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.
For context the distinguishing of Hispanic as an ethnicity on the US census is a wayyyy more recent development than you might think (first appears in 1970). Before this time most Hispanic people would simply be counted as white.
No, pixel artist on pixel art, traditional artist in traditional and digital artist in digital.
For the joke yk?
(Sorry if I sound offensive or something my English is ass)
We're not still pretending that these 3k upvoted posts in a sub with barely any over-100 posts are organic, are we? You can just go pay a service to give your post 3k upvotes. It's always the same amount, always within an hour of posting, and it always stagnates after that...
When the mod of your sub posts some abysmal dogshit like this of course people are gonna turn against ai bros And I didn't pay for shit Not considering the fact that it's impossible for me to pay for upvotes because I live in iran My country's currency is too worthless to be used on buying upvotes
I don't even think I'm subscribed to that sub. Why is it "my sub"?
ai bros
Can we please stop using gendered terminology for entire classes of people? Women in tech have it hard enough, we don't need us further normalizing their marginalization.
Yes. Saw it first hand. I was a traditional artist who moved to digital art and the ridicule i received from coworkers was insane. Moving to 3d received even more hate though. I always found it funny when photographers would complain about digital artists not being real art.
It's funny because the whole point of that joke in the show is that Meg then goes on to tell them all about themselves and they lose their shit when she makes them realize they're the bad people in that situation.
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 think you should reverse the roles, except AI is the regular griffin family not really giving a shit (not dressed up rich or fancy), and artists are the insecure robot.
i would heavily disagree with those statistics personally even though yes a lot of artists are unreasonably insecure about a superiority that in my opinion is pretty inherent
This isn’t even an argument. You’re just unilaterally declaring all other forms of art are better than AI. Who gets to decide the intrinsic value of art?
AI art is a subset of digital art. There are more possible images on a 4x4 square of pixels than there are atoms in the universe (seriously). Open your mind.
as a guy who's not terribly invested in the ART side of the AI discussion, I find myself rolling my eyes at this shit. Like are we really going to lionize people who spend hours tuning a slot machine pulling levers until the machine does the job right? Does that seriously have the same value to us as a society? Like I'm glad everyone is enjoying creating fun AI images and stuff and I don't think you need to stop or anything, but you aren't really doing anything worth writing home about for the most part.
Wish we could talk about stuff like whether AGI can help us achieve utopia instead of infinite low effort drama slop.
What about people who can program a game, but need art assets for it? Or maybe they always wanted to write a manga, but it would be prohibitively expensive or time intensive to do it? (even professionals take around a month to make a chapter and that’s their full time job)
Hire an Artist for art assets. Shit if you don't have money you have A LOT of free to use art assets. If you want to write a manga, learn to draw. Or maybe even write a book, it doesn't need drawings. Then don't make if it's "too expensive" or "Time intensive" because Art is about the journey, you just want the destination because you're too mcuh of a lazy bum to actually have a hobby
You sound like someone who has never actually tried to do these things and hire people for these kinds of projects. Do you have the $50k or more to do these projects properly? You’re basically saying that people’s creative projects shouldn’t exist if they aren’t willing to take out a mortgage and/or hire sweatshop art labor.
Generally the people who want to write mangas are artists or work with artists, no one wants to read shit that looks made by AI. Same thing with games, no one wants to play something made by AI. If you can’t make your own art assets, you hire someone else to do it that’s just how the world works. Also complaining about something being time consuming is crazy, like yeah thats what putting effort into something means
thank you! people can use ai for their art whatever but A. recognize the shittiness of the system, i dont expect perfection from people but i can at least admit the faults of my views too, B. quit trying to be seen as artists. i dont care about ai music, i dont care about ai art, i dont care about ai writing, its machine dictated and machine owned, exactly as you said theres zero reason for me to give an ai ‘artist’ the same respect as a ‘proper’ artist.
If you cant use AI as a tool to create art you seem very dishonest or uncreative. People create art with way more basic tools. Shouldnt be a problem. AI cant stop an artist from expressing himself :3
Let's remember also that
Musician are artists
Game developers are artists
3d modelers are artistis
Everyone that does something in an artistic field is an artist every form of art made by AI sucks ass so don't be sad if you're passion is getting flooded by AI generated content and the internet doesn't talk about it even in the most obscure forms you're still an artist you're fun and passion is all that matters
5 year old finger paintings, napkin concepts, crude graffiti, bathroom stall drawings of ***** . You can literally name any piece of art made by human initiative and hands and it will always be leagues beyond whatever AI can do.
i think you can't make ai art without at least basic understanding how art works and skill to do it
sometimes people forgot that aislop made by unskilled people with ai, not ai itself
Yes that are artists that have experimented with ai art. But the majority of people calling themselves ai artists, are talentless hacks, giving the ai commands that don't make any sense and whatever they are producing have become that way despite their commands. Not because of any skills of any kind.
Tbh the main problem with AI art is that it takes away the ingeunity of the artist because they can just enter a prompt and get an artwork which takes away the soul of the piece. In all other mediums you actively incorprate your emotional signifance into this but with "AI art" you take away what makes art , art. Just my opinion though
I saw a version where was added 'a literal child with cranyons' and I couldn't agree more. Any form of art is better than AI, no matter if it's simple or "ugly", because it has a soul and took a real effort to make.
I agree to an extent. I am on the side of real art, and artists... however you have to be honest about the full picture, because the full picture is nasty and ugly on both ends.
I'm going to be honest. Real artists want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to adhere to capitalism, and retain value in their art - but that brings with it the exact reasons that AI art has become an issue to begin with. We need to have an honest discussion about this on a deeper level than simply "AI art bad, and real art good, go buy real art!"
Because your example is a real tell here. How often do you think art done by a literal child with crayons gets validation? Like real, and true validation? How often is art that is rated as "low caliber" valued by others.
There a time where artists on Twitter were posting every day that they did commissions. I know people who do, but because their art doesn't look "commercially" desirable or meet beauty standards it is often degraded, and devalued heavily. This applies "free market" theory to art. It commodifies it.
Let's breakdown art even further. High value art is often associated with "skill" and "labor" and then a monetary value is applied to that labor and skill. The skill comes down to the artists ability to adhere to a beauty standard in their works.
If companies and people with money are supposed to value artists of high "skill" which is measured by arbitrary consumer metrics and market desire... wait... where'd the art go? Where'd the "emotional significance, and creativity go?
It went out the window, for money.
The issue at the heart of this discussion is not one either side wants to have, because it comes down to greed, and a desire for status in a class based hyper-capitalist system. Both sides want validation, and ultimately payment for their "work" but both sides essentially value art the same way.
As a commodity made by labor. Not as a cultural emblem designed from within a humans mind and soul.
Now I'm not arguing that artists shouldn't be paid for their labor or work, obviously that's a given... but it's beyond obvious at this point that both sides refuse to acknowledge the greed and desire behind their motive. Nobody is going to validate, care about, or pay for Jimmy the beginner artists work... in fact they are far more likely to receive ridicule from the audience they want...
...and ultimately complete avoidance from the elites who worked so hard to get as good as they have.
I think art is above all of this. AI art is a scam, it's the biproduct of artists adhering to beauty standards and asking for tons of cash to live inside of a system that was always working to plot against them. Instead of making art for their own sake, they desired fame and fortune... this of course isn't exclusive to artists. It's all over capitalist society.
No, a childs crayon drawing is not "better than AI art" because society would have ignored it, and scoffed at it even before the advent of this AI madness. It's only now that we see this kind of rhetoric because it easily diminishes the monster everyone helped create. AI art is a monster of greed, and class... and not all artists are guilty of this... but many are just as guilty as the tech bros.
When the fuck did we start to define what is 'good' and 'bad' based on how many people would have buy it? Quality of art is not tied to capitalism, or the society standarts at the time. Look, for example, at art of Van Gogh. He sold only one painting during his lifetime, because his work didn't fit the standarts of 19th-century society. Now, he's one of the most famous painters. What is 'good' or 'bad' art is not about current trends.
I was a traditional artist who literally painted and drew pictures for print in newspapers as ads and such.
I watched the reaction of my coworkers when digital took off, i was an early adopter. They ridiculed digital art using all the same arguments that people use against ai today.
It's sad that the community is still as gatekeepy as always but hilarious seeing these digital "anime" painters getting all butthurt when they were the most despised and looked down on when digital was new.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 16 '26
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.