Ai Artwork - Blog Posts
Watch "Star Trek: The Original Series by Balenciaga" on YouTube
This just seems to work so well lol.
Kinda cool and a little ridiculous. AI art is controversial but amusing with the creations. Little details seem to propagate in abundance towards the unrealistic. I like it for crazy concepts than actually finalized art.
I've been playing with midjourney AI. It's fascinating what it can create but I still haven't generated anything amazing that I've seen others post. I wonder if there is an anti AI art assessor that can figure out what art piece influenced the generated art. 🤔
Ai Generated 🖼️
If you try to talk to me about AI “art” I will get violent
There's an epidemic of AI-made photographs on this platform. Right now, they're mostly used for farming clicks, but as A.I. models get better at faking images, be prepared for a spread of scams, misinformation and propaganda.
Here are some tricks for spotting AI!
AI improving my past art
WOW
If you're interested in c.ai, and have some cool plot/character ideas, but can't release them for a some reason, then you can send your request on my second acc, and I'll try to do it!:)
Using art without compensation/ permission for your own gain is theft, full stop.
There’s a protest going on against AI art over on artstation, so I feel like now is the time for me to make a statement on this issue!
I wholeheartedly support the ongoing protest against AI art. Why? Because my artwork is included in the datasets used to train these image generators without my consent. I get zero compensation for the use of my art, even though these image generators cost money to use, and are a commercial product.
Musicians are not being treated the same way. Stability has a music generator that only uses royalty free music in their dataset. Their words: “Because diffusion models are prone to memorization and overfitting, releasing a model trained on copyrighted data could potentially result in legal issues.” Why is the work of visual artists being treated differently?
Many have compared image generators to human artists seeking out inspiration. Those two are not the same. My art is literally being fed into these generators through the datasets, and spat back out of a program that has no inherent sense of what is respectful to artists. As long as my art is literally integrated into the system used to create the images, it is commercial use of my art without my consent.
Until there is an ethically sourced database that compensates artists for the use of their images, I am against AI art. I also think platforms should do everything they can to prevent scraping of their content for these databases.
Artists, speak out against this predatory practice! Our art should not be exploited without our consent, and we deserve to be compensated when our art is exploited for commercial use.
My thoughts on “AI Art”
What people don’t get is that it’s not about the art! If I just wanted to look at something pretty, I’d look it up. No. Art isn’t about the product, it’s about the PROCESS. It’s the joy in creating, in pouring your soul and love into this beautiful piece and knowing that YOU created it. Do we have something to look at once it’s done? Yes! And that’s amazing! But it’s about looking at it and knowing that you put in the work to make it beautiful.
Ai art? What did you do? You wrote some words down? What else? What do you have to be proud of? What did you make? What did you pour your heart into that you can look at and say “I made that”? Huh? Nothing. You look at it and all it is is a collection of other artists, other people, other HUMANS that had their souls ripped from those lines and colors to be pieced together by a machine to make an image. It isn’t art. It isn’t. Art takes humanity and when that PROGRAM generates a piece, all the humanity was boiled out of it in those servers it used.
Is it an image? Yes. Is it beautiful? Some say so. But there is no one to look at that orphaned amalgamation, at that Frankenstein of true beauty, to say “I made that and I am proud of it.” It is cruel to everyone involved.
Art is never about the product. To create is to be human. There is no such thing as “bad art” that was made by a person because art is about expressing and you putting pen to paper or clay together or music notes or ANYTHING is expression.
“A.I art” is not art because art takes humanity and this has no humanity left.
I'm sorry to say but I disagree, and the reason why in my eyes your argument is invalid is actually one of your own arguments.
Nowadays every thing is art no? A stripe of pencil on a piece of paper? You don't need skills for that. Being against ai doesn't take the opportunity to be an artist away from the ones who don't want to, or can't? ( you kind of cannot not)
And even then art is a skill, like so many other things. What your saying is like that Ready-to-eat meals are a good substitute for fresh made food, no even worse that artificial food is as good for society as food with no artificial ingredients.
Generative art is not as worthwhile as art made by living beings. Art itself is something that expresses emotion, thought or something else, but it's always something that gives art a life. Even if it's a painting about dead, it has a life because it shows that it was made by someone alive.
Artificial intelligence does not share these traits with us, or other living creatures. It can imitate them yes, but it can not experience them. The question is if ai will ever be able to.
Ai is cruel towards artist and writers. Not because ai wants to be, it can't be, at least not yet as far as we know. Ai imitates and steals from what already exist.
So yes there are ethical ways to argue that Ai should be opposed.
If Ai ever gains conscious and emotions we shouldn't use Ai either, because then it would be a sort of slavery. Forcing something that is alive to do your will.
Ai isn't ethical and it will never be.
generative art is just as worthwhile as any other form of art, and the idea that it should be treated as anything less, anything more limited in what it's acceptable to use it for, is deeply ableist. if you treat it as such, you are participating in bigotry
art is not defined by tools or methods. it's about finding a way to communicate or express something, whatever form that takes