AI art

[Dahaarkan]

I'd like to hear opinions on this.

I've heard many people complaining that it is not true art because it is generated by AI, and while at this stage you are essentially just giving a program random words to create art from, I do think this holds much promise.

Personally I consider art to be a manifestation of your psyche given form for others to observe and peer unto your being. How you manifest this, whether it is by carving a drawing with a rock or using advanced programs, is irrelevant to me.

What are your thoughts?

I personally am looking forward to seeing this develop further. Technology being pushed for artistic pursuits is in itself a beautiful thing to witness, especially in contrast with the reality that it's usually pushed to create oppression and horrors beyond comprehension.

 

[DawStarlight]

While I respect the skill and creativity of a "real" artist, I still consider the AI generated images to be the art. The main argument against it is that it just takes the existing art and photos made by humans and shapes something out of it and therefore it can't be the real art and in essence is just plagiarism of sorts.

I disagree with that, since genuine artists don't get their ideas out of a vacuum and the inspiration comes from things they've already seen and from the other artists.

Though I'm not sure how I feel about this technology eventually making a large part of the employed artists obsolete, which could happen or not.

 

[Henu the Great]

While I respect the skill and creativity of a "real" artist, I still consider the AI generated images to be the art. The main argument against it is that it just takes the existing art and photos made by humans and shapes something out of it and therefore it can't be the real art and in essence is just plagiarism of sorts.

I disagree with that, since genuine artists don't get their ideas out of a vacuum and the inspiration comes from things they've already seen and from the other artists.

Though I'm not sure how I feel about this technology eventually making a large part of the employed artists obsolete, which could happen or not.

Ai can't replace Human made art because Ai lacks consciousness, thus art by it will always remain inferior.

 

[Nameless One]

Ai can't replace Human made art because Ai lacks consciousness, thus art by it will always remain inferior.

(Yes, the duct taped banana passing off as "art" is real)

 

[Windstrider666]

It's just another tool. As always whenever there is a technologocal breakthrough there will be backlash due to fear of unknown or change. I've seen a lot of fear mongering or misunderstandings in the art community over AI art. The same happened with the appearance of digital tools like photoshop. As long as it is used appropriately ie not for plagiarism then theres nothing wrong with using it.

The act of creation is to manifest ones will into reality. AI is a tool not the end means. As long as that is understood then there isnt any issues.

Personally though any artist that isnt already at a certain level shouldnt use it as I think it would hinder growth.

 

[DawStarlight]

While I respect the skill and creativity of a "real" artist, I still consider the AI generated images to be the art. The main argument against it is that it just takes the existing art and photos made by humans and shapes something out of it and therefore it can't be the real art and in essence is just plagiarism of sorts.

I disagree with that, since genuine artists don't get their ideas out of a vacuum and the inspiration comes from things they've already seen and from the other artists.

Though I'm not sure how I feel about this technology eventually making a large part of the employed artists obsolete, which could happen or not.

Ai can't replace Human made art because Ai lacks consciousness, thus art by it will always remain inferior.

That's true. Of course when we refer to the AI, we all know it's not the actual AI and just machine learning. The real artists will still be in business, but I can imagine how it can steal a job or two from them when that technology gets an upgrade or two. Imagine you're a small video game studio making something simple like a visual novel. You can pay an actual artists to so they can create the portraits of your characters or you can generate them yourself using several prompts.

 

[Bravera]

I am a programmer, I am not a Digital Artist.
I plan to use AI art to assist in the development of projects I have for years been contemplating.

Also, I have in the past meditated upon artwork. With AI art, I can easily and efficiently choose the art.

 

[Bravera]

I'd like to hear opinions on this.

I've heard many people complaining that it is not true art because it is generated by AI, and while at this stage you are essentially just giving a program random words to create art from, I do think this holds much promise.

Personally I consider art to be a manifestation of your psyche given form for others to observe and peer unto your being. How you manifest this, whether it is by carving a drawing with a rock or using advanced programs, is irrelevant to me.

What are your thoughts?

I personally am looking forward to seeing this develop further. Technology being pushed for artistic pursuits is in itself a beautiful thing to witness, especially in contrast with the reality that it's usually pushed to create oppression and horrors beyond comprehension.

I'd like to see Books turned into Movies with the use of AI Art. Give it another 10 years.

 

[Epiphany]

I'd like to hear opinions on this.

I've heard many people complaining that it is not true art because it is generated by AI, and while at this stage you are essentially just giving a program random words to create art from, I do think this holds much promise.

Personally I consider art to be a manifestation of your psyche given form for others to observe and peer unto your being. How you manifest this, whether it is by carving a drawing with a rock or using advanced programs, is irrelevant to me.

What are your thoughts?

I personally am looking forward to seeing this develop further. Technology being pushed for artistic pursuits is in itself a beautiful thing to witness, especially in contrast with the reality that it's usually pushed to create oppression and horrors beyond comprehension.

The highest forms of art express the parts of the human experience that can't be expressed. It speaks to what can't be put to words and brings to the collective experience that which is deeply intimate and personal and cannot be known outside the self.

However there is certainly merit to art which exists merely to provide an aesthetic experience. AI art cannot reach the limits of what a talented artist can do with brushes and pigments. But it can certainly create beautiful depictions, and sometimes a patron can still find meaning in it as it is still an artpiece and art brings meaning to life.

But the operator of the AI has to feed it quality inputs. Art depicting generic anime girls cannot offer much to humanity. But it can certainly produce beautiful works, though they may not be entirely original.

I believe its best use is to synthesize artwork based on styles of artists bygone, or to blend styles together to create new ones, and to help give expression to ideas held by the artistically uninclined.

AI certainly has more soul to it than "artwork" coming from grads from major art schools today(ala calarts).
It can be no less soulless than the usual CGI artwork today, but again it depends on the AI and the operator feeding it good inputs. My opinion is that digital art is inherently inferior to physical mediums.

 

[Dahaarkan]

While I respect the skill and creativity of a "real" artist, I still consider the AI generated images to be the art. The main argument against it is that it just takes the existing art and photos made by humans and shapes something out of it and therefore it can't be the real art and in essence is just plagiarism of sorts.

I disagree with that, since genuine artists don't get their ideas out of a vacuum and the inspiration comes from things they've already seen and from the other artists.

Though I'm not sure how I feel about this technology eventually making a large part of the employed artists obsolete, which could happen or not.

Ai can't replace Human made art because Ai lacks consciousness, thus art by it will always remain inferior.

I personally do not see that much difference in using a drawing tablet and instructing an advanced AI to create something based on your imagination. In both cases you are instructing a piece of technology to create an illustration although the latter is more accessible.

Indeed when using a brush you are likewise using a tool to illustrate something. The more advanced your artistic tools are, the more spectacular and beautiful things you can make. This technology is still in it's infancy, but I'm curious to see where it goes.


The AI does not work on it's own imagination, it requires the user's creativity to instruct it to create something. So one of an uncreative and dim soul will likely make mundane works even with such advanced tools. I think technology being pushed artistically is a beautiful thing to witness.

 

[Dahaarkan]

I'd like to hear opinions on this.

I've heard many people complaining that it is not true art because it is generated by AI, and while at this stage you are essentially just giving a program random words to create art from, I do think this holds much promise.

Personally I consider art to be a manifestation of your psyche given form for others to observe and peer unto your being. How you manifest this, whether it is by carving a drawing with a rock or using advanced programs, is irrelevant to me.

What are your thoughts?

I personally am looking forward to seeing this develop further. Technology being pushed for artistic pursuits is in itself a beautiful thing to witness, especially in contrast with the reality that it's usually pushed to create oppression and horrors beyond comprehension.

The highest forms of art express the parts of the human experience that can't be expressed. It speaks to what can't be put to words and brings to the collective experience that which is deeply intimate and personal and cannot be known outside the self.

However there is certainly merit to art which exists merely to provide an aesthetic experience. AI art cannot reach the limits of what a talented artist can do with brushes and pigments. But it can certainly create beautiful depictions, and sometimes a patron can still find meaning in it as it is still an artpiece and art brings meaning to life.

But the operator of the AI has to feed it quality inputs. Art depicting generic anime girls cannot offer much to humanity. But it can certainly produce beautiful works, though they may not be entirely original.

I believe its best use is to synthesize artwork based on styles of artists bygone, or to blend styles together to create new ones, and to help give expression to ideas held by the artistically uninclined.

AI certainly has more soul to it than "artwork" coming from grads from major art schools today(ala calarts).
It can be no less soulless than the usual CGI artwork today, but again it depends on the AI and the operator feeding it good inputs. My opinion is that digital art is inherently inferior to physical mediums.

I consider anything that is a true manifestation of one's creativity, one's soul and emotion to be art, by whichever tool this is created whether it is a simple brush or an advanced program. If an AI is capable of peering into one's psyche and manifesting it in the form of an illustration, I don't really discard it entirely as if it has no merit or value.

Of course as of now it's still in it's infancy so we'll see how this develops. Music is my favored art form and much of it is soulless garbage nowadays. In my opinion, making the process of creating artistic works easier is not a negative thing, though I can agree there is an unmistakable charm and unique beauty to art through physical mediums that technology is yet to replicate.

 

[Soaring Eagle 666]

I mean, to the ancient Greeks, beauty was mathematical, iirc. I see nothing wrong with it.

On the other hand, there are grand works of art that probably incorporate the power of Divine Geometry and shapes perceived straight from the crown chakra. That definitely can't be emulated by machines.

I think AI art has its place, and it's not going to replace the glory of art made by great human artists and Gods.

Exactly.
For nearly 100 years now, things like this

have been considered art, unanimously among everyone I know.
And all that endless beauty is simply the formula Z = Z² + C, iterated infinitely for Z.

The only reason people are even questioning whether AI art is "art", is because it's now getting good enough to threaten human artists' jobs.

However, the only reason AI can make such good art is because it has been trained on human art. The human is still the artist, but in a different way. In theory, AI could generate art with spiritual symbolism, if provided with such art for training. However, since there is an endless amount of spiritual knowledge and symbolism to discover, the human will always be the primary source of new art.

 

[Henu the Great]

...

I've listened to AI-created music next to Human made, and while it was well made and almost indistinguishable from the real deal, it did not excactly have the same substance than Human made. I don't see how it ever could match even when mastered.

 

[Sunny]

I think that the artificial is still a creative and useful thing. I appreciate and enjoy all forms of development and advancement.

Surely playing video games at the screen will become retarded and primitive very soon. There are advances in that but that too is primitive, I am referring to entering the video game by involving the physical body.

What would be very interesting is a technology with which to merge consciousness and enter the virtual. This of course should be used for useful things and for fun, not for wasting all one's free time (not that there are people who don't waste their time with current virtual development and other things).

 

[tabby]

" post_id=399488 time=1668401395 user_id=346]

I mean, to the ancient Greeks, beauty was mathematical, iirc. I see nothing wrong with it.

On the other hand, there are grand works of art that probably incorporate the power of Divine Geometry and shapes perceived straight from the crown chakra. That definitely can't be emulated by machines.

I think AI art has its place, and it's not going to replace the glory of art made by great human artists and Gods.

Exactly.
For nearly 100 years now, things like this

have been considered art, unanimously among everyone I know.
And all that endless beauty is simply the formula Z = Z² + C, iterated infinitely for Z.

The only reason people are even questioning whether AI art is "art", is because it's now getting good enough to threaten human artists' jobs.

However, the only reason AI can make such good art is because it has been trained on human art. The human is still the artist, but in a different way. In theory, AI could generate art with spiritual symbolism, if provided with such art for training. However, since there is an endless amount of spiritual knowledge and symbolism to discover, the human will always be the primary source of new art.

That's oddly relaxing to watch, the gif loop.

I haven't really looked at AI art but honestly, if a robot is doing better art than oneself, that's some great motivation to improve ones skills on a personal level lol.

 

[Bonedust]

I personally do not see that much difference in using a drawing tablet and instructing an advanced AI to create something based on your imagination. [...]

Alright guys, time out. I'm taking a big break from this community.

 

[Satnam666]

Got any recommendations on ai art programs would love to try it out

 

[Dahaarkan]

I personally do not see that much difference in using a drawing tablet and instructing an advanced AI to create something based on your imagination. [...]

Alright guys, time out. I'm taking a big break from this community.

lol

 

[Dahaarkan]

...

Also, if my activity (which isn't much in the first place) bothers you, you may use the block feature to not see my posts.

 

[Bravera]

Enjoyed reading this, agreed with most of this.
But, as you said "The quality of the art isn't what sells the most either, its the value you present with that art."

If we could create an AI that would destroy the enemy for us... I would not hesitate for one second. Sure I would be sad that I could not train my warrior abilities further, but I would accomplish the objective.

And then I would go on to create AI that I could compete against, that would further develop the beast within.

Another further comparison, every gym is filled with these "soulless" weight machines instead of free weights. And yet, why is every gym filled with them?

I have personally taken the stance of Kill or be Killed.
Win or Lose. This is my fate, I accept this moment.

The Camper can afk in a corner for 20 minutes and win a fight against another who has spent 1000s of hours training.

Website creation, application development, is continually removing the extreme difficulty it took for programmers to learn and develop these skills.

Your argument is one of Ethics vs. Logic.

I am sure we would all fall at different points of this spectrum, depending on the topic.
----
Do you believe that the Gods might have technology that can read their thoughts and instantly create an Image exactly as they want it to look?

This seems to me to be an extremely important technology to develop. Specifically what comes to mind is Architects and Engineers having this type of technology.

 

[Henu the Great]

Another further comparison, every gym is filled with these "soulless" weight machines instead of free weights. And yet, why is every gym filled with them?

Lol, look harder. Plenty of gyms have free weight areas. Besides, those machines can be decent training. Like the cable machine.

 

[Ol argedco luciftias]

Today, however, by being allied to this monstrosity and hand waving our concerns away, you are thereby effectively attacking the artistic integrity of others with reckless disregard for our collective passion. That includes musicians, actors and writers.

"You have no respect for the art. You're a disgrace to the art."

Www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E62iA6KCIQ

 

[Yurei]

I approve of it. It helps people with wild imaginations like me to manifest their creations in an easy way.

 

[FancyMancy]

Ai can't replace Human made art because Ai lacks consciousness, thus art by it will always remain inferior.

(Yes, the duct taped banana passing off as "art" is real)

Yeahhh... Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... Yeah... I can feel... so much emotion and... depth... and deep, deep emotions coming from the ba-nnannaa. I need a tissue. weeps

 

[Kitsunebi]

My opinions: Do whatever want with it like referencing or if it's your code and you want to share what your code did(for programming resume purposes) but DO NOT FUCKING POST WHATEVER THE FUCK THE COMPUTER DID AND GO SAY "OOOH MMIII GOOOOSH GOIZ I DRUUUU DIZZZ PICTURRRR HARR DARRR!!!"

 

[Woodlandman]

I bet op watches these Victorian hentai ai arts.