Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

gameryamen t1_izaxw08 wrote

I think there's a lot more nuance to the sourcing of the training data. At some point, artists have to take some responsibility for uploading their art and making it public. I don't think it's quite right to say that someone posting their art to social media did so without consent, even though I recognize that they didn't predict all of the impacts of that decision. I think it's a good time to think about what you put out in public, and how to use no-crawl tags (which have been around for a long time).

I don't think that crediting every person who's art is in the LAION database is reasonable, useful, or necessary, but I do think it's shitty to directly use these tools to imitate living artists, and I'd rather see a generator focused on nuanced style distinctions instead of celebrity status. There's no reason these tools can't be used to encourage us all to get better about how we talk about art.

On a personal level, I'm aphantasiac, and these tools are the closest I've been able to come to experiencing guided visual thinking. It's wild, I love it, and my creativity has grown greatly. I'm happy to advocate for better tools, and better understandings, and I'm not blind to the flaws that the tech currently has. But it's almost like getting a mobility support device that allows me to walk. I'll keep using it until a better version comes around, because I don't want to stop walking.

On a commercial level, I've offered a small selection of generated prints on my art table next to my fractal art, poetry, and laser-cut art. I'm very upfront about how the art is made, the flaws the tech has, and how it can be improved. In person, I have met nothing but glowing praise for the work, in spite of the intensity of the debate online.

However, I recognize that the painters and artists around me at these art shows are pouring much more trained skill, time, and resources into the things they create, and I've tried to be mindful in how I present the value of generated prints. I don't pretend that I'm doing the same work as manual artists, and I base my prices on my own effort and contributions to the process, not based on the fine art it might resemble. Generator art is a lure to attract people who might not know they like fractal art, and as a result, I've had more fractal commissions this year than the last 3 combined.

1

artbypep t1_izdgsry wrote

I’m an artist and an aphant, and art is the only way I can fully visualize things. I’m also pro AI art progression, but with regulation. We already reap the benefits of computer assisted art in myriad ways, and beyond that it’d be stupid to stand in the face of progress and demand it halt, but I agree and feel strongly about living artists being compensated for work that couldn’t have been generated without their years of work and efforts.

It’s really nice to see a nuanced take here.

1