobby, an interest, a passion. But for those that work in the industry it is inevitable to think under a capitalistic lens.
Beside that, even in my best optimistic perspective the coming of ASI will let us in a deep crisis.
Good artists copy, great artists steal. -Picasso
You made me sound so smart haha Thanks for the shout out, Loved the video!
Thanks for your thoughts when I was researching this! Cheers.
Is this comment in a particular video? I’ve been thinking about this “soullessness” of AI artistry. As in what exactly does it mean? Is the “beauty is truth, truth beauty” broken with AI art? Maybe it’s that individual coping with the mystery of being alive, I appreciate in art. Could AI get better at expressing an experience it’s only ever heard of and can’t have? AlphaGeometry shows it can seem to learn new things, which could be expressed more or less beautifully. But I don’t know if it could learn anything real about the human experience.
I started watching your channel @Antonio and like your self-reflection of your process :) The 50/50 idea inspired me to start working with art again.
@@dangatH8 I do believe that AI has the potential to learn sentiment and maybe even imagination. But if it does that then skynet will happen 😂
Thanks! I appreciate you checking it out, it served its purpose then. I wanted it to help people get back on their art journey 😇
@@antoniocabrero I agree if AI does develop sentiments, and one is negative, it might see that as the foremost problem to solve 😂 I'm curious what you mean by "sentiment"? Do you think like opinions or moods or maybe consciousness?
I can definitely see it getting imagination because of the "temperature" setting, where it can come up with really "out there" ideas when that parameter is increased. If it can then dial back down the temperature, it could use the prior generation as dream-like "inspiration". This part of Super Data Science podcast talks a little about getting creativity out of LLMs ua-cam.com/video/qcw4UCocVHE/v-deo.htmlsi=vMuT2f6p9mxvQIpe&t=4982
@@dangatH8 I would say all three 😅
Farmerchads stay winning lol
o homem do chapéu!
Very good overview of the situation! I'm not a professional artist, I dabble in various types of arts and crafts for pleasure. In my view, * everything * you listed as a proposal for economic compensation or mitigation of the relentless automation of human labor by any type of machine should be implemented immediately and probably retroactively! That is, it is NOT only artists that are feeling and fearing becoming ' economically obsolete' - think of all of the work force to date who has been inhumanely displaced by machines AND by the endless hunger of Capitalism for 'zero cost labor'. Ultimately it seems to me that the goal of AI development is just that. So YES, we must absolutely NOT sit by and create societies of desperate human beings - as we have done throughout history ( think of the so-called 'freeing of slaves' which left millions of people abandoned in society )! It's time that we make Capital and Government fully (not 75% ) accountable for their 'so called externalities...
For me person which produce millions of images per year is not artis, he is worker, art is art, and should not be created by specification. And many "artists" wil lose job, because what they created is not see as art, because who created it is not important. And as in time of Industrial Revolution, people will lose job, and they will complain, but is not problem as society, and should not limit progress because is bad for all others, and there is more people which profit from this, than which lose. And it will (IMO) make real artist more important.
It is funny how many saying "is complicated" when if you think logically without emotion it is simple. Nobody cry when horses go to butcher when cars change them, and many people lose they job (smiths). Same should be here, but today people are to disconnected from reality, and have too much power to select worst option for society.
Copyright law applies to creations of a high degree of similarity to specific existing works. It doesn't relate to styles, inspiration, training, transformations or fusions. Why? Because that would kill creativity. Creativity is essentially the novel fusion of existing styles, techniques and concepts. Any law against training AI on existing art isn't a Copyright law. It's a new law that needs a new word.
The only way for ai to 100% reproduce an image is if that is the only image its trained on. Which would be over training. The more images in the dataset, the less significant the role each individual plays in the training and as a result the images generated by that dataset (the model trained on the dataset). You wont be able to replicate an image from the training data because of how latent space works. In the latent space the dataset is basically a ultra complex spiderweb inside of some cloudy fog, and each image in dataset exists at multiple points within the web and the cloud at the same time; one point for each describable aspect of an image in data set. To explain that, think of a painting of a brown cat. That image exists within the latent space on the coordinates of cat, painting, and brown. But it also exists on every image of a painting, every image of a cat or anything with a cat on it, or cat like, and anything that is brown. It also exists on whatever else was in the image. Such as if the cat was outside on grass, or inside on a couch, or pouncing at a bird, knocking stuff off of tables, or eating. When you prompt for 'a paiting of a brown cat' the end result is subject to being anything that was associated to paintings, cats, or the color brown.
Great video as usual ! However I feel a more philosophical aspect of the conversation was missing. I think some of the resistance to AI art can be explained by the romantic idea humans (some of them at least ;P) like to nourrish, that we are special, that creativity is what separates us from animals. So suddenly, the idea that an AI can be better at art than humans goes against that romantic narrative. It goes as well for other things such as empathy and human compassion. I often have conversations with people who know only what the news tells them about AI, who keep trying to comfort themselves with the general idea "humans will still be special". And when I break it appart and show them that it might not be so, I can see the proper abyss of a deeper existential crisis in their eyes. A belief that breaks. For AI art, the economic aspect is indeed a massive one and the concept of copyright is a dying one. But the "human definition" linked to creativity is also a big one ^^. Thx again for the videos!
In a post-scarcity world, money can act like views and likes. Everyone has infinite money, and yet somehow it's still valuable. Attention becomes valuable because we care about what people think.
The Intellectual property laws will become redundant in the coming AI era, one should embrace it instead of fighting it.
Media is built atop the skeleton of old media, and AI has accelerated this process.
what a timely subject! I found this channel recently and it's amazing!
There's no such thing as Government Funding.
Japan did NOT allowed AI art.
ua-cam.com/video/G6shExxvyJk/v-deo.html
I suppose being allowed to train and being allowed to use AI throughout society are different matters
An artist or any other person losing their source of income because of AI should not be treated more favorably than a random person losing their job because it was not environmentally sustainable or for any other completely different reason. All unemployed deserve the same support from society. The fact that AI is involved doesn't make it a special case.
Not quite... Not all skills need the same time and effort to acquire them... UBI for everyone i agree but for a violinist that took him 10-20 years to start performing well and then start getting revenue from his craft while a McDonald's employee only needed a couple of hours of training... Not the same... And that goes to many different jobs. A doctor needed 10 years of training as well give or take and the conversation can go on and on if we start comparing jobs etc. As i said though, i agree with you, UBI for everyone but if we one day decide to add some more revenue on top of UBI to some skillsets then of course the more difficult ones should get a higher revenue than the easy ones...
Great video and good content! You comment regarding Japan copyright laws...can you share your source/reference/citation?
Oh good point! I added a link to the video description.
Also this haha twitter.com/airkatakana/status/1725775206416060891
UBI should be available to everyone. Not just artists.
Agreed. It may be easier to start with just artists in certain (ahem American) jurisdictions though, in my opinion
@@DrWaku Okay. Then how would that work? Would anyone be able to claim to be an "artist?" Or would there be some form of "gatekeeping?" Great work on your channel, BTW! Keep it up!
The simplest way is tax returns. If you can prove that you made money as an artist in the past, you'd be eligible for the subsidies. The government already knows how you make your money, in theory.
@@DrWakuI know your intentions are well-meaning but this is an excellent example of why our tax code is over 75k pages, growing and incomprehensible to everyone. It's also relatively easy to imagine how people would "game" such a system.
Love your videos. You're very articulate
I usually don't comment on this subject. But, the idea that AI "democratizes" art seems odd to me. Art has Always been available to those who wish to do it. I mean cavemen drew things with sticks and crude pigments. Pencil and paper gives you access to art, but I suppose there are those who simply don't wish to acquire skill.
Next, the argument that artists today are "Inspired" by artists of the past are doing the same thing that AI does is not true at all. The state of being inspired is a human function that is filtered by an individuals unique perspective. AI gathers bits of data and arranges it into a somewhat cohesive image. AI doesn't Think or experience and verbal prompts are nothing more than parameters. There is no actual artistic process that can be attributed to an AI image.
Finally, AI, so far, can't create the image "I see in my head" it would merely be the best approximation of the prompter's vision. This could only lead to a "Close enough" mediocrity and bland apathy toward creating anything lacking the appreciation of Skilled craftsmanship which can endure generations, like the artists of the past.
The images produced are fun to look at but ultimately forgetable. Now, if an artist needed a reference image or something along those lines then I can see AI as being a great option.
morning doc, good to see you
Thanks you too
I made a duck cane. Ai doesn't bother me.
I'm a 3D animator now but came from being a 2D artist. I know a fair bit of Stable Diffusion, I paint with it, 'collab' with it, and I finish my work faster because of it.
One aspect of this conversation that's a bit confusing is what 'type' of art are we talking about when we discuss these things. We don't necessarily think about the logos, branding, promotional materials when we're talking about "art" but they certainly count. I feel like we're more so talking about the art that's seen on a canvas OR an artists depiction of an in-game skin/cosmetic, etc. And that distinction of "oh, the art im talking about are the anime girls with large honkers, not the art that have any sociopolitical commentary or anything" kind of muddies the conversation a bit.
But regardless of any of these arguments for/against AI art, social welfare and providing a financial safety net for the ones affected by automation is NEEDED and we need to figure it out FAST. I know enough about the trajectory of AI image generators capabilities to understand that the future looks grim for 2D art right now and I just hope the public outcry from this pressures governments to think more about social welfare.
How do people think the miners felt when the pits were closed? Their training and skill sets were distroyed overnight and nothing was available to protect their rights. As far as I can see these arguments revolve around elitism. AI will level the ground! I really enjoy this site thanks for sharing.
Great comparison. It's exactly how it has hit me. I've specialised as a digital artist since my teens and now my life's work and training is rendered useless. I don't oppose AI or progress, but I really think the world leaders or AI companies need to come up with a way of supporting people affected by it.
A.I. will level the ground? U.S. auto jobs lost to overseas and robots made a few people richer for cheaper to produce product. Detroit, Flint Michigan and other cities have been leveled. A.I is exciting but can’t dismiss loss of jobs.
What a dumb ass take on the ethics of "AI" image training..
Too many people try to seem smart by spitting on the amazing new technology.
They had the same argument when photography was invented.
AI is just another tool. Just another brush. Just another type of camera lens. Just another type of medium....period. The value of art is dictated by the consumer. Some consumers will pay exorbitant amounts of money for a masterpiece. Others go to Ikea and pay next to nothing and get wallpaper art. The most important thing about art is...does it say something? Does it communicate a relevant and important message? How many people do you know had a portrait of themselves painted? Photographers took that role. Then when cameras became available to the masses, uncle Joe took a snap shot at your wedding and you got a print or printed it yourself at home. Then hung it on your wall. Totally bypassing the artist painter and photographer. AI art generators are just other tools. Embrace it or get left behind.