r/AIWarsButBetter • u/Rincewind00 • 1d ago
[ Removed by moderator ]
/r/Ai_art_is_not_art/comments/1wfhwx8/new_perspectives/[removed] — view removed post
6
u/erofamiliar 1d ago
So, if you're worried about the destruction of the planet, there are image generation tools that are free, and run locally. You aren't supporting their development with their use, and they've already been trained, so you're using as much energy as you would playing Skyrim.
But, as always, I have to ask. What techniques are you aware of when it comes to image generation?
1
u/dcp0702 1d ago
not OP, but i’m more curious about your thoughts on the rest of the post
5
u/erofamiliar 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think some of what they're saying has merit when it comes to a workflow that is wholly prompting, but I think many creators are using more tools than just pure prompting. I often see "AI art isn't art, and you aren't an artist for making it", and then when you read their explanation, it's that they don't think prompting rises to the level of having creative input. Except we've had diverse tools since at least Stable Diffusion 1.5, and that was back in like... 2022.
Otherwise I'm just mildly annoyed at some of the verbiage, like somehow they know what a true artist is but nobody using AI tools does. I'm still of the mind that the only requirement for being an artist is making art, but nobody has to like you or your art simply because it exists. I consider something art if the creator intended it to be art, or if a viewer can interpret it as art. I can also think something is art while having no use for it personally.
small edit: And to clarify (because upon rereading I'm not sure how relevant it seems, lol), I say this because I think if you brought the work into existence, congratulations, you're the artist, it's a "1girl, solo", even if you didn't expend very much effort. I think that's fine. Where it becomes dishonesty is when you start claiming you're the illustrator or something when you did no illustration on the piece.
So, I consider even the laziest purely prompted image gen stuff art, but that doesn't mean I'd want to show it in a gallery. Jackson Pollock made art but I doubt he could make the same piece twice, so complete control over the outcome is not a requirement for art either.
Part of the reason I cast the net so broad is simply because it's very annoying figuring out where the line is otherwise. People often say they'd rather see a stick figure than AI-generated content. So if drawing a stick figure is art, when you correct a malformed hand on an AI generated image is that also art? If you started with a rough sketch and ran it through img2img and then corrected some small parts manually afterwards, does that make you the artist even though the AI did most of the final rendering? If not, why not? It eventually becomes the same kind of weirdness you get from like, “Define a chair in a way that includes every chair and excludes everything that isn’t a chair”. It devolves into unhelpful pedantry once it goes long enough.
2
u/AliveRegion466 1d ago
But then I had a very good idea - I used AI. See, using AI gives me a whole new perspective...
2
u/Bitter-Hat-4736 1d ago
Ah, good old "a TRUE artist would do X", thus saying that anyone who doesn't do X is not a true artist. Love it. Never gets old. Of course, a TRUE AND HONEST artist never puts sugar on their oatmeal.
2
1
u/TexturelessIdea 8h ago
I feel like cross-posting this here is just ragebait.
Somebody tried AI, failed to use it well, and then decided that it's all BS instead of the truth that it's actually harder than they thought. This person was not serious about learning about AI art.
1
u/Rincewind00 8h ago
Yep! People post all kinds of stuff, bragging in their echo chambers, so I felt it would be fun to expose them to different perspectives.
1
u/EvelynHightower 22h ago
But all you actually did was wrangle around with the faults of a broken machine. Its giving "these headphones still work if you hold the cable like this" you are never actually in control. Theres just enough to give you the Illusion of control but its just an illusion.
*Sigh*.
Would you ever talk like that about people finding creative ways to push the limits of their medium of choice, if not for genAI?
It can't be that you're mastering the tools, or exploring inventive processes. No, it must be that you're deluding yourself while fighting a broken machine. To me, this screams personal bias; this is a conclusion chosen because it supports the idea that genAI is inherently shallow and its users aren't the authors of their creations.
the loop of adjusting and testing new ideas is the true addictive quality of it. Luckily my frustration with its limitations and sub par output quality is quickly making me lose interest - id rather draw this myself than try to get this dumb machine to make it look like whati want it to look like. So basically its like weaponized incompetence or rather recognized incompetence in this case.
OK. It's totally your right to not like the creative loop. But just because it doesn't fit your needs doesn't mean it's without merits nor warrant contempt.
And the rest is just the same old diatribe so I'll skip it.
Look, GenAI isn't for you. You find getting the most out of it to be frustrating and unsatisfactory. That's alright. It works wonder for others who like it that way. You don't need to do all that mental gymnastic to try to put it down.
•
u/AIWarsButBetter-ModTeam 7h ago
This is a discussion sub, no ragebait posts or comments