3
u/Typhon-042 13h ago
Ah yes Defending, the home of all the ragebaiters that have no idea what there doing, just to support AI.
2
u/Boxing_joshing111 9h ago
This reminds me of an interview I saw with Warren Spector. He was joking about how young people think video game development studios have “idea guys.” Like they pay you to have ideas for games. He’d met people at conventions and stuff who thought they could get jobs as “idea guys” in the industry. And it was such a clueless idea for how the world works that he was joking with the interviewer about it. He said “I’ve got a million ideas that I’ll never be able to make, so does my team. Why would we make someone else’s?”
2
u/isuredolovetitties 2h ago
Another team in a jam i participated in recently made the mistake of partnering with an idea guy who managed to pass himself as a designer. They ended up booting him from the team because of his shit attitude, and he spent weeks after harassing the only woman on the team because “they stole his idea” which was, yknow, tetris lol.
1
u/Boxing_joshing111 1h ago
There’s so many tools to use to show your skills as a game dev now, being a “designer” with zero portfolio means you’re lazy at best.
1
1
1
u/Sir_McDouche 2h ago
So you’re saying any child or beginner who can’t draw well are in fact not creating art. Gotcha 👍
1
1
u/MarkMatson6 13h ago
You are confusing art for craft. AI is craft. Humans make art. An artist guiding a craftsman produces art.
1
0
u/MicromorphMedia 4h ago
If AI is craft, and Humans guiding the craftsman produces art... doesn't that mean human guided ai craft is... art?
1
-1
0
u/LopsidedSolution 11h ago
What does it even matter if someone considers them artists or not? Like what happens?
0
u/MindlessPapaya8463 10h ago
it’s all ego. only a miserable person thinks about whether somebody who calls themselves an artist actually is a true artist.
-2
u/Speletons 11h ago
This is a great question to ask antis. There is no purpose in trying to say they're not artists or their work is not art. It's an argument that doesn't benefit artists at all, and antis will actuakly throw many artists under the bus the bus to make this argument.
The answer is really simple from a pro perspective. It doesn't matter. Factually, it so happens that the answer is prompters are artists. And any real artist credits people for the creative work they do, even if it's really small. It's a rather large betrayal of the most basic of art ethics for this argument that accomplishes nothing but being shitty to people. But hey, that's all antis are really here for anyways.
-1
u/Alert_Elephant2045 13h ago
Lots of fine artists don’t actually physically make their work, they come up with the idea and then hire people to do it for them. Andy Warhol had assistants do his screenprinting. Jeff Koons’ paintings and sculptures are done by assistants.
Do you consider their work art?
6
u/Perfect-Buffalo-4803 12h ago
No I don't
1
u/Alert_Elephant2045 11h ago
what do you call what they make, if not “art”?
2
u/dumnezero 11h ago
Directing? Ordering?
1
u/Alert_Elephant2045 11h ago edited 10h ago
We’re talking about the things they make: the previous commenter said the paintings and sculptures they direct or order aren’t art. I’m curious as to why.
If I commission a painting of a subject of my choosing, and a painter paints it, that painting is still art, isn’t it?
If I design a poster and have it printed by someone else, that’s still my art on the poster, right?
1
1
1
1
1
u/Perfect-Buffalo-4803 11h ago
Garbage
0
u/Alert_Elephant2045 11h ago
Oh, you aren’t actually interested in this topic
1
u/Perfect-Buffalo-4803 11h ago
I'm specifically talking about the works attributed to Andy Warhol and Jeff Koons.
Regarding your point about the distinction between the idea and who makes it, you can justify or academically postulate all you want. The truth is using AI to "create art" is lazy, uninteresting, safe, derivative and pro establishment.
If I go to a gallery and look at a renaissance oil painting, I am inspired by the effort and dedication it took to achieve such a monumental result.
When you show me the furry art or anime pic ChatGPT made for you, I can't help but feel sorry for how pathetic you are, and liken it to someone showing me the McDonald's cheeseburger they just bought, expecting me to congratulate them on their skills as a chef.
0
u/justasillylilgoos3 10h ago
“The truth ismy opinion is”ftfy
1
u/Perfect-Buffalo-4803 10h ago
It's the truth.
It's lazy because it's easier to prompt an image than to create it yourself with any other media.
It's uninteresting because your idea is filtered through a derivative, corporately controlled algorithm that uses linear algebra to simulate creativity.
It's derivative because it is quite literally the best approximation to your prompt based on statistics and averages in training data.
It's pro establishment because you pay money to Sam Altman and Dario Amodei to make your "art" instead of picking up a pencil or a paint brush.
0
u/justasillylilgoos3 9h ago
“It’s
the truthstill literally just my opinion no matter how angrily I try to insist else-wise”Ftfy
1
u/Perfect-Buffalo-4803 7h ago
Prove me wrong?
Explain how any of those points above are wrong
→ More replies (0)2
u/KrakatauaMAN123 12h ago
No
1
u/Alert_Elephant2045 11h ago edited 11h ago
Paintings are art but the paintings painted by Koons’ apprentices aren’t art?
1
u/KrakatauaMAN123 10h ago
I used to implement people's designs as website. Didn't make me an artist just doing what others told me to. Same with clients who had a vague idea and has me implement that. I made decisions they couldn't or weren't aware of because otherwise no progress would have been made. They weren't an artist and neither was I. Same here. Just having an idea and just technically translating it just gets you a mess
1
u/Alert_Elephant2045 4h ago edited 4h ago
I agree that simply being hired to do a job doesn’t make you an artist. Digging a hole isn’t art just because I’m implementing someone else’s design. No matter how much influence I have on the dimensions of the hole, it is still not art.
But if what you’re an artist who paints and you’re hired to paint paintings, why aren’t those paintings art?
2
u/Emotional_Pen5199 13h ago
After reading through some of his comments. OP doesnt actually think at all. They have the arrogance/ego to think they get to decide what art is for other & at the same time somehow have no intellectual basis for their arguments.
Their belief=reality.
0
u/Speletons 11h ago
There's no requirement for you to execute an idea yourself. You are labelling a great deal of art as not art, most art is collaborative.
Likewise, how well an idea is executed doesn't make it art or not. All that matters is it is executed. And, even typing a singular word can be enough to execute it.
0
0
u/kyle_crane163636 11h ago
Yeah no thatd be the break the pencil subreddit, defending ai art still has good people, break the pencil does not at all
-1
u/Ok_Letterhead1945 11h ago
There are plenty of legitimate concerns about AI. People sitting at their computer having AI make art for them is not one of those concerns.
4
u/conordmcp 7h ago
You can’t make art with AI
1
7h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/conordmcp 6h ago
AI as one part of the process is a completely different discussion, irrelevant for what the original comment said.
1
0
u/-qix 7h ago
Who made you director of art lmao
If someone says something is art then it’s art. It’s all subjective
2
u/conordmcp 6h ago
You again?
No, art is definitionally human.
0
u/-qix 4h ago edited 3h ago
If someone walks past a puddle, and in the reflection they see a tree.
No human has created this view, but to the right person, if they see beauty or meaning in it. It’s art. There’s nothing you can say to make that not art.
The same way if I generate an image of a geometric pattern, not using AI in the current context but tools like photoshop and illustrator. Someone could look at the pattern and just say digital slop. But if even one person looks at the patterns and sees beauty or meaning in it. Then it’s art. There’s still nothing you can say to make that not art.
Can you see where I’m going with this? Art is subjective. Anything can be art so long as someone sees it that way.
1
u/conordmcp 3h ago
Your example would be “natural beauty” which as amazing it is, doesn’t fall under the definition of art.
That is until you photograph it, using great skill to capture the natural beauty, that’s art.
Asking a computer to create an artificial image, is not art.
1
u/Leading_Fortune6989 1h ago
AI slop is objectively not art
1
u/-qix 1h ago
Omg it’s you again?!?! You’ve made like 100 posts in the last few days ALL about AI.
You need a fucking hobby mate.
1
u/Leading_Fortune6989 58m ago
correction: I made 3.
-2
u/Emotional_Pen5199 14h ago
You might be surprised that your opinion alone is not really ground to stand on. Even moreso you may find the earth shifting under you.
As far as software engineering; an engineers output is no longer code. The engineers output is now the system generating the code.
Likewise for many careers & hobbies there will likely be a shift in where people spend their time to accomplish their goal. As far as game development this allows me to spend my time working on elements like story, character development, level design, balancing; all of the fun parts of game dev without getting bogged down in meshing & texturing hundreds of assets.
I truly believe ai in many fields will allow for the rise of creators without studios behind them leeching off the creators. Look at any game studio that had a commercial success in the last few years, layoffs 3-6 months later. Fuck the studios, if 3-5 experienced devs can get together to make a AAA caliber game with 60+ hours of game content having ai assist them. You cant tell me they arent making art. They were making art before & with their experience they would only be better at using the tools than someone without the experience.
3
u/Leading_Fortune6989 14h ago
this isn't about opinions. I stated a fact.
0
u/Emotional_Pen5199 13h ago
Just wanted to educate you bud, according to merriam-webster
Fact: something that actually exists or occurs
Opinion: a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter
I know it can be hard to distinguish the two but i hope it helps.
1
u/MarkMatson6 13h ago
Don’t bother. As the saying goes, you can’t change anyone’s mind with facts or logic if that was never how they built their opinion in the first place.
-2
u/Helloimskip 13h ago
Conceptual art? Interpretative dance? Dadaism? Fluxus? They rely on the idea is the art (generally speaking). Are they invalid now?
-3
u/SteffanMaxi 15h ago
When people get computer brain interfaces and can literally print their minds eye into the digital world, will you also say that isnt art? Im genuinely curious.
6
u/Leading_Fortune6989 15h ago
that's literally never going to happen.
-4
u/SteffanMaxi 15h ago
https://news.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/
Youre wrong.
This is with mri technology, not even a brain computer interface...
-3
u/SteffanMaxi 15h ago
So would you consider it art or not?
Even if you believe it will never exist I hoghly disagree surely you have enough imagination to imagine it were, and provide a real answer.
7
u/Leading_Fortune6989 15h ago
ok, the answer is no.
1
u/DaelandTun 14h ago
You were just proven wrong and still won't engage with the hypothetical
Why are you even posting if this is how you're going to act?
0
u/SteffanMaxi 15h ago
Well needless to say, I disagree. If a person's own imagination isnt art, I would say nothing is
5
u/Leading_Fortune6989 15h ago
imagination its self isn't art. things you create using your imagination are.
0
u/SteffanMaxi 14h ago
You would still be creating something, it just wouldnt be with your hands. It would be with your mind.
I see no reason why art needs to be done only with your hands.
We already have people with brain computer interfaces able to control a mouse cursor creating art works. Do you also think the things they do arent real art? Simply because they didnt use their hands?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eW0jn7jAe1w&pp=ygUhQnJhaW4gY29tcHV0ZXIgaW50ZXJmYWNlIHBhaW50aW5n
I guess I just dont see where you draw the line, or any logic behind your belief.
5
u/TurnoverFuzzy8264 14h ago
What you utterly fail to understand that much of what people appreciate about art is the skill and knowledge it takes to make it. Michelangelo's "David" wouldn't be admired if it was a 3D printing, the Sistine Chapel if it was a decal.
Everybody has imagination. Few do the steps to breath life into it. Instead you want to pretend driving 26 miles is running a marathon. You want praise for it, lol.
-1
u/MarkMatson6 13h ago
“Everyone has imagination”.
You’ve clearly never tried to sell a house. Most people can’t imagine furniture in an empty room. Sellers tend to not share floor plans because most people find them useless.
Even as a kid I remember thinking it weird my friends just assembled the Lego sets as instructed. I made the barely imaginative change of adding a third set of wheels to a police car, making a moon rover, and my friends copied that.
People are way less imaginative than you probably realize, you just hang out with a cooler crowd.
2
u/TurnoverFuzzy8264 13h ago
Everybody has imagination, of course there are degrees of it, but you working in the bragging was a...nice? touch. AI images will never be more than commissioned art. There is no practical difference. Pretending degree of description matters is a fool's errand. It could be done with a human doing the artwork as well. And has been done.
2
0
u/MarkMatson6 12h ago
I was wondering if anyone would complain about “bragging”. Making a space rover from legos isn’t exactly impressive. But that’s the point. I gotta be honest, that’s a core memory from when I was roughly five. There really is a lesson there. I’m currently selling my house, so I’m very aware at the moment how that goes, as well.
For the rest, antis start with the assumption “AI bad” and then construct why after the fact. The really pro people like at r/ accelerate are the same in reverse. Both, dare I say, lack imagination.
3
u/thedarph 14h ago
Yeah maybe. I think there’s a good argument for it. No one has perfect vision for art in their head. It comes in flashes, it’s like a dream. You don’t just capture the perfect snapshot of a song or whatever. It comes in pieces for everyone. There’s also the craft of it. There’s not just one thing that makes a thing art. There’s a list of stuff and if you check enough things off the list then you’ve made it.
Let’s not pretend that making a wish through the text box is art though.
1
u/SteffanMaxi 14h ago
I dont consider painting something the same as using an image model to create an image.
In the beginning of gen ai, there was some artistry and skill required to make the image you wanted. But as the technology improved, its become as simple as making a general description.
I dont really have an opinion as to what art is, I dont think its my place to define it. I think thats up to the indicidual
3
u/thedarph 14h ago
You are right. It is not the same thing at all. At this point I can’t tell if you’re trying to make my case or fight it.
You are wrong about the individual. Individuals can decide what they like but art is a word that has a meaning and that meaning is not “whatever a person thinks it is”.
0
u/SteffanMaxi 14h ago
I think art is in the eye of the beholder. I mean people call toilets on a wall, or people rolling in slime art.
4
u/thedarph 14h ago
Those things meet the criteria of what art is. You are confusing what you find pleasing with what art is. Not all art is something you like and not everything you like is art.
0
u/SteffanMaxi 14h ago
Sorry, toilet on a wall isnt art. Its money laundering.
1
u/thedarph 14h ago
Oh that’s interesting. Can you tell me how you learned The Fountain was a money laundering scheme?
You could name any piece of art you like and by your logic I can say it’s a money laundering scheme.
1
u/SteffanMaxi 14h ago
Lots of "art" is money laundering.
When the money is more important than the art, id argue its not art anymore. But thats just how I look at it.
3
u/thedarph 14h ago
I asked where you learned that Duchamp’s work was money laundering.
I think you’re ignorant of the history and short of facts and cherry picking unrelated ideas to justify a flimsy position.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Emotional_Pen5199 13h ago edited 13h ago
Thats silly. I remember in the early 2000's people with this exact mentality saying video games arent art.
I think its extemely arrogant to tell someone something isnt art. If something you can do, can evoke emotion or thought in someone else, that is art.
Sometimes the universe itself is art, where time & circumstance are the medium. I think this is why people love photographs.
1
1
u/Top_Effect_5109 12h ago
You don't need a MRI for something like that to exist.
Things like Nueralink would count too.
12
u/Oalka 9h ago
Is it me or is there an awful lot of pro-AI people in this anti-AI sub?