Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

FruityWelsh t1_iu4w6qo wrote

Reply to comment by Atticus_Vague in AI-generated art sparks furious backlash from Japan’s anime community by JumpinKing

Point and click. Type a word. The skill comes from the tool selection, the choice of subject, framing, curation and post process.

Trust me, I've made very low quality works with both now and can confirm that they both have allowed me to have the level of quality far exceeding many artists, while also understandably being very shitty. Like, the pictures of my dog alone would cost a fortune to replicate with a painter.

7

Atticus_Vague t1_iu4zw63 wrote

“a level of quality far exceeding many artists” except that it isn’t because you didn’t actually make anything.

It’s the same as a ‘digital guitar solo’ app. Type in a genre of music, the computer makes a solo, and then you pretend you can play guitar better than Jimmy Page.

Or someone insisting they can cook real food based on the fact that they play video games where they cook.

I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t enjoy your art making app. I’m merely suggesting that whatever pride you take in your ‘creations’ is kinda silly.

−4

FruityWelsh t1_iu524ch wrote

I mean, I think photographers that really excel in their craft should absolutely take pride in their work. Even if a large part of the work was done in the engineering as well.

6

Atticus_Vague t1_iu53lxw wrote

You are actually speaking to a former professional photographer who teaches both photography and computer graphics. And absolutely I take pride in my work. What I do with a camera is a far different reality from typing a word and clicking enter. And, beyond all the technical understanding that real photography requires, the true art of the photographer is the art of ‘bearing witness’. A photographer must be present in the environment to make the photography. I have spent countless hours walking paths in pitch dark so I could be in a certain location at sunrise. This is a far cry from typing a word and pressing enter.

But even in that I am honest. I was also trained as an illustrator and I am more than happy to admit that no single photograph has challenged me as much as a thirty hour pen and ink drawing. Photography is easier to make than a painting by orders of magnitude and likely wouldn’t qualify as an art form but for the fact that photography is indeed truth and photographers must bear witness.

But AI paintings? Nahh that’s the visual arts version of Cooking Mama. Like I said, enjoy making your little projects, just don’t make the mistake of thinking you are making art.

−4

FruityWelsh t1_iu55rwo wrote

Typing a word is the same as pointing and clicking.

You are dismissing the work people do put in to get good generated art. It's the equivalent of equating what you do with a camera with what I do with my phone when I see my dog being cute.

Like I want AI generated art to be able to make masterpieces that take the ideas in my head and turn them to be as good as some of the awesome works I've seen so far, but I'm just winging the phrase and picking between maybe 18 images, so clearly not putting in the same effort as some of the people really making cool works.

4

Atticus_Vague t1_iu5a9lv wrote

I’m dismissing the idea that typing a word and selecting an image, then doing some basic post processing is art.

Photography is not pointing and clicking, if I handed you my camera bag, you wouldn’t even know how to attach a lens to the camera body, and if you did figure that out, my camera is a pro rig, so unless you know what all those little numbers do, you likely won’t even be able to make a properly exposed photograph. Furthermore, as I said, my photography is not the same as my drawing and painting. Photos take an average of 1/60 of a second to make. The average painting I do is somewhere between 10-20 hours of time. But photography is truth and photographers must bear witness to the truths they record. And for that reason, photography has earned its place in the art world.

Much as I try, I can’t find any similarly compelling attributes to AI art. Its as fast as a photograph, without truth or bearing witness and without any in depth learning about the art.

Like I keep saying, it’s the Cooking Mama of art. You don’t have to agree with me (even though I’ve worked in the visual arts for three decades). My opinion is just that, and opinion.

I mean I’m sure some folks make some pretty cool things using AI. But those of us who can turn a piece of white paper into art with nothing more than a pencil will always be entirely unimpressed by AI ‘art’. Sorry but we’ve earned that privilege.

3

FruityWelsh t1_iu7cepu wrote

> Photography is not pointing and clicking, if I handed you my camera bag, you wouldn’t even know how to attach a lens to the camera body, and if you did figure that out, my camera is a pro rig, so unless you know what all those little numbers do, you likely won’t even be able to make a properly exposed photograph.

Do you know how to make generative art professionally? Or know what all the dials and inputs mean or do?

2

Atticus_Vague t1_iu8boov wrote

I teach computer graphics so I’m familiar with photoshop, lightroom, Illustrator, and have even done some low level work with Maya (3-D animation program). Have I personally laid eyes on one of these AI art generating programs? No. Am I confident that I could figure out the UI quickly and easily navigate the tool menus? Yes.

1

the33rdparallel t1_iu8kqq0 wrote

Goddamn Buzz Killington over here guys 😂

1

Atticus_Vague t1_iu8nnc1 wrote

Not sure why folks are so triggered. I mean do people who play guitar hero get triggered when an actual guitar player tells them they aren’t really musicians? Do folks who make paint by numbers truly believe their ‘original’ art should be in a gallery somewhere? I mean, I have no qualms with AI generated ‘artwork’, but am I really expected to consider the folks making it ‘artists’? Because that’s like someone who’s really good at Madden demanding folks consider them an elite level athlete. Just sayin.

1

the33rdparallel t1_iualstk wrote

Art gatekeepers are the coolest people.

Being condescending and calling it a “little hobby” in hopes of infantilzing a technology that you’re afraid is coming for “mAh ArT”

1

Atticus_Vague t1_iucugrl wrote

Wow, again, so triggered. Listen, if you wanna call yourself an ‘artist’ I’m not stoping you. I’m not going to pretend to be impressed, but that shouldn’t really bother you.

1

the33rdparallel t1_iueh1ob wrote

Never once was I one of your buzz words. I just said you sound like a real fun guy. Then you went and spoiled the surprise.

See, even when the only effect you had was embarrassing yourself, you still think you’ve had some profound effect on others. Truth is you don’t. The only thing you triggered in me was cringe, but then again that seems to be the norm for a “cool guy” like you.

1

Atticus_Vague t1_iueihyb wrote

You’re wasting time my friend. In the time it took you to post at me, you could have literally created dozens, nay hundreds, of masterpieces with your AI art generator.

1

the33rdparallel t1_iuekjo0 wrote

I guess you finding out you’re insufferable is probably a waste of time. Not like you’d reflect and choose not to be a dick.

1

Atticus_Vague t1_iueno4w wrote

Buddy you should take a look in the mirror. You’re the one who is insisting that I must bow down before AI artists and recognize their unique genius. I’m simply unimpressed is all. Deal with it. I’m not against AI artwork, I’m just not impressed by it. Sorry not sorry.

1