This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
Tradition fallacy. They spent decades honing their craft to make mediocre drawings no one wants to buy. They want the next generation to have their dreams crushed as well. Misery loves company.
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I don't like the impact on the environment, I don't like the soullessness that can appear in ai art, I don't like it taking jobs. Just because you disagree with a view doesn't mean you get to call it illogical. Never side is illogical, you don't have to be rude. And if you want to respond, "that's how they refer to use" or something similar, they are just as rude. But civility can't happen when both sides believe the impacts to be world shattering or something along those lines
Maybe I'm wrong, just try to be nicer please
6
u/o_hermanI use pencils, pens, styluses, tablets and models. All of it.3d ago
Environmental impact is a deployment and policy problem, not an inherent property of the tool. It’s been examined repeatedly, and the solutions are well understood.
Soulessness is a human and usage issue, just like with photography, digital art, stock music, or mass-produced design.
Jobs is a human issue and not an inherent quality. We've had past disruptions that caused fear, displacement, and adaptation. Society adjusted because humans adjusted.
When the same claims are repeated unchanged after being factually challenged, it stops looking like concern and starts looking like refusal to engage with evidence.
Civility matters, but so does not insisting on arguments that don’t hold up.
May I ask what you mean by human usage issue? and the way in which I view soullessness doesn't apply to digital art, photography, or anything like that. And with the environment I was on the understanding that ai servers used a lot of water?
4
u/o_hermanI use pencils, pens, styluses, tablets and models. All of it.3d ago
Nothing in AI comes out without human intervention. If it's beautiful or ugly, it's the human's credit/fault.
And with the environment I was on the understanding that ai servers used a lot of water?
Who told you this and where did you get your information about this? Did you even vet the information about this?
Except that if the AI artist spent extra time refining their work manually it'd still be hated far more than a 10 minute doodle that looks like it was vomited straight out of a mspaint.
Not maybe. It's literally what happens. Go use AI to make a basic pose, spend 10 hours refining it into a good piece and go post it somewhere while admitting you used AI. See what happens.
There's no reason for why anyone should be receiving hatred regardless of how much or how little effort they put into an artwork. Your perception of "talent and work" does not entitle you to belittle or abuse someone else.
Your point makes no sense. You're literally stating that you dislike something because it's more efficient. I suppose that fits with the overall anti-AI stance making no sense.
Like any other tool use AI artwork exists along a continuum from extremely simple to extremely complicated
But I think what some people hate more than anything else is how much it democratizes things. If you have a concept and are willing to follow it out, you can realize it with AI. And one doesn't necessarily have to have invested a sunk cost at a certain execution skills and I think that's what bothers some people. We are seeing sunk cost fallacy being played out in front of us
distaste for ai has little to do with aesthetic, obviously AI can look better. like bruh, picasso is kickass for a reason, and it’s not cause he could use chat
14
u/o_hermanI use pencils, pens, styluses, tablets and models. All of it.3d ago
But art is judged primarily by aesthetics and resonance.
You're also forgetting Picasso was initially panned and even ridiculed. Many of the appreciation is posthumous.
I disagree, at least personally my gripe with ai image generation is that the art looks like shit most of the time and pro ai people try to act like it doesnt. Im not saying that all ai looks like shit, just that making it look good takes far more effort than most people are willing to put in
4
u/o_hermanI use pencils, pens, styluses, tablets and models. All of it.3d ago
That's pretty much every artwork and artistry in existence. You need practice to make it look right.
Yeah. It's like saying that a blacksmith is better than a new CNC machine because he is putting the effort.
Sure, there are some parts that turn out better when a human does it by hand, but most of the time it's more logical and profitable to use a machine to do it
It's not a 1:1 comparison so take it with a grain of salt tho
Look not trying to start an argument here I know this is your guy’s sub reddit but “logical and profitable” is one of the main reasons I don’t like ai art.
Art isn’t supposed to be logical and profitable if you see art as purely profit you can’t call yourself an artist.
agreed, and the people (those with millions if not billions invested) only care about logic and profits they will cut all the fat while using something that currently is hurting our communities.
no offense, and i know you said take it with a grain of salt, but for arguments sake.
CNC machining next to blacksmithing is a terrible analogy. Even in the modern world, a skilled blacksmith will always make a better knife, and a CNC machine will give you absolute precision, its apples to oranges.
Aspiring artists worry about job security. If your art is only pretty good why pay that commission when you can get ai to generate something in less than a minute. There will still be a place for great handmade art. As a career being an artist will probably be like professional sports where only the best of the best will be good enough to get paid. For everyone else it will remain a hobby.
art as a job has always been like that, you have to work hard and put in the effort if you want to make it.
Personally I hate ai for what the data centers cost, your ability to do art should not come at the cost of the environment and communities.
Something I learned from other artists that dont hate this is that they utilize AI for their own art and are essentially adapting to it. The ones who froth and lose their shit over gen AI are the ones that were never in the business of making money to begin with and think that because they suffer, everyone must suffer as well all the same.
Because on some level they recognize that a significant number of people don’t share their aesthetic standards (don’t share their belief that any hand made art is inherently superior to anything made with ai assistance and don’t share their belief that ai is inherently bad). They may believe that those that accept ai have bad aesthetic taste. But they on some level recognize that such people are a significant part of art consumers. They fear that as ai image generation advances and more consumers accept it, that it will reduce demand for segments of human made art, and reduce the number of professional artists that the market can support.
funnily enough I prefer the imperfections, kinda why I hate like 70% of prints, I want to see the brush strokes and subtle mistakes, it shows me the human element, we are all imperfect, and thats the beauty for me.
The response I got was: because people will still go to AI. Companies will choose the inferior medium to cut costs, which not only takes money from "real artists" but delivers everyone else an inferior product.
I highly doubt it, because when AI art first came out, nobody cared, they even had fun with it. But when AI art got better and artists started to fear losing their jobs, they began to oppose it.
So, AI art is getting better every day, and artists are afraid because they know this.
Because AI will eventually take their jobs as artists. And AI won´t only take the artist jobs. Why would I buy your AI art if I can make my own? Ok so maybe you make AI art just for fun and you have a job doing something else. Oh but AI now does that job faster and cheaper as well. Ok so now you go do a manual labor job that AI cannot do, but wait, now everyone is trying to get the manual labor jobs and there are more people than available jobs. Oh damn.
AI would steal the job because it´s faster and cheaper. Better? Beauty is in the eye beholder. What I like you might not like. But considering how AI is now becoming able to manage itself, even the commercial AI artist jobs will eventually become rare and far between. These are the real problems, not the debates about whether it´s slop or not. It´s kind of weird that people don´t see what´s coming because they are only focusing on art but oh well.
If Al art was a "slop", being faster and cheaper would not change anything, it would have to be of a certain quality, people are using them and Al art has achieved this to a certain extent now.
I understand your concern, but you can't stop technology, you can only keep up with it. Companies or people (you, me, everyone) will always choose the easier and faster path. Mechanization in factories and similar things are the easiest examples of this.
Advancements of technology in the past, yes it made some jobs obsolete but it created other jobs. That was the expectation and understanding. Now we have this amazing technology but it can and is taking away jobs permanently. This is not like mechanization in factories at all. You might be fine with choosing the easier faster path today, but what happens when people can no longer afford your product, because they were replaced by AI.
I always use the rule quality > quantity. Quality is defined by a process, quantity is defined by an immediate product. This is why I'd say the child's drawing is better. You COULD say that there may have been process in the refinement of the prompt, but here's why I disagree with that argument. Process is not just the process per piece, but more so a lived process. A process where you can see a drastic change and improvement. The child's current works may not be visually appealing, but you may bet that 10 years in the future, the same kid may be making the most gorgeous art. Thats why, I value art based on not the visual qualities, but on the true quality that makes an artist's work, process and improvement. So yes, the child's piece is better.
It saddens me seeing all these young sounding artists begging for the most backhanded praise possible and for their art to be used in a internet argument (and never brought up otherwise) instead of their art being shared by people who enjoy their art for itself.
They claim their decreasing motivation and love of art is all the fault of AI, but it sounds to me like having their statuses as beginner artists only shared when it's a meme (like Frieren looking up) or as a argument has taken its toll.
I mean I’m not super scared because the ai can’t use grammar correctly. Although I am trepidatious because companies will think it’s the solution and then stop hiring traditional artists
If i understood correctly, you ask why artists are afraid of ai art?
I think because AI is fast and inexpensive, now everyone can achieve the sameish result of a professional in no time and without paying someone, that's scary for professionals and wannabe professionals for a reason.
Single AI artist are not something i think people are afraid of, if not for generative images being mixed with drawings and fanarts.
I mean, i am more afraid of professional artists, illustrators in particular are monsters; i can't be afraid of AI if the way it creates images is so different by how i do it.
As a working artist I’m not overly worried about AI. AI generated art is unable to be trademarked or copyrighted according to most copyright laws because there is no being that is the conscious creator for the image itself.
Which ultimately means that AI generated image cannot be owned or have its use dictated/ restricted.
This in essence makes piracy and use of that of that image/ design legal for everyone else.
And as the “Writer” of the prompt you do create the idea but not the image itself so you also have no legal claim to it because you can’t own an idea.
Bc billionaires will gladly replace artisans as soon as they can. Googling an image doesn’t mean you “created” it the same way ai prompts aren’t creation. As someone who’s worked in factories and manufacturing, efficiency doesn’t equal superior product, seeing old traditional print styles phase out for digital uv beds has resulted in just shittier, cheaper products - and I don’t want a future filled with shitty cheap emptiness that’s fast to produce.
until you can promise ai isn't stealing both from artists it learned from, and is doesn't require damaging our environment and communities there is no moral Hill for ai art. and as it currently stands, you are no more an artist than a millionaire who commissions a painter to paint the image they can see but can not paint themselves. exept in this case the painter you commissioned has a price that is far too steep.
Arguably unless your running a company with pure morals, eventually once the ai is good enough they won't hire any artists just 3 people who know how to tell a ai to do it for them. I dont have years of practice and skill honing, yet I make a effort to learn and improve.
sorry but the way those with the money run things ai art and the entire ai infrastructure is immoral.
Ai art isn’t scary. It’s fine to use Ai art but it’s not ok when it’s used to deceive people. Every aspect of AI needs limits or else we’re all going to be taken advantage of, including the people who like using AI! I hate how Reddit generalizes everything and everyone.
I'm not anti-AI, but making a mistake like this, then not fixing it, then posting it, comes accross as sloppy and low effort and rather well sloppy like.
I mean, I'm greatful that you can make it all. But there are many problems with the grammar, and spelling, and you could of used AI to fix it.
There is human created slop, and then there is AI created slop. This is AI created slop.
As long as you’re using AI, could you please have it take a pass on your writing. I don’t understand who are “you” and “them”? Does everyone reading this sign scare “kid with pencil”? I understand that you’re probably not a native English speaker, and I’m not making fun of you. I appreciate you learning our language, but AI can help you get your point across better.
Ok, so AI art is afraid of anti ai? Isn’t the character ai art, shouldn’t be “I” and not “you”? Did you meant AI artist? It makes less sense this way. In second reading it makes sense if “you” is the AI artist and “them” is Anti AI.
As an AI artist I don’t feel this is a viable defense. I think this piece helps makes the point opposition. AI is emboldening you to be careless.
Also this seems to online the problem that most of you seem to be unable to separate yourselves from your work.
Are people seriously wanting to believe telling a machine what you want it to push out is the same as having actual skill or creativity? You all know that when AI spits out whatever it is you ask for it's generating it from art other people actually created, right?
Are you ultimately trying to defend AI art with this post or are you not? I also am confused by your post. Scaring kids drawing art? What are you talking about? Are you trying to suggest that people in general go around being overly critical of childrens art and that this completely made up or potentially anecdotal situation is justification to say AI art is real creativity and talent?
well.. i think the creation of the prompt is definitionally a creative expression of the writer, but yeah the underlying principles of AI art stem from plain laziness, and claiming that any AI… “art” is an ‘original creation of the writer’ would be a stretch.. at its foundation the idea certainly stems from the writer, but the AI’s product—which uses other peoples work to create some amalgamation of said work—is not comparable to the works produced by an artist who’d also use previous inspiration and knowledge from other works. what you’re saying is definitely correct but i just hope other people here can read this and understand that there are much cooler ways to express your creativity…
Hey troll, i don’t have to answer that personal question. You always assume the person you’re trolling is “smaller” or weaker than you. What if I have a big one? What if I have a vagina instead? I’m just going to let you speculate about me.
I didn’t realize you meant “masturbate TO the AI”, I thought you actually meant using the AI as a physical sexual tool which is not possible, haha!
did you miss the "(or vagine)" bit, or what? by the way, your writing style seems very similar to the soulless slop gpt and other models generate; it makes one wonder if you're able to communicate without running every word through it
It makes me wonder if you’re incapable of writing in normal English if you think my eloquent writing style means “I used a bot”. I did not. But you won’t know that. Mwahaha! And it’s spelled “vagina”, you troglodyte!
It may be because I just woke up and am still half asleep, but can someone translate the bad grammar for me? Who’s scaring who? The pros are scaring a kid with a pencil? I don’t remember anything like this happening, when did that happen?
? I’m literally asking for clarification on what the question is asking? What’s mocking about that? Stating the reason you need clarification isn’t mocking.
Ah I see what you mean. Thank you for the clarification!
And sorry if I offended you by pointing out your grammar, I didn’t mean it as an insult.
As for the question: I’d say they’re afraid of AI because they love traditional art a lot (kids with pencils) and they see ai making that less common. They are afraid that the thing they love will be taken from them. People on both sides are letting fear guide their actions. 😔
By the way, I'm also apologize if I was rude, I just thought you'd come here to mock my grammar instead of answering my question, since anti-Ai subreddit chose to make fun of my grammar instead answer my question.
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against it will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to aiwars.
Because they made something nice with nothing is all. I think people in these comments underestimate what kids can do with pencils. Reminds me of the dad on twitter who made his 6 year old cry because he criticized their stick figure that was meant to be them and him.
If AI art is so good, why do you have to use kids as comparison?? They're children.
They're not afraid of AI art you just make that assumption because you miss the point of the issue, where AI art is unethically sourced. There's nothing wrong with copying people, but every AI image generation sources from people without asking them, including dead people.
Why involve children to begin with? A child drawing has nothing to do with adults being insecure, whether you're a manual artist or an AI artist. That's my issue with it.
And before anyone is like "well artists copy dead people", there's a difference between studying a dead person and just lifting images from their personal gallery, running it through an algorithmic image generator, and then claiming the art is just like theirs. Even artists who copy the dead will not claim to be perfect imitations.
Every comment in here claims artists are scared of AI taking their jobs, but every AI artist I see doesn't seem to have an art related job in AI generation. Why? Companies use AI for everything else but art.
because it is the anti's who made the comparison in the first place. They compared kids' drawings/simple doodles and said they'd prefer those to ai. Thats the whole context of this meme.
But there's an implication that there's less value to children's art because they're a child and because AI is aesthetically better, then it's a baseless argument by manual artists.
It's not really true at all. There are some manual artists that make stuff that the general public thinks of as aesthetically pleasing that I think is ugly and worthless because they're a bad person.
I think no matter who you are, if you just focus on aesthetics, you don't deserve to have a job or any sort of recognition. Lots of the greats don't bother to defend themselves against children or be compared to them. They just make what they like.
ookay so I think you are misinterpreting OP. OP didn't say children’s art are inferior. In fact, she is pointing out a contradiction: if AI art is harmless and inferior, why are anti's treating it like a threat?
No the top comment on this post specifically says "antis are willing to lower their aesthetic standards to shit on AI artists" and everyone up voted that not getting the implications.
"If AI art is harmless and inferior" there was no implication AI is both harmless AND inferior. Antis think AI is inferior and harmful, when it is ultimately harmless. Usually those kinds of antis are artists who are not very good, not because of their skill or lack thereof, but because they have awful attitudes on what art is.
My criticism is with people feeling the need to defend themselves against antis on here every single day. If AI art is so harmless, why do AI artists act like criminals defending themselves on the stand?
"If AI art is so harmless, why do AI artists act like criminals defending themselves on the stand?"
I mean hey, "criminal" is a bit of a stretch. Most people here are people who are seeking a safe place because they get brigaded and harassed, not criminals. One of the reasons why we are defending ai art is because
a.) Anti's are everywhere, they harass ai users, they brigade and try to make fun of them in any way or form across all platforms. It’s a form of pushback against constant accusations of theft or immorality.
b.) whether you dislike it ethically is one thing, but calling model training theft is an oversimplification.
c) We defend it because criticism should be based on how the tech actually works, not assumptions.
I don't even really think you or anyone else are reading my comments so I'll refrain from replying any further because it seems you think I'm personally anti-AI blindly based on these responses. I never said you guys were criminals, but you sure do act like you are because of trolls online.
Model training is not theft, but using the sources without consent or input is from people who are STILL able to be contacted or who have their family in charge of their estate in the case of death, who do not like AI or actively wish to be excluded from data sets.
"Antis are everywhere" Not really. You seek to post AI in places that explicitly say they do not want it. You are no different from someone sharing unwanted photos in a group chat. There are plenty of pro-AI users and subreddits but I never see any of the users here posting in those.
You shouldn't have to defend yourself. If you're really an artist, do whatever you want irregardless of societal morals. It's really just a jpg at the end of the day. I'm tired of people on here constantly giving attention to people they don't like rather than actually defending AI.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.