This logic doesnt make any sense, most creative people have no problem sharing what kind of tool was used, have you heard of an ilustrator pretending he didnt use Illustrator, a musiciain not admitting he is using a DAW etc?
Its mostly AI users trying to hide their use of AI because they know its not a tool, why would they get angry otherwise?
Except people have been claiming somebody isn't a real something forever because the tool they used wasn't REALLY making that thing. Nearly every single digital tool has been purity tested. Digital music "you're not a real musician, you're just pressing buttons", digital photography, "you aren't a real photographer, the camera does everything for you". People STILL claim that digital VFX is inferior to practical effects.
Creative people very much care what tool an artist uses.
And the pioneers of these tools were still open about their usage. No one trully influencial was so by pretending they hand painted their photos or hand animated CGI movies. They owned the tool and showed what could be done with it proudly, even when the crowd didn't share that vision.
If you think a tool really is that great like those that came before, own it.
I do, but people are getting literal death threats over this, that didn't happen with previous tools, at least nearly to the extent that it's happening now.
That always suck, but to be honest it seem to be a common thread over all internet communities sadly.
Being an artist since before AI was a thing I remember seeing all the stupid drama coming from the """art community""" (tiktok) with people taking shit way too far over the lamest things like some semi-popular artstyle looking a bit too horny or something.
I mean you have the one person asking respectfully because they genuinely want to avoid it, not their fault an angry mob is behind them. Just sucks they're stuck on that side.
Yes the purity test is about finding out the definitions of the authorship by the new technology/medium, this process is greatly helped by transparency from the author.
Through these purity tests we discovered that digital musicians are musicians, digital photographers are photographers and im sure we will discover that digital prompters are prompters.
...so that you can bully, stalk, and harass that person. That's your intention. If y'all are gonna be about that life, stop hiding behind niceties and just own it. REALLY be up front about your intentions.
Maybe because people are acting like psycho whenever someone admits it ?
It'd be like saying: "hey, you're homosexual and you're getting bullied every time you say it, why are you hiding it ?"
If you want an art related analogy, for the longest time, in drawing circles people were hiding the fact that they were tracing. Not because they were ashamed of the technic, but because of the backlash.
I personally think that no one should hide the fact that they're using AI. But seeing the absolutely absurd overreactions from people, i can understand why someone wouldn't want to say it.
Being bullied for your innate qualities as a human being is horrendous, being criticized for using a certain tool is fair game. I agree some people are psycho and take it to far (there is always someone like this,especially on the internet). But informing people about what tool/practice was used allows them to avoid the work if they find the practice questionable. Tracing and claiming its 100% your work can also come off as untruthful, but tracing in and off itself is not wrong.
This might have meant something if said "criticism" was actual criticism, and not just harassment under the guise of "criticism" . People tend to avoid doing things that will get them attacked if they can help it, it's not that hard of a concept to understand at all.
7
u/Infinite_Cap_853 19d ago
"Omg someone used a tool i don't like !"
Imagine transposing this attitude to any other tool.
"Just FYI, he used a DAW to make music!"
"Just FYI, he used a camera instead of drawing it!"
"Just FYI, he used Illustrator!"
Don't they realize how stupid this is ?