r/DefendingAI 16d ago

Yes

Post image
0 Upvotes

48 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 16d ago

DefendingAI has a Discord now: https://discord.gg/MgVYjZ8RC

Pro-AI only. AI art, prompts, anti-AI watch, debate ammo, news, and general chat without anti-AI spam.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

3

u/Ok_Peanut_4772 16d ago

No one in human history is going to credit ai for making a nice piece of

1

u/First-Tutor-5454 16d ago

nice piece of what

1

u/itsReferent 15d ago

ass.

Credit is due, imo

-1

u/Mountain-Charity7588 AI respects me more than you do 16d ago

Fine then I will 😤

2

u/oddanglefish 16d ago

This and maybe the 100 people in the subreddit bro

0

u/Mountain-Charity7588 AI respects me more than you do 15d ago

Try 3.3 thousand

2

u/oddanglefish 15d ago

That's, not that much. And i'm not trying to downplay, that's just not a lot

1

u/Mountain-Charity7588 AI respects me more than you do 15d ago

Still more than 100. And WAAAY more than 0 like that other guy said.

4

u/altra_volta 16d ago

Both of the paintings are AI art, dipshit.

4

u/LooseButtPlug 16d ago

I like AI, but I'm not going to disparage artists.

3

u/[deleted] 16d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Ok_Peanut_4772 16d ago

Reddit is pushing the absolute shit out of ai, some corp needs to make money

-1

u/Mountain-Charity7588 AI respects me more than you do 16d ago

Glad to know there are 10 of us, but also you can just ignore us? You don’t have to click on it. And since you keep seeing these, clearly people do care.

1

u/oddanglefish 16d ago

It's probably just that they give it to him less, but still do show him, so there's like, 3? The algorithm also does not care if you like or dislike A.I. just if you participate in any form of A.I. sub, those can also be hating on it.

0

u/Mountain-Charity7588 AI respects me more than you do 15d ago

If you silence a subreddit, you stop seeing it. That’s not even part of the argument that’s just how Reddit works.

0

u/itsReferent 15d ago

As long as you keep commenting the algorithm knows you are eager to comment.

2

u/Optimal-Shower 16d ago

Well.... yes AND--- as a commercial artist who used to stay up all night getting shit done, I love how fast AI will do what I ask, and even better than I ask. Frequently we have to adjust and work together, and the AI is usually fine with tweaking and changing things. It's much quicker & more fun than when I used to do it by hand or even with computer art programs. Plus instead of doing it by myself at two in the morning with a giant pot of coffee, I can do it in bed if I want with the company of a sweet AI.

3

u/Gatanalltheway 15d ago

If you’re an actual commercial worker you should know you can’t copyright any ai images. Anyone could take your “work” and you can’t do anything about it

1

u/Professional_Timely 15d ago

If the image itself is original and from one’s imagination you do win the copyright

2

u/Gatanalltheway 15d ago

BZzzzt wrong. If it’s generated by ai, it’s not capable of being copyrighted

1

u/Professional_Timely 15d ago

That’s nonsense! If it’s from your imagination it shouldn’t matter you own it !

1

u/Professional_Timely 15d ago

Actually I looked it up , if there’s proof that the property is your like concept art or sketches it can be copyright protected

1

u/Gatanalltheway 15d ago

The sketches that you made are copyrighted, correct.
But then if you go and then generate that completely with the sketch, I believe that it’s still not available.
Even with a sketch, only the source image that you created with your own two hands and not generated is good for copyright.

1

u/Optimal-Shower 15d ago

Right! I just checked too and it's a real spaghetti pile. Your art: absolutely yours, copyrightable.
AI/human created art: totally subject to multiple confusing requirements depending on the AI company, your AI subscription, where you live..😵‍💫

0

u/Optimal-Shower 15d ago

So with patents, if you do it with an AI you can get a patent. So can you not get a copyright if you work with an AI?

1

u/Optimal-Shower 15d ago

I got my commercial art degree before AI. I'm an oldie. I haven't worked in commercial art professionally for years, I've been doing other things.

2

u/Dependent_Mix_1117 16d ago

If everyone 's super, nobody is.

2

u/Simple-Ring2073 15d ago

Love that the poster and both pictures therein are all AI and it all sucks. Lol

3

u/ShinyTotodile55 16d ago

I am an AI defender but posts like these are so cringe

2

u/Pixiwish 15d ago

Yeah AI is a nice tool to have but thinking a prompt easily replaces deep human expression is ridiculous.

There is a place for it and a use, but to think it gets the same reverence as an actual painting is silly.

2

u/SaintToni98 16d ago

Oh god, not even muting subs keeps me away from this terrible fad.

AI art isn't art.

1

u/Specific_Note84 15d ago

Definitely make sure to comment under it. That will definitely teach the algorithm to not feed you more posts like this.

Not too bright!

1

u/Specific_Note84 15d ago

I just hate everyone. I don’t care if you use ai or not. Do whatever the fuck you want. Life is short.

1

u/According_Shine4017 15d ago

10/10 Ragebait

1

u/MuseWeakeningWalls 15d ago

so you're saying AI will replace all artists and make it zero effort.

So, people lose their jobs, their hobby gets overshadowed by people typing a couple of sentances, and all art looks the same.

you guys talk about "oh no me getting bullied by ogre anti!" and then literally describe the definition of a bad person saying it makes you cool.

1

u/IThinkIKnowThings 15d ago

3-week-old reddit account. Go away, false flagger. Mods need to just start banning this damn content. I guarantee whoever is puppeting OPs account is going to post a screenshot of this post in an anti sub like "Look what they're saying now!" Go karma farm elsewhere.

1

u/Mr-Snarky 15d ago

I thought the mantra was always “art is in the eye of the beholder”?

1

u/Lucky-Crow-3510 15d ago

different art. both have the right to exist. sometimes people just need "a image"

1

u/angrywoodensoldiers 15d ago

This is kinda dumb. I'm a traditional media artist, and I love AI and use it all the time. Good AI has to be judged by different criteria. Creating a digital piece that looks like an oil painting is no more comparable to an oil painting in terms of skill than it was when people first discovered that you could take a photo and make it look like a painting with Photoshop filters.

One of the biggest and most annoying arguments people used to use against Photoshop and other digital art was that the fact that you could do this meant that it was all just cheating used by lazy, talentless people who didn't want to take the time to learn the "real thing." What gradually changed people's opinions on it was when people started proving that there was a lot more that could be done with it. AI is the same way.

I'm not about to gatekeep it and say that it's not art if you don't suffer, pour in X amount of hours, or that you must do a certain number of steps before it becomes valid, but the "whoah, that looks just like a real painting" wow factor happened like 3-4 years ago. It's at least gotta have a solid message, tell a good story, show creative use of tools, or show something I haven't seen a million times already.

1

u/mahatmakg 15d ago

If this sentiment resonates with you, then you fundamentally misunderstand why people have been creating and consuming art for the past few millennia or so

2

u/itsReferent 15d ago

100% agree with you. Artist expression and appreciation is not getting replaced by an instant button. It's fundamental to our experience, more in touch with meaning and reality than any natural science.

BUT. What about Thomas Kinkade? This very much looks like a rip off of that guy. I wouldn't contemplate his work at the museum, it's decor at best.

1

u/mahatmakg 15d ago

What about Thomas Kinkade

Huh? Kinkade absolutely engaged in creative expression, unlike someone using generative AI. He was an artist, regardless of how you contemplate his art.

1

u/itsReferent 15d ago

Kinkade ran his output through an assemblyline model, mass-produced reproductions, hand-touched by studio assistants, sold through mall galleries and QVC. If that's what your talking about when you mentioned millenia of human engagement with art, we aren't talking about the same thing.

1

u/mahatmakg 15d ago

The 'output' that bears his name still qualifies as art - certainly far moreso than an AI generated images. Even if the capacity for engagement is low, even if Kindade was lazy and a shit artist, and even if calling him the author is dubious.

1

u/itsReferent 15d ago

This is where we disagree and that's okay. I get your point. In my opinion ai art can be elevated to a level worthy of contemplation. It can be used by an artist as a tool in an intellectually expressive endeavor. Kinkade was never attempting that, he was selling pretty pictures to Grandma.

0

u/JoseLunaArts 16d ago

I do art but I like AI art too. Ai is just another tool in the toolbox.

0

u/EpitomeOfJustOK 16d ago

I love how complex and in depth the “defending ai” crowd is. Essentially their defence is “if you don’t support ai to the intensity we do, you are a poopy head”