Aspiration isn't the same as ideas. Sports aren't nearly as creative as music. I see your point, but I tend to agree with Cleo. Although people with both technical skill and creativity should receive more praise. No question.
The real gap it's bridging is the accessibility to certain types of art creation, and that accessibility is normally an economic class thing. Some kid from a disadvantaged background can potentially have greater accessibility to playing around with artistic concepts through AI, where before it would take more money & resources to enter that world, or so the potential therein lies. However, there is a downside to this, and it's basically what you're saying. Technical ability doesn't define artistic talent on its own, creativity & experience are such an important factors that has me in 2 minds about AI art stuff. If you're trying to get into art, I actually think AI art can stifle and constrict your creativity, but if you're already an experienced artist, these tools can actually be of good and novel experimentational use; come up with new ideas from using them etc. So I know I've kind of gone against my first point with my second point, so I wanna broaden the first part a bit. AI should be bridging the economic gap of EDUCATION, that includes art as well as science etc., but the limits of AI art on a young artist's creativity should be highlighted. AI should first and foremost be being used to serve humanity in helping resolve social, economic, and societal issues, I think AI art should come as a cool by-product of that rather than a mainstage thing like it is now.
For all of humanity, we have been using tools to help us be more efficient. Tools could be something like: shoes, an axe, or different machines. They are simply used to help make the work/creative process more efficient. AI does ALL the work for you. There is no creative process in telling an AI to "make a beat or write lyrics to a song about a bird." Especially when it comes to creative fields where there is no 'objective' best, AI will do whatever the algorithm decides. Removing all the human experience from the equation. Art is not about best, its about a human experience. Thanks for taking the time to comment!
@@GregoryAgid so I agree with you on that, there's nothing creative about putting in a prompt, sitting back, and saying "wow that's so cool that I made that". No you didn't. All the thousands of artists that had their work non-consentually taken to train that AI did the work for you. So as far as all these image prompting models go yeah I agree they aren't tools, but can they be used as tools? Could an experienced artist prompt AI for inspiration, whether it's writing music, a story, or a film? And I appreciate that what I'm talking about is a very small corner but I still think there's a case for AI as a tool for artists, as I said before I hate that AI art has just taken over so much of the AI space where we could be devoting its capabilities to actually solving some big issues in humanity.
Aspiration isn't the same as ideas. Sports aren't nearly as creative as music. I see your point, but I tend to agree with Cleo. Although people with both technical skill and creativity should receive more praise. No question.
Thanks for chiming in!
Facts.
The real gap it's bridging is the accessibility to certain types of art creation, and that accessibility is normally an economic class thing. Some kid from a disadvantaged background can potentially have greater accessibility to playing around with artistic concepts through AI, where before it would take more money & resources to enter that world, or so the potential therein lies.
However, there is a downside to this, and it's basically what you're saying. Technical ability doesn't define artistic talent on its own, creativity & experience are such an important factors that has me in 2 minds about AI art stuff. If you're trying to get into art, I actually think AI art can stifle and constrict your creativity, but if you're already an experienced artist, these tools can actually be of good and novel experimentational use; come up with new ideas from using them etc.
So I know I've kind of gone against my first point with my second point, so I wanna broaden the first part a bit. AI should be bridging the economic gap of EDUCATION, that includes art as well as science etc., but the limits of AI art on a young artist's creativity should be highlighted. AI should first and foremost be being used to serve humanity in helping resolve social, economic, and societal issues, I think AI art should come as a cool by-product of that rather than a mainstage thing like it is now.
For all of humanity, we have been using tools to help us be more efficient. Tools could be something like: shoes, an axe, or different machines. They are simply used to help make the work/creative process more efficient. AI does ALL the work for you. There is no creative process in telling an AI to "make a beat or write lyrics to a song about a bird." Especially when it comes to creative fields where there is no 'objective' best, AI will do whatever the algorithm decides. Removing all the human experience from the equation. Art is not about best, its about a human experience.
Thanks for taking the time to comment!
@@GregoryAgid so I agree with you on that, there's nothing creative about putting in a prompt, sitting back, and saying "wow that's so cool that I made that". No you didn't. All the thousands of artists that had their work non-consentually taken to train that AI did the work for you. So as far as all these image prompting models go yeah I agree they aren't tools, but can they be used as tools? Could an experienced artist prompt AI for inspiration, whether it's writing music, a story, or a film?
And I appreciate that what I'm talking about is a very small corner but I still think there's a case for AI as a tool for artists, as I said before I hate that AI art has just taken over so much of the AI space where we could be devoting its capabilities to actually solving some big issues in humanity.