AI art for TUGs?

[drgoremd]

I think your analogy is flawed. I'm not a good artist but I can just pick up a pen and draw something I like, be it a character in my head or a simple sketch of my cats. There is inspiration and reference but in the end, that piece of artwork would not exist without me, regardless of quality.

So anyone who has ever taken a photograph is an artist? Anyone who has ever sung a song is an artist?

I'm curious. Which do you think is the superior piece of art?

[drgoremd]

And as for your second point, you show a willful miaunderstanding of what makes art valuable, which is the creativity behind it.

Yes, you have to be truly creative to produce great art that can been shown in a famous museum

[DeeperThanRed]

I think your analogy is flawed. I'm not a good artist but I can just pick up a pen and draw something I like, be it a character in my head or a simple sketch of my cats. There is inspiration and reference but in the end, that piece of artwork would not exist without me, regardless of quality.

So anyone who has ever taken a photograph is an artist? Anyone who has ever sung a song is an artist?

I'm curious. Which do you think is the superior piece of art?

Yes. And yes. I believe all people are capable of creating art, regardless of quality.

Your pictures don't load but I'm guessing it's a bad faith comparison that "proves" AI art is better than crude drawings, correct me if I'm wrong.

And as for your second point, you show a willful miaunderstanding of what makes art valuable, which is the creativity behind it.

Yes, you have to be truly creative to produce great art that can been shown in a famous museum

Yes, you have to be truly creative at producing art that challenges people's perception of what art actually is and encourages them to look at the brushwork and how the shading on the canvas changes depending on the light conditions.

People still discuss Rauschenberg's work for a reason, rather than procedurally generated vapid human faces. But seriously, dunking on white paintings is such an old, tired criticism of modern art that people have been doing it for over 70 years now.

[Volobond]

So anyone who has ever taken a photograph is an artist? Anyone who has ever sung a song is an artist?

I'm curious. Which do you think is the superior piece of art?

That is the whole point! Your metric of art's worth being its market value or whether it is photoreallistic or makes sense to you is completely going over your head! Art is a personal creative act - if it was made by someone intending to make art, it's automatically superior to anything spat out by a machine. And the fact that AI does not take inspiration from art like a human artist can because it cannot think. It is gathering data from images and works it does not have a right to utilize.

Which is all entirely besides the point. Whether or not you believe that AI can make art, however you define the "worth" of art, the fact remains that this AI art trend is going to be negatively impactful on the lives of actual human beings who use their art for a career. Who depend on it for income. From concept artists for movies and media to book illustrators to simply just artists who spend time and effort to create artwork.

AI art is unethical, and that's really all it comes down to.

[FelixSH]

I think your analogy is flawed. I'm not a good artist but I can just pick up a pen and draw something I like, be it a character in my head or a simple sketch of my cats. There is inspiration and reference but in the end, that piece of artwork would not exist without me, regardless of quality.

So anyone who has ever taken a photograph is an artist? Anyone who has ever sung a song is an artist?

I'm curious. Which do you think is the superior piece of art?

Both are awful. The first is something that looks weirdly similar to so much other ai art. There is no intention behind it. You typed some words in, and the algorithm spit something out. And I guess you go by it being somewhat realistic, right? The Simpsons or Ren & Stimpy, which are crude and look weird, are way more artistic than this piece will ever be.

The second is just something you drew to proof a point - you didn't try to create anything, or to express yourself. THIS is an example of something that isn't art, because creating and expressing was not the point for you. You just wanted to proof a point.

And honestly, if a child draws such a stick figure, or for all I care an adult, who is simply bad at drawing - this stick figure is way more artistic than this pseudo-realistic thing, drawn to proof a point, not trying to express anything but simply to copy reality.

Generally, realism is super boring. Yes, you can create beautiful art with it, but there is so much more, and nearly all of it is way more interesting. We already have reality. Show me something different.

Especially the flaws are what makes art so interesting. I like to play video games, so my focus is there - Life is Strange is very artistic, as is something super-weird like the Dominique Pamplemousse games.

-----

That all said, it doesn't matter. If ai stuff is art or not is besides the point. There are jobs on the line, and the replacement of people will lead to tv shows, books, etc... without, for lack of a better word, soul. AI will not care, if the show it writes is something new and interesting, something people will always do. It will just give us the same stuff again and again. Which is already happening - are you one of the myriad of people, who complain (understandably, to a degree) that every movie is the same now? Using ai will just make this worse. As long as you have people working on a project, they will try to be creative, because that is what artists do. They will try to push against boundaries, try new stuff, and even more or less fail. This creates really interesting stuff. AI will just give us more and more of the same. It will not push, it will not take chances and risks, and it will not offer its own ideas.

It's not just the artists themselves, who will lose something (but never forget, they are the biggest losers here, with their entire career on the line) - everyone will lose, because we, as a culture, will produce stuff that is just not as interesting anymore. If nothing else, your entertainment will get worse.

Also, as an endpoint: If you think art is so great at this point, why are you here? ChatGPT is right there, open for you to get all the stories out of it you want. Sure, for bondage you have to be a bit sneaky, but you can get stories out of it. I did, a lot, for some time.

You are still here, because the stories here are better. They are created by people, who can remember the start of a story, when they reach the middle. They offer new insights, and details of a type you will not get from ai, definitely not yet. Not all stories, but still - you can let ChatGPT write a ton of stories for you right now. It just doesn't matter, because they are bad.

---------

Anyway, I'm sorry, wanted to leave this topic. I just find it way too interesting. Still, I'll leave with this post, and maybe come back in a month.

[drgoremd]

Both are awful. The first is something that looks weirdly similar to so much other ai art. There is no intention behind it. You typed some words in, and the algorithm spit something out. And I guess you go by it being somewhat realistic, right? The Simpsons or Ren & Stimpy, which are crude and look weird, are way more artistic than this piece will ever be.

The second is just something you drew to proof a point - you didn't try to create anything, or to express yourself. THIS is an example of something that isn't art, because creating and expressing was not the point for you. You just wanted to proof a point.

So first you say there is no intention behind the stick drawing but then you say I drew it to prove a point which would mean there was an intention behind the drawing. Your argument is that something made by humans is inherently superior to AI art but then you say that both pictures are equal in that they both lack value. So apparently you don't really believe that the fact something is created by a human matters at all.

[Volobond]

So first you say there is no intention behind the stick drawing but then you say I drew it to prove a point which would mean there was an intention behind the drawing. Your argument is that something made by humans is inherently superior to AI art but then you say that both pictures are equal in that they both lack value. So apparently you don't really believe that the fact something is created by a human matters at all.

So, you completely ignore the second half of the argument about the moral and ethical implications of AI art on real people in favor of a "gotcha" that really doesn't hold water. I think it's clear you don't really care about it, and so your relevance to the conversation has petered out.

[drgoremd]

So, you completely ignore the second half of the argument about the moral and ethical implications of AI art on real people in favor of a "gotcha" that really doesn't hold water. I think it's clear you don't really care about it, and so your relevance to the conversation has petered out.

If "real" artists can't produce work better than a computer can in seconds at a fraction of the cost, why should they have jobs? Photoshop has allowed many average people to create outstanding photographs but skilled photographers are still in demand. If your work is deemed to be worse than something you think is soulless and bad, why would someone pay you?

[Volobond]

If "real" artists can't produce work better than a computer can in seconds at a fraction of the cost, why should they have jobs? Photoshop has allowed many average people to create outstanding photographs but skilled photographers are still in demand. If your work is deemed to be worse than something you think is soulless and bad, why would someone pay you?

Truly, a response lacking empathy or consideration for others. I don't think you're worth engaging with further.

[drgoremd]

If "real" artists can't produce work better than a computer can in seconds at a fraction of the cost, why should they have jobs? Photoshop has allowed many average people to create outstanding photographs but skilled photographers are still in demand. If your work is deemed to be worse than something you think is soulless and bad, why would someone pay you?

Truly, a response lacking empathy or consideration for others. I don't think you're worth engaging with further.

Maybe the government can pay people who produce art that no one else wants to buy. Would that make you feel better? And they can store it in giant warehouses that no one ever comes to visit.

[Terry]

Trying in several Art AI sites and it can never give me a picture of someone tied up and gagged. Some sites even prohibit those words specifically also.

[gustorak]

A.I. Art is not art at all it's cheap treak to cheat. Real art is made by people who work hard to acquired the skill to made is work. I'm a artist and work really hard to give great art piece to people and i found insulting people call them self artist when they do not any knowlege to do art with out a computer.. Real artist can write, draw take picture with out the help of a computer. I made exception for the 3D artist who in there way made work in the computer still but still do respect the art and work and you can see those work are not perfect and they put lot of time and effort to give great work.

For A.I. are to perfect and cold i can this kind of work over taking art who was 10 time better, because people want perfection and speed insteated hart and time.

[Gaggedcowgirl]

I have not been more fascinated about the AI conversation until reading through this thread. With so much AI stuff on the rise, my oh my will copyright and digital stealing be potentially larger issues…

I’m more than under qualified to say anything, just wanted to just share my appreciation for the conversation

[Lady Knotty]

Hey, I'm a bit late to the party here but whatever.

Isn't the original question whether AI generated images can be used to complement a story? Seems like it derailed into another is-it-art-or-not-war.

But first you should probably ask yourself as a writer why you think you need images to complement your writing. Isn't the beauty of writing that everyone makes up their own little images with their own imagination?

As for those of you who don't understand how to generate such images or think it's not possible, here are some examples of what you can do. I'm only including images that I think most people wouldn't really consider "art", but rather AI-generated images.

Also yes they are censored, deal with it.

► Show Spoiler

[the_him]

I've managed to use AI to make GiD art with heavy amounts of bondage, it's about knowing what to search. At the end of the day it comes down to whether people want to use it or not